Approaches to Islamic Heritage: Asharite, Hanbalite and Maturidite Aqeedah
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- Help us educate and mentor others to share the faith academically.
Donate now: sapienceinstit...
Free online courses: learn.sapience...
Free books: sapienceinstit...
Have doubts? Book a mentor: sapienceinstit...
Listen (Podcast): sapienceinstit...
Follow:
- Facebook: / sapienceinstitute.org
- Twitter: / sapienceorg
- Instagram: / sapienceinstitute
Articles, speaker requests & more: sapienceinstit...
Please make a book out of Londoniyyah. It would turn out to be very interesting.
I think you should go through and make notes out of the videos. Better way to learn InshaAllah.
@@QuadriviumPilot Did I say you're not allowed to study with a book? Maybe learn to better your character instead of being rude to others like an unlearned adolescent.
Isn't londoniyyah based... on a book ?? Or maybe I did not hear correctly
@@QuadriviumPilot ok I see. May Allah reward you and bless you. Salam aleykoum !
Read burhan it has a lot of arguments from that
Ashrai segment starts at 44:10
This issue with this video is that it doesn’t really explain the arguments of these groups. He’s only talking about the key figures and their opinions on each other and what this sheikh said about that sheikh. Your title implies that you’re gonna talk about those aqai’id but you’re not. It’s great that you know all this but you’re all over the place and this is clearly not organized as much as it should have been. Please fix that mistake brother and thank you for your work.
Ma sha Allah, Al Ghazali did have a existential, intellectuall crisis for which he travelled physically and spiritually for 10 years, leaving his family behind in this time. He stated that the certainty came to him not from his aql but from a light Allah placed in his heart.
If there is any cure for atheism in this modern era it is in the teachings of Al Razi and Ghazali.
You think this way because they used reasoning to destroy the rationalists
But ibn taymiyyah used reason and destroyed philosphers who are atheist and even ar razi
You can read his rudud on ar razi
28:30
And as hijab said he brought a sledge hammer on his opponents
@@yousefalfuraihNo way you compared ibn taymiyyah to ghazali and razi… especially on philosophy
As salamu aleykum brother i find it really funny that you are suprised but really go read ta3arud al aql wa anaql from ibn taymiyah and you are going to see that ar razi is not on his level (in philospohy)
When it comes to al ghazali its really hard to say who is better i would say it depends on what area of philosphy we are going to talk about.
I believe that imam al ghazali made a mistake in asmaa and sifat of allah
And ibn taymiyyah didnt ant both ibn taymiyyah and al ghazali refuted ibn sina s work so i would say ibn taymiyyah and al gahzalli are not the same because ibn taymiyyah maintaind high level of philosphy while still going with text ant not the mind over the text like al ghazaliay allah have mercy on all of them
@@yousefalfuraih Wa alaykum salam brother in which do you think he Ghazali made a mistake on asma and sifat?
@@Visible-jb2ewal ghazali himself lived his while life with reluctance changing madhabs untill finally he repented and said that Al-Kalam does not give answers and if we were to drop all masks it is haram.... Al-Shafii said it is haram too even al razi repented and said the same and he said "whoever tried my experience will know my knowledge" ie Al Kalam is not useful in giving full clear certain answers.
Assalamualeykum Brother,
I wanted to correct one point.
Imam Taftazani is an ashari scholar, not maturidi. But he wrote a sharh on Aqaid an-nasafiyah. The Matn is maturidi but the sharh is from an ashari scholar.
وعليكم السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته
Br. Mohammad Hijab use those both schools interchangeable, because they are very similar in relation to atharizm.
Taftazani says that Asharis reject the sifat in that commentary :P
There is ikhtiflaf on that I think, but most people say he's Ashari
@@_zaaphiel Incorrect he affirms the Ashari position in the attributes but says the Philosophers denied the attributes.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 📚 Introduction to the Three Main Creedal Schools
03:19 📜 Early Islamic Period: Scripturalism and Limited Theological Discourse
11:38 📖 Development within the Hanbali School
17:43 📚 Evaluating the Importance of Early Scholars
23:15 🌐 Concluding Thoughts on Creed and Early Islamic Scholars
23:28 📚 Overview of Even Tamia's Impact
30:23 📖 Influence of Ibn Taymiyyah's Students
36:23 📜 Even Taymiyyah's Unique Views on Divorce
39:14 📚 Scriptural Conservatism in Early Islamic Thought
44:55 🧐 Controversy over Understanding Attributes of Allah
46:23 📚 Differences in interpreting Allah's attributes
51:10 🤔 The clarity of the Companions' understanding
54:09 📜 Early Islamic scholars and their contributions
56:17 📖 Evolution of Islamic thought
01:03:48 🔄 Antagonism and intellectual growth
01:10:11 📚 Discussion on the impact of challenges and opponents on intellectual growth.
01:12:05 📖 Focus on the importance of logic and reason in Islamic jurisprudence.
01:15:13 📚 Brief overview of different Islamic schools and scholars.
01:18:52 🕌 Discussion on the development of Islamic theological thought.
01:21:26 🌐 Emphasis on tolerance and collaboration among different Islamic schools.
Made with HARPA AI
Jazakallah❤❤❤
@@afconsultants732 wa iyyak 😉
Thank you.
ibn taymiyah not "even tamia"
Jazakallahu khairan. May Allah guide and make you successful in this world and give you what I pray for me for you too in the hereafter world
"My dad is bigger than your dad" 🙈😹 thats how some ppl behave
What part is that
@@Faithfulresonance1 cant remember, got to watch all to catch it 😉
@@Faithfulresonance1 The beginning part
Mohammed Hijab's choice of shirt colour is almost as interesting as this lecture! Maashaa Allah!! Jokes aside, brilliant work by Sapience. Keep it going brothers.
what about the "samt hasan" ? could we dress up like muslims ? not cloths that describe our bodies from some one who represent islam ?
The point about ashari creed developing into something more 'rational' or 'more away from Quran and Sunnah' is as far from the truth as one can state. Imam Nawawi, Ibn Hajar and Sayuti for example all came AFTER Al-Razi.
Two of the above-mentioned even wrote books against logic.
If anything later Asharites became more ahlul-hadith once beliefs were codified. This orientalist view of Asharism needs to stop.
@@arfaouisami2955 no it's not necessary for him to dress like what you describe
all i know that ashari, maturidi and ahlu hadith considered Ahlu sunnah wal jamaah. I follow ashari school
Be careful some highly intellectual RUclips scholars with degrees in RUclips commenting may call you a deviant 😂. Btw by RUclips scholars I meant laymen
Shafi Ashari over here!
@@G1NG3RRRmuslim over here!
Asheri and atharis are part of sunni
This is just intellectual debate
I really like this talk. I don't get deep in the difference of aqeedah and just stick to the basics. But I do like to learn about the backgrounds. Usual of the different fiqh is also very interesting. Esp I'm a fan of Shafii but interested by Hanbali.
These are carefully selected sophistry.
Lol "fan of"
Imam Shafi (RH) held the view that one can follow any mujtahid in any issue as long you understand the ruling.
Aqidah is even more interesting. Expand your horizons, fiqh is secondary, aqeedah is essential.
@@bigboywasimWhere's the evidence for this?
I was most excited to learn your views on the Maturidi creed and I got a bit disappointed that it was so short but I respect you admitting that you are not as learned in it as maybe in the other 2 creeds discussed here but I would really like a longer video on what you learned about the creed if/when you study it more maybe. For me personally Maturidism is like a hidden gem its very underrepresented especially in the western world even tho Maturidi figures had a big impact on alot of the Ummah. I also wanted to thank you for making your views a bit more clear regarding these very controversial and debated topics in this day and age I am not sure if you will ever read this but I view you as someone honest and trustable and I also wanted to say that I feel that Allah guided me thru making me stumble upon your videos you helped me get out of a bad phase in life in which I didnt know any of these evidences for my beliefs. Jazakallah Khair for your effort
Maturidis are almost the same as Asharis except for some differences, Abu alhassan Al-Ashari the very founder of this school of thought repented and Wrote the book Al-Ibanah which he announced his new position, he became Athari but mo hijab didn't mention that part lol.
@@cesarborgia9240 there r some issues with the authenticity of al ibanah.. eg isnad is weak… or it was written during imam al shari early years after denouncing his mu’tazilla views.. n to add.. he didn’t bother to announce publicly that he had abandoned his own creed n followed athari creed like how he did when he denounced his mu’tazilla views… it’s kinda dodgy n full of malicious intent by u lot… not forgetting the various version of al ibanah floating around each with it’s own adjusted text… so just chill n relax… stop sitting on ur high pedestal n look down on others…
@@dinopalavra876 They claim everyone did this on their deathbed lol. Same for Imam Ashari etc.
@Path of Sahaba I don't believe neither Ibn Kathir (RA) nor Al Dhahabi (RA) made those claims. This is a Salafi propaganda. In fact, it's known they're both Asha'ari. What about Al Dahabi (RA) repenting and writing a book against the creed of Ibn Taymiyyah (RA)? What about Salafi senior scholars criticizing both Ibn Kathir and Al Dhahabi for doing Tafwid? Which is consigning the meaning to Allah and condemning the literal meaning which Salafis do? They don't sound like they follow the creed of Ibn Taymiyyah (RA). I would also like to say all the Ahlu Sunnah before Ibn Taymiyyah believed Imam Asha'ari had two phases. If you believe Ibn Kullab (RA) was a deviant then I suggest you also condemn Imam Bukhari (RA) and Imam Muslim (RA) who both advised the ummah to follow him in theology and several other scholars from the Salaf praised him and called him the defender of Ahlu Sunnah. This claim Imam Asha'ari (RA), Al Juwayni (RA), Al Ghazali (RA) and few others repented on their death bed is a lie made up by Ibn Taymiyyah. No one made these claims before him. Instead of doing Taqleed, how about you investigate his claims? No one in his time took him seriously. He was also known to lie on the Ijma and scholars of his time would ask for proof and he would get emotional and not bring any references. This is all factual, khalas.
@@cesarborgia9240 this claim has been disproven in Ibn 'Asakir's biography of Imam Abul Hassan Ashari. The book you're referring to the Ibana was one of his first works after leaving the Mu'tazila, he made his positions clear in later works
The point about ashari creed developing into something more 'rational' or 'more away from Quran and Sunnah' is as far from the truth as one can state. Imam Nawawi, Ibn Hajar and Sayuti for example all came AFTER Al-Razi.
