PDA

View Full Version : al-Ashariyya & al-Maturidiyya


Hamoudeh
18-09-05, 05:51 AM
Assalamu Alaikum

Imam Abu‘l-Hasan al-Ash‘ari

‘Ali ibn Isma‘il ibn Abi Bishr Ishaq ibn Salim, Abu al-Hasan al-Ash‘ari al-Yamani al-Basri al-Baghdadi (260-324), a descendent of the Yemeni Companion Abu Musa al-Ash`ari, was in the first half of his scholarly career a disciple of the Mu`tazili teacher Abu `Ali al-Jubba’i, whose doctrines he abandoned in his fortieth year after asking him a question al-Jubba’i failed to resolve over the issue of the supposed divine obligation to abandon the good for the sake of the better (al-sâlih wa al-aslah). At that time he adopted the doctrines of the sifatiyya, those of Ahl al-Sunna who assert that the divine Attributes are obligatorily characterized by perfection, unchanging, and without beginning, but He is under no obligation whatsoever to abandon the good for the sake of the better. He left Basra and came to Baghdad, and took fiqh from the Shafi`i jurist Abu Ishaq al-Marwazi (d. 340). He devoted the next twenty-four years to the refutation of "the Mu`tazila, the Rafida, the Jahmiyya, the Khawarij, and the rest of the various kinds of innovators" in the words of al-Khatib. Ibn `Asakir then mentions that al-Ash`ari’s works number over two or three hundred books.

Imam Abu‘l-Hasan al-Ash‘ari - Dr. G. F. Haddad (http://www.livingislam.org/ashari_e.html)

Tabi`een Kadhib al-Muftari - The Great Asha`ari Scholar - Ibn `Asakir

The First Generation of al-Ash`ari's Students and Companions:

Muhammad ibn al-Qasim, Abu `Abd Allah al-Asbahani, known as al-Shafi`i (d. 381), Abu al-Hasan al-Bahili al-Basri (d. ~370), the companion of al-Ash`ari and teacher of Ibn Furak, al-Baqillani, and Abu Ishaq al-Isfarayini.
Abu al-Hasan al-Tabari, `Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Mahdi (d. ~380) studied under al-Ash`ari in Basra and Abu al-Hasan al-Bahili, and accompanied Abu Ishaq al-Isfarayini, Abu Bakr ibn Furak, and Abu Bakr al-Baqillani. Abu Muhammad al-Tabari, al-Qadi `Abd Allah ibn `Ali ibn `Abd Allah al-`Iraqi al-Jurjani al-Manjaniqi al-Shafi`i, a companion of al-Ash`ari. Abu Sahl al-Su`luki, Muhammad ibn Sulayman ibn Muhammad ibn Sulayman al-Shafi`i al-`Ijli al-Naysaburi al-Ash`ari al-Sufi of the Banu Hanifa (d. 369), the imam of Khurasan among the jurists and scholars of kalaam, tafsir, and Arabic in his time. Abu Zayd al-Marwazi, Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn `Abd Allah al-Shafi`i (301-371). Al-Awdani, Muhammad ibn `Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Nasr or Nusayr or Basir, Abu Bakr al-Awdani al-Bukhari al-Shafi`i (d. 385), the foremost imam of the Shafi`is in Transoxiana in his time and a hadith scholar.

Tabi`een Kadhib al-Muftari - Ibn `Asakir (http://www.sunnah.org/aqida/tabyin_kadhib.htm)

The Ash'ari School

The Ash'aris are the Imams of the distinguished figures of guidance among the scholars of the Muslims, whose knowledge has filled the world from east to west, and whom people have unanimously concurred upon their excellence, scholarship, and religiousness. They include the first rank of Sunni scholars and the most brilliant of their luminaries, who stood in the face of the excesses commited by the Mu'tazilites, and who constitute whole sections of the foremost Imams of Hadith, Sacred Law, Quranic exegesis. Shaykh al-Islam Ahmad ibn Hajar 'Asqalani (d. 852/1449; Rahimullah), the mentor of Hadith scholars and author of the book "Fath al-Bari bi sharh Sahih al-Bukhari", which not a single Islamic scholar can dispense with, was Ash'ari. The shaykh of the scholars of Sunni Islam, Imam Nawawi (d. 676/1277; Rahimullah), author of "Sharh Sahih Muslim" and many other famous works, was Ash'ari. The master of Qur'anic exegetes, Imam Qurtubi (d. 671/1273; Rahimullah), author of "al-Jami' li ahkan al-Qur'an", was Ash'ari. Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar Haytami (d. 974/1567; Rahimullah), who wrote "al-Zawajir 'an iqtiraf al-kaba'ir", was Ash'ari. The Shaykh of Sacred Law and Hadith, the conclusive definitive Zakariyya Ansari (d. 926/1520; Rahimullah), was Ash'ari. Imam Abu Bakr Baqillani (d. 403/1013; Rahimullah), Imam 'Asqalani; Imam Nasafi (d. 710/1310; Rahimullah); Imam Shirbini (d. 977/1570; Rahimullah); Abu Hayyan Tawhidi, author of the Qur'anic commentary "al-Bahr al-muhit"; Imam ibn Juzayy (d. 741/1340; Rahimullah); author of "al-Tashil fi 'ulum al-Tanzil"; and others - all of these were Imams of the Ash'aris. If we wanted to name all of the top scholars of Hadith, Qur'anic exegesis, and Sacred Law who were Imams of the Ash'aris, we would be hard put to do so and would require volumes merely to list these illustrious figures whose wisdom has filled the earth from east to west. And it is incumbent upon us to give credit where credit is due, recognising the merit of those of knowledge and virtue who have served the Sacred Law of the Greatest Messengers (Allah bless him and grant him peace). The Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l Jama'ah (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=494) are the true followers of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) and his Companions (Allah be pleased with them all), followed by by those who trod their path for the last 1400 years. It is in summary the followers of Imam Abu'l Hasan al-Ash'ari (Rahimullah) and Imam Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (Rahimullah) in Aqeedah, and this saved sect is represented by the adherents of one of the four schools - Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i and Hanbali today. This is the sect which has had the largest following throughout Islamic history as-Sawad al-Az'am) as confirmed by the Qur'anic and Ahadith based evidence and it will remain dominant until the Hour is established, inshaAllah.

