Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Farah. A View Post
    Every time I reply to your comment, you put my comment aside and keep posting like three long comments and we lose the main point. How can I reply to all of that!
    Anyway calling the people who follow the Quran and Sunnah liars is enough to make me stop replying to you.
    please stop copying and pasting things you haven’t read about. you are blindly following this shaykh.

    I honestly don’t have time now to reply to all of that and I don’t know which part we should discuss because we lost the main point but in shaa Allah I will try after Ramadan because it is a waste of time now.
    I'm putting some issues in your comments (and that of other people) aside, because I don't think they deserve any real attention (or because I want to answer later on).
    Then: The things that I post have been translated by myself (except if I mention another source for them), so it's really rich for you to claim "copy pasting"!
    Specifically the last quote by MIAW (in red) was part of a thread of mine with the name "The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than ISIS". The thread is from 2015 (!) and at that time I did not even know the Shaykh! So this shows to you, that you should not assume things about other people without knowledge!

    As for IAW being a liar (a very big one!), then this has been proven in a post from 2015 from the same thread (HERE). In the quote he was claiming that the majority of the people of Hijaz rejected the resurrection after death and this is an obvious and clear lie.

    Anyways it's not like this man was just a liar. He was also ignorant of basic sciences like 'Ilm al-Balagha and yet you people almost worship him. This should be enough to know how wrong you are.

    AND: The main point (!) of this thread is that mainstream Hanbalis are different in their creed than "Salafis".

    Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 26-04-20, 04:15 PM.

    Comment


    • Farah. A

      "He said: (The contemporary Salafism did wrong Sheikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah and distorted it by its affiliation with him, and they distanced people from his understanding and reading it correctly and its absorption)..."
      Was he referring to the differences between MIAW and Ibn Taymiyyah on Takfir and Udher bil-Jahl or Asma wa Sifat?

      Also:


      Sixth: His boldness on the Hanbali school of thought

      The young Muhammad Abd al-Wahid - may God guide us and him - claims his affiliation with the Hanbali school of Islam, and calls himself Azhari al-Hanbali, and presents himself to people in the means of communication in the form of a specialist in the doctrine, his expert, who is determined by him, the scientist in all its parts, surrounding the sayings of his flags and imams, so he sees more criticism of some He took care of the doctrine and its books, until they were deceived by the knowledge and experience.

      The problem is that he does not care about the Hanbali school of thought, nor that he adheres to him and does not deviate from his sayings, as this has been practiced by many scholars over the centuries, yet most of them do not come out of being imitators, and the imitator as mentioned by Ibn Abdel-Barr and others is not counted in the scholars.

      Rather, the problem is that he climbed on the doctrine, and dared him on it, without having a predecessor from the Hanbali who received from them the sciences of the doctrine, read his munitions, and explain to him the
      phrases of his companions, and determine his origins and rules, for most Hanbalis today in Najd in particular, and he was not known about the introduction It is from them, in addition to their accompaniment, that it appears that he did not receive the Hanbali school of thought which he claims only from the stomachs of books, and it is no secret that the taking of books does not make him an expert in the doctrine, in addition to becoming a visionary critic.

      Perhaps I conclude with a tip that I address to our young brother Muhammad bin Abdul Wahid, which is to watch God Almighty, and warn of wonder and vanity, for they perish the servant, and they exasperate the Lord, to discipline with the literature of scholars, adhere to their approach, and take their path, and do not rush anything prematurely, but rather he must be careful It is necessary to accompany the scholars, and to take from them, and to leave the self-esteem and trust in them, and it is not independent to take knowledge from the stomachs of books, for knowledge is taken only from the mouths of the divine scholars, with sincerity and sincerity, and it invokes God Almighty.
      I also advise the youth and beginners to seek knowledge, to be careful to take knowledge of the people who are known to it, those who work with it, those responsible for it, and avoid inundating ones who are searching for everything new, because science is authentic and there is nothing new in it, and the methods of scholars to take knowledge, receive it, understand it and work with it are still Maslua followed, and with it the scholars became imams to guide them, and it was true of the Prophet, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, that he said: “ It is one of the signs of the Hour that knowledge be sought by the smallest ” [Narrated by Ibn Al-Mubarak in “Al-Zuhd”, and Al-Laki in “Origins of the Sunnah” and others], The "minor" were interpreted by the people of heresy and young.
      So this portion of the article is criticizing him for being a self-taught imposter Hanbali. He's taking directly from the books of the previous scholars without the proper training and misinterpreting their Aqeedah. If you can find some quality material explaining point by point how exactly he's done this please post it here.