Two of the above-mentioned even wrote books against logic.
If anything later Asharites became more ahlul-hadith once beliefs were codified. This orientalist view of Asharism needs to stop.
Very true in a sense ar razi and an nawawi were very different. Ar razi was more philosophical an nawawi was more hadith oriented. I don’t know as much about imam as suyooti but he is not as intellectual as imam razi, who was a true intellectual giant raheemuhullaah. His Tafseer mafaatih al ghayb shows why imam ar razi was at ibn Taymiyyah level…perhaps even higher.
The early Ash'aris were Ahlul-Hadith as well as Nawawi states clearly in his explanation of Saheeh Muslim. We should remember that a person being affiliated with a group holding certain views does not mean that he represents the group in all of his views - even if he us prominent; like Ar-Razi.
I'd advise brother Hijab to ascribe yourself to the view of Ibn Qudamah al Maqdisi on the statements given by imam Ahmad.
Comparing him with ibn Taymiyyah is like night and day, there is no doubt he was closest to the salaf and imam Ahmad in his ways. And I say this as an ash'ari, knowing both's stance towards us, but I also acknowledge that the critics of both of them hold an entirely different degree of truth, and the conclusions they both have at the end is evaluated with their own methodology in mind.
@Path of Sahaba Wrong on basically every point. Stop learning from the internet. Ibn Qudamah doesn't prove it's from the fitrah, he merely posit it is from it. And he argues for a fiqhi view of pointing upward, not aqa'id, which is ironically the view shared by the asha'irah.
As for him calling the asha'irah ahl'ul bid'ah, so what? Do we take into account the many that have deemed imam Abu Hanifa out of the fold of ahl'ul sunnah deviants? Not necessarily. Do we take their jarh into account? No.
Same case here. He is no deviant, yet his critique is simply not taken into account.
The fact that you seem to view this topic as black and white... as I said, stop learning your deen from the internet.
We simply do not follow 1 scholar on every point he makes, especially in aqeedah. Otherwise we end up as brainless fools who try to argue the Creation as a type is eternal, hellfire will end and emergents can exists within the essence of Allah, despite having no proof from amongst the salaf, the Quran and Sunnah apart from a wishful reading of it that has precedence only within the philosopher circled, ibn Rushd at their head and IT and IQ following on the footsteps
@Path of Sahaba "you pick and choose what you like lmao"
Go study, I'm not your dad to explain to you how 'uloom works
@@Ersilay I mean if we are going to take from ابن قدامة، he has the same aqeedah as sheikul islam ibn teymmiye, because he did tafwidh of kayf not of the meaning, and tafwidh of meaning is the same as ignorance of the verses, because if we do this tafwidh we will not be able to understand anything from that tafwidh, beside that why did Allan SWT said those sifaat verset in the quran if we are not going to understand anything from them, and if the salaf did that tafwidh, then the asharite and maturidis understand the quran more than them, including the Prophet peace be upon him
@@abdulvahitamro ibn Qudamah did tafwid of the kayf? What are you smoking:
لا حاجة لنا إلى علم معنى ما أراد الله تعالى من صفاته جل وعز فإنه لا يراد منها عمل ولا يتعلق بها تكليف سوى الإيمان بها ويمكن الإيمان بها من غير علم معناها فإن الإيمان بالجهل صحيح فإن الله تعالى أمر بالإيمان بملائكته وكتبه ورسله وما أنزل إليهم وإن كنا لا نعرف من ذلك إلا التسمية
وإن عاب السكوت عن التفسير أخطأ فإننا لا نعلم لها تفسيرا ومن لم يعلم شيئا وجب عليه السكوت عنه وحرم عليه الكلام فيه قال الله تعالى {ولا تقف ما ليس لك به علم}
وذكر الله تعالى في المحرمات {وأن تقولوا على الله ما لا تعلمون}… وأيضا فإن عائب هذه المقالة عائب على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فإنه كان يؤمن بالله وكلماته ولم يفسر شيئا من ذلك ولا بين معناه
Both are from his Tahrim. Like why do you lie when he literaly says it?
وعلموا أن المتكلم بها صادق لا شك في صدقه فصدقوه ولم يعلموا حقيقة معناها فسكتوا عما لم يعلموه وأخذ ذلك الآخر والأول ووصى بعضهم بعضا بحسن الإتباع والوقوف حيث وقف أولهم وحذروا من التجاوز لهم والعدول عن طريقهم وبينوا لهم سبيلهم ومذهبهم ونرجوا أن يجعلنا الله تعالى ممن اقتدى بهم في بيان ما بينوه وسلوك الطريق الذي سلكوه
Here he talks about the madhab of the salaf is not knowing about the reality of their meanings. Like you see meaning, meaning, meaning, meaning, meaning, then you have your sorry attempt at rewriting history saying "nO iT's KaYfIyYaH".... wallahi this is pathetic.
This is so blatant that your sheikh, abdur razzaq afeefi said this on the matter: مذهب السلف هو التفويض في كيفية الصفات لا في المعنى، وقد غلط ابن قدامة في لمعة الاعتقاد، وقال: بالتفويض ولكن الحنابلة يتعصبون للحنابلة، ولذلك يتعصب بعض المشايخ في الدفاع عن ابن قدامة، ولكن الصحيح أن ابن قدامة مفوض
Do I have to quote ibn Uthaymin contradicting himself in the same sentence, first saying he's upon the madhab of tafwid al ma'na, which is one of the worst deviance, and straight after calling him an imam of the sunnah who couldn't have wrote that. He was talking about luma'tul i'tiqad... literally the strongest book we have from ibn Qudamah. And this doesn't adress the half a dozen of other books where he explicitly states that he makes tafwid of the ma'na... denying this is foolish, only suitable for your ilk
11:40 Imam Buchari mentioning Allah is above the Throne but he never said to take the literal meaning of it… the literal meaning would mean Allah ta ala has changed…
He also talks about Allahs smiling and says it means he is pleases with his servants…
Ustadh Muhammad Hijab mentioned it before and many times…
Even the Sahabah interpreted things which Allah said about him when the literal meaning contradicts what we know about Allahs saaat (essence).
You contradicted yourself multiple times I couldn’t keep track. You believe the early generations knew the clear language ie apparent meaning on Allah rose above the throne? But you also admitted that Harb Al Kirmani was refuted for saying Allah moves. Same with Ahmad and Bukhari rejected Allah moving. So it’s not apparent meaning. Because the apparent meaning is movement. Make up your mind.
Later on in this recording you ironically said “the Athari position is we know what it means, but we don’t know what it means in relation to Allah’’. Okay so that’s essentially tafwidh otherwise an oxymoron. Either you know what it means or you don’t. You also misrepresented asharis/maturidis. Non of the them deny the text that Allah is above the arsh. Imam Ahmad and Bukhari are correct that it doesn’t mean movement.
Good points bro even though i like hijab he should study with our shuyukh before making these videos about aqaid
@@Nox-02 Exactly. He also contradicted himself another time when he suggested “Bukharis Khalq afāl Al ibād” where Bukhari quoted Salaf. But then he also said that sahaba isn’t hujjah according to opinions mentioned by Ibn Qudama.
In which case suggesting Bukharis book becomes meaningless. Also those texts are for scholars not for random obtuse laymen. It’s an embarrassment. Considering hijabs meant to be one of the top dawah guys.
.
@@lifestransitory1 I can understand that he leans towards the athari madhab, but he shouldn’t make aproximations and such claims. However I can see that he try at least be honest about our history and that there is a before and after ibn taymiyya in the hanbali madhab. And that in our madhab there is a lot of ibn taymiyya
The point about ashari creed developing into something more 'rational' or 'more away from Quran and Sunnah' is as far from the truth as one can state. Imam Nawawi, Ibn Hajar and Sayuti for example all came AFTER Al-Razi.
Two of the above-mentioned even wrote books against logic.
If anything later Asharites became more ahlul-hadith once beliefs were codified. This orientalist view of Asharism needs to stop.
With all due respect you are incorrect about imam Al bukharee and baqilaani saying or believing that Allah is above the throne.
1. He did not speak English , you are translating what he said into he is above the throne.
2. He said he believes in istiwa as we all do, you are imposing on imam Al bukharee, I. Saying that he meant above the throne.
This is wrong and it is dishonest if you did it intentionally.
Totally wrong statement. Moroccan Arabic is not a mixture of Arabic and 4 or 5 European languages. Moroccan Arabic is predominantly and heavily influenced by the indegiouness Berber (Amazigh) languages. Even Saudi dialect is influenced by European words, most Arabs say Telephoon or bye bye or oxygeen (oxygen) and name it. It is a often heard misconception. The French influence is only heard in the capital and mostly spoken by the Liberal secular Moroccans who have an inferiority complex. The overwhelming majority of Morocco does not. You even have areas where the Berber population doesn't speak Arabic till this day subhanallah.
Calm down brother... I visited maghrib and hardly understood a thing
@@mohammedabdirrahmanrubblei9141 wether you understand or not is not the point I was making. I was not talking about understanding it, I was talking about that Moroccan (and Algerian) Arabic is heavily influenced by the Amazigh language. European influence is just recent. Also you still have areas where the people only speak Berber/Tamazight and no Arabic.
Calm down. Those influence happened in the modern era
Moroccan arabic heavily uses old arabic words that aren't even remembered anymore, the rest of it is tachel7it and only a small portion is french or spanish.
The Deobandis are Maturidi not Ashari.
Topic moved to explaining Aqeedah and Manhaj of ibn taymiyyah.
Also The point about ashari creed developing into something more 'rational' or 'more away from Quran and Sunnah' is as far from the truth as one can state. Imam Nawawi, Ibn Hajar and Sayuti for example all came AFTER Al-Razi.
Two of the above-mentioned even wrote books against logic.
