Link to my translation of Ibn Taymiyyah's treatise: www.academia.edu/49229114/_Response_to_Those_Who_Say_that_Heaven_and_Hell_Will_Pass_Away_by_Ibn_Taymiyyah Link to the original Arabic: waqfeya.com/book.php?bid=9510
Hi Hassan Radwan I am new to your Video's ..I just watched other 2 Video's of yours they made sense to me ....And I am practitioner of Bhakti Yoga commonly known in western World as Hare Krishna"s ...we have our own Philosophy from our Scriptures and we have our Interpretaions why Exclusivist religions like Islam / Christianity exist and we believe in Mercyful God...
11:107staying there forever, as long as the heavens and the earth will endure, except what your Lord wills.Surely your Lord does what He intends. 11:108 And as for those destined to joy, they will be in Paradise, staying there forever, as long as the heavens and the earth will endure, except what your Lord wills1-a ˹generous˺ giving, without end. The verses explain that both hell and paradise eternity is subject to gods will but difference is that paradise is promised to be without end.
The everlasting torment of hell is one of the main reasons I left as well. The idea that so many innocent and well minded people will go to hell simply because they won’t believe is just absurd. When I was a Muslim I had and still do have a Christian friend who was amazingly intelligent. We would study ap history together and get into theological and philosophical discussions which was simply rewarding. He knew what Islam was but did not believe in it. Why? Because he was Christian. One of the things I realized when I became an ex Muslim is what humanity truly is. It is a collection of societies made up of individuals in which each society has its own norms, axioms, narratives, and perceptions of the world around it. The individual grows up and adopts these ideas and norms from the society they grow up in and accepts it as if it’s a universal or inherent truth. The individual then becomes biased to his society’s views, axioms, and world views, because after all, it is the correct point of view about the world right? When applied to me and my friend, we both grew up in our respective societies, adopting its norms, it’s claims on nature, and we accept it as the inherent truth of the universe. Because of this, when we learn advanced ,much more nuanced topics we adopt them to our world view because of the idea that nothing can contradict our inherited truth, thus the information we learn is wrong or is different then the consensus. That is why a religious person like my friend can be so smart but still religious, and most importantly, that is why he stayed Christian when I tried to convert him, and that’s why I stayed Muslim when he tried to convert me. When we are exposed to an individual who grew up in a whole different society with their own norms, claims, and perspectives, we are unconsciously, cognitively, biased to reject their view and support ours, this is an indisputable fact. Though some may try to analyze different societal view points objectively, we are always biased in our own. This affect is much stronger when we add religion to the mix. The Christian is only Christian because he grew up with a Christian world view. The Muslim is only Muslims because he grew up with a muslim worldview. When you add the possibility of damnation in hellfire for eternity to the mix, the cognitive bias of these two religions is ten fold. As such, there is little chance of any of them converting to the other religion do to fear of damnation. I had realized this truth when during my Muslim phase when I considered the question “if I was born in a Christian family, would I still convert to Islam?” When I realized the truth that I most likely wouldn’t, I went down a rabbit hole of anxiety and doubt. If people like my intelligent friend are going to burn in hell simply because they grew up in a whole different society and religion that are biased against Islam because they too worry about going to hell, then that is simply cruel and unfair. But god says in the Quran that he is wise and just, but the existence of hell and the fact of human bias shows unfair expectations of humans finding truth. This fight in my head continued for weeks and some nights I cried in trauma praying to god to save my friend and not to burn him in hell, or maybe I can sacrifice my self for disbelievers. However, by the end I had just accepted, that god was going to burn good people forever while I live with my nice hot babes in Jinnah while good people scream and suffer for eternity simply because they didn’t believe, including my friend. From that time until my deconversion I fell into a melancholic and pessimistic mood. I still fought to defend my faith despite knowing my own cognitive dissonance and I tried to justify my belief through scientific miracles or linguistic miracles, but by the end of it it all came crashing down and I resorted to believe on faith. Unsurprisingly I apostated and no longer believed. After that, I began going down another rabbit hole such as the origins of human life and what it means for our identity, why we do the things we do, why we are the way we are, what is our purpose, what do we see as goals, if our societal norms are wrong how do we find truth, etc. For some I have answered and I am pleased with it but for others I still contend with. However, where I am know is a 1000 times better then being forced to believe in an eternal hell where good people go. As a side note, a lot of these topics may seem similar to you because they are influenced by your videos. When I found your channel, you articulated thoughts in my head so well, better then I ever could. Thank you for making this channel and congratulations on where you are now!
