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 maturidee View Post

    Where did i wrote you have tot agree with him? Im am just quoting someone and his proofs.

    Look at the proof, not the name behind it. If you can, refute every claim made in the proofs.
    I already refuted the general premise.. no need to go any further.

    In which you had no response... It seems like you want to argue just to argue, you're not a seeker of truth. khalas.
    Last edited by aMuslimForLife; 28-12-20, 03:48 PM.
    My Blog ---> Reflections of the Traveler http://baraka.wordpress.com

    Comment


    • Originally posted by aMuslimForLife View Post

      I already refuted the general premise.. no need to go any further.

      In which you had no response... It seems like you want to argue just to argue, you're not a seeker of truth. khalas.
      You did not refute anything.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by aMuslimForLife View Post

        I already refuted the general premise.. no need to go any further.

        In which you had no response... It seems like you want to argue just to argue, you're not a seeker of truth. khalas.
        It is not possible for Allaah to have requested in eternity a non-existent Zayd to fulfil the obligation of prayer and zakat in the present (as in now) - since Zayd did not exist then. Requesting something is to make something binding and to make something binding is something that occurs and completes, and this necessitates in al-Razi's terminology, huduth al-sifah, a new attribute in Allaah's essence. To hold that Allaah is eternally requesting Zayd to fulfil the obligation of prayer and zakat, before the creation of Zayd and after Zayd perishes is absurd and opposes naql (revealed text) and aql (sound reason).

        It is impossible for Allaah to have heard the voice of Zayd or the form of Zayd before he was created. Allaah hearing that voice or seeing Zayd was only when Zayd spoke or when he came into existence with a form. This necessitates huduth (something new, recent) in the essence of Allaah according to al-Razi. To put it another way, whatever you are doing right now, did Allaah see you in your bodily form doing it in eternity? If so, that would mean you are eternal along with Allaah's attributes. The answer is no, Allaah is seeing you and your actual form (body with soul) and hearing you (voice) right now, as you exist, but this was not the case before Allaah brought you into existence with an actual form.


        The Asharis of course have no answer to these questions and all they did (and continue to do) was to play word games, and that really is the essence of the Ashari (Jahmite) school. It is all about playing with words and definitions to wriggle out of difficulties. So what the Ashari (Jahmite) did was to say that hearing (sam') and seeing (basr) are really knowledge (ilm), when Allaah hears, it means He knows and when He sees, it means He knows. And in this way, the Asharis are actually forced to deny Allaah has actual hearing (by which He hears His creation) and actual seeing (by which He sees His creation) - otherwise the argument above is binding upon them, and they are forced to acknowledge that the foundation of their madhhab and creed is laid to waste, in ruins, in utter annihilation, and the game is over and done with. This is what we find the later Asharis tending to, explaining away hearing and seeing to mean knowledge, because the implication finally sank into their confused brains (which were roasted and toasted by that ilm-kalaam), after many centuries.
        Last edited by maturidee; 28-12-20, 05:04 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by maturidee View Post

          It is not possible for Allaah to have requested in eternity a non-existent Zayd to fulfil the obligation of prayer and zakat in the present (as in now) - since Zayd did not exist then. Requesting something is to make something binding and to make something binding is something that occurs and completes, and this necessitates in al-Razi's terminology, huduth al-sifah, a new attribute in Allaah's essence. To hold that Allaah is eternally requesting Zayd to fulfil the obligation of prayer and zakat, before the creation of Zayd and after Zayd perishes is absurd and opposes naql (revealed text) and aql (sound reason).

          It is impossible for Allaah to have heard the voice of Zayd or the form of Zayd before he was created. Allaah hearing that voice or seeing Zayd was only when Zayd spoke or when he came into existence with a form. This necessitates huduth (something new, recent) in the essence of Allaah according to al-Razi. To put it another way, whatever you are doing right now, did Allaah see you in your bodily form doing it in eternity? If so, that would mean you are eternal along with Allaah's attributes. The answer is no, Allaah is seeing you and your actual form (body with soul) and hearing you (voice) right now, as you exist, but this was not the case before Allaah brought you into existence with an actual form.