If anything later Asharites became more ahlul-hadith once beliefs were codified. This orientalist view of Asharism needs to stop.
the postition of tafwidh isn’t what you said exactly and I really want you to study ash’ary aqidah more because it’s not that they didn’t know they did tafwidh because the (ظاهري) meaning isn’t appropriate to Allah and استوى has more than one meaning from a language perspective and they did tafwidh so that they don’t affirm a place to Allah . this is the position of ash’ary and maturidis and imam ahmad رحمه الله didn’t really get into متشابهات . so they know the meaning but it is wrong to affirm a place to Allah . the المجسمة و الحشوية said that the throne is a place to Allah . because Allah exists and nothing else existed then he created the throne kursy of course God doesn’t need anything and we believe Allah is the way He was before creating the throne. Change is something that happens to creation not the creator. and the صحيح narration of imam malik is الإستواء غير مجهول meaning we affirm it Since there’s text but some take it as he meant it as if being a place or sitting العياذ بالله and after that he said والكيف غير معقول which means we can’t say means he’s sitting or it’s his place then he said والإيمان به واجب والسؤال عنه بدعة and imam غزالي رحمه الله said that those sifat shouldn’t be translated to another language and he’s right because the apparent meaning leads us to تجسيم و تكيف and حد which we can’t set a limit to Allah. and imam ahmad said بلا كيف و بلا معنى clearly means we can just say it’s a sifah and we believe in it but don’t translate it because if you research استوى it has more than one meaning we should leave the meaning to Allah and don’t the apparent meaning and affirm a place to Allah . imam abu hasan alash’ary رحمه الله said that the مجمسمة و حشوية said that the throne is Allah’s place . so read some more into it.
1:08:00 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
"You ruined me. You're such an easy opponent"
This sectarian in Islam is like an acidic substance that cause a serious damage to the ummah. this is why i don't attach myself to any of them. i'm just a muslim following the Quran & authentic hadith along with my little knowledge in logic. Tawakkalto alaLLah.
These aren't sects. Even family members have differences; despite sharing Dna. Yes. Seek Allah. He will guide you. The presentation of the topic here was inaccurate and lacked fundamental issues.
When i read the quran Allah SWT command us to beleive in one God, the hereafter and do good deeds. Allah SWT also remind us to not split into sects as happened to yahood and nasara. Why is it now the aqeedah becomes confusing, divisive and whereas the quran says to beleive in one god, hereafter and do good deeds. Who makes this deen confusing and complicated and divisive. Is it the scholars? Allah SWT also remind us not worship scholars as the yahood and nasara. Allah SWT says rasulullah saws is not responsible for the splits. And is it because the ummah has abandoned the quran as lamented by rasulullah SWT.
The statement you made from 10:00 minutes onwards is just absurd. You said that in the first 2 hundred years there weren’t Ashari/Maturidi creeds. But those creeds were present within the first 300 years ie born around (250 H). That’s what’s important. Because the Hadith “the best of generations is mine then those after them then those after them”. The Messenger didn’t say first 200 years as your assertion. Nor were they in the 400’s.
Also, if we consider this for arguments sake then 4 madhabs weren’t present in the time of the Prophet. So we go directly to the Prophet? Nonsense. And stop trying to portray the Hanbali Madthab as the earliest. As all the other imams Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafii were all before him. In fact Imam Ahmad was last. Ibn Qudamah mentions statements from Ahmad and Shafii as doing tafwidh. Unless you want to deny your own imams or imply they’re not trustworthy in their writings. Same as Abu Ya’ala.
.
ALSO The point about ashari creed developing into something more 'rational' or 'more away from Quran and Sunnah' is as far from the truth as one can state. Imam Nawawi, Ibn Hajar and Sayuti for example all came AFTER Al-Razi.
Two of the above-mentioned even wrote books against logic.
If anything later Asharites became more ahlul-hadith once beliefs were codified. This orientalist view of Asharism needs to stop.
This comment is such a mess, you're conflicting a lot of informations and many matters like comparing fiqh with aqeedah, abu hanifa wasn't a mturidi nor shafi was an Ashari! Since these schools founded by indivsiuals came way after them 😂😂😂😂😂, the four imams or let's say our salaf in the three first generations held the same position as Atharis today, except maybe minor differences here n there, but none of them share the same views as the maturidis or Asharis today.
@@dinopalavra876 great point
@@cesarborgia9240 The brother already highlighted one of your misunderstanding.
Abu Hanifa and Imam Shafii were as much Maturidi and Ashari as Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali rah were labeled Hanafi Maliki Shafii and Hanbali 🤦🏻♂️ And no one said that Abu Hanifa was Maturidi. It’s the opposite. That Maturidis base their creed on Abu Hanifa and Tahawis codified text. Just as the neo salafis think they’re basing their beliefs on Imam Ahmad. But Ahmad wasn’t even born when Abu Hanifa was around. So we are the earliest most authentic according to your own standards. You also fail to see that your comment actually backfires. Because if those madhabs were “Atharis” [as you stated] then you’re conceding that the basis of Maturidi/Ashari is Athari.
Mohammad Hijam jazakumullahu khairan for your work, may Allah swt keep increasing your knowledge and understanding as well as of all those who commented and may we learn to have a polite and genuine conversations with the truth on mind and not " my dad is bigger then yours".
ALLAH THE SUN GOD AKBAR THE MOON GOD . LOOK ON THE MOSQUES...AND FLAGS....
اَمِين يَا رَبَّ الْعَالَمِيْن
Ameen 🧡
Ibn al-Hummam one of the greatest Hanafi jurists.
Deobandis are predominantly Maturidi (not Ash'ari - although the two are very close)
Deobandi are predominantly Wahhabis(not Maturidi/Ashari and two are completely opposite to one other)
It was in India that Deobandi movement was found and truth of matter is this movement was nothing but continuation of Wahhabi movement led by Ibn Abdul Wahhab Najdi in Arab from Najd known as so called Muwahhidun movement indirectly same name used by Mu'tazila in past and Indian version of same Wahhabi movement known as so called Tariqa e Muhammadiyah directly led by Gustakh e Ahmad of Rai Bareli.
Note: This khwarji Wahhabi propagandist Indian movement was deliberately divided into two subsects or subgroups of Indian wahhabiyah one called themselves gair muqallideen/ahle Hadees which miserably failed in Indo subcontinent led by Siddiq Hasan Bhopali and co thus right hand of (Gustakh of)Ahmad of Rai Bareli's right hand man Ismail Dehalvi took rashid Gangohi,Qasim Nanotvi under his wing to spread/sell more acceptable yet same Wahhabi stained product in name of hanafism while being in core/aqeeda same khwarji Wahhabi just like their cousins so called Ahle Hadees(name given official recognition by Queen Elizabeth after gair muqallid wahhabi begged to their British masters).
Hijab himself is a Wahhabi only difference is guy is neo ikhwani(old name used by Wahhabi barbarians led by Ibn saud against Ottoman Caliphate). These neo Ikhwanis think having same aqaid like wahhabis then differentiating with them in few things and renouncing original founding fathers like Ibn Abdul Wahhab Najdi and Ibn Taimmiya like how Deobandis did would just make them free from Wahhabi stain and wahhabi khwarji name, well they can totally fool common ignorant people to have them join them in their secretly Wahhabi cults but knowledgeable person would never fall for it
@@bhatbasit8614I'm sorry what? You have no idea of what you're speaking of.
Deobandi's don't have a set aqeedah, some are Athari, some are Ashari and some are Maturidi.
The ulama of Deoband also criticised Mohammed ibn Abdul Wahhab heavily and over 20 of them signed off on the work of Khalil Ahmed Shanapuri which quoted the verdict of ibn Abidin who declared him to be the khawarij of his time.
@@bhatbasit8614typical brelvi. According to you guys if one don't believe Prophet S.A.W. is Noor than he is Gustakh and Wahabi.
@@youngomniverse35 you're just as ignorant as one can be, Deobandis have same set of aqaid which they acquired from Nanotvi Gangohi ambethvi all of whom got it from Ahmad of rai barelvi and ismail Dehalvi whom both gair muqallid sifli Wahhabi and Deobandi wahhabis follow and call shaheeds and actually are true founders of both sects.
Deobandis got nothing to do with Ashari Maturidi and athari in aqaid or hanafi shafi maliki Hanbali in fiqh they are what they're,they only follow three monkeys who founded this school under agent Ismail Dehalvi with full support from British government, Deobandis all andhere to Qasim Nanotvi and Rashid Gangohi and they have laid the foundation of their khwarji beliefs in their books which were inspired by taqwiyat ul iman of ismail Dehalvi indian version of kitab ut tawhid of ibn abdul Wahhab Najdi
Read your history first then come to talk.
Today if Wahhabi would write fatwa against Saudi government it doesn't mean he no longer remains Wahhabi and hasn't taken millions in petrodollars, thing is when you teach your dog only to bark hate and terrorize people and make it complete beast,one day it's gonna unleash upon you too, doesn't saudi today fear their own creation wahhabis most? so it doesn't matter if Wahhabi Deobandi fight today or in your fantasy Khalil ambethvi murtad criticized him and quoted our scholar. If BJP would tomorrow criticize Mohan Bhagwat current leader of RSS would that mean BJP isn't political wing of RSS and have zero connection to it?
Deobandi only started to separate themselves from their Brothers in crime gair muqallideen who call themselves ahle hadis or salafi today when in early 2000s Saudi petrodollars were cut off to Deobandi circles thus creating rift in both. Ask both so called muqallid wahhabis(Deobandi) and gair muqallid Wahhabi(siflis)who is ismail Dehalvi and Ahmad of rai barelvi they both will tell you lol,both of them were staunch wahhabis and actually started Wahhabi movement in Indo subcontinent as part of British divide and rule policy before that sunni Muslims had zero rift with each other and all had same beliefs which in today's day and age are followed by Sunnis too whom khwarjis call barelvis or sufis to isolate them and counter Sunnis and give their ignorant sunni targets false impression that they're part of new sect when in fact it's they Deobandi khwarji Wahhabis who are new subsects of grand khwarji sect and haven't been found anywhere along with all their sick blashpemous beliefs till before 1900s. Buildings talk writings talk and all shrines of Auliya and Ambiya in Syria Iraq Palestine India Kashmir Pakistan Bangladesh Kazakhstan Tukey and all muslim nations which are thousand years old like those or Prophets or some hundred years old those of Sahaba Auliya and Salaf are proof of sunni existence whereas Wahhabis is real biddah and they're all either deviants or murtadeen cause of their takfeer of ummah and blashpemous beliefs period.
Know your history own it and be ashamed
@@youngomniverse35 I replied you many times someone keeps deleting my comment
1:19:00
Kawthari sure wasn't Ashari, he was Maturidi.
And it was Razi who said that statement about Ibn Khuzaymah's book
Theres no core difference.
When the word ashari is used amingst scholars they are understood to mean both Ashari and Maturidi
My understanding is there is even a split within Atharism. Those who practice tafwīdh like the ‘Ash’aris and Maturidis and those who practice ithbāt.
What's sad is Salafis say things which are not said by Salafs.