The Ash`ari School - Shaykh Sayyid Muhammad Alawi al-Maliki al-Makki. (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/ashari.htm)

Those who claim that the Asha`ariyya school is of the Ahl al-Bida' and not of the Ahl al-Sunna, claims made mostly by those who do not follow any of the Sunni schools in Fiqh or Aqida, will often add that Imam al-Ash`ari repented for the position he had taken by way of the book titled al-Ibana `an Usul al-Diyana (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=695)

To this I would want to add the following mentioned by Shaykh Nuh Hah Mim Keller:

The Salafis claim that Abul Hasan Ash‘ari formulated the Ash‘ari tenets of Islamic faith (‘aqida) while he was between the Mu‘tazila and Ahl al-Sunna, and that he later refuted his formulations and joined Ahl al-Sunna in the Hanbali madhhab before he died. Is there any truth in this? They say his last book, al-Ibana, contains the refutations. If not, how can I prove it to these people? They also say that he had a second dream in which the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) appeared to him and told him that his Ash‘ari positions were wrong!

The Ash‘ari school and Maturidi schools have represented the ‘aqida or "tenets of belief" of the majority of Sunni Muslims for more than a thousand years; just as the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi‘i, and Hanbali schools have represented the shari‘a or "Sacred Law" for the majority of Sunni Muslims for this period. Those against these two traditional schools of tenets of faith are people of bid‘a, defined in a fatwa or formal legal opinion by Imam Ibn Hajar Haytami as "whoever is upon other than the path of Ahl al-Sunna wa l-Jama‘a, Ahl al-Sunna wa l-Jama‘a meaning the followers of Sheikh Abul Hasan Ash‘ari and Abu Mansur Maturidi, the two Imams of Ahl al-Sunna" (Haytami, al-Fatawa al-hadithiyya, 280). In the past, such contraventions, aside from Mu‘tazilites, Shiites, and purely sectarian movements, were confined to a handful of mainly Hanbalis, whose bone of contention with the two traditional schools was that neither had anything to do with their literalist, anthropomorphic understanding of Allah Most High, which they promoted by all means at their disposal.

It is noteworthy that Saudi Arabia has printed and distributed worldwide thousands of copies of a Salafi book called Manhaj al-Asha‘ira fi al-‘aqida [The methodology of the Ash‘aris in tenets of faith] by one Safar Hawali, a professor at Umm al-Qura University in Mecca. It ascribes to the Ash‘ari school the misrepresentations typical of that part of the world, identifying the school with the positions of heretical sects like the Jahmiyya, the Qadriyya, Murjiites, and so on, and contains a number of the things you asked about the Ash‘aris, so I would guess this is the misinformation that your English Salafis are going upon. One can find the details in Hasan Saqqaf’s recent rebuttal of the work entitled Tahni’a al-sadiq al-mahbub, wa nayl al-surur al-matlub, bi maghazala Safar al-maghlub [The greeting of the beloved friend, and attainment of happiness sought, in affectionate discourse with Safar the defeated]. I have heard that Hawali has since moved on from his positions, though I do not know the details.

Saqqaf also talks in his work about the bogus Hanbali "repentances" of various Ash‘ari Imams such as Ash‘ari, Juwayni, and Ghazali, that don’t appear in their books but have rather reached us by sanads each containing an anti-Ash‘ari or two, as is also corroborated by Ibn Subki in his Tabaqat al-Shafi‘iyya al-kubra [The greater compendium of the successive generations of Shafi‘i scholars] under the biographical entries on each of these scholars.

From the wider perspective of Islamic law, these forgeries are rather meaningless, since a Muslim may not believe in the Islamic faith (‘aqida) of Ahl al-Sunna merely because his Imam has said it, but rather because he sincerely believes it is the truth. Scholars say that it is not legally valid to follow qualified scholarship (taqlid) in tenets of Islamic faith (as opposed to rulings of Islamic law) unless one has full conviction of these tenets of faith from one’s own heart—which is why they tell us that one’s faith (iman) by taqlid in such tenets is only legally valid on condition that if one’s Imam were to cease believing something of them, one would not. So the forgeries would seem to have little scholarly relevance, other than to show the lengths to which their perpetrators were willing to go.