      Comment


      • Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
        Farah. A



        Was he referring to the differences between MIAW and Ibn Taymiyyah on Takfir and Udher bil-Jahl or Asma wa Sifat?

        Also:




        So this portion of the article is criticizing him for being a self-taught imposter Hanbali. He's taking directly from the books of the previous scholars without the proper training and misinterpreting their Aqeedah. If you can find some quality material explaining point by point how exactly he's done this please post it here.

        Ya Salam! Look who's speaking about being "self-taught"! Ohh, the irony!
        What is even stranger is for people who do not adhere to a Madhhab (!) to claim that someone is an "imposter" and this with the knowledge that this person is STRICTLY adhering to the Madhhab!

        Maybe AmantuBillahi can explain to us who MIAW took his 'Aqida from? I'm asking this with the knowledge that ALL "Salafis" have taken their 'Aqida from him!
        Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 26-04-20, 04:30 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post

          Ya Salam! Look who's speaking about being "self-taught"! Ohh, the irony!
          What is even stranger is for people who do not adhere to a Madhhab (!) to claim that someone is an "imposter" and this with the knowledge that this person is STRICTLY adhering to the Madhhab!

          Maybe AmantuBillahi can explain to us who MIAW took his 'Aqida from? I'm asking this with the knowledge that ALL "Salafis" have taken their 'Aqida from him!
          I'm not concerned with anything from the article other than the portions I quoted.

          What's more disturbing is how you're trying to convince us of taking pure Hanbali Aqeedah from someone who studied at and champions the Ash'ari university al-Azhar:

          "When Salah al-Din came into power, he followed the footsteps of Nur al-Din and Nizam al-Mulk in utilizing education institutes as means of political support. In 566AH, as minister under the Fatimids, he replaced the Fatimid Ismaili judge of Egypt with the famous Ash'ari, Abd al-Malik al-Maradani (d. 605), and converted the Shi'i Madrasas into Sunni Ash'ari ones, the most recognized, of course, being the famous al-Azhar." (Pg. 72)
          https://archive.org/details/YasirQad...earch/al-azhar

          Anyways I don't want to argue back and forth during Ramadan. InshaAllah Farah. A can provide more information on post #287 and we'll take it from there.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post

            I'm not concerned with anything from the article other than the portions I quoted.

            What's more disturbing is how you're trying to convince us of taking pure Hanbali Aqeedah from someone who studied at and champions the Ash'ari university al-Azhar:



            https://archive.org/details/YasirQad...earch/al-azhar

            Anyways I don't want to argue back and forth during Ramadan. InshaAllah Farah. A can provide more information on post #287 and we'll take it from there.
            The problem is that you’re depending on others (be it Abuz Zubair, Umm Abdullah M, some Madkhalis, Yasir Qadi and now Farah A). Since you are unable to read the actual sources, you should not take part in this thread in the first place!

            If Farah A wants to make any posts after Ramadan, then let her stick to the actual topic of this thread, which is the claim or statement that mainstream Hanbalis are different in creed than modern day "Salafis" and nothing else. I have already brought proves for my position.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post

              The problem is that you’re depending on others (be it Abuz Zubair, Umm Abdullah M, some Madkhalis, Yasir Qadi and now Farah A). Since you are unable to read the actual sources, you should not take part in this thread in the first place!