For eg: if we say "Our fate is in God's Hands" and you ask the meaning of this to general population, they will say it's God who is in control of our destiny
etc.
But if you ask A salafi, what do you takeaway from the above he will say "God has a hand unlike any other hand"
Let's look at some examples below:
1. Hands. In the verse,
"And the sky We built with hands; verily We outspread [it]" (Qur'an 51:47),
al-Tabari ascribes the figurative explanation (ta’wil) of with hands as meaning "with power (bi quwwa)" through five chains of transmission to Ibn ‘Abbas, who died 68 years after the Hijra, Mujahid who died 104 years after the Hijra, Qatada [ibn Da‘ama] who died 118 years after the Hijra, Mansur [ibn Zadhan al-Thaqafi] who died 131 years after the Hijra, and Sufyan al-Thawri who died 161 years after the Hijra (Jami‘ al-bayan, 27.7-8). I mention these dates to show just how early they were.
2. Shin. Of the Qur'anic verse,
"On a day when shin shall be exposed, they shall be ordered to prostrate, but be unable" (Qur'an 68:42),
al-Tabari says, "A number of the exegetes of the Companions (Sahaba) and their students (tabi‘in) held that it [a day when shin shall be exposed] means that a dire matter (amrun shadid) shall be disclosed" (Jami‘ al-bayan, 29.38)-the shin’s association with direness being that it was customary for Arab warriors fighting in the desert to ready themselves to move fast and hard through the sand in the thick of the fight by lifting the hems of their garments above the shin. This was apparently lost upon later anthropomorphists, who said the verse proved ‘Allah has a shin,’ or, according to others, ‘two shins, since one would be unbecoming.’ Al-Tabari also relates from Muhammad ibn ‘Ubayd al-Muharibi, who relates from Ibn al-Mubarak, from Usama ibn Zayd, from ‘Ikrima, from Ibn ‘Abbas that shin in the above verse means "a day of war and direness (harbin wa shidda)" (ibid., 29.38). All of these narrators are those of the sahih or rigorously authenticated collections except Usama ibn Zayd, whose hadiths are hasan or ‘well authenticated.’
the neo salafis are the most divided ones
@@MZD15 the verse in sūrat Ad-dhariyat does not mean hands to even need a ta'weel. The word أيد originates from آد يئيد which means to have strength.
The verse which shows that hands mean hands is that of sūrat Sād (38:75) in which Allah SWT says "O Iblees, what prevented you from prostrating to that which I created with my hands?" Here Imam Tabari interprets the word "ََّبيدَي" to mean hands, and he narrates from ibnu Umar that "Allah SWT created four things by his hands."
When it comes to the attributes of Allah SWT, it is safer to accept them as they are and make the tafweed of the how كيفية
@@salahjraden7592 .
What about the shin ayah? Do you take Tabri’s view on that?
The deoband institute is not ashari- inclined but rather maturidi-inclined.
True, deobandiyyah is in fiqh hanafi and in aqeeda maturidi
41:50 Allah is above the throne-
As Ustadh Muhammad Hijab said: when the Sahabah heard the verses which are Mutashabihat - they believed the verses mean - How magnificent is Allah, how powerful etc. and not that Allah ta ala is literally above the throne with his Saat (essence).
Directions were created by Allah jal jalaluhu, he existed before directions and since muslims beleive that Allah subhanahu wa taala created the throne and the throne has limits, the space above the throne is not a void. Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him said that above the throne there’s a book where it is written
” إن رحمتي سبقت غضبي"
which means the features of God’s mercy outnumber those of his wrath. So for someone to say that Allah subhanahhu taala is in a direction above the throne is saying he now shares that place with that book. Allah jala jalaluhu exists before creating directions, and after creating them, he does not need them. So the meaning of (الرحمٰن على العرش استوى ) should be understood with what’s befitting to Allah, he established authority over the biggest creation, and by extension over everything smaller than it. Istawa means قهر، حفظ and 13 other meanings in Arabic, and no one should use a meaning from those that would have someone imagine that Allah jal jalaluhu needs a direction or place to exist. Solid bodies like books, trees, people, planets need a place and direction to exist, soft bodies like the wind, light, the soul need a place to exist. But Allah subhabahu wa taala created these attributes and things and directions, he does not change after creating them or become bound by them, subhanahu wa taala.
@@Ahmad_DE
vertical height is created
Allah's aboveness isnt
conclusion : Allah is The most High, BUT ITS NOT vertical height
@@Ahmad_DE
And His aboveness isnt vertical height
@@Ahmad_DE
Not in vertical direction.
its created
Wait so yall didnt listen to what he said
You have ruined me😂 best thing i heard for a long time.. respect bro Hijab
Prophet ﷺ said: ‘Allāh existed and nothing (including place and direction) existed apart from Him’ (Bukhārī). Place, locus and directions are all creations and He is the only Creator - it is rationally impossible for the Creator to dwell into His creation.
Bukhari 7420
But the atharis reject rational thinking
I am not here to discuss, but some remarks.
First of all, there are certain lies and half truths told about Atharis and their Aqida. For example, an Athari is not a mujasima. There are maybe mujasima that are Atharis, but an Athari is not automatically a mujasima.
Second, using the concept of rationality (which is not stable in itself and free from subjectivity, person X sees something as rational while person Y sees the same thing as irrational, or person X will see something as rational today, and tomorrow, he will see the same thing as irrational) to try to explain the unseen (Allah Himself, His throne, etc.) entails certain risks or is even doomed to fail. In the Akhira, there will be people who will see Allah Himself and His Throne. There is no doubt regarding that, it is there, it exists.
Second, one of the main problems with the Aqida of asharis, maturidis, etc. is that it cannot be uphold without neglecting certain verses of the Quran and certain words of the Prophet and the Sahabi, and without neglecting certain words of many of the Salaf, the clear majority of them hold views that contradict essential parts of their Aqida (while supporting the Aqida of Atharis).
Third, another problem and lack of sincerity in dealing with these matters of the unseen is that exogenous assumptions play a far too important role in their Aqida. They value (exogenous) assumptions more than the words of Allah, the Prophet, the Sahabi and many great scholars of the Salaf.
What you are doing there is trying to work with the concept of rationality and exogenous assumptions to try to explain something regarding the unseen, to be able to make a certain conclusion in regards to the unseen. You are taking "and nothing existed apart from Him", then you are adding the concept of time, space and direction to that, and then you are also taking "it is rationally impossible for the creator to dwell into His creation", so that you can conclude a certain conclusion. You are putting the capability of our limited mind above the content within the Deen itself, a way that is prone to mistakes and false conclusions in regards to the unseen. The matters of the unseen are far greater than the matters of this seen world, trying to explain them by putting so much emphasis on exogenous assumptions and the concept of rationality, is or can be fatal, and is also kind of doomed to fail. Such conclusions, in regards to the unseen, do not come from the Deen itself, but it comes through exogenous assumptions one establishes based on our limited mind, and limited to the things we can perceive with our senses in this seen world (and Allah knows best what we have not perceived yet regarding this seen world, and are not able to perceive at all). One should be cautious applying the same rules of the seen world to the unseen world. Allah has created great and incredible things, we have not seen yet, and only will see in the Akhira, if Allah wills.
So, the methods they use are doomed to fail, especially in the long term. If there are mistakes recognized, then not because they have gathered a better understanding in regards to the content of the Deen itself, but because they have learned and perceived new things regarding this seen world, things they have not recognized/realized before. That way, one can see something as rational today, but then as irrational tomorrow.
To conclude, there are way too many verses in the Quran, transmissions from the Prophet, the Sahabi, and too many works of great scholars of the Salaf that contradict crucial parts of their Aqida, independent of whether one looks at them as a whole or separately/isolated. One will not be able to find another Aqida than that of Atharis that is the most loyal to the content of the Deen, and makes most sense within the framework of our Deen.
May Allah guide us, and open our hearts and minds towards what is true and right, and not towards what our nafs wants to be true and right, may He make us devoted to Him and not to our nafs.
@LoneBedouin99 2 simple questions for you .
Is place, direction, space, time Creation or Eternal ?
Is God independent of his creation ??
@@lonebedouin9922 So tell me what verses one has to neglect to justify Ashari/Maturidi Aqeeda.
With this understanding, why do salafis cling onto Ibn Taymiyyah if he’s not even one of the salaf and introduced/dabbled in approaches that the salaf didn’t?
There’s a misconception that salafi’s rely or mostly rely on Ibn Taymiyyah. Most of their beliefs come from the book “creed of the raziy’ayn” written by Imam Abu Zur’ah Ar-Raazi (277AH) and Imam Abu Hatim Ar-Raazi (264AH)
Can you discuss the book Al-Aqida al-Tahawiyya
Wonderful overview of Athari development, which may well be your strong-point. But significantly lacking in knowledge about Ashari and Maturidism. This may well be because of your unintentional bias, which is understandable and not deliberate. Your ideas around athari creed a more well thought-out and the same level of clarity is simply not there with the ashari and maturidism. This is a shame because the latter two represent the vast majority of major heavy weight islamic scholars throughout Islamic history, and this doesn't do them justice. It can't be argued that it is entirely political, this causation can't be proven. It can equally be argued the battle of ideas and truth won the spheres of influence.
Let's be frank, Allaah is the preserver of all truth, but had the Ashaa'irah not stepped up their game against the Mu'tazilite, the ratios of sunni and shi'a Islam in the world may be the opposite.
The answer regarding the very valid question a brother asked about exactly where the change happened in Ash'ari history where it became (implied) somehow less orthodox... It was unsatisfactorily addressed, because there is no single point in history. As with all things, development is good because there is a layer of aqeedah that will be developed as new quantum physical or darwinian ideas come to light needing refutation... The definition of orthodoxy IS Asharism and Maturidism, in light of the prophetic hadith that his peace be upon him ummah will not unite upon error... Look at all the huge intellects on the side of these perspectives....
We must accept Asharism Maturidism and the aqeedah of Ahmed (r) as all orthodox, without any stigma.
Because you're well versed in Athari creed, please, Ustaadh Hijab, do a detail exposition regarding the difference between the Mujassimah and Ghair Mujassima of the madhhab, from early times. And the intra hanbali madhhab divide and discussion. I understand there are very subtle but important differences, like the salaf and early hanbalis accepting the ayaat as they are, yet not accepting the litteral import, whereas in the modern age people accept their litereal import, yet claim to resign the how-ness....Which seems a contradiction. I have not seen this explored in any good detail and I am sure you will be the man to do the topic justice (this IS a challenge as well as a supplication)...