Imam Ash'ari Repudiating Asha'rism - Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/masudq2.htm)

Imam al-Maturidi

Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Mahmud Abu Mansur al-Samarqandi al-Maturidi al-Hanafi (d. 333) of Maturid in Samarqand, Shaykh al-Islam, one of the two foremost Imams of the mutakalliműn of Ahl al-Sunna, known in his time as the Imam of Guidance (Imâm al-Hudâ), he studied under Abu Nasr al-`Ayadi and Abu Bakr Ahmad al-Jawzajani. Among his senior students were `Ali ibn Sa`id Abu al-Hasan al-Rustughfani,1 Abu Muhammad `Abd al-Karim ibn Musa ibn `Isa al-Bazdawi, and Abu al-Qasim Ishaq ibn Muhammad al-Hakim al-Samarqandi. He excelled in refuting the Mu`tazila in Transoxiana while his contemporary Abu al-Hasan al-Ash`ari (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=517) did the same in Basra and Baghdad. He died in Samarqand where he lived most of his life. The founder of the Egyptian Muniriyya Salafiyya Press, Munir `Abduh Agha wrote:

"There is not much [doctrinal] difference between Ash`aris and Maturidis (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=523), hence both groups are now called Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`a."

Al-Maturidi surpasses Imam al-Tahawi as a transmitter and commentator of Imam Abu Hanifa's legacy in kalâm. Both al-Maturidi and al-Tahawi followed Abu Hanifa and his companions in the position that belief (al-îmân) consists in "conviction in the heart and affirmation by the tongue," without adding, as do Malik, al-Shafi`i, Ahmad ibn Hanbal and their schools, "practice with the limbs." Al-Maturidi, as also related from Abu Hanifa, went so far as to declare that the foundation of belief consisted only in conviction in the heart, the tongue's affirmation being a supplementary integral or pillar (rukn zâ'id).

Most of the Hanafi school follows al-Maturidi in doctrine, but he evidently achieved lesser fame than al-Ash`ari because the latter entered into countless debates to defeat the opponents of Ahl al-Sunna (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=494) while al-Maturidi, as Imam al-Kawthari said, "lived in an environment in which innovators had no power." The absence of a notice on Imam Abu Mansur al-Maturidi in al-Dhahabi's Siyar is a major omission in that masterpiece of biographical history.
Imam al-Maturidi - Dr. G. F. Haddad (http://www.sunnah.org/history/Scholars/al_maturidi.htm)

Hamoudeh
14-10-05, 09:24 PM
The following book by Imam al-Ash`ari explains the Ash`ari Creed:

The Ash`ari Aqeedah, The Creed of the Muslims (http://alghazzali.org/resources/articles/ashariAqeedah.pdf)

An essential work recognized by the Ahl al-Sunna is Imam al-Tahawi's following book:

Aqeedah at-Tahawi (http://alghazzali.org/resources/articles/aqeedahNotes.pdf)
Question:

Can you comment on the claim that many are making now that Imam
Nawawi, in his commentary on Sahih Muslim, repudiates the Ash'ari
school to which he belonged?

Ustadh Abdullah's response:

Firstly, I'd ask that one provide us with this supposed quote from
Imam Nawwawi wherein he repudiates the Ash'ari creed. Salafis often
make claims that certain well-known Ash'aris repudiated the Ash'ari
creed whenever they find one of them making mention of opposing
views, or stating the general approach of the Salaf with regard to
the ambiguous/allegorical verses of the Qur'an and the Prophetic
Sunnah.

They claim that Imam Ghazali repented as well as Ibn Hajar Al-
'Asqalani, Imam Nawwawi, Imam Al-Haramain al-Juwayni, and others.
They usually based this claim on the fact that they may use the same
words that Allah used in the Qur'an for a particular issue
like 'istawa' without commenting on it. So Salafis would then claim
they repented or repudiated the Ash'ari creed.

Even the quotes of some of them, like Imam Razi who stated that he
found in his experience that the safest approach to allegorical
verses was to avoid interpretation, is not a repudiation of
anything. It is merely an acknowledgement of the safest path for all
Muslims and that the only objective they've ever had in offering
possible interpretations of those particular quotes from scripture
has been to bring people back to the way of the Salaf of not
indulging in such issues. And had it not been for the fact that many
had taken the verses and hadiths literally and others denied any
possible meaning to be taken from them, they would have never
indulged in these matters.

So this is just another Salafi ploy and propoganda used to
strengthen their claims that their literalist tendencies are
supported by the people (Ash'aris) whose approach they most fear
will once again eclipse their falsehood as they have done with all
deviant creeds and sects throughout Islamic history.

Abdullah bin Hamid Ali (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=884)

Lamppost Productions (http://lamppostproductions.org/)

The good brother faqir posted:

The "salafis" seem to like taking one or two statements of some of the Imams in favour of Tafwid to use it as somehow being a "refutation" of the Asharis. The truth is that the Asharis only ever engaged in ta'wil when it was necessary to refute the innovators. They considered the 'azima to be tafwid with ta'wil only being a dispensation used in cases of necessity.