              If Farah A wants to make any posts after Ramadan, then let her stick to the actual topic of this thread, which is the claim or statement that mainstream Hanbalis are different in creed than modern day "Salafis" and nothing else. I have already brought proves for my position.
              Who are you to tell me not to take part in the thread when you mentioned me by name in the OP? Next time think twice.

              I've objectively defeated you in this debate despite not being competent in Arabic. It is only your arrogance which continues you to post and try to get the last word.

              Syllogistic argument:

              1. The majority of Ash'aris consider Ibn Taymiyyah a Mujasimma and his books filled with Tajsim.
              2. The majority of Hanbalis do not consider Ibn Taymiyyah a Mujassima and neither are his books filled with Tajsim.
              3. The Ash'aris and the latter Hanbalis have a different approach to terms like Tajsim, Hawadith, Hadd, Makkan, etc.

              https://www.ummah.com/forum/forum/li...5#post12692435

              Comment


              • Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post

                Who are you to tell me not to take part in the thread when you mentioned me by name in the OP? Next time think twice.

                I've objectively defeated you in this debate despite not being competent in Arabic. It is only your arrogance which continues you to post and try to get the last word.

                Syllogistic argument:

                1. The majority of Ash'aris consider Ibn Taymiyyah a Mujasimma and his books filled with Tajsim.
                2. The majority of Hanbalis do not consider Ibn Taymiyyah a Mujassima and neither are his books filled with Tajsim.
                3. The Ash'aris and the latter Hanbalis have a different approach to terms like Tajsim, Hawadith, Hadd, Makkan, etc.

                https://www.ummah.com/forum/forum/li...5#post12692435
                I mentioned you by name, because I thought you understand Arabic.

                Then: Your way of argumentation is wrong by absolute certainty.

                An example: The issue of God's Self being subject to Hawadith or not. The Shaykh Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728 AH) explicitly admitted that he disagreed with his [Hanbali] forefathers on this issue and the Hanbila after him NEVER EVER refer to him in this issue or even try to defend him on this, but rather say the exact opposite in their books of creed!

                And this is just ONE example, which shows that you have literally no idea what you’re talking about and yet declaring yourself to have won a debate (as if I was debating you in the first place!).
                Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 26-04-20, 05:49 PM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post

                  I mentioned you by name, because I thought you understand Arabic.
                  You're a shameless liar. You've known me for 3-4 years (since the MIAW thread).

                  Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
                  An example: The issue of God's Self being subject to Hawadith or not. The Shaykh Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728 AH) explicitly admittedt that he disagreed with his [Hanbali] forefathers on this issue and the Hanbila after him NEVER EVER refer to him in this issue or even try to defend him on this, but rather say the exact opposite in their books of creed!

                  And this just ONE example, which shows that you have literally no idea what you’re talking about and yet declaring yourself to have won a debate.
                  If the Hanbalis and Ash'aris understood the concept of Hawadith in the exact same way (i.e. that Hawadith necessarily entails Jismiyyah), then Ibn Taymiyyah should be classified as a Mujassim by the consensus of latter Hanbalis. There's no way around this.

                  I don't trust your Arabic google copy and paste research. You're not a student of knowledge to be speaking about these issues yourself.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
                    Farah. A



                    Was he referring to the differences between MIAW and Ibn Taymiyyah on Takfir and Udher bil-Jahl or Asma wa Sifat?

                    Also:




                    So this portion of the article is criticizing him for being a self-taught imposter Hanbali. He's taking directly from the books of the previous scholars without the proper training and misinterpreting their Aqeedah. If you can find some quality material explaining point by point how exactly he's done this please post it here.

                    Walahi there is nothing authentic about this shaykh.

                    the info he posted about this shaykh, where he was taught and his shyookh, is not authentic. It is from unauthentic website and if he looked at the comment above it he would know what I am talking about. he brought the info from a thread and there was other comments warning people not to follow this shaykh. One of them said that he met that shaykh in person and the shaykh said that when he was studying at Al-Azhar he didn’t meet any hanbalis there so he asked him from where did you take your fiqh he said he doesn’t have any shyookh there. He added that he and another shaykh studied it through internet. I didn’t post this because this is not an authentic website but Br. Abu Sulayman did brought that info from there و الله أعلم.