As I pointed out, this book was only relatively recently published in 1995 from manuscript, so a great many Muslims are not fully aware of its contents.
In fact in this book, Ibn Taymiyyah argues there wasn't a consensus amongst the early generations. But I doubt I will be making any more videos on this topic. I think I've done it to death. You can check out some previous videos on the topic. In my view the Qur'an definitely presents the view of an eternal Hell. I don't think the verses quoted for a finite Hell are enough to say the Qur'an's view is a finite Hell (ie لابثين احقابا and ما دامت السموات والأرض ...) As I said in the video, at best one could argue the Qur'an contradicts itself. Perhaps Muhammad was in two minds on the topic. Allah knows best ;)
@@HassanRadwan133 Nice and simple question and i assume you would respond balanced and sensibly. You mentioned at the beginning of the video that this was one of the main reasons you lost faith in Islam. So since there are qualified scholars who state, and explain that hell is not eternal, how can you force an interpretation contrary, given your not a scholar? So I find it invalid that you could reasonably justify leaving Islam because of your assumption that hell is eternal. (That's because you're imposing your own interpretation regardless if other scholars say hell is everlasting). Let's say there are multiple models as to the existence of the universe and its nature etc. You (or i) as a layman in the field of physics hold a view also (let's say). Now, our view corresponds with some physicists. Why should we reject all of physics (as a science)? The reasonable thing to do would be to follow those scholars whom our view corresponds (In this case Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn Arabi) etc. If I've missed something please explain your rationale behind it. You can't just say, "because the Quran is clear on it " when clearly some qualified authorities disagree with you. Maybe you just found out that there are scholars who hold this view. Thanks
I was always aware some scholars said Hell was finite (ie ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya). The problem for me is that a perfect divine book cannot present a contradictory view on such a central and fundamental issue. In other words; if it is true Hell is eternal, then I reject Islam on that basis. If it is true that the Qur'an really meant to convey the meaning that Hell is finite, then I reject Islam on the basis that the Qur'an is not the perfect divine speech of God as it is incapable of clearly stating something that is not difficult to say.
Brother Hassan, i left Islam years ago and gained awareness of the absurdities set forth within the islamic dogma. Yet i am still having recurrent nightmares and redundant thoughts about the atrocious tales of hell and Aadab alqabr i have been told in my childhood. Sometimes i feel tempted to take on the wager in order to calm my nerves and have calmer nights of sleep but my conscience takes over, it reminds me that fear is the factor which allows political islam to thrive and to oppress people in lands in which the power dynamics are favoring Islam.
@@techieshu9553 i refuse to take the pascal wager for the islamic god on who's name many are being oppressed and forced into silence to this day, the god which allowed slavery and institutionalized it or the God who allowed his prophet to marry Aicha at 9 knowing that it could have killed her considering that more than 40% of pregnancies of girls that age issue into their death, and more importantly the god who would eternally torture my neighbor for the mere fact that he did not believe in him.
@@empereurjustinien2082 This persisting fear of hell is not uncommon, I've heard many ex-Christians offer accounts of such suffering with similar anxieties after becoming atheists, in some sense it is the best example I know of why people like Dawkins talk of childhood religious indoctrination as child abuse. I've heard an ex-muslim offer that after he left, he had a terrible accident , immediately his mind fell back into old habits and he became concerned this was a sign , a punishment for his apostasy. He rather than surrender to the fear internally challenged god right then and there to do his worst , nothing happened , and he gained a little bit of control over his reactions. I feel for you , I hope you can get a handle on this .