The position of Imam Ashari and the Ash'aris in general has been expanded upon and explained by Imam Ibn al-Subki who comments in Tabaqat al-Shafi`iyya al-Kubra (5:191-192) :

"Ash`aris have two well-known positions regarding the affirmation of the Attributes and whether they are let pass according to their literal meaning but in confirmity with Transcendence, or whether they should be interpreted. The first position is that which is traced back to the Salaf and forms the Imam's choice in al-Risala al-Nizamiyya as well as in other passages of his kalam works. So his 'return' means a return from interpretation (al-ta'wil) to committal (al-tafwid). Neither the latter nor the former are condemned for it is a question of ijtihad. I mean the question of interpreting on the one hand or committing together with Transcendence. The great problem and terrible disaster consists in letting them pass according to literal meaning while believing that the latter is the actual meaning and that it is not impossible for it to apply to the Creator. And that is the creed of the idol-worshipping anthropomorphists. {Those in whose hearts is doubt} (3:7), their doubt impels them to pursue that which is allegorical {seeking to cause dissension}. Allah's curses be upon them uninterruptedly! How bold they are in committing lies, and how little is their understanding of realities!"

"Salafi" forgeries & manipulations - GF Haddad (http://webkom.abc.se/~m9783/n/slfm_e.html)

As I learned about the repentence conspirancy it took my astonishment one level further. On this forum it has been claimed that Imam al-Ghazali (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=648) repented by way of his Iljam. Then of course there is the well-known alleged repentance of Imam al-Ash`ari (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=517) himself by way of al-Ibana (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=695). In an Orientalist class I am taking on `Ilm al-Kalaam & Falsafa, I have constantly heard the claim of how Imam al-Suyuti was an exemplication of extreme opposition to `Ilm al-Kalaam. I also found this claim in a certain Shia book. However, to the best of my knowledge he was Ash`ari and this is confirmed by many `Ulema. That what cought my attention most was the immense resemblance between claims and methodology shared by Salafiyya and Orientalism in opposition to stands taken by the Ahl al-Sunna wa-l-Jama`a on certain topics; this appears to be one of those topics. Perhaps in this fashion I ought to consider myself having repented as well by way of my thread on The Dangers of `Ilm al-Kalaam (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=815) that I will post later on.

Hamoudeh
14-10-05, 09:25 PM
Those who claim that the Asha`ariyya school is of the Ahl al-Bida' and not of the Ahl al-Sunna, claims made mostly by those who do not follow any of the Sunni schools in Fiqh or Aqida, will often add that Imam al-Ash`ari repented for the position he had taken by way of the book titled al-Ibana `an Usul al-Diyana.. Shaykh Gibril Fouad Haddad says the following about this book:

The Corrupt Text of al-Ash`ari's al-Ibana

The above lists exclude al-Ash`ari's al-Ibana `an Usul al-Diyana but Ibn `Asakir explicitly attributes it to him in the first few pages of Tabyin Kadhib al-Muftari, an attribution confirmed by al-Bayhaqi, Abu al-`Abbas al-`Iraqi, Abu `Uthman al-Sabuni, and other hadith masters.10 The book dates from the beginnings of al-Ash`ari's Sunni career according to a report narrated by Ibn Abi Ya`la in Tabaqat al-Hanabila and adduced by al-Dhahabi in the Siyar. The report is phrased rather oddly since it depicts a fawning Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Ash`ari visiting the Hanbali Abu Muhammad al-Barbahari upon entering Baghdad and enumerating before him his refutations11 of the Mu`tazila and defense of Ahl al-Sunna in order to win his approval, to which al-Barbahari coolly responds: "We only know what Ahmad ibn Hanbal said." "Whereupon," the report continues, "al-Ash`ari went out and wrote al-Ibana but they [the Hanbalis] did not accept it from him."12 Al-Dhahabi cites this report at the opening of his biographical notice on al-Barbahari in the Siyar directly following the extremely brief notice on Imam al-Ash`ari.13 Apart from its obviously Hanbali-biased terms, the report clearly shows that al-Ash`ari composed the Ibana upon first coming to Baghdad or shortly thereafter. Shaykh Wahbi Ghawiji cites a statement explicitly confirming this date from Imam Abu al-Hasan `Ali ibn Ibrahim al-Muqri (Ibn Matar) who died in the year 306: "Imam al-Ash`ari composed it in Baghdad upon entering it."14

However, despite the authenticity of al-Ash`ari's authorship, the text of the Ibana itself has undoubtedly not reached us in its original authentic form but in a corrupted version which comprises interpolations along two main ideological slants: (1) the anthropomorphist interpretation of the divine Attributes and (2) the apostatizing of Imam Abu Hanifa ( for supposedly holding, with the Jahmiyya, that the Qur'an was created. Shaykh Wahbi Sulayman Ghawiji has shown in his analysis of the work entitled Nazra `Ilmiyya fi Nisba Kitab al-Ibana Jami`ihi ila al-Imam al-Ash`ari ("A Scientific Look at the Attribution of al-Ibana in Its Entirety to Imam al-Ash`ari") that these two stances are contradicted by what is known of al-Ash`ari's authentic positions in his and his students' works.15

(1) The anthropomorphist interpretation of the divine Attributes is illustrated by the following examples:

* The passage: "[Our position is] that He has two eyes (`aynayn) without saying how; just as He stated: {That ran under Our eyes (a`yuninâ)} (54:14)."16 Ibn `Asakir's citation of the same passage in the Tabyin states: "[Our position is] that He has an eye (`aynan) without saying how."17 A recent edition of the Ibana consequently amended its own tradition to follow the text cited by Ibn `Asakir18 since the evidence of the Qur'an and the Sunna mentions {My Eye (`aynî)} (20:39) in the singular and {Our Eyes} (52:48, 54:14) in the plural but never two eyes in the dual.19 Further down in all versions of the Ibana the text states: "Allah Almighty and Exalted has said that He possesses a face and an eye which is neither given modality nor defined."20

* The passage: "When supplicating, the Muslims raise their hands toward the sky, because Allah Almighty and Exalted is established (mustawin) over the Throne which is above the heavens...21 The Muslims all say: `O Dweller of the Throne' (yâ sâkin al-`arsh)!"22 This kind of faulty reasoning can hardly come from al-Ash`ari for the following reasons:

- The Attributes are divinely ordained (tawqîfiyya) and al-Ash`ari considers it impermissible to make up or derive new terms such as mustawin and sâkin al-`arsh if there is no verse or authentic hadith transmitting them verbatim: "My method in the acceptance of the Names of Allah is Law-based authorization without regard to lexical analogy."23 - The argument of supplication on the basis of location leads to placing Allah Almighty and Exalted inside the Ka`ba according to the same logic, an absurd impossibility. - The claim that "the Muslims all say: `O Dweller of the Throne'" is unheard of. Yet Ibn Taymiyya cites it and attempts to justify it with the narration: "Allah created seven heavens then chose the uppermost and dwelt in it,"24 adducing a condemned report to support an invented phrase! - Three editions of the Ibana have, "O Dweller of the heaven (yâ sâkin al-`samâ')"25 which further casts doubt on the integrity of the text in addition to being equally anthropomorphist.

* The passage: "If we are asked: `Do you say that Allah has two hands?' The answer is: We do say that, without saying `how.' It is indicated by the saying of Allah Almighty and Exalted {The Hand of Allah is above their hands} (48:10) and His saying {that which I have created with both My hands} (38:75). It was also narrated from the Prophet - Allah bless and greet him - that he said: `Allah created Adam with His hand then He wiped his back with His hand and brought out of it his offspring.'26 So it is established that He has two hands without saying how. And the transmitted report reached us from the Prophet - Allah bless and greet him - that `Allah created Adam with Hand, created the Garden of `Adn with His hand, wrote the Torah with His hand, and planted the tree of Tuba with His hand,'27 that is: with the hand of His power (ay biyadi qudratih)."28 The last clause contradicts the entire reasoning that precedes and follows, and is actually suppressed from the latest edition of the Ibana!29 The text further states: "They say: `the hands' (al-ayd) are the strength (al-quwwa),30 so the meaning of {with both My hands} has to be `with My power' (bi qudratî). The answer to them is: That interpretation is wrong."31 Al-Ash`ari's actual position on the Attribute of hand according to Ibn `Asakir is: "Al-Ash`ari took the middle road and said: His hand is an Attribute and His face is an Attribute, just like His hearing and His sight."32

* The following passage is missing from two of the editions of al-Ibana but is found in two others: "And [we believe] that He established Himself over the Throne in the sense that He said and the meaning that He wills in a way that transcends touch, settlement, fixity, immanence, and displacement. The Throne does not carry him, rather the Throne and its carriers are carried by the subtleness of His power, subdued under His grip. He is above the Throne and the Heavens and above everything to the limits of the earth with an aboveness which does not bring Him nearer to the Throne and the Heavens, just as it does not make Him further from the earth. Rather, He is Highly Exalted above the Throne and the Heavens, just as He is Highly Exalted above the earth. Nevertheless, He is near to every entity and is (nearer to [the worshipper] than his jugular vein( and He witnesses everything."33

[b](2) The apostatizing of Imam Abu Hanifa - Allah be well-pleased with him - for supposedly holding, with the Jahmiyya, that the Qur'an was created.34 Imam al-Tahawi stated that Abu Hanifa held the opposite position in his Mu`taqad Abi Hanifa or "Abu Hanifa's Creed," also known as the `Aqida Tahawiyya.35 Nor did al-Ash`ari mention Abu Hanifa in the chapter on those who held the Qur'an was created in his Maqalat al-Islamiyyin.36 Al-Ash`ari lived in Baghdad - the seat of the Caliphate and home of the Hanafi school - at a time the Hanafi school had long been the state creed37 and would probably have been executed or exiled for making such a charge. Furthermore, al-Bayhaqi stated that "al-Ash`ari used to defend the positions of the past Imams such as Abu Hanifa and Sufyan al-Thawri among the Kufans."38 The charge of the Ibana is therefore almost certainly a later interpolation, as enmity against the Imam al-A`zam and his school and followers typifies fanatic Hanbalis and their "Salafi" successors.