May Allaah grant you success, guidance and closeness to truth, and aid you in your journey to Him. JazaakAllaahu Khairan for all the research and content.
Even the Athari discussion was inaccurate and lacking.
Where is Ibn Al-Jawzi who preceeded Ibn Taymiyyah? Where is As-Saffarini who came after him?
@@AmeerLatif-o4v
According to those who adhere to the Ithbaat camp (Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al Qayyim, Ibn Khuzaymah etc and likewise those who came after, do not see him authoritative in Hanbali Aqidah and is not relied upon.
Nor do the Mufawwidah of thr Hanabila hold him to be a reference in Hanbali Aqidah.
Imam abul hasan ash'ari had written tafseer of 350+ volumes, and the pages of that time were bigger than that of modern day.
Unfortunately it was 🔥🔥🔥 and we lost this treasure.
Was it burned during the mongols invasion? I recall from history that the mongols burned down every single city the captured, including Baghdad, which was the center of humen civilization in that time.
Maybe but he made tawbah didn't you know? He repented and made a famous khutbah of Jumua explaining the truth to people. In my country they are Asharis in aqeedah, and when you tell them that he repented they will say no we are with him before that.
I know it is difficult to understand the Asma' and sifat, one way to understand it better is to follow up a salaf scholar's explanation on it like Ibn Taymiyyah or imam Ahmed.
@@aminmez119false. Old rotten argument
A very detailed and informative video ما شاء لله !
But a very small correction brother ; Deoband school of thought follows the Maturidiyyah Creed.
May Allah bless you and May Allah grant you all goodness آمین
deobandis doesnt. they are not sunnis.
@@Adam91838
Instead of slandering the other group, I would request you to attain knowledge. The ikhtilaf between the Deobandi's & the Barelvi Ulema is not one that is of kufr. It is of furo'i aqaid.
I'm very sure that if I ask you a few things about the aqidah of us Hanafi Maturidis you won't be able to answer.
Both sides have ulema & dalail. I am a Hanafi Maturidi and I respect both the schools and benefit from both الحمد لله . Ulema's from both the schools have committed some real bad mistakes but afterall they were all humans. So learn the deen and try to put it into practice instead of deciding who's from the Ahlus Sunnah and who's not.
جزاک لله خیر
@@rafiullah9262 do the barelvis not make takfir of salafis? and use derogatory language like wobbler?
@@JHMninja89
Being an honest Muslim from the Ahlus Sunnah what would you prefer from the following? :
1) Following the usool.
2) Using harsh words against a group or an individual because they use harsh language towards us?
What I have learned from my Shuyookh is that no matter what the other person or a group says ; stick to the usool and do not declare them a bid'ati, mushrik or a kafir etc just cause they call you one.
I would like to give you the same advice as well.
جزاک لله خیر
Also clarifying that I'm a Hanafi Maturidi and not from either of the groups under discussion even though I respect both of the groups equally and consider both of the groups from Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama'ah Ahnaf Maturidiyyah.
May Allah grant goodness to the ulema and mashaikh of both the groups and May Allah grant us all the correct understanding of Islam.
آمین
reminder to say Alhamdullillah, AstagfiruAllah, Allahu Akbar 🤍
Actually deobandi school is weak in ilm ul kalaam in indian subcontinent Barelvis are strong in kalam
Berelvism concept of hazir and nazir is not the aqeedah of al azhar sharif misr.
Sayyed, both are Maturidis! Let's take the hand of our brothers and help each other.
The UK has a treasure and it's called Muhammad Hijab
Beautiful, i always like basic aqeedah without going into depth. This results in 0 debates and spending time where its more needed
I ask allah to guide you to truth
@@finvknownmuslim Ameen
@@finvknownmuslim
Ameen
@@wackypeace1135 who said that. Accusing my intention or neyah is a clear reflection of a black heart. Accusing muslims without evidence is a sin in islam. Be careful next time. May allah forgive you
@@wackypeace1135 i dont like responding a lot however i think the issue you have is presupposing ever dua done by someone to the other is some how reflection of superiortiy or arogance of the one making dua over the other. This supposition is faulty because i may have done dua to myself after or before typing you will never know + the ملائكة write back the dua for the one making it which is a mercy from allah that making dua for your brother is payed bacl to you. Second point i am not hypocrite i am stating a fact in deen read tazkiya books yourself. One of its topics talks about heart diseases that lead us astray and one of them is accusing fellow muslims without evidence is a sign of a disease in your heart. I used evidence + i want what is good for you that is why i am advicing.
Which video is about Ibn Taymiyahs quotes and position?
45:00 dear brother Hijab
The Ash’ari position is - we affirm the ayah as it is but at the same time exclude meanings which would indicate that Allah ta ala consists of parts or a body, or that his saat is located in a place etc.
And you can read it basically in Ash’ari work. I think you should check it brother for the next time to correct yourself.
thats exactly what hijab said but better lol. hijab
Yeah, as an ashari I also affirm the attribute of yad for Allah as befits His majesty, but I do not translate yad as hand because that would be to make taweel (interpretation of it) and surah imran verse 7 is clear that you cannot make taweel of the mutashabihat (ambiguous verses). Now ofc in tafsir at tabri imam at tabri narrates multiple chains from hazrat Abdullah ibn abbas where he says the yad means the power of Allah, so I accept that as one possible meaning because it is narrated from the faremost mufasirin among the sahaba, but I do not limit the attribute to this. At the end of the day, believe in all the mutashabiat verses and leave their meaning to Allah. It is that simple
If we blindly follow the salaf what different are we from the kuffar that told each prophet that we’re following our predecessors who had knowledge of revelation….
Isn’t the point of the Quran that we have the revelation with us along with our brains? So that we don’t need a patriarchal/authoritarian model? Or else we would have a Khalifa on earth such as Adam today… but we don’t…
Please Mr Hijab address this fallacy because it seeps into a lot of your discussions.
"I'm not here to defend the principles I'm here to follow the salaf". Spot on! 👌
He/some want(s) to follow the salaf and between him and them are 1200 years !
@@TheMercifulAndJustyou want to follow RasulAllah sallallahu alaihi wasallam and the difference is 1400 yrs
The salaf as-salih were not asharis or maturidis. May Allah guide hijab and all his followers to true Islam.
@@LearnTawhid They weren't Atharis or the deviant offshoot of Atharism that Salafis follow today either.
@@aunthegeek5788the salaf were ahlul hadith and ahlul
athar and they used this label jahil.
What’s the point then when Allah mentions asking the people of knowledge? How did they gain that knowledge of theirs without interpretation? Revelation does not equal knowledge.
This clearly isn’t about the verbatim word of revelation. To me it seems apparent that it’s about the intellect’s logical ability to grasp at the essences and intentions of the revelation, extended into everyday situations.
I have a question, why not the word "athari" (instead of hanbali) ? Does anyone know ? Jazakumullahu khair, salam aleykoum
Because the other Madhhabs eventually became Asharis and Maturidis, while the Hanbalis remained Atharis.
@@jasonjason6525 haha all 4 madhabs were atharis
@@fatezero1919 didn’t i say “eventually”?
The early term was hanbali in aqeedah not athari
@@dinopalavra876 yes salafis have really messed up the Hanbali aqeedah
Directions were created by Allah jal jalaluhu, he existed before directions and since muslims beleive that Allah subhanahu wa taala created the throne and the throne has limits, the space above the throne is not a void. Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him said that above the throne there’s a book where it is written:” إن رحمتي سبقت غضبي"
which means the features of God’s mercy outnumber those of his wrath. So for someone to say that Allah subhanahhu taala is in a direction above the throne is saying he now shares that place with that book. Allah jala jalaluhu exists before creating directions, and after creating them, he does not need them. So the meaning of (الرحمٰن على العرش استوى ) should be understood with what’s befitting to Allah, he established authority over the biggest creation, and by extension over everything smaller than it. Istawa means قهر، حفظ and 13 other meanings in Arabic, and no one should use a meaning from those that would have someone imagine that Allah jal jalaluhu needs a direction or place to exist. Solid bodies like books, trees, people, planets need a place and direction to exist, soft bodies like the wind, light, the soul need a place to exist. But Allah subhabahu wa taala created these attributes and things and directions, he does not change after creating them or become bound by them, subhanahu wa taala.
Can I have the reference for a book being above the throne?
Deobandis are mostly matrudis if I'm not mistaken
ٱلسَّلَامُ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَةُ ٱللَّٰهِ وَبَرَكَاتُهُ
Brother hijab does catch his slip of the tongue in hindsight here at 1:26:22 .
ماشاءاللہ
What a memory
ﷲ ﷻ
Had blessed him with to even catch mistakes unprovoked more than an hour later off nonstop speech. May
ﷲ ﷻ
Preserve him and reward his efforts Ameen.
They are in creed maturidi and ashari both because they think these two school of thought haven't big difference
Yeah like the Primary text on Kalam taught at Darul Uloom is Sharh al Aqaid al Nasafiyyah by Imam Taftazani R.H.
Williams Shirley Gonzalez Barbara Anderson Timothy
May Allāhu Ta3ālā reward you tremendously. Your lectures are amazing, Allāhumma bārik. I've been following you for about 7 years now and you're always try to be as neutral as possible without being biased. Keep up the great work! Greetings from Belgium
Ameen 🧡
47:30 Ustadh Muhammad Hijab pointed out that Buchari said; Allah is distinguished from his creation - meaning he is not in or outside his creation.
I love your great work brother, may Allah shower you with blessings. You, your family, relatives and colleagues. One precision: Moroccan arabic is not mixed with four or five european languages. It is arabic heavily influenced by amazigh gramatical structure, with amazigh words, words of turkish origins (I know that the Ottomans did not stay more than a hundred years but there is concrete proof and studies of this. Even I was shocked about this) and unfortunaly a lot of French arabized words (as well as a few of spanish origins in the norther parts of the country). wa salam aleykoum
Oh by bbbbbbjjvvlbbhbhvn in v. Nvnn nn. L. Bhbhhbhbbb
Lvbbvbbhbł Oh llnnnlon
L biokol l. Olli. Ok
Njo
according to your description of asharism which is accepting tafwidh and tawil and that neo salafis think more scripturally to the point it flirt with anthropomorphism, and then mentionning the fact that ibn abbas and others did tawil of some verses ........... all of this is proving mroe and more asharism is nearer to the truth, or at least more humble to accept many opinions in contrast to neo salafis
"Ali Dawah passed the test" moment
The perfect primer for anyone curious about this sensitive topic.