@@tdsdave sometimes, it is not only about the doctrine. The society where this traditional values is uphold is more intimidating ten fold. It is like, if you come out as an unbeliever now, the people will bring hell to you, and if you die God Almighty will torture you forever in the more real hell... That thought is lingering and excruciating every non-believer who commits apostasy.
Pascal didn't know much about Islam or he'd've hit this problem. If you accept that Jesus is part of the Trinity, orthodox Muslims say you are absolutely damned for believing that. If you don't accept that Jesus is the Son of God and part of the Trinity, orthodox Christians say you are damned for *not* believing it. If you're just "playing the odds" you've got a problem... There's a clever chart on the subject here: markhumphrys.com/atheism.arguments.html#pascals.wager
I got an answer for every muslim and non muslim that satisfied me: Allah is the most merciful, he will forgive your sins if you repent and do good deeds. What happens to those who knowingly do bad and dont care? They get to go to jannah to? No, they go into hell. Not everybody stays in hell forever, it depends on the person and their actions.
Extremely interesting. Have been afflicted with the same confusion over how God could permit eternal Hell and found myself unsatisfied with every argument that could be given. I never expected that the archetypical scholar that every traditionalist hardliner references would arrive at the same conclusion on eternal Hell.
I was intrigued when I read it. I'm certainly no fan of Ibn Taymiyyah, but I appreciate he was an deep thinker. His modern fanclub on the other hand are an insidious cult who ironically don't understand him like they think they do.
I read you comment that you are considering retiring from producing this sort of content. I just want to say thankyou so much Hassan, for everything that you have done over the years. It has meant much to many people, including myself. I hope you enjoy your retirement and the rest of your life both in your own personal capacity and in the company of your friends and family.
@@HassanRadwan133Lol enjoy while it may last. This is all temporary. We, you and us, will see it soon what the delusional reality of this worldly life was, and how it was merely enjoyment of a delusion (Tafsir Quran - 57:20). Rather we should have focused for afterlife, as this worldly life was a test from Allah. Signs of the end of this world, as predicted by Islam, are all lining up and happening in real-time. You better be prepared. Cheers.
You have captured the essence of atheism: If you want your scriptures taken seriously there is no way around these problems. This goes for any religious text. And if I may say so, you articulate it beautifully, without prejudice and hostility. Thank you.
I've only discovered you recently and I would like to say what you're saying is simply brilliant. Unlike many athiests or muslims who come off as apologetics; your arguments are always middle ground. You defend islam when need be despite being exmuslim. You are the epitome of maturity and I would like to become someone like you when I grow up. I would love to see more of your content, please upload more.
There are many issues with this book, •only 3 pages of manuscript of this book were found. •And the publishers normally (Darul masriyyah) have an issue with grabbing later manuscripts and sometimes every falsely attributed manuscripts. •the original chain doesn’t even lead back to ibn qayyim and neither ibn al wazr. As the book tries to claim. We have many other instances where ibn Taymiyyah affirms hell has no end
Well articulated as ever Hassan. I remember this business from when I was a Catholic, followers will look for any explanation other than the most obvious one, that it's all man made.
That's because you are ignoring another obvious choice. You are unable to comprehend God's wisdom. You cannot claim your choice is any more valid than the latter.
Dear Hassan, I've been following your works for the last two years now. Big fan of your works. I come from Indonesia with the largest muslim population. I'm a radio announcer here in Jakarta, Indonesia. Wish I could translate your works and had a freedom of speech here to spread the truth. Great job, Sir!
There's a very simple solution to the whole problem: The text was written by a man (or woman) who was not intelligent enough to realise they either needed to allow for their own failings, or carefully review the whole work for inconsistencies and contradictions before sharing it (which was probably an impossible task for a single person).
Yes, indeed, which makes his views on this topic even more ironic as they are quick to denounce the slightest deviation from their creed as apostasy. Which is why they have such a hard time accepting that their poster boy held such views and have to twist in the wind trying to deny it.
I mean anything can mean anything; meanings are literally MAN MADE & entirely subjective in nature. Postmodernism ironically is a deadly weapon against you anti thiest nutjobs.