                    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UtK2yTRIS5o

                    there is also this video. This man said that shaykh Muhammed Abdulwahid referred a fatwa about niqaab to him although this shaykh doesn’t follow a madhab and shaykh Muhammed ibn Abdulwahid is against this. And shaykh muhammed told this man that he is introducing a new way other than the stereotyping of tamathub( adhering to one madhab) to accept different opinions and referring fatwas to others. Sorry for this bad translation i tried my best.

                    I really don’t know how can someone rely on this shaykh to take ilm from him. If you saw his videos and how he answers some fatwas he is always using bad words and insults.
                    Last edited by Farah. A; 26-04-20, 11:48 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post

                      I'm putting some issues in your comments (and that of other people) aside, because I don't think they deserve any real attention (or because I want to answer later on).
                      Then: The things that I post have been translated by myself (except if I mention another source for them), so it's really rich for you to claim "copy pasting"!
                      Specifically the last quote by MIAW (in red) was part of a thread of mine with the name "The original Najdi/ Wahhabi movement was more extreme in bloodshed & Takfir than ISIS". The thread is from 2015 (!) and at that time I did not even know the Shaykh! So this shows to you, that you should not assume things about other people without knowledge!

                      As for IAW being a liar (a very big one!), then this has been proven in a post from 2015 from the same thread (HERE). In the quote he was claiming that the majority of the people of Hijaz rejected the resurrection after death and this is an obvious and clear lie.

                      Anyways it's not like this man was just a liar. He was also ignorant of basic sciences like 'Ilm al-Balagha and yet you people almost worship him. This should be enough to know how wrong you are.

                      AND: The main point (!) of this thread is that mainstream Hanbalis are different in their creed than "Salafis".
                      So what is the point of this discussion if my comments doesn’t deserve attention. I can say the same about you but this is not from my akhlaq.

                      btw I wasn’t interested in this thread at all. I was only commenting on that brother who got banned. But you interrupted me and said that I bring laymen’s opinions and when I brought the daleel you mentioned me in other post where you claim that Ibn Uthaymeen makes tashbeh. I proved to you that he didn’t but you still argue. You brought unauthentic information about that shaykh you follow and still argue..

                      now you insult scholars subhanallah and when I reply you say you don't care about my comments and that it doesn’t deserve attention.

                      so i have nothing more to add. I think i have done my best In this thread to help the people not be mislead by this fake accusation of scholars.

                      Br. Amantubillah if you need any help please mention me in any other thread. I don’t think this thread is worth my time. Not even yours to be honest.

                      May Allah guide us All. At the end we all believe in Allah SWT and his messenger. It is not a competition who is going to win. Let everyone follow what he thinks is right but I don’t think it is wise to make this thread and mislead people.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post

                        You're a shameless liar. You've known me for 3-4 years (since the MIAW thread).



                        If the Hanbalis and Ash'aris understood the concept of Hawadith in the exact same way (i.e. that Hawadith necessarily entails Jismiyyah), then Ibn Taymiyyah should be classified as a Mujassim by the consensus of latter Hanbalis. There's no way around this.

                        I don't trust your Arabic google copy and paste research. You're not a student of knowledge to be speaking about these issues yourself.
                        Thank you very much for calling me a "shameless liar". This is how much you "respect" Ramadan, right?

                        I was under the impression that you at least understood Arabic when opening this thread. Does having a wrong impression make one a shameless liar?

                        The intention of this thread was that brothers like you have been misinformed about some issues and I wanted to present some scholarly statements to correct these misunderstandings. I really didn’t expect you to stoop that low.

                        Regarding "Arabic google copy paste":
                        Many of the things that I‘ve posted on this thread can NOT be found on google at all (at least I couldn’t find it).
                        That is why I didn’t post the Arabic of the quotes from al-Mu'tamad or that from Nihayat al-Mubtadi`in or other works, but rather only posted a link to the scanned books in Arabic.