01:03:00 Ustadh Muhammad Hijab: The Ash’ari school has brought about without doubt some of the most intellectual, genius in Islamic history. We have ibn Taymiyyah in Hanbali school but the Ash’aris have so many ibm Taymiyyah. And that’s hard to say 😂😂😂🌹
Only imam ar razi comes to ibn Taymiyyah level. This is why ibn Taymiyyah focused on responding to his points and not even Imam Ghazali. Also if there were so many ibn Taymiyyah who were ashari level scholars, the whole world would only study ashari shafiee school. They would never study the hanbali school at all.
@@ARmirzaful about 70 to 80% of muslims are asharis/ maturidis
@@Kihalchal786 There is no way really to gauge numbers. Most Muslims don’t know the strictness of the salafis…they are too busy running from them. Or the philosophy of the asharis…most Muslims are not intellectual enough to read baqillaani or ibn fawruk. Allaah knows best.
@@ARmirzaful oh really ? I dont think so there are 200 million muslims in india around 150 million are asharis/maturidis + around 170 million in pak among atleast 100 million ahsaris/maturidis + around 30 million maturidis/asharis in Bangladesh . And I can guess that other countries including Malaysia etc will have roughly 150 million asharis and maturidis atleast
Now,
How many of these learn deen in their life this can be understood by the fact that the madaris are almost everywhere and also
. We have a system called darsgah or maqtab where almost every children of the town or village goes, who teaches them asharis and maturidis .
@@Kihalchal786 bro most of Muslims don't know anything about Kalam, you can't really be an atharite or maturidi without knowing Kalam
Williams Kimberly Perez Maria Brown Anthony
The Hanafis are mostly Maturidhis. They were/are from Turkey, Central Asian states, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Asia and traditional hanafis from Europe as they were on the path of the Ottomans. Today some are influenced by Asharism.
I think what you mean is they systemised/codified it and it became famous in the time of the Imams. Like in the Hanafi mazhab it is considered the codified teaching of ibn Mas'ud, Ali ibn abi Talib and Umar ibn Alkhatab (may Allah ta'ala be pleased with them).
As for the early muslims, the Mutazillah and others existed in that time, so it is true there were people that weren't mujassimah. And even their disagreement on Hasan al Basri wasn't on the issue of the non literalism when it came to Allah (it actually implies Hasan al Basri and his group weren't literalists), rather it was on whether a sinner is a disbeliever.
NO SUCH THING AS ISLAM MUSLIMS OR IMAMS SORRY
@@markjapan4062 Give yo head a shake, dk head.
@@markjapan4062 when u die,if not dead already...ur in for a surprise
@@markjapan4062this proves your ignorance
Original hanafis were from Iraq kufa
Moore Susan Davis Carol Gonzalez Timothy
Excellent topic
Ash'aris and maturidis are not from AhlusSunnah.
Would love to see a conversation between Muhammad Hijab and Sh. Atabek on this topic.
Anyone in New York should address him as hazrat hijaab or mufti niqaab
Lol! Afabek is a joke.
Lol! Afabek is a joke.
Lol! Afabek is a joke.
Lol! Afabek is a joke.
Hall Charles White Dorothy Robinson Brenda
we miss you brother
Perez Michelle Young Paul Taylor Edward
I agree and disagree with Mohammad Hijab. Yes, necessity is the mother of invention but Islam has transcended that. There is no opponent. We just need to overcome our weaknesses collectively.
This is a very confusing lecture, the presenter need to get his delivery in order and do some research, my brother, whatch you speech.
Asalamulyakum the deobandis are maturidis not asharis
54:43- a slight correction on what the Ustadh said about Imam al-Ash'ari. He didnt write few books; he wrote many books, more than a hundred and it is said that he wrote a tafsir of the Quran that reached 70 volumes. Unfortunately, most of his works became extant and only around 5 books have reached us. To learn more about Imam al-Ash'ari, you can read Shaykh Abdal-Qadir al-Husayni's work on Imam al-Ash'ari and the 4 volume work that was published by al-Azhar al-Sharif on Imam al-Ash'ari's legacy.
Also people should read his final book. Sadly many asharis lie and claim it isn’t attributed to him, but many of his contemporary scholars claim it was from him.
It’s called “Al-Ibaanah an Usool id-Diyaanah”
@haghuro9843 Contemporary Asharis, in general, don't deny al-Ibanah was written by the Imam. The debate normally revolves around whether it was the last book the Imam wrote or whether al-Luma' was the last book and a compelling case can be made that al-Ibanah predates al-Luma'. Also, if you want a comprehensive account of Imam al-Ash'ari's aqidah (especially since most of his books are extant) see Imam Ibn Furak's "Mujarad Maqālāt al-Shaykh Abi-l Hasan al-Ash'ari".
@@abdullahimusa9761 many scholars close to his time period stated it was his final word:
Al-Bayhaqi (Al-I’tiqād wal-Hidāyah ilā Sabeelir-Rashād (pp. 31, 32, 26))
Imam Adh-Dhahabi (Al-‘Uluww lil-‘Aliyyil-Ghaffār (p. 160)
Ibn Farhoon Al-Māliki (Ad-Dībāj (pp. 193-194)
Ibn Katheer (Al-Bidāyah wan-Nihāyah (11/187) where he affirmed that Al-Ibānah was the final book of Abul-Hasan Al-Ash’ari.)
Ibn Taymiyyah (Al-Fatāwa Al-Hamawiyyah Al-Kubrā (p. 70)
There’s more I just can’t be bothered writing them all here
Imam Subki - mujtahid of his time - refuted Ibn Taymiyyah
Hall Sarah Rodriguez Donald Smith Shirley
keep these videos coming
Invite Shaykh Asrar Rashid for a discussion on ilm ul Kalam
Im afraid he has too much ego to get schooled
Dear brother Allah bless you you are doing great work on this planet and we love ❤
اَمِين يَا رَبَّ الْعَالَمِيْن
Thomas James Martin David Jackson Sharon
28:00 Ustadh Muhammad Hijab is so honest that’s what I really appreciate about him.
Most Salafi selects do not acknowledge that Ibn Taymiyya and Qayyim believed that hellfire will run out…. Inn Qayyim was always repeating his Sheykh and both have written books on this matter. Albani refuting ibn Qayyim and Taymiyyah is also something that is not being discussed…
No Salafi sect ever said he began Kufr even though it is clear Kufr…
Lol no one ever accused a scholar who says jahannam will run out of kufr, besides you. Scholars can make ijtihaad on that topic, even if it is Aqidah. And are you accusing umar radiyAllaahu anhu of kufr and ibn abbas? They both said the same about jahannam. Be very careful. Ibn Taymiyyah quotes three sahaabah who said the same. Are you saying sahaabah made clear kufr? I hope not.
@@ARmirzaful The Qur'an is very clear that Jahannam is eternal for the Kuffar
Watched it fully. You made mistake in beginning that Deobandis are Ash'aris whereas majority of deobandis are Maturidis. However towards end you corrected yourself.
Then you said that Imam Zahid al Kawthari (rah) called Kitab at Tawhid of Ibn Khuzayma as Kitab us shirk. You meant as if he was first one to say so. Whereas Imam Fakhr ud din Razi (rah) called it Kitab ush Shirk in his Tafseer al Kabeer.
Anyways you took good approach but you seem more Athari inclined. You somehow said that Ash'aris and Maturidis came later but that is not true. Ibn Kullab (rah) is considered founder of these and he was from Salaf. Regarding Mujasima beliefs then one can say they originated from Maqatil bin Sulayman and then it got spread and Athari school got influenced. Plus Mutazila existed in Salaf too and their belief on Sifaat is similar to Ash'aris/Maturidis. NOTE I SAID SIMILAR NOT SAME.
You did not talk about Imam Bayhaqi (rah) and Imam Ibn Hibban (rah) who were Ash'ari inclined. Also you missed out Imam Ibn Jawzi al Hanbli (rah). He was not Ash'ari but on Asma wa Sifaat he was like Ash'aris.
I am an Ash'ari but I consider Ash'aris/Maturidis/Atharis to be Ahlus Sunnah
Anyways good bayan. Loved it. Thanks for praising Ash'ari and Maturidi scholars too.
There were many other mistakes. Yes, a person being from the Salaf doesn't make them correct or above reproach. He used this statement in defense of Ibn Khuzaymah as if it was.
I missed a bit more of objectivity rather than brother Hijab telling us why atharism is better...
Being inclined towards your position doesnt make someone objective.
@@stati5tik neither does one inclining to their own position, hence why OP was seeking more objectivity.
What if the objective truth is that one position is better
49:00 Ustadh Hijab points out that Ibn Abbas believed that Wajhullah (the face of Allah) - means his Qibla not a literal face as some salafi selects believe in.
Love it...
Taylor Lisa Jackson Barbara Perez Betty
If you’re not defending any “principles” and you just want to look at the quotes from the salaf, how do you determine WHO from the salaf we take from? Why did you prefer Tabari over X or Y if you have no principles to determine whether Tabari is correct? There were also people who were misguided in the time of the salaf but we have principles to determine who had the right aqida and who didn’t. Hijab is often logical but here it seems he was a bit all over the place unfortunately.
What do you suggest?
Agreed, the lecture was anything but clear and presice.
@@Sheen023 have principles to know who Allah is. After you know the truth then you’ll know the men of the truth, whatever time period they’re in.
He was talking about sahaabah here.
Anybody who chooses later peoples opinions over an authentic explanation of a Companion, has built a house like a spiders Web.
@@millatiibrahim2416 lol. Islam did not begin and end with the honorable companions. Simple as that.
Alhamdullilah used to follow this guy but now I see him as misguided.
Sadly he is, pray for him.
@1:16:37
Super important...
Some Muslims praise Ibn Sina/Avicenna as an Islamic Scholar...
They are wrong... He was an expert in Medicine - - sure... But aside from that
he said Kufr statements regarding Aqeedah /attributes of god
???
Shockingly pink shirt. Amazing talk though. Extremely juicy and interesting.