@@user-ks1hp2pb5g In science, anything can't mean anything. In math, anything can't mean anything. The only way garbage man-made ideologies stick around for a thousand+ years is by being so vague that anything can mean anything, the favorite parlor trick of "psychics". Fuk religion, there are no answers to the big questions of existence. Be an adult and deal with it.
@@brianclone9583 That's literally not true, in both science; anything can mean anything. Scientists are human beings, subjective beings therefore; prone to error & their subjective biases. Scientists CHOOSE to study something. They also CHOOSE to construct their data around a methodology CREATED BY HUMAN BEINGS. The production of the data regardless of the claims asserted by positivists is still prone to error. That doesn't mean I discard of a peer-reviewed empirically based study because of it but it means I should be aware of the subjective human aspect in-built into those studies and their possibility of being false. You also conveniently ignore quantum mechanics, which literally debunks positivist epistemology. Showing that the existence of everything is all probabilistic. If you really want though, I'll happily have a verbal discussion with you about this topic. I have Discord or Skype.
@@user-ks1hp2pb5g You either seem to be confusing two entirely different topics, one on how a sequence of words in a particular language should be interpreted, and the other as to how scientists use their own judgement and choice in investigating matters. This probably constitutes a straw-man argument if it is being used to justify the claim, "anything can mean anything", as far as a language is concerned. So as far as scientific language goes, the word "plant" cannot refer to anything, like say the ATP molecule. We are talking about linguistics here, not about whether or not we can choose to investigate certain questions while consequently choosing methods to investigate as well. It is true that it's humans that create languages themselves, but once the grammar and meanings of various words have been established within a language, a user of that language has to abide by those norms to make sense in communication. To say otherwise is to say that either the user does not know the basics on how to communicate, or that he wasn't well acquainted with the language itself, or that he was intentionally misleading people about what he wanted to say. This is, of course, incompatible with the notion of being a Perfect, All-Wise Being. Besides, if anything can mean anything, wouldn't that quite literally mean that all your responses themselves here can mean anything? This would render communication meaningless.
The Quran is the literal word of Allah ! As long as one unflinchingly believes in that, the scope for any "positive " interpretation is severely limited !
If what I have read is true, Ibn Taymiyyah's idea of Hell is the same as that of Zoroastrianism (which is where Islam gets the "Bridge of Sirat" narrative anyway). If you accept that Zoroaster is one of those hundred thousand earlier prophets whose teachings were later lost or corrupted, maybe you could take "temporary Hell with purification" as one of the true teachings that got through unscathed.
Very nice video. I've actually read this book a while back, and though I consider ibn Taymiyyah (and shudder at the common title "Shaykh al-Islam") to be the single scholar who has done, and continues to do, the most damage to the Muslim world - with every violent fanatic/extremist group having him as a major figure, while other figures may come and go - yet still in this book I remember he brought a lot of decent arguments, combining traditional with some actual philosophy (don't tell the Salafis!). What I have always hated though in all these arguments is, oddly, the appeal to God's Mercy ... that it is God's Mercy that will not allow eternal punishment ... its almost as saying that it takes God's Mercy to stop God's injustice. I find it ludicrous. Even if God was bereft of all Mercy and were just going to punish people for their crimes on the basis of His Justice, still as the Qur'an says explicitly none will receive even an "atom's weight" of injustice. And yes the understanding of justice and injustice with God is the same we have in this world, which He has enjoined upon us in this world, and has given us as part of our unchanging fitra. There is no other. This isn't a dispute between mercy and injustice. God's Justice is enough, and His injustice is non-existent. No mercy is required.
@@mohamedmusthafa6182 We will finally be breaking up from work in two weeks so things are slowing down now. About to start a translation and deciding what my next "scripted" video will be.
