Belief of Hanbalis / Atharis (past) vs "Salafis"

[BK]

Mashallah good reads on here.
Could you please post more things from shiek uthameen?

Are there other scholars we should follow?
Jazakallah khurn everyone ☺️

[AmantuBillahi]

History of Ilm al-Kalam:

Notes from Yasir Qadhi's Ilm al-Kalam lecture:

https://m2w4k5m5.stackpathcdn.com/wp...erspective.pdf

The Theological Implications of Ibrahim and the Story of the Stars (Ibn Taymiyyah vs the Mutakalimin):

https://muslimmatters.org/2009/07/27...n-yasir-qadhi/

[AmantuBillahi]

This is the list of traditional Hanbali texts in Aqida, by Abu Jafar al Hanbali...

Read my post carefully. The article you provided didn't meet my request:

Could you prove using modern Salafi sources that each one of the scholars you listed (especially Ibn Hamdan) is recognized as representing "mainstream" Hanbali Aqeedah? I want quotes from Albani and Ibn Uthaymeen validating these scholars and attempting to justify why they've chosen to deviate from the mainstream.

Also, why isn't Imam al-Barbahari on your list? What methodology did you employ to determine which scholars represent the mainstream Hanbali creed?

[Farah. A]

Farah. A

What do you and other Egyptian Salafis in general think about studying Hanbali/Athari Aqeedah through the Hanbali program offered at al-Azhar? There were a few "Hanbali scholars" that were referenced earlier in the thread who graduated from al-Azhar. How are figures like these received by the Egyptian Salafi community?

Huh! How come?

Azhar only teaches Ashari aqeedah

[Mavikick]

I see you didn't create this thread.
so Ramadan is tomorrow so why are you debating?

You have your opinions and beliefs and we have ours.
So I think it's just best leaving everything you obviously don't believe or wish to see it from our point of view.

I don't believe u said? U making takfeer of me? I ain't discussing anything anymore with kids of female gender. Adios.

[Mavikick]

Huh! How come?

Azhar only teaches Ashari aqeedah

This is not true. Yesterday a good friend of mine, who has a PhD from Al Azhar said this is not true what u just said.

[AmantuBillahi]

Huh! How come?

Azhar only teaches Ashari aqeedah

Are you familiar with Muhammad 'Abd al-Wahid al-Azhari al-Hanbali?

https://youtu.be/Hcj6_1teud0

The Ash'ari brother referenced him and another "Azhari Hanbali" as modern authorities in Hanbali Aqeedah on page #5.

[Farah. A]

This is not true. Yesterday a good friend of mine, who has a PhD from Al Azhar said this is not true what u just said.

Show me the curriculum.

[Mavikick]

Anyway anyhow new age salafiyyah follow only imaams of khalaf, beginning with ibn Taymiyya until bin Baaz, ibn Uthaymīn etc. First 7 or so centuries seems not to exist for them regarding other ulama. Ain't that true? Saalfi follows Khalaf? Beats me. Seriously.

[Mavikick]

Show me the curriculum.

I don't need to. I trust my friend who is Hafeez of Qur'an since age 13 and who has a PhD there. Obviously curriculumatum ain't everything. It's like somebody said, give me the list of all books in this library but ain't interested in actually reading them (there might be said hula bila there or whatever). Right?

[Farah. A]

Are you familiar with Muhammad 'Abd al-Wahid al-Azhari al-Hanbali?

https://youtu.be/Hcj6_1teud0

The Ash'ari brother referenced him and another "Azhari Hanbali" as modern authorities in Hanbali Aqeedah on page #5.

No. i am not familiar with him at all. i even googled his name, he doesn’t seem popular at all

[Mavikick]

Anybody else wants a piece of me? U have exactly 39 mins. Go.

[Abu Sulayman]

...

B) I still don’t know why are you applying these examples to make it sound like there is likeness between the creator and the creation Astghfiruallah.
it is the usage of the word شبيه and مثيل no more.

...

Your words seems like you are following the Asharis and I don’t really know how can someone who is able to read the Quran and ahadith follow them. Alhamduliallah, as someone who is living amongst them, I don’t follow their Aqeedah.

You can defend Ibn 'Uthaymin as much as you want, this does not change his clear Tashbih.
By the way: I didn’t say he believes God to be like the creation, but rather "only" similar to a certain degree. This is something that he establishes in many different statements, so there’s no way to deny it.