8:33, Really so why the prophet Salla Allahu alayhi tested a female servant when he asked her "where is Allah ?" and she said : above the heaven (fee al samaa), and then he freed her ? Is there more "layman" than a female servant ?
the hadith :
Mu'awiya b. al-Hakam said:
While I was praying with the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), a man in the company sneezed. I said: Allah have mercy on you! The people stared at me with disapproving looks, so I said: Woe be upon me, why is it that you stare at me? They began to strike their hands on their thighs, and when I saw them urging me to observe silence (I became angry) but I said nothing. When the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had said the prayer (and I declare that neither before him nor after him have I seen a leader who gave better instruction than he for whom I would give my father and mother as ransom). I swear that he did not scold, beat or revile me but said: Talking to persons is not fitting during the prayer, for it consists of glorifying Allah, declaring his Greatness. and recitation of the Qur'an or words to that effect. I said: Messenger of Allah. I was till recently a pagan, but Allah has brought Islam to us; among us there are men who have recourse to Kahins. He said, Do not have recourse to them. I said. There are men who take omens. That is something which they find in their breasts, but let it not turn their way (from freedom of action). I said: Among us there are men who draw lines. He said: There was a prophet who drew lines, so if they do it as they did, that is allowable. I had a maid-servant who tended goats by the side of Uhud and Jawwaniya. One day I happened to pass that way and found that a wolf had carried a goat from her flock. I am after all a man from the posterity of Adam. I felt sorry as they (human beings) feel sorry. So I slapped her. I came to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and felt (this act of mine) as something grievous I said: Messenger of Allah, should I not grant her freedom? He (the Holy Prophet) said: Bring her to me. So I brought her to him. He said to her: Where is Allah? She said: He is in the heaven. He said: Who am I? She said: Thou art the Messenger of Allah. He said: Grant her freedom, she is a believing woman. (Sahih Muslim : 537 a)
Where is Allāh? A question which our Salafī brothers often ask and mistakenly deem it a creedal matter. I want to clarify this issue with the following important points, Inshā’Allāh:
1. There is only one incident in the authentic narrations where the Prophet ﷺ asked this question from a slave girl. This narration is a solitary narration (Khabr wāḥid) that has been reported with various different words.
2. In the narration of Imām Muslim the words of the Prophet ﷺ are: ‘Where is Allah?’, to which the slave girl replied في السماء - He is in the heavens. However, in other authentic reports, the Prophet ﷺ asked her: ‘Do you bear witness that there is no God but Allah?’. And in one narration he ﷺ asked: ‘Who is your Rabb?’. So there are different wordings of this incident and it’s definitively not proven that the words ‘Where is Allah’ are the *only* authentic transmission of the incident.
3. For arguments sake, we will give preference to the narration of Muslim due to its rigorous nature. Thus, then know that the narration in Muslim has been mentioned by Imām Muslim in the section pertaining to *Ṣalāh* and not *Īmān*. Most of the narration is to do with prayer, and this incident has been mentioned as *part* of the entire narration.
4. The slave girl replied that Allāh is in the heavens, to which the Prophet ﷺ said to the companion: ‘free her for indeed she is a مؤمنة (believer)’. Now, the important question here is that would anyone - including our Salafī interlocutor - accept that a person will enter the fold of Islam merely by saying that Allāh is in the heavens without the declaration of shahādah? Of course not. Even our Salafī brothers regard the shahādah as a sine quo non to enter faith. But in this narration there is no mention of the slave girl giving her declaration.
5. Keeping the aforesaid point in mind, it is clear that the Prophet ﷺ wanted to ascertain a *sign* from her to determine whether she is a believer. Why? The answer is that some narrations (Abū Dāwūd, Aḥmad, etc) postulate that she couldn’t speak. Hence, instead of saying Allāh is in the heavens, she pointed (أشارت) at the heavens. The owner of this slave girl, a companion, was having difficulty knowing whether she was a believer due to the fact that she couldn’t speak. So he brought the case to the Prophet ﷺ. Otherwise if she could speak, it would have been easy for the companion to determine this matter by asking her himself without taking her to the Prophet ﷺ.
6. How did the Prophet ﷺ ascertain a sign of her īmān by asking her this question? The likes of Imām Al-Nawawī, et al., explain that, since she couldn’t speak, she pointed at the heavens which meant that she supplicated to Allāh and not the idols of the ground. The sky is the *direction* of the داعي (supplicator) just as the direction of the one praying Ṣalāh is the Ka’ba. In fact, the Prophet ﷺ said: When one of you offers Ṣalāh, they should not spit in front of them, for indeed Allāh is in front of them when they pray (Bukhārī). And in one narration it is mentioned that Allāh is between him and the Qibla. Despite facing the Ka’ba in prayer, and despite the fact that the one praying is *speaking* to Allāh, and despite the fact that copious authentic narrations apparently suggest that Allāh is in that direction, and despite the fact that the Ka’ba is the *House of Allah*, NO ONE believes that Allāh is in the Ka’ba or in that direction. Hence, just as Allāh is not in the Ka’ba, He is not in the heavens too!
7. In addition, our Salafī brothers who take this narration literally, without any interpretation or contextualisation, cannot remain consistent in explaining verses of the Quran such as ‘He (Allāh) is with you wherever you are…’; ‘And We are nearer to him than his jugular vein’, amongst many other verses like this.
8. So why point at the sky when referring to Allāh? The summary of the detailed answer given by the polymath, Imām Al-Ghazālī, is that true reverence of Allāh is with the heart and the actions of the body limbs are indicative to that reverence and acknowledgment of the lofty status. The maximum a person can show of Allāh’s high status with their body is indicating to the heavens. As we sometimes say, ‘the person is in the sky’. Meaning, they have a high status. And, yes, this kind of indication is natural and intuitive. But it doesn’t mean that Allāh is literally in the sky. This is a very short summary of Imām Al-Ghazālī’s lengthy answer.
9. The methodology of the people of Sunnah is simple: Imām Al-Nawawī has transmitted a consensus from Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ that the texts that postulate a direction, or place, etc., for Allāh will be given an appropriate interpretation. And in this way one remains consistent and faithful to the Book of Allāh.
10. In summation, Allāh exists without any place. Prophet ﷺ said: ‘Allāh existed and nothing (including place and direction) existed apart from Him’ (Bukhārī). Place, locus and directions are all creations and He is the only Creator - it is rationally impossible for the Creator to dwell into His creation.
تلك عشرة كاملة
@@fifafreebies8941
What you are saying is off topic. He was saying that for a layman it's not important to know the important points of islamic aqeedah in details. According to him, you just have to know the 6 pillars of faith. So i gave the hadith of the female servant who was tested and freed based on a specific point of aqeedah, which is not about the 6 pillars in general.
Concerning the fact that Allah is really above his Throne... Lol this is why, for example, abu Hatim al Razy and abu Zur'ah al Razy (two great scholars of hadith) said, in the aqeedah they trasmitted to abu Hatim's son, Abdurahman (an another great scholar of hadith), that all imams they met are agreed upon the fact that Allah is above His Throne, separate from his creation" (wa inna Allah ala arshihi ba'in min khalqih)
This is why Harb ibn Isma'il al Kirmany, who wrote a book of aqeedah in which he brings the ijma of the salaf, said that Allah is a above (alaa) his Throne, above (fawqa) the seven skies. (wa huwa alaa al arsh fawqa al samaa° al saabi3ah)
This is why imam al Bukhary has a chapter in his Sahih (hadith 7418), in which he brings the meaning of the word "istiwa" as explained by the tabi'in :
قَالَ أَبُو الْعَالِيَةِ: {اسْتَوَى إِلَى السَّمَاءِ} ارْتَفَعَ، {فَسَوَّاهُنَّ} خَلَقَهُنَّ.
وَقَالَ مُجَاهِدٌ: {اسْتَوَى} عَلاَ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ.
وَقَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ الْمَجِيدُ الْكَرِيمُ، وَالْوَدُودُ الْحَبِيبُ. يُقَالُ حَمِيدٌ مَجِيدٌ كَأَنَّهُ فَعِيلٌ مِنْ مَاجِدٍ، مَحْمُودٌ مِنْ حَمِيدٍ.
This is why imam al Bukhary wrote a book called "khalq af'al al ibad" (a book wrote to refute the aqeedah of the jahmiyyah) in which he quote the statement of Abdallah ibn al Mubarak about this issue. Abdallah ibn al Mubarak (died in 180 hijry) said : we don't say like the jahmmiyah : "Allah is here (on earth), but He is above His Throne. Someone said to him : "how we know Allah ?". Abdullah ibn al Mubarak said : "Allah is above (fawqa) the skies, above (alaa) His Throne"
ﻭَﻗَﺎﻝَ اﺑْﻦُ اﻟْﻤُﺒَﺎﺭَﻙِ: «ﻻَ ﻧَﻘُﻮﻝُ ﻛَﻤَﺎ ﻗَﺎﻟَﺖِ اﻟْﺠَﻬْﻤِﻴَّﺔُ ﺇِﻧَّﻪُ ﻓِﻲ اﻷَْﺭْﺽِ ﻫَﻬُﻨَﺎ، ﺑَﻞْ ﻋَﻠَﻰ اﻟْﻌَﺮْﺵِ اﺳْﺘَﻮَﻯ» ، ﻭَﻗِﻴﻞَ ﻟَﻪُ: ﻛَﻴْﻒَ ﺗَﻌْﺮِﻑُ ﺭَﺑَّﻨَﺎ؟ ﻗَﺎﻝَ: «ﻓَﻮْﻕَ ﺳَﻤَﺎﻭَاﺗِﻪِ ﻋَﻠَﻰ ﻋﺮﺷﻪ
There is an authentic addition narrated by al Darimy ("al radd ala al jahmiyyah") and the son of imam Ahmad (in his book of aqeedah : '"al sunnah"), which is : "Allah is above his throne, separate from his creation."
ﻧَﻌْﺮِﻑُ ﺭَﺑَّﻨَﺎ ﻋَﺰَّ ﻭَﺟَﻞَّ ﻓَﻮْﻕَ ﺳَﺒْﻊِ ﺳَﻤَﺎﻭَاﺕٍ ﻋَﻠَﻰ اﻟْﻌَﺮْﺵِ ﺑﺎﺋﻦ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻠﻘﻪ
This is why Imam al Tirmidhy said in his sunan : Allah's knowledge (ilm), his capacity (qudrah) and his sultan (i don't how to translate) is in every place (makan), and He is above the heaven. (sunan al tirmidhy : 3298)
عِلْمُ اللَّهِ وَقُدْرَتُهُ وَسُلْطَانُهُ فِي كُلِّ مَكَانٍ وَهُوَ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ كَمَا وَصَفَ فِي كِتَابِهِ
@@debiandebian7721 The simple fact that you quote both the Raziyayn and Bukhari in the same comment shows that your knowledge is from the internet.