@@beluga9744 (۞ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ یَأۡمُرُ بِٱلۡعَدۡلِ وَٱلۡإِحۡسَـٰنِ وَإِیتَاۤىِٕ ذِی ٱلۡقُرۡبَىٰ وَیَنۡهَىٰ عَنِ ٱلۡفَحۡشَاۤءِ وَٱلۡمُنكَرِ وَٱلۡبَغۡیِۚ یَعِظُكُمۡ لَعَلَّكُمۡ تَذَكَّرُونَ) [Surah An-Nahl 90] (۞ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ یَأۡمُرُكُمۡ أَن تُؤَدُّوا۟ ٱلۡأَمَـٰنَـٰتِ إِلَىٰۤ أَهۡلِهَا وَإِذَا حَكَمۡتُم بَیۡنَ ٱلنَّاسِ أَن تَحۡكُمُوا۟ بِٱلۡعَدۡلِۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ نِعِمَّا یَعِظُكُم بِهِۦۤۗ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ سَمِیعَۢا بَصِیرࣰا) [Surah An-Nisa' 58] (فَأَقِمۡ وَجۡهَكَ لِلدِّینِ حَنِیفࣰاۚ فِطۡرَتَ ٱللَّهِ ٱلَّتِی فَطَرَ ٱلنَّاسَ عَلَیۡهَاۚ لَا تَبۡدِیلَ لِخَلۡقِ ٱللَّهِۚ ذَ ٰلِكَ ٱلدِّینُ ٱلۡقَیِّمُ وَلَـٰكِنَّ أَكۡثَرَ ٱلنَّاسِ لَا یَعۡلَمُونَ) [Surah Ar-Rum 30] These and others.All of that is justice ... it is known to us and God commands to it. When God commands us to "be just" it is assuming we know what is justice and what is injustice. And indeed we do. It's one of the most basic senses. A child knows when they are being treated unfairly. If there are twin kids and you give one a third of a cake and the other two thirds, they know it isn't fair. I mean I'm not sure what you are expecting other than what I've said? Are you expecting that God has a Justice that we would not recognize as just? No. The Justice we know and understand both through reason and fitra is the same sort of justice God has because it is that justice (ie His justice) that He imbibed us with knowledge of when creating us. We only recognize justice because our sense of justice comes from Him. The only difference is that His is perfect ... It can balance on a pin ... and it is linked to His perfect knowledge, while ours is not.
Excellent as always! This, for me, is the most obviously false element of Abrahamic faiths, & the reason I could never really buy Christianity growing up (although I tried to force myself to believe, since I went to a C of E Primary school & Jesus was never far from any lesson or conversation!) The idea that a merciful God would know you will go to hell if he creates you, & does it anyway, is just absurd. Honestly when I talk to religious people I find this whole concept so off putting. How can I be genuinely friendly with someone who believes I deserve to burn to ashes over & over again for eternity?!"
I love how you end your videos, I'm an agnostic now , and i like how you focus on one point proving through it that islam can't be the word of omnipotent and most merciful entity.
I always ask myself when i hear such arguments and mental gymnastics from muslim, "did Allah verfiry your answer? Are you just saying something that suits to your understanding"?
I really like your videos as they are neutral and well made, as you are an educated person in Arabic, religion and science, I have stumbled upon discussions on Quora that claim that Qur'an and islam don't conflict with the theory of evolution, is this true?
@@nabilrady6767 they say that the story of adam and eve is metaphoric however the evidence that suggests that god did create adam and eve is very strong .
Mr.Radwan can you please add an Arabic transition or I could do it for you because it is might be so helpful for People who live in Arabic countries ...thank u
A couple of Hassan's earliest videos on the "CEMB Forum" channel are also available in Arabic there. This one's on Hell: ruclips.net/video/dpElNJbJfwc/видео.html
@@HassanRadwan133 just want to say I really enjoy your work; voice, pace, tone, logic and arguement. You are very talented and doing all a great service. At your pace, and as you are inspired, we will impatiently wait.
My justification for god saying that there is eternal hell is: what if god says you will go to heaven after purifying yourself in hell, then most people would not hesitate to do bad things.
So God doesn't really mean what he says? What else does God say that he doesn't really mean? Eternal Paradise? Do we just pick and choose what God really means?
@@HassanRadwan133 Even if hell is not eternal and everyone will be in heaven at one point in time in full happiness, then the concept of hell and heaven will be more useless in my opinion. Just sharing a thought I had..