          The Asharis of course have no answer to these questions and all they did (and continue to do) was to play word games, and that really is the essence of the Ashari (Jahmite) school. It is all about playing with words and definitions to wriggle out of difficulties. So what the Ashari (Jahmite) did was to say that hearing (sam') and seeing (basr) are really knowledge (ilm), when Allaah hears, it means He knows and when He sees, it means He knows. And in this way, the Asharis are actually forced to deny Allaah has actual hearing (by which He hears His creation) and actual seeing (by which He sees His creation) - otherwise the argument above is binding upon them, and they are forced to acknowledge that the foundation of their madhhab and creed is laid to waste, in ruins, in utter annihilation, and the game is over and done with. This is what we find the later Asharis tending to, explaining away hearing and seeing to mean knowledge, because the implication finally sank into their confused brains (which were roasted and toasted by that ilm-kalaam), after many centuries.
          Problem with this quote is that it isn’t even Fakr Al Din. Al Razi actual words. It’s a summary. The problem with this summary is that it was summarized by people who hate Fakr al Din Al Razi and the Asharis. I don’t feel confident in the accuracy of this argument. If the argument is accurate there aren’t any Asharis I know that believe this and I’m not going to defend something I don’t believe. Believe it or not scholars do make mistakes.
          My Blog ---> Reflections of the Traveler http://baraka.wordpress.com

          Comment


          • Originally posted by maturidee View Post

            Stay on the topic, it seems you are running away to answer my given arguments and proofs.

            As i said i am a muhaqqiq. I dont reason things over names or fractions with their views. It does totally not bother me if i would oppose all the Asharis or Hanbalis or Salafis or Hanafis. Nor i am a advocate of any of them.

            Here i am discussing with you a subject, so just give me direct answers on the subject.
            Well, this is the topic of this thread:
            "Belief of Hanbalis / Atharis (past) vs "Salafis""

            As you see this thread is not even about Ash’aris, yet you’re boldly claiming that you’re on-topic. Another point is that you clearly are not aware what the Asha’ira believe or do not believe, because otherwise you would have not copy-pasted from the joke that the [anti-]"asharis"-website is, which is filled with wrong information.

            As for you not caring about opposing all Ash'aris / Maturidis and Hanabila: This means that you’re either a Mubtadi' or a Zindiq!
            Choose which one we should regard you!

            I asked this ignorant creature - who ironically regards himself a "Muhaqqiq" - what the percentage of the major scholars of the Hanabila were that accepted the two points he defends (i.e. the possibility of there being no first creation and God being subject to change) as correct. Until now I did not receive any answer.

            Note that I did not ask him for a quote here or there, which most of time is not even correctly ascribed to the author or not correctly understood, but simply for a percentage, so that we know what for cultists these people are!

            Comment


            • Originally posted by aMuslimForLife View Post

              Problem with this quote is that it isn’t even Fakr Al Din. Al Razi actual words. It’s a summary. The problem with this summary is that it was summarized by people who hate Fakr al Din Al Razi and the Asharis. I don’t feel confident in the accuracy of this argument. If the argument is accurate there aren’t any Asharis I know that believe this and I’m not going to defend something I don’t believe. Believe it or not scholars do make mistakes.
              Yes its a summary, and i have posted al-Razi's quote also.

              Just give direct answers to the following questions:

              1. Is Allaah eternally requesting Zayd to fulfil the obligation of prayer and zakat ?

              2. Whatever you are doing right now, did Allaah see you in your bodily form doing it in eternity?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by maturidee View Post

                Yes its a summary, and i have posted al-Razi's quote also.

                Just give direct answers to the following questions:

                1. Is Allaah eternally requesting Zayd to fulfil the obligation of prayer and zakat ?

                2. Whatever you are doing right now, did Allaah see you in your bodily form doing it in eternity?
                Look at this "Muhaqqiq"! Trying to "refute Ash'aris" without actually knowing their understanding! How great!
                And then bringing a quote while not even knowing what Imam al-Razi (d. 606 AH) stated in the very same work and other than it regarding what he regarded as the correct position.

                FYI: The Ash'aris are not saying that Allah ta'ala heard our speech since eternity, rather they say that His hearing of our speech is eternal. There is a difference between the two.
                The first position only becomes an option when one says that hearing goes back to knowledge and in this case one can say that He heard us since eternity.
                Whatever the case, this is a complex issue and it‘s enough to know that Allah ta'ala is All-Hearing and All-Seeing without similarity or likeness. The reality of the divine attributes are beyond our comprehension anyways and this is in opposition to your mindset.

                (As for your position, then it’s that of the evil Karramiyya!)

                What really astonishes me is how you can get yourself in these type of detailed Kalami discussions without having studied 'Ilm al-Kalam! What you’re doing is forbidden according to both Ash'aris and Hanbalis.
                Imam al-Ghazali (d. 505 AH) specifically wrote a book regarding why laymen should stay away from 'Ilm al-Kalam.

                This is also the reason why I’m not getting more into details, because as non-scholars and as people who have not studied these issues IN DETAIL we should not have this discussion. I hope you'll understand this point and not run into your own destruction. We ask Allah ta'ala for well-being.
                Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 28-12-20, 08:20 PM.