Imam Bukhari was a kullabi. The incident between him and the raziyayn proves it. Yet you're reliant upon him to transmit credal matters?...
Hafiz Abdullah b. Muhammad al-Harari states the following in his book titled “Sharhus Siratul Mustaqim”: The hadith about the female slave is not sound due to two reasons.
1. This hadith is a mudtarib (confused) hadith because there are narrations of it that are different from one another.
2. That hadith is contrary to the rules of methodology because, according to the rules of our religion, a person who utters kalima ash-shahadah becomes a believer and a Muslim. As a matter of fact, in the hadith narrated by 15 Companions, the Prophet (pbuh) says, “I have been ordered to fight until people witness that there is no god but Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah.”
If the hadith “Where is Allah?” is accepted according to its apparent meaning, it is contrary to mutawatir hadiths. In that case, it is either interpreted or rejected because hadith scholars reject hadiths that are contrary to mutawatir hadiths and that cannot be interpreted.
The following question can come to mind at that point:
- Imam Bukhari narrated the hadith of the female slave mentioned above. How can we not accept a hadith narrated by Imam Bukhari as sound?
We answer it as follows: Imam Bukhari did not include that hadith in his Sahih. He included it in his book named “Khalqu Af’alil-Ibad”. He did not say, “All the hadiths in this book are valid.” Besides, Imam Bukhari accepts that some hadiths in his Sahih as weak. He wrote those hadiths without a chain of narrators to indicate that they were weak. We explained that issue in our works about hadith defense. Those who wish can refer to it.
We have proved the following points so far in this part:
1. The hadith about the female slave is weak because there is idtirab in the hadith.
2. The Prophet (pbuh) did not ask anyone except that female slave the question “Where is Allah?” That is the only hadith with that question.
3. The questions the Prophet (pbuh) asked were “Who is your Lord?” and “Who am I?” In addition, he wanted his addressees to utter kalima ash-shahadah.
4. The hadith about the female slave is contrary to the rules of methodology because, according to the rules of our religion, a person who utters kalima ash-shahadah becomes a believer and a Muslim.
After all those explanations, if Some one still insist and say, “No, we act based on the hadith about the female slave”, we will give them a different explanation:
We say to them: Even if you accept the hadith about the female slave as sound, it does not prove that Allah is in the sky. For, the Prophet (pbuh) asked اَيْنَ اللَّهُ. The word اَيْنَ in Arabic is not used only for space (place). It is used for both space and glory, that is, fame. So, the question can be in the form of “Where is Allah’s glory?” instead of “Where is Allah?” When the female slave said, “in the sky”, she meant, “His position is very high.” As a matter of fact, when Arabs say, “The place of so and so is in the sky”, they neither mean the sky nor to occupy a place there. They mean the loftiness of that person’s glory with that statement.
Many scholars like Imam Razi (Asasut Taqdis), Hafiz Subki (as-Sayfus Saqil), Imam Qurtubi (at-Tadhkar), Imam Nawawi (Sharhu Sahihi Muslim) Imam Suyuti (Sharhu Sunani Tirmidhi) Imam Abu Hayyan Andulusi (Tafsir al-Bahrul Muhit), Hafiz Asqalani (Risalah al- Qazwini) interpreted the word اَيْنَ in the hadith as glory, that is, fame.
If you ignore the idtirab in the hadith, if you do not heed the hadith scholars’ statement, “That hadith is weak” and even if you accept that hadith as sound, you cannot prove that Allah is in the sky because we can interpret the word اَيْنَ in the hadith as glory since it is a style used by Arabs.
Bonous:
In practical legal matters, conjecture [dhan] is sufficient as a basis of obligation. In this case, solitary hadith may well establish a rule of law. However, in matters of belief - scholars of creed only accept such hadith if it is free of contradictory evidence and the conditions are satisfied. With respect to the aforementioned hadith of the slave girl, the conditions are not satisfied on the basis that there are various narrations of the hadith. One narration in the Muwatta' of Malik states that the slave girl was black and that when the Messenger of God questioned her; he said "Do you testify that there is no god but Allah?" She said, "Yes." He asked, "Do you testify Muhammad is the Messenger of God?" She said, "Yes." He went on, "Do you believe in the resurrection after death?" She replied, "Yes." The Messenger of God said, "Free her."* In other versions, the slave girl cannot speak, but merely points to the sky in answer. Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani said of the various versions of the hadith, "There is great
contradiction in the wording." Given the conflicting versions, there is a strong
possibility that it has been related merely in terms of what one or more narrators
understood, and hence one of the versions is not adequate to establish a point of belief.
*Muwatta' under the chapter Setting Free and Wala '-9 / 322.
Robinson Jose Robinson Gary Taylor Laura
Assalam Aleikum brother, please kindly put this in written.
Its inevitable to read Tabsiratul Adillah on the Maturidi creed. That's the real Maturidi deal. Also and the book of Imam Nooruddin Al Sabuni the one who debated with Imam Razi.
Brother, can you be more specific? What are you talking about?
After a disclosure that I am Hanafi, here is a comment: from the presented information, it seems like there is a discrepancy between what the neosalafis believe about the positions of the Hanbali school and ulama and the reality on the other side. You suggested some sources for those who want to study the real salafism. The question here is, if it is so hard to study salafism and since there is no mazhab that would teach this doctrine, how people suppose to conduct their daily lives firmly rooted in knowledge in case they are not ulama ? That means being a salafi for most of the people would be that they will fall in different groupings and this will cause discord among them selves and with the wider communities. And we see that this is already the case.
We should know that we will not be asked about what we believe about Allah in detail (whether He takes space or time, etc). We just take what Quran and Sunnah give us and beyond them, whatever the scholars say is speculation. For the jurisprudence, we have well defined sunni schools which everyone accepts all 4 as valid. Khalas! Hadiths and the methodology of schools direct us to trusting the concensus among scholars. In specific matters like talaq/divorce, we follow concensus, not the private views of individual scholars.
I mean, there's no need to hold one aqeedah mazhab and deny others. That is sectarianism! These precise matters and positions of kalam are not the issues that will save us. I am sure many sahabah didn't have detailed understanding of these issues which people hold against each other nowadays. It's a sickness to divide the ummah by the egotistical drive of nafs to claim 'I am right, you are wrong'.
@@koroglurustem1722 If a person believes that Allah takes up time or space, then he is a kaafir, and will be regarded as such in the Hereafter.
I recommend you to watch video of yasir qadhi about the origin of sifat controversy
Lopez Paul Lopez Karen Davis John
Sorry to say, Salafis overrate Ibn Taymiyyah. He was a machine gun, firing extreme opinions left and right. Extremely knowledgeable with a photographic memory, but also came out with crazy opinions. He didn't have a teacher to keep him on a leash so his pen ran riot with whatever his mind came up with. This is all very well documented.
May Allah forgive him and have mercy on him
Are you prepared to say this in the Yawm Ul Qiyyamah akhi?
AMEEN!
RakhimahuLlah!
This guy is misguided, may Allah guide us all
I disagree about the triple Talaq issue because before ibn taymiyyah there was Ijma on this masalah as u mentioned.
We should follow Umar RA in this matter.
The position existed before Ibn Taymiyyah, it was the norm according to Ibn Abbas as narrated in Sahih Muslim that a threefold divorce still counted as one, it was Umar R.A who gave the fatawa that it counted as three due to the way people were taking the issue lightly during his rule and it became the norm, later on madhhabs took this view. I think both opinions are valid, but we can't deny the fact that due to the opinion of Ibn Taymiyyah being the opinion of the companions makes it a stronger stance. May Allah guide us all.
@@nabilmuhammadsani2827 So Umar made a Halal wife Haram for the people.
And that Haram wife if she marries someone else, it is Halal?
This is illogical mate. Ibn Tayimiyah RA had many strange opinions which went against the Ijma. In which he should not be followed.
Ibn Rajab Hanbali, his student, wrote a book against this masalah.
@@nabilmuhammadsani2827 Give me one fatwa of a sahabi who say 3 is 1 catagocally or when he was asked, even daif will go.
We don't have it.
Ibn abbas's own fatwa is against it.
Exactly. And this religion is not a game. Not every opinion is followable.
Furthermore, the authentic Hadith of Ibn Umar was clear about divorce occurring during menses.
@@nabilmuhammadsani2827Note: an opinion existing within the 700 years before Ibn Taymiyyah does not mean that Ijma3 has not occurred.
I think it is very sneaky and a bit cheap to label the correct aqeedah as hanbali aqeedah. Because Ashari en maturidi aqeedah were named after persons. Imam Ahmad was a Sunni muhadith and faqieh, he did not invent any aqeedah by himself.
Ashari’s and Maturidi’s are lost
In 1hr 8mins onwards you talk about how the Asharis produced big timers because they faced huge challenges towards Islam. It also seems that many of the Muslims were also in expanding Islam and facing so many different ideas, could this therefore shape the way Asharis are because of what they faced where as many of the Atharis based in Saudi didn't meant hardly any challenges and therefore view things in a complete different (maybe) simplistic view?
Interesting approach.
Salafi-Athari are stuck beating in the same drum of reacting to the Mu'tazilla (and the Shia as well). That seems to be the limits of their intellectual scope.
The other schools of Aqeedah face much more broader hermeneutic questions and are not reactionary schools to single issues. There is a reason that Atharis and Maturidis have always been the majority in Islam.
Reactionary Aqeedah is only useful in the context it emerges but does not apply to all situations. The Salafi-Athari school are only really useful in when philosophical imports (mainly Greek) started imposing on the Deen. In response, going fully down the Athari way helped get rid of the Mu'tazilla.
But the Atharis don't have much of a use or appeal outside of that.
@@Hastenforthedawm would you say in the time of revelation the prophetic method was quite reactionary intellectually?
Brother i hope you have burned this shirt :)
Ashari aqeedah is based on imam ibne kullab ( ahmed and ibne kullab are both from the same time)
Maturidi aqeedah is based on abu Hanifa and his disciples
Hanbali aqeedah is based on imam ahmed bin hanbal
There were some extremists in hanbali mazhab
They also have salafs but .......
May allah give you knowledge you seem very ignorant
Mashallah great work. I like hijab bro. Deobandi scholars are maturidi❤❤❤❤