The Qur'an promises eternal hell to the unbelievers. And you cannot rely on your own limited knowledge to determine the nature of God, other than what God reveals about Himself. God tells us that He is both Merciful and Just - merciful to the believers who repent their mistakes and just in punishment of rebels who arrogantly assume they know best. The only question is "do you feel lucky"?
When you say that we cannot rely on our limited knowledge to reason about the nature of God, is that just to say that we can't make sense of these religious claims? This strikes me as a strange thing to say
@@armand9120 What's so strange about the reason that a limited being like yourself with a tiny lifespan cannot comprehend the infinite , ever-living God?
@@AnalyseThat I think it's strange for two reasons. One worry is that you're relegating all these religious claims to nonsense when you grant that we can't make sense of them. Another general worry is that whenever you throw logic/reasoning/critical thinking out of the window, that's usually not truth-conducive. That's truth-detracting.
@AnalyseThat I was talking generally but you can apply it to religious claims about the nature of God. Why would you grant that they're all nonsense? And assuming that there is something coherent to be said about the nature of God, you're denying that we can use logic to consider its implications or think critically about it. That is your position, right? Or am I not tracking?
All those who left for that reason haven’t understood God. God is merciful and Just. Dont try to belittle His knowledge of what Mercy really is by using your limited created brain. Allah guide you all.
(1) eternity is allegory for long period of time. (2) time outside the universe does not exist. Thus everything existing outside time could be said to be eternal. Those who do not believe in God will cease to exist after their punishment. - This is what i think.
Dear Hassan Radwan can you make a video about sheikh ahmed al gubbachi? His most video are in Arabic. He makes a lot of video about why Quran can not be the word of God, and why prophet Muhammad is a false prophet. Quite interesting. Since many of us don't understand Arabic we are missing his wisdom.
Not saying that I believe in Yahweh but if you look at the ten commandments it is very simple and clear. You cannot say that you did not understand it and there is very little need for scholars and interpretations. If it is said to have come from God then it would make some kind of sense. The Koran on the hand is a complex, confusing and contradictory document
Do you think Ibn Taymiyyah believed that apostates has no punishment if he/she doesn't participate in war against muslims.I heard that Taymiyyah believed apostate punishment is only exist in afterlfe plus I also heard he believe that apostate should be killed even if he/she doesn't do war against Muslims.
hi Hassan, please do not spread lies, if u decided to go out of Islam, i am sad for you, but do not lie. A CLARIFICATION and CORRECTION: Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Qayyim did NOT say that Hell is temporar. That was a slander against them. In their own books they always say its eternal. Ibn taymyiya: Dar at taarud, volume 2, page 358: وقال أهل الإسلام جميعاً: ليس للجنة والنار آخر، وإنهما لا تزالان باقيتين، وكذلك أهل الجنة لا يزالون في الجنة يتنعمون، وأهل النار في النار يعذبون، ليس لذلك آخر And all the people of Islam said: There is no end to Heaven and Hell, and they are still there. Likewise, the people of Paradise are still enjoying in Paradise, and the people of Hell are in Hell being tormented, and there is no end to that Ibn Taymiyya also says in his books (مجموع الفتاوى)) (18/307)؛ ((بيان تلبيس الجهمية)) (1/581 وقد اتفق سلف الأمة وأئمتها وسائر أهل السنة والجماعة على أن من المخلوقات ما لا يعدم ولا ينفى بالكلية، كالجنة والنار والعرش The salaf and its imams and ahlu sunnah wal jamaah agree, that some creation like the Arsh, jannah, and Hell will never cease to exist Ibn Taymiyya authored a book refuting those who claim that Hell is temporar The book is called: الرد على من قال بفناء الجنة والنار There is no evidence that Ibn Taymiyya hold that view. Assuming he did, he obviously retracted it, since in every single book he says that Hell is eternal like Paradise The scholar Ibn Hazm wrote a book where he gathered issues where there is ijmaa' (consensus) of Islamic scholars. Ibn Taymiyya wrote a commentary on it and he criticised some mistakes of Ibn Hazm, because there actually was a difference of opinion in some issues. But, ibn Hazm claims there is consensus that Hell is eternal and Ibn Taymiyya NEVER critices Ibn Hazm for that. So, Ibn Taymiyya clearly did believe that Hell is eternal, like all other Islamic scholars. This is why u should learn Islam from Islamic scholars, NOT from western academics Thid historian John Hoover accepted subkis account, who was a fierce and biased enemy of ibn Taymiyya. 