                        It should be noted here that you accused me of dishonesty more than once and I did not do the same with you, even though I could have done so easily nor did I start any character asassination against you.

                        As for me not being a student of knowledge, then the answer is:
                        My understanding is based upon that of scholars, so I‘m not making things up nor do I trust random websites as you do.
                        I have quoted Shaykh al-Gharsi from the Ash’ari side and Shaykh al-'Awni from the Hanbali side and am able to quote more scholarly statements to support my understanding.

                        As for Tajsim: Imam al-Saffarini was quoted and he defined the meaning of Jism that he rejects regarding God. Are you saying that he was lying in his definition?
                        Today I read a discussion between two Ash'ari scholars. One of them was against the Shaykh Ibn 'Arabi and the other was pro. Using your logic they must have had different creeds, yet they both had had the same creed.
                        You’re mentioning the position of scholars towards the Shaykh Ibn Taymiyya as an independent proof regarding their creed, and this is obviously a wrong way of argumentation.

                        Anyways, since you have turned this into a personal issue I don’t see any point in keeping on conversating with you any further.
                        May Allah ta'ala guide us all.

                        Comment


                        • Farah A: All I asked from you was that you post regarding the topic and if you’re not interested in the actual topic, then what is the point of posting?

                          All you did was to try to defend Ibn ‘ Uthaymin and at the same time you brought wrong infos regarding the Shaykh Muhammad (which a specific brother instantly believes of course) and that’s it. That’s why I answered in the way I answered.

                          For anyone else who wants to post:
                          This thread is about the beliefs of mainstream Hanbalis in comparison to modern day "Salafis". Concentrate on this.
                          Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 26-04-20, 08:35 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post

                            Thank you very much for calling me a "shameless liar". This is how much you "respect" Ramadan, right?

                            I was under the impression that you at least understood Arabic when opening this thread. Does having a wrong impression make one a shameless liar?
                            You created this thread with my name in the OP 6 days prior to stating this:

                            Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
                            I had ONE big advantage however and that was my knowledge of the Arabic language, which made it possible for me to read books regarding beliefs from so called "Salafis", Ash'aris and later also Hanbalis / Atharis. When you read these books then you'll realize what the difference between these groups are and also why during our Islamic history the scholars of Ahl al-Sunna used to be either Ash'aris, Maturidis and Atharis and NOT "Salafis".

                            https://www.ummah.com/forum/forum/is...-thread/page30
                            My response in that thread doesn't give any indication for you to think that I didn't know Arabic. We've also been discussing these issues for 3-4 years now. Are you telling me that you've been under the impression that I was fluent in Arabic this whole time? I could probably dig up more quotes of you using language to your advantage, but I really couldn't care less at the moment.

                            May Allah grant us sincerity.

                            Comment


                            • You had never a wrong impression in your life and never forgot something regarding someone?
                              You're acting as if I know you personally, which is not the case.
                              We’re online here and it’s not like I remember whatever you post.

                              Anyways you turned this into a personal issue and basically insulted me and now you’re speaking about sincerity. What should I say more than this?

                              All this because I’m saying that Ash’aris and Hanbalis are both Sunnis and that one should not trust "Salafis". Defending classical scholars is not a crime, such that one starts a character asassination attempt based on this.
                              Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 26-04-20, 09:02 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
                                You had never a wrong impression in your life and never forgot something regarding someone?
                                You're acting as if I know you personally, which is not the case.
                                We’re online here and it’s not like I remember whatever you post.

                                Anyways you turned this into a personal issue and basically insulted me and now you’re speaking about sincerity. What should I say more than this?
                                Actually in all fairness I did say:

                                "You're not an expert translator and some of these passages are extremely delicate. The tide could easily shift once you input your bias on how you interpret certain terms. AbuNajm was a professional translator and he criticized your novice/biased translations in a previous discussion."

                                So perhaps this quote was enough for you to realize after 3-4 years that I wasn't fluent in Arabic. Allahu Alam.

                                Anyways don't put my name in the OP of any of your future threads and we won't have these problems.

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                                Working...
                                X