                Comment


                • Historically the followers of the four Madhhahib and those who were in agreement with the Ash'aris, Maturidis and Hanabila in the major issues of creed were regarded as Ahl al-Sunna.

                  If anyone is a cultist and wants to claim that these scholars - who transmitted to us this religion - were all wrong in their creed in major issues, then please let him have a little bit of shame and find another name for his cult than Ahl al-Sunna! Don’t hijack our name!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
                    FYI: The Ash'aris are not saying that Allah ta'ala heard our speech since eternity, rather they say that His hearing of our speech is eternal. There is a difference between the two.
                    The first position only becomes an option when one says that hearing goes back to knowledge and in this case one can say that He heard us since eternity.
                    Since? The referral of "since" points to certain beginpoint. It is nonsense to say sinds eternity, eternity does not have a begin.

                    That aside, what do mean "that His hearing of our speech is eternal" ? This neccasiates that the heared one is eternal along with Allaah's attributes. Do you believe this?


                    One should understand that the asharis have a big problem by believing in a God that has willed, and done everything eternally (to avoid affirming hawaadith, and uphold the proof for hudooth al asjaam). This is the core problem of all absurd binding neccasities (lawaazim) in every subject they (and the philisophers like Ibn Sina, Farabi) got.

                    They have to deny all the attributes pretty much, except life (hayaat) (which is laazim). As for hearing and seeing (these are muta'addi), they must deny them because they imply huduth (Allaah hearing and seeing things that are recent), and likewise iraadah and qudrah (Allaah willing and exercising power over things which are of recent occurrence) and Allah's knowledge (prior to Zayd dying it is in Allaah's knowledge that Zayd is living and will die at an appointed time, and when Zayd has died, it is in Allaah's knowledge that Zayd was living, has died and died at the appointed time). These Jahmis wish to escape from the deity of the Qur'aab and seek refuge instead in the deity of Aristotle, an abstract, static, frozen deity, unable to actually hear, actually see, actually speak, or act.

                    But asharis are academic fraudsters. For, example they will say that Allaah is all seeing, but they mean completely something else than the appearent with what one should understand. And in think if the general masses would know in detail with what they mean in the details of their creedal stances, they would ran away from them like mad mules. This is even thought by asharis themselfs (have quotes of it).


                    PS: You mentioned Ahl al Sunnah, well let me say that Asharis are according to the Maturidis not regarded as Ahl al Sunnah. For example they are Mujbira according to them.



                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by maturidee View Post
                      Since? The referral of "since" points to certain beginpoint. It is nonsense to say sinds eternity, eternity does not have a begin.

                      That aside, what do mean "that His hearing of our speech is eternal" ? This neccasiates that the heared one is eternal along with Allaah's attributes. Do you believe this?


                      One should understand that the asharis have a big problem by believing in a God that has willed, and done everything eternally (to avoid affirming hawaadith, and uphold the proof for hudooth al asjaam). This is the core problem of all absurd binding neccasities (lawaazim) in every subject they (and the philisophers like Ibn Sina, Farabi) got.

                      They have to deny all the attributes pretty much, except life (hayaat) (which is laazim). As for hearing and seeing (these are muta'addi), they must deny them because they imply huduth (Allaah hearing and seeing things that are recent), and likewise iraadah and qudrah (Allaah willing and exercising power over things which are of recent occurrence) and Allah's knowledge (prior to Zayd dying it is in Allaah's knowledge that Zayd is living and will die at an appointed time, and when Zayd has died, it is in Allaah's knowledge that Zayd was living, has died and died at the appointed time). These Jahmis wish to escape from the deity of the Qur'aab and seek refuge instead in the deity of Aristotle, an abstract, static, frozen deity, unable to actually hear, actually see, actually speak, or act.

                      But asharis are academic fraudsters. For, example they will say that Allaah is all seeing, but they mean completely something else than the appearent with what one should understand. And in think if the general masses would know in detail with what they mean in the details of their creedal stances, they would ran away from them like mad mules. This is even thought by asharis themselfs (have quotes of it).


                      PS: You mentioned Ahl al Sunnah, well let me say that Asharis are according to the Maturidis not regarded as Ahl al Sunnah. For example they are Mujbira according to them.