1. Ibn Hazm in his book "Meratibul Ijma", on which Shaykhul-Islam gave a comment, says, speaking about the eternity of Paradise and the Fire (Jehenna): "The Fire is the truth, it will not disappear (cease) nor will its inhabitants disappear." Shaykhul-Islam did not make any remark on the said speech as he did in other places where he disagreed with Ibn Hazm. 2. Says Sheikhul-Islam: "The Salaf of this Ummah and its Imams agree that among the creatures there are those that will not disappear, such as Paradise, the Fire, the Throne and the like..." (Majmu'ul Fatawa 18/307) So, after this text, can we say that Shaykhul-Islam conveys the consensus of the Salaf and Imams of this Ummah and then after that he advocates a contrary position?! 3. Ibnul-Qasim, regarding the words of Shaykhul-Islam in his reply to the Jahmiyyah: "And that the rest of Paradise and the Fire are eternal", says: "This, together with what will come, refutes the lie with which his enemies have accused him of the transience of the Fire .” (Bejanu telbisi al-jahmiyah 1/157) 4. Ali al-Qari, a well-known Hanafi scholar, says: "And as for his words that Ibn Taymiyyah al-Hanbali thinks that the disbelievers will eventually come out of Hell - that is a slander on him." (Er-reddu alel kailine bi vihdetil wujud 86). 5. Shaykh Abdul-Aziz er-Rajihi says: "What this misguided person attributes to Shaykhul-Islam (i.e. talk about the transience of fire) is falsehood, a lie and a hoax." On the contrary, Shaykhul-Islam says the opposite... The basis is what Shaykhul-Islam mentioned in his books, and what his enemies attribute to him is not proof. If it were credible, then the hakk would be in his speech that coincides with the proof, which is the speech about the eternity of the Fire." (Kudumu ketaibil jihad 84-85). Then, on page 85, he says: "The attribution of this talk about the transience of the Fire to Ibn al-Qayyim is also invalid because Ibn al-Qayyim holds the opposite opinion..." 6. Shaykh Ibn Jibrin in the preface of the book "Ikaful ferikajni ala huludi ahlid-darayn", says: "From these quotes it is obvious that the one who attributes to two shaykhs (Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim) the speech about the transience of the Fire and the cessation of its azab (punishments) ) - speaks about them without knowledge. Their books are present among people and they also talk about aqeedah, and among other things there are clear texts that they advocate the view of the eternity of enjoyment (in Paradise) and punishment (in Hell)." Then, apart from the things mentioned above, we did not see that any of the disciples of Shaykhul-Islam attributed this speech to him. What's more, Subki, one of the fiercest enemies of Shaykhul-Islam, did not attribute this speech to Shaykhul-Islam. tnx for reading,.
Whatever position Ibn Taymiyyah had previously, he clearly revised it in later life. His treatise; "The Response to Those Who Say Heaven & Hell Will Pass Away," (الرد على من قال بفناء الجنة والنار) was written shortly before his death and so reflects his final position on the matter. I can only assume you haven't read it yourself, because it leaves no doubt he favoured the position that Hell would eventually cease to exist. I urge you to read it for yourself. It is available online in both Arabic and English. Here are the links: www.academia.edu/resource/work/49229114 www.academia.edu/resource/work/44727692 Best wishes.
@@HassanRadwan133 and somehow you in 2023 is a bigger critic of IT than his lifetime rival Imam Subki who never ever attacked or mentioned that IT said this! How ilogical is this? His biggest rival and opposer, NEVER attacked It for this, which is probably rhe MOST CONTROVERSIAL topic and somehow Imam Subki doesnt write a book about this, how stupid this is man??