There are also blatant errors which al-Ash`ari the heresiographer and former Mu`tazili would never commit, such as the attribution to the Mu`tazila as a whole of the belief that Allah Almighty and Exalted is everywhere,39 when he himself reports in his Maqalat that the vast majority of the Mu`tazila said, like Ahl al-Sunna, that it was the controlling disposal (tadbîr) of Allah Almighty and Exalted that was everywhere.40 Furthermore, there is apparently no known chain of transmission for the Ibana from the Imam despite its ostensible fame and the abundance of his students,41 nor do any of his first or second-generation students - such as Ibn Furak - make any mention of it.42 Finally, Imam al-Qushayri's Shikaya Ahl al-Sunna bi Hikaya Ma Nalahum Min al-Mihna provides an additional external sign that the tampering of al-Ash`ari's Ibana took place possibly as early as the fifth century:

They have attributed despicable positions to al-Ash`ari and claimed he had said certain things of which there is not one iota in his books. Nor can such sayings be found reported in any of the books of the scholars of kalâm who either supported him or opposed him, from the earliest times to our own - whether directly quoted or paraphrased. All of that is misrepresentation, forgery, and unmitigated calumny!43

In conclusion it is possible to say with a fair degree of certainty that the Ibana attributed to al-Ash`ari today is actually the anonymous, chainless rewriting of an anti-Ash`ari, anti-Hanafi literalist with clear anthropomorphist leanings and a willingness to adduce Israelite reports typical of the works of anthropomorphist doctrine44 while the unaltered version known to Ibn `Asakir, Abu `Uthman al-Sabuni, and other Ash`aris did not reach us. It is a telling confirmation of this conclusion that the early anthropomorphists used to reject the Ibana while those of later centuries quote it without reservation. And Allah knows best.

Imam Abu‘l-Hasan al-Ash‘ari - Shaykh G. F. Haddad (http://www.livingislam.org/ashari_e.html)


Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller has written about this subject as well:

The Salafis claim that Abul Hasan Ash‘ari formulated the Ash‘ari tenets of Islamic faith (‘aqida) while he was between the Mu‘tazila and Ahl al-Sunna, and that he later refuted his formulations and joined Ahl al-Sunna in the Hanbali madhhab before he died. Is there any truth in this? They say his last book, al-Ibana, contains the refutations. If not, how can I prove it to these people? They also say that he had a second dream in which the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) appeared to him and told him that his Ash‘ari positions were wrong!

The Ash‘ari school and Maturidi schools have represented the ‘aqida or "tenets of belief" of the majority of Sunni Muslims for more than a thousand years; just as the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi‘i, and Hanbali schools have represented the shari‘a or "Sacred Law" for the majority of Sunni Muslims for this period. Those against these two traditional schools of tenets of faith are people of bid‘a, defined in a fatwa or formal legal opinion by Imam Ibn Hajar Haytami as "whoever is upon other than the path of Ahl al-Sunna wa l-Jama‘a, Ahl al-Sunna wa l-Jama‘a meaning the followers of Sheikh Abul Hasan Ash‘ari and Abu Mansur Maturidi, the two Imams of Ahl al-Sunna" (Haytami, al-Fatawa al-hadithiyya, 280). In the past, such contraventions, aside from Mu‘tazilites, Shiites, and purely sectarian movements, were confined to a handful of mainly Hanbalis, whose bone of contention with the two traditional schools was that neither had anything to do with their literalist, anthropomorphic understanding of Allah Most High, which they promoted by all means at their disposal.

It is noteworthy that Saudi Arabia has printed and distributed worldwide thousands of copies of a Salafi book called Manhaj al-Asha‘ira fi al-‘aqida [The methodology of the Ash‘aris in tenets of faith] by one Safar Hawali, a professor at Umm al-Qura University in Mecca. It ascribes to the Ash‘ari school the misrepresentations typical of that part of the world, identifying the school with the positions of heretical sects like the Jahmiyya, the Qadriyya, Murjiites, and so on, and contains a number of the things you asked about the Ash‘aris, so I would guess this is the misinformation that your English Salafis are going upon. One can find the details in Hasan Saqqaf’s recent rebuttal of the work entitled Tahni’a al-sadiq al-mahbub, wa nayl al-surur al-matlub, bi maghazala Safar al-maghlub [The greeting of the beloved friend, and attainment of happiness sought, in affectionate discourse with Safar the defeated]. I have heard that Hawali has since moved on from his positions, though I do not know the details.

Saqqaf also talks in his work about the bogus Hanbali "repentances" of various Ash‘ari Imams such as Ash‘ari, Juwayni, and Ghazali, that don’t appear in their books but have rather reached us by sanads each containing an anti-Ash‘ari or two, as is also corroborated by Ibn Subki in his Tabaqat al-Shafi‘iyya al-kubra [The greater compendium of the successive generations of Shafi‘i scholars] under the biographical entries on each of these scholars.

From the wider perspective of Islamic law, these forgeries are rather meaningless, since a Muslim may not believe in the Islamic faith (‘aqida) of Ahl al-Sunna merely because his Imam has said it, but rather because he sincerely believes it is the truth. Scholars say that it is not legally valid to follow qualified scholarship (taqlid) in tenets of Islamic faith (as opposed to rulings of Islamic law) unless one has full conviction of these tenets of faith from one’s own heart—which is why they tell us that one’s faith (iman) by taqlid in such tenets is only legally valid on condition that if one’s Imam were to cease believing something of them, one would not. So the forgeries would seem to have little scholarly relevance, other than to show the lengths to which their perpetrators were willing to go

The claims that Imam Abul Hasan Ash‘ari (d. 324/936) repudiated his own positions are not new, but have been circulated by these Hanbalis for a long time, a fact that compelled the hadith master (hafiz) Ibn ‘Asakir to carefully investigate this question, and the sanads (chains of narrators) for the attribution of these repudiations to Ash‘ari. The results of his research furnished probably the best intellectual biography of Ash‘ari ever done, a book that rebuts these claims thoroughly and uniquivocally, called Tabyin kadhib al-muftari fi ma nusiba ila al-Imam al-Ash‘ari [On showing the untruth of the liars, concerning what has been ascribed to Imam Ash‘ari], that proves that there are liars in all the sanads that impute this to Imam Ash‘ari. The book is in print, and whoever would like the details should read it.