                      From the Maturidis:

                      Imam Ibn Abideen al Hanafi al Maturidi said, ''The Ahlus Sunnah Wa'l Jama'ah are the Maturidi and Ash'ari.’ [Imam Ibn Abideen ash-Shaami al-Hanafi al-Maturidi رحمه الله in Radd al-Muhtar]

                      Imam Ahmad Shihab ad-Din al-Qalyubi "One who departs from what Shaykh al-Islam Imam al-Mutakallimun Sayyiduna Abu al-Hasan al-Ashari and Shaykh al-Islam Imam al-Mutakallimun Sayyiduna Abu Mansur al-Maturidi رضياللهعنهما reported is not a Sunni. These two Imam's followed the footprints of the Prophet صلىاللهعليهوعلىآلهوصحبهوسلم and his Companions رضواناللهعليهمأجمعين." [Imam Ahmad Shihab ad-Din al-Qalyubi رحیم اللہ in Kanz ar-Raghibin]

                      From the Asharis:


                      Imam Ibn Hajar al Haytami said, ''The Sunnis are the Ash’ari and the Maturidi.''
                      [Imam Ibn Hajr al-Haytami ash-Shafi’i al-Ash’ari رحیم اللہ in Fatawa al-Hadithiyya]

                      Shaykh ul-Islam Imam Taj ud-din as-Subki ash-Shafi’i al-Ash’ari said, ''The way of Imam Abu Mansur al-Maturidi and Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari رضي الله عنهما is the same way that the esteemed scholars follow the notable for schools of law (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i and Hanbali) who know the permissible from the prohibited, who are engaged in giving victory to the religion of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وصحبه وسلم.'' [Shaykh ul-Islam Imam Taj ud-din as-Subki ash-Shafi’i al-Ash’ari رحیم اللہ - Tabaqat al Shafiyya al Kubra]

                      Imam Ibn Abdus Salam said, “Agreement has formed in subscribing to Al Ashari’s doctrine among the Shafis, the Malikis, the Hanafis, and the nobility of the Hanbalis.” (ibn al Subki Tabaqat al Shafiyya al Kubra)

                      From the Atharis:

                      Imam al Safarini al Hanbali said, “Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah consists of three groups, the Atharis, their Imam is Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, the Asharis, their Imam is Abu al Hasan al Ashari and the Maturidis and their Imam is Abu al Mansur al Maturidi.” (Lawami al Anwats al Bahiyya)

                      Imam Ibn al Shatti al Hanbali said, “Some scholars say that they, the saved group are the People of Hadith, in other words, the Atharis, Asharis and Maturidis.” (Tabsir Al Qani fi al Jami)

                      Imam al Mawahibi al Hanbali said, “The factions of Ahlus Sunnah are three: The Asharis, the Hanbalis and the Maturidis. “ *(Al Ayn wa Athar)
                      Last edited by aMuslimForLife; 29-12-20, 02:09 AM.
                      My Blog ---> Reflections of the Traveler http://baraka.wordpress.com

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by maturidee View Post
                        Since? The referral of "since" points to certain beginpoint. It is nonsense to say sinds eternity, eternity does not have a begin.

                        That aside, what do mean "that His hearing of our speech is eternal" ? This neccasiates that the heared one is eternal along with Allaah's attributes. Do you believe this?
                        When a Muslim says "Allah ta’ala is All-Knowing since eternity“, then he's obviously not intending a specific point in time, but rather that Allah ta’ala was always All-Knowing without beginning or end.
                        The usage of "since" here is from the limitation of the language, which is understood.

                        As for the Allah's Hearing and Seeing being eternal: This does not necessitate the heard and seen things to be eternal just like Allah ta'ala Knowing us before our creation does not turn us eternal.

                        Note that the affirmation of these divine attributes are affirmations of absolute perfection for the Creator and this is necessary and at the same time every flaw or likeness or similarity is rejected, because that is impossible regarding Him.

                        The similarity that is affirmed between the Creator and the creation is that in naming only and NOT in reality - and I've already quoted the Hanabila explicitly clarifying this! - and that is why you can’t expect us to affirm a seeing like our seeing or similar to it.

                        Your cult - call them Taymiyyans or "Salafis" or Karramis or whatever else - does not understand this and thinks that our Creator is described with attributes that are basically similar to us. You people also try to understand the reality of the Creator and therefore fall into Tashbih.
                        What you don’t realize is that you'll be held responsible for your mindless speech. A wrong word today can have huge consequences in the hereafter.

                        Also regarding the divine Will: It’s also eternal and NOT as you mindless creatures claim a sequence of wills that form after not being there.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
                          As for the Allah's Hearing and Seeing being eternal: This does not necessitate the heard and seen things to be eternal just like Allah ta'ala Knowing us before our creation does not turn us eternal.

                          .....

                          Also regarding the divine Will: It’s also eternal and NOT as you mindless creatures claim a sequence of wills that form after not being there.
                          I mean did Allaah see you in your bodily form eternally? If yes this means your bodily form is eternal too. Did you do your actions eternally. Ajeeb ajeeb...