He said that Allah sees through eyes. Do you understand what this means? He has turned the A'yun regarding the Bari ta'ala into Adawat (tools) of seeing! What do you call this? Why do you think Hanabila reject Adawat? For the sake of fun or so that people do not make these type of statements?

And: You're ignoring his example with animals in the context of the divine attributes, which is ugly and disrespectful to say at least!
He says that the face of a horse is not like the face of a cat. I ask: They’re not like eachother, but are they not similar?!
So this man is clearly establishing a certain degree of similarity between the Creator and the creation!

As for your statement concerning Ash'aris, then this shows your lack of understanding! Major scholars of this Umma who understood the Qur`an al-karim 1000 times better than me, you and whoever is in this forum were Ash'aris!
You should respect both Hanbalis and Ash’aris, because both represent classical Sunni 'Aqida (as mentioned in al-Ayn wal Athar!) and their differences are Ijtihadi ones.

I really advice you to listen to the Egyptian Shaykh Muhammad 'Abd al-Wahid al-Hanbali, because then you'll understand the difference between real Hanabila and those so called "Salafis".

[Farah. A]

I don't need to. I trust my friend who is Hafeez of Qur'an since age 13 and who has a PhD there. Obviously curriculumatum ain't everything. It's like somebody said, give me the list of all books in this library but ain't interested in actually reading them (there might be said hula bila there or whatever). Right?

Ok you can trust him as you want but don’t tell me that I am wrong without proof.i don’t mind if you correct me but give me a proof. I went to Azhar and checked their curriculum and i know A looooot of azharis

[BK]

Ibn 'Uthaymin ("Salafi"): There is some degree of similarity between the Creator and the creation


Ibn 'Uthaymin is regarded as a major scholar by the modern-day "Salafis". We've already seen how the Hanabila rejected attributing similarity (Tashbih) in an explicit and absolute way.

So let's see wether Ibn 'Uthaymin agrees with them (the Hanbalis) or says something that no Sunni Muslim would ever say!

Ibn 'Uthaymin (d. 1421 AH) said [as mentioned in the book Majmu' Fatawa wa Rasa`il Ibn 'Uthaymin]:

والتعبير بنفي التمثيل أحسن من التعبير بنفي التشبيه، لوجوه ثلاثة: أحدها: أن التمثيل هو الذي جاء به القرآن وهو منفي مطلقا، بخلاف التشبيه، فلم يأت القرآن بنفيه
الثاني: أن نفي التشبيه على الإطلاق لا يصح، لأن كل موجودين فلا بد أن يكون بينهما قدر مشترك يشتبهان فيه ويتميز كل واحد بما يختص به، فالحياة مثلا وصف ثابت في الخالق والمخلوق، فبينهما قدر مشترك، ولكن حياة الخالق تليق به وحياة المخلوق تليق به
الثالث: أن الناس اختلفوا في مسمى التشبيه، حتى جعل بعضهم إثبات الصفات التي أثبتها الله لنفسه تشبيها، فإذا قلنا من غير تشبيه، فهم هذا البعض من هذا القول نفي الصفات التي أثبتها الله لنفسه

The expression of denying attributing likeness (Tamthil) [between the Creator and the creation] is better than expressing the denying of attributing similarity (Tashbih), and this is from three sides:
The first: Attributing likeness (Tamthil) is that which the Qur`an came to deny absolutely unlike attributing similarity (Tashbih), which the Qur`an did not deny.
The second: Denying attributing similarity (Tashbih) in an absolute way is not correct, because every two existing beings / things must have [at least] a common degree between them (Qadar Mushtarak) where they are similar to each other while every one of them is different in that which makes him special. Life (Hayat) for example is a proven description for the Creator and the creation, so there is a common degree (Qadar Mushtarak) between them, but the life of the Creator is [one] befitting Him and the life of the creation is [one] befitting them.
The third: That the people have disagreed regarding that which is named as "Tashbih" to the degree that some of them turned the affirmation of the attributes that Allah affirmed for Himself as attributing similarity (Tashbih). So if we say "without attributing similarity" some would understand from this statement the negation of the attributes that Allah affirmed for Himself.
- end of quote -

And Ibn 'Uthaymin also said [in the same book]:

فإذا قلت: ما هي الصورة التي تكون لله ويكون آدم عليها؟ قلنا: إن الله عز وجل له وجه, وله عين, وله يد, وله رجل - عز وجل - لكن لا يلزم من أن تكون هذه الأشياء مماثلة للإنسان، فهناك شيء من الشبه لكنه ليس على سبيل المماثلة، كما أن الزمرة الأولى من أهل الجنة فيها شبه من القمر لكن بدون مماثلة

If it is asked: What is the image (Sura) that Allah and Adam are [both] upon?
Then we say: Allah - 'azza wa jall - has a face, an eye, a hand, a foot - 'azza wa jall -, but this does not necessitate that these [descriptions] are like that of human beings, for there is some [sort of] of similarity (!), but not upon the way of likeness (Mumathala); just like the first group from the people of paradise are similar to the moon (i.e. shining), but without likeness.
- end of quote -

And Ibn 'Uthaymin said in one of his lectures (taken word by word from a "Salafi" website!):

نقول مثلاً وجه الله ولم نقل وجه وأطلقنا فوجه الله يكون لائقا لذاته أو لائقا بذاته ، كما لو قلت وجه الفرس ووجه القط الهر هل تفهم من قولك وجه الفرس أنه مثل وجه الهر ؟ أبداً

We say for example "face of Allah" and we do not just say "face" in general [terms], because the face of Allah is befitting to His essence or befitting His essence.
Just like when you say "face of a horse" and "face of a cat": Do you understand from your statement "face of a horse" that it is like (mithl) the "face of a cat"? Never...
- end of quote -

So this is how these people speak of Allah ta'ala! Allah's refuge is sought from this ugly Tashbih to the degree that they do not even shy away from mentioning animals while speaking about Allah ta'ala!
So the degree that Allah ta'ala is different from his creation - according to the above statements made by Ibn 'Uthaymin - is similar to the difference between the first group to enter paradise and the moon or similar to the difference between the face of a horse and that of a cat!? Is this the Tawhid?! Well, this sounds more like Wathaniyya (paganism)!



In response to this Tashbih I would like to remind you of the statement of Imam Ibn Abi Ya'la (d. 526 AH) in his Tabaqat al-Hanabila:

واعتقدوا: أن الباري سبحانه استأثر بعلم حقائق صفاته ومعانيها عن العالمين وفارق بها سائر الموصوفين
...
وكل ما يقع في الخواطرمن حد أو تشبيه أو تكييف: فالله سبحانه وتعالى عن ذَلِكَ وَاللَّهِ ليس كمثله شيء ولا يوصف بصفات المخلوقين الدالة عَلَى حدثهم ولا يجوز عَلَيْهِ ما يجوز عليهم من التغير من حال إلى حال ليس بجسم ولا جوهر ولا عرض وأنه لم يزل ولا يزال وأنه الَّذِي لا يتصور فِي الأوهام وصفاته لا تشبه صفات المخلوقين لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ وهو السميع البصير
...
أن البارىء سبحانه موصوف بأنه: حي عالم قادر مريد والخلق موصوفون بهذه الصفات ولم يدل الاتفاق فِي هَذِهِ التسمية عَلَى الاتفاق فِي حقائقها ومعانيها هكذا القول فِي أخبار الصفات

And they believed that the Maker - glory be to Him - is exclusive in having knowledge of the realities of his attributes and their meanings (!) [without anyone] from the worlds [having this knowledge] and He is [completely] different from all that has descriptions;
...
Whatever comes to the mind from limitation (Hadd) or attributing similarity (Tashbih) or attributing modality (Takyif), then Allah is glorified and exalted above it and there is nothing like Him. He is not described with the attributes of the creation that indicate their temporality and that which is possible regarding them - from the changing of one state to another - is not possible regarding Him.
[Allah ta'ala] is not a body (Jism) or a particle (Jawhar) or an accident ('Aradh) and has always existed and will always exist. He's the One who can not be imagined and his attributes are not similar to the attributes of the creation, { nothing is like Him; and He only is the All Hearing, the All Seeing. } [42:11].
...
The Maker - glory be to Him - is described with being Living (Hayy), Knowing ('Alim), Powerful (Qadir) and Willing (Murid) while the creation is also described with these attributes and this agreement in the naming does not show their agreement in their realities (!) and meanings (!) and likewise is the statement regarding the narrations of the [divine] attributes;...
- end of quote -

This is what real Hanbalis / Atharis believed!

I'm confused could you simplify this.
In your opinion you think shiek uthameen is wrong?