Imam Ash‘ari’s al-Ibana ‘an usul al-diyana [The clarification of the bases of the religion] was not his last book, but rather among the first after he broke with Mu‘tazilism. Imam Kawthari states:

"The Ibana was authored at the first of his return from Mu‘tazilite thought, and was by way of trying to induce [n: the Hanbali literalist] Barbahari (d. 328/940) to embrace the tenets of faith of Ahl al-Sunna. Whoever believes it to be the last of his books believes something that is patently false. Moreover, pen after pen of the anthropomorphists has had free disposal of the text—particularly after the strife (fitna) that took place in Baghdad [n: after A.H. 323, when Hanbalis ("the disciples of Barbahari") gained the upper hand in Baghdad, Muslims of the Shafi‘i madhhab were beaten, and anthropomorphism became the faith (‘aqida) of the day (Ibn Athir: al-Kamal fi al-tarikh, 7.114)]—so that what is in the work that contradicts the explicit positions transmitted from Ash‘ari by his own disciples, and their disciples, cannot be relied upon (al-Sayf al-saqil, 108).

This is borne out by hadith master (hafiz) Dhahabi in his Siyar a‘lam al-nubala’ (15.90), as well as Ibn ‘Asakir’s Tabyin kadhib al-muftari. As for seeing dreams, dreams may warm the heart, but they are not a proof for either Islamic law or tenets of faith. In his introduction to Ibn ‘Asakir’s work, Kawthari notes that "the anthropomorphists are the ones who seem to need this [relating of dreams]: when unable to prove their point while awake, they go to sleep, to find the proofs they are looking for while asleep, to fill their books with them" (Tabyin kadhib al-muftari (21–22)."

Imam Ash'ari Repudiating Asha'rism - Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/masudq2.htm)

Imam Ash'ari Repudiating Asha'rism - Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller - Google Cache (http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:78aa6iePmb0J:www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/masudq2.htm+%22al-Ibana%22&hl=nl&start=1)

Hamoudeh
14-10-05, 09:27 PM
Kalam and Islam

Most of us have met dedicated and otherwise intelligent Muslims who have made themselves “‘aqida police” to confront the rest of us with their issues in tenets of faith. We are told that this group, or that group, or most Muslims, or we ourselves are kafirs or “non-Muslims” on grounds that are less than familiar, but found in some manual of Islamic creed. Before going to hell on a trick question, or sending someone else there, many Muslims today would do well to cast a glance at the history of traditional Islamic theology (kalam), and the real creedal reasons that make one a Muslim or non-Muslim. Nuh Keller examines them in the following address given at the Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought in Amman, Jordan

Few would deny today that the millions of dollars spent worldwide on religious books, teachers, and schools in the last thirty years by oil-rich governments have brought about a sea change in the way Muslims view Islam. In whole regions of the Islamic world and Western countries where Muslims live, what was called Wahhabism in earlier times and termed Salafism in our own has supplanted much of traditional Islamic faith and practice. The very name Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama‘a or “Sunni orthodoxy and consensus” has been so completely derailed in our times that few Muslims even know it is rolling down another track. In most countries, Salafism is the new “default Islam,” defining all religious discourse, past and present, by the understanding of a few Hanbali scholars of the Middle Ages whose works historically affected the tribes and lands where the most oil has been found. Among the more prominent casualties of this “reform” are the Hanbalis’ ancient foes, the Ash‘ari and Maturidi schools of Sunni theology.

For over a thousand years Ash‘ari-Maturidi theology has defined Sunni orthodoxy. When I visited al-Azhar in Cairo in 1990 and requested for my library the entire syllabus of religious textbooks taught by Azhar High Schools in Egypt, one of the books I was given was a manual on Islamic sects, whose final section defined Ahl al-Sunna as “the Ash‘aris, followers of Abul Hasan al-Ash‘ari, and the Maturidis, followers of Abu Mansur al-Maturidi” (Mudhakkara al-firaq, 14).

This is not an isolated assessment. When the Imam of the late Shafi‘i school Ibn Hajr al-Haytami was asked for a fatwa identifying as-hab al-bida‘ or heretics, he answered that they were “those who contravene Muslim orthodoxy and consensus (Ahl al-Sunna wa al- Jama‘a): the followers of Sheikh Abul Hasan al-Ash‘ari and Abu Mansur al-Maturidi, the two Imams of Ahl al-Sunna” (al-Fatawa al-hadithiy-ya, 280).