                          So the God you believe in does not hear you NOW right at this moment if you would remember Allaah? Do you say "Sami' Allaahu liman hamidah, Rabbanaa lakal hamd" in salaah? Why do you say this?

                          Also eternal will, means the God you believed in had no choice and what he willed eternally has also no choice. That's why Jabriyyah holds that position, the asharis also (only play words of not), asharis also believes Allaah is actually Mujeeb'un dhaat (upheld by Ibn Sina, Farabi etc) but play words again in this issue.



                          Comment


                          • I almost forget to mention 1 big difference between asharis and maturidis:

                            Asharis are Jabriyyaah because they say that iradah juziyyaa is created by Allaah. This means for example, when i want to lift my hand, the action of lifting comes after my intention/will/decision to lift my hand. Now the asharis say this specific intention/will/decision is also created by Allaah, leaving no room for humans free will and thus falling in jabr.

                            The maturidis, they saw this in ashari creed and said this is jabr, and said thus no, this intention/will/decision that precedes the action is not created by Allaah. They agreed actually with the Mutazilah that human does create his own intention/will/decision given by a potance Allaah granted human. So as some researchers did point out, the difference between maturidis and mutazila is actually one of semantics. The maturidis saved themselfs from falling into jabr by differentiating between the action of will and the action of deed.

                            So the maturidis say Allaah creates the actions the humans want do, but Allaah creates not the will for that action. So Allaah's iraadah is mutaabi to the iradaah of the human. Means a man in soleley the agent for his action and thus accountable for his actions.

                            Note: Among the maturidis irada juziyya was always considered as a effective power that the human possesed, however it was Ubaydullaah bin Masud Sadr as Sharia who explicitly mentioned this openly. And after him Ibn al Humaam.
                            Last edited by maturidee; 29-12-20, 04:18 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by maturidee View Post
                              I almost forget to mention 1 big difference between asharis and maturidis:
                              Learn to be on-topic please. This thread is not about the differences between the Ash'aris and Maturidis and their differences are not many and only in very detailed issues anyways. Both groups regard each other as Sunnis - because their differences are only Ijtihadi - and this does not change just because a minority of their early scholars disliked each other.
                              And if we want to know about their differences we will read works by proper scholars and not the ignorant claims of your satanic cult.
                              This article is a short summary of their differences: The Disagreements between the Ash'aris & Maturidis by Imam Ibn Kamal Pasha (d. 940 AH)

                              Regarding the issue of the actions of created beings: Allah ta'ala is the sole Creator without any partners and He created us and our actions. Nothing happens in the creation except through His Power, Will and Knowledge. If you have a problem with this or regard this as the creed of the "Jabriyya" (which is different), then your problem is with Islam in reality!

                              And now stop polluting this thread with your off-topic posts.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by maturidee View Post

                                I mean did Allaah see you in your bodily form eternally? If yes this means your bodily form is eternal too. Did you do your actions eternally. Ajeeb ajeeb...

                                So the God you believe in does not hear you NOW right at this moment if you would remember Allaah? Do you say "Sami' Allaahu liman hamidah, Rabbanaa lakal hamd" in salaah? Why do you say this?

                                Also eternal will, means the God you believed in had no choice and what he willed eternally has also no choice. That's why Jabriyyah holds that position, the asharis also (only play words of not), asharis also believes Allaah is actually Mujeeb'un dhaat (upheld by Ibn Sina, Farabi etc) but play words again in this issue.
                                Allah ta'ala is Eternal and so are His attributes of absolute perfection. This is what the people of Islam believe and no one from among those who say the Shahadatayn disagreed with this except the wretched Karramiyya and their likes. The ruling regarding them is either Tabdi' or Takfir! Choose which one we should apply to you.

                                Allah ta'ala has always been All-Hearing and All-Seeing without modality. There is no need for us to get more into details, nor is it possible to comprehend the reality of the divine attributes anyways.

                                As for your Karrami imagination that "God" hears and sees things in a sequence so that there happens a change to His divine Self, then this is from the attributes of the creation and not the Creator.
                                Your satanic cult also claims that "God" sees through two literal eyes, so in your pagan imagination "God" needs tools and this is yet another attribute of created beings.


                                As for the issue of the divine Will: What you stated is in no way necessitated. As for your belief that "God" forms a will after not having it, then this is yet another attribute of created beings.
                                By the way: Do you believe that God's knowledge is eternal? If yes, then does God not know eternally what His Will is and what not? Answer, o "Muhaqqiq"!

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                                Working...
                                X