Few Muslims today know anything about the Ash‘ari and Maturidi schools or their relation to Islam. So I shall discuss their theology not as history, but as orthodoxy, answering the most basic questions about them such as: What are the beliefs of Sunni Islam? Who needs rational theology anyway? And what relevance does it have today? We mention only enough history to understand what brought it into being, what it said, what it developed into, what its critics said of it, and what the future may hold for it.

Kalam and Islam - Nuh Ha Mim Keller (http://www.islamicamagazine.com/ViewCompleteArticle.aspx?ArticleCd=112)
It is to be noted that there are great dangers in any `Ulum, when they are engaged in by laymen. Any science in Islam is a potential trap and doorway to heresy, deviance and innovation for those who are not qualified to engage in them. This includes any single person on this forum and to great extents. This is why we should be very conscious of our position and the assertions we make in relation to the knowledge and qualifications we may possess. Indeed this goes for any science, but especially for `Ilm al-Kalaam. There are several reasons for this:

1) `Ilm al-Kalaam is a science in which many of the positions taken are not relevant for the practical religious life of laymen. They often deal with matters that we are not required to believe, and as such considerably irrelevant for us to dispute upon.

2) `Ilm al-Kalaam is at the same time a science that, when engaged in improperly, offers the possibilty to question the most fundamental aspects of our Creed.

3) `Ilm al-Kalaam is a science in which certain methodologies are incorporated that are of themselves rather controversial; their legitimacy lies within purpose and context, something which is hard for laymen to always consider.

4) `Ilm al-Kalaam is a science from which several heresies developed, and has proved to be perhaps the most vulnerable science to be infected by such heresies.

In the societies that most of us live in, the methodologies incorporated in `Ilm al-Kalaam are prominent and easily engaged in by regular people; these are societies that encourage "free thinking", individualism and praise experimental ponderings and experimenting with metaphysics, logic, ethics and so on. It is very easy for us to become influenced by this mentality and incorporate it into our own religion. We are very vulnerable for this when we are raised in such a culture and speak it's language; that we are inclined to use its ways is something we cannot but admit. This unfortunate phenomenon can be seen in the Tafsir and Fiqh engaged in by laymen, Kalaam is then something out of reach for many; let it be left alone as well by those of us who can reach it insha'allah.

Imam al-Ghazali the `Alim of Ash`ari Kalaam has written the book Iljam al-`awam `an `Ilm al-Kalam (Restraining the uneducated from the science of Theology) which is dedicated to this particular subject of dangers that rest within this fascinating science of Kalaam. The book is online available in Arabic at Ghazali.Org (http://www.ghazali.org/works/iljam.pdf)

Ma`salam

Hamoudeh
26-12-05, 06:10 PM
An overview of sources:

Imam al-Ash`ari (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=517)
Imam al-Maturidi (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=518)
Imam al-Suyuti (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=976)
Imam al-Ghazali (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=648)
Imam al-Kawthari (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=1107)
The Alleged "Repentance" of the Asharis (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=873)
Introduction to Ashari Aqeedah (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=888)
Taw`il & Tawfid in al-Ash`ariyya (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=885)
Maturidis and Tafwid al-Ma'na (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=918)
Differences between Ash`ariyya & Maturidiyya (http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ahadunahad&showtopic=523)

Ma`salaam

CISC
26-12-05, 09:33 PM
Salam ala men itaba3a al Houda

Why do you post Links, information by Sects? Are you from Ahlul Bidha?

Dear Muslims and Non-Muslims,

this group are not islamic. They are a sect. We have lot of information about this sect.

Hamoudeh
26-12-05, 10:05 PM
Ibn Hajar Asqalani, Nawawi, Ghazali, Suyuti, Ibn Hajar Haytami and so on we're from "sects", "unislamic" and "Ahlul Bid'a"? Those who deny the orthodoxy of the Ash`ari school are upon Dalaal, the Ash`ariyya have always been at the forefront of the Ahlus Sunnah and in defense of innovation. Don't accuse others of secterianism when you take secterian positions not shared by anyone but a few individuals in modern times. Who is your "we"? Instead of warning people on a forum, why don't you take your "we" to the Mashriq and the Maghrib and the rest of the Muslim world to tell the Sunni `Ulema and the people how they are all Ahlul Bid'a?

Debater
27-12-05, 08:15 PM
Ibn Hajar Asqalani, Nawawi, Ghazali, Suyuti, Ibn Hajar Haytami and so on we're from "sects", "unislamic" and "Ahlul Bid'a"? Those who deny the orthodoxy of the Ash`ari school are upon Dalaal, the Ash`ariyya have always been at the forefront of the Ahlus Sunnah and in defense of innovation. Don't accuse others of secterianism when you take secterian positions not shared by anyone but a few individuals in modern times. Who is your "we"? Instead of warning people on a forum, why don't you take your "we" to the Mashriq and the Maghrib and the rest of the Muslim world to tell the Sunni `Ulema and the people how they are all Ahlul Bid'a?
Well, you divide Muslims into sects and claim you are not promoting sectarianism, subhaanAllah.
What else is called sectarianism?
People like you don't have any evidence of your innovations from Quran and Sunnah but you always have 'Ulama whom you have made your lords besides Allah as is mentioned in Quran.
Such people don't often talk about Quran and Sunnah, but scholars and scholars and scholars...

Has Allah descent Scholars with Islam or He sent Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam with Quran?