You can also check out Yasir Qadhi's lecture on Jahannam where he talks about the book and says that in his opinion it's fair to say that Ibn Taymiyyah did hold the opinion that Hell would cease. (Yasir Qadhi did his post grad on Ibn Taymiyyah) ruclips.net/video/hLTNfBCxBTo/видео.html
Have you considered that you just have to accept part of religion as true ? If for example I read the Quran and was inspired by it in someway. Would it not be possible to leave the questions I can't answer on faith ?
The question is not are there some nice bits. The question is: "Is it from God?" If I don't genuinely believe it's from God then I can't call myself a Muslim. Maybe you can. But being true to myself is important to me.
Hi Hassan, what would you say if a muslim tries to solve the contradiction between a Merciful God and Hell by saying that God is Merciful yes but only to believers, he is not Merciful to unbelievers, since the believers will be shown Mercy for eternity in heaven so we can say He is the most Merciful.
I would say that's not Mercy then. Mercy is something you show to those who oppose you or have wronged you. Showering favours on those who obey and worship you is called generosity (or bribes). It's not called Mercy. Saddam Hussein was also very generous to his sycophants.
The true value of mercy like love is that it can not be earned it's selfless the giver of mercy does not consider how he or she is feeling it's a gift going to heaven because you worshiped him as the contract goes you enter paradise reward for job done not an act of mercy you fulfilled a contract and you got paid for it
Read what Ibn Taymiyyah said and make up your own mind. www.academia.edu/44717485/Response_to_Those_Who_Say_that_Heaven_and_Hell_Will_Pass_Away?fbclid=IwAR39OEUAuHmFrDce_PEgf983bNIXFiD_g8LMhNFgAYkMw8civFXg37m0HDM
Having the knowledge Ibn Taymiyya had about Islam would make it unthinkable for Him to leave Islam. His certainty was far greater that you can even conceive of, because, unlike you, he was not ignorant. And why would God have to make explicit that He will cause the fire to end? That might only increase rebellious people in rebellion. God's book is a guidance, and His prophet is a giver of glad tidings and a warner. His duty was to warn people from the fire.
Who knows if he left Islam or not. As you can see, the arguments he was making in this book are against the Quran. And going against Quran is a form deviance. We will never know if he died with a shattered Imaan.
Had anh of actually took yhd time to study islam, you'd kniw eternal hell is only for the worst of creation. Those who out of Arrogance denied Allah. Plus youd know that Noone would feel unfairly judged. No person would say Allah this is unfair. I think these points destroy your argument. You're welcome.
لقد قرأت الكتاب ابن تيمية لم يقل ان النار فانية، بل قام بذكر اقوال الناس في هذا الموضوع وتكلم عن كل قول بأدلة بدون الانحياز أو إبداء رأيه غي هذا الكتاب. *يجب عليك قراءة الكتاب بنفسك*
والله ضحكتني 🤣 لم أقرأه فقط بل ترجمته الى اللغة الانجليزية www.academia.edu/49229114/_Response_to_Those_Who_Say_that_Heaven_and_Hell_Will_Pass_Away_by_Ibn_Taymiyyah
من الواضح لمن يقرأ كتاب ابن تيمية أنه يرى بأن النار فانية وقد قال بذلك كثير من أهل العلم ومنهم ياسر قاضي الذي ناقش الكتاب هنا ruclips.net/video/hLTNfBCxBTo/видео.html
I don't know what sites you have visited but the book can be downloaded as a pdf from several sites that are simply repositories for a wide range of Arabic books that are not confined to any one single school of Islamic thought. For example: waqfeya.net/book.php?bid=9510
In the bible it says hell is everlasting. " And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever." Revelation 20:10 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." Jude 7
I lost all respect for ibn taymiyyah after he straight up invents Bible verses to prove that Muhammad is prophecied in there in his response to Christians
Hadith is not proof. It is a claim. Anyone can make a claim. You need *evidence* to prove a claim. There is absolutely no scientific evidence that the moon has been split in two and then reassembled. As NASA scientist Brad Bailey said "No current scientific evidence reports that the Moon was split into two (or more) parts and then reassembled at any point in the past." sservi.nasa.gov/?question=evidence-moon-having-been-split-two
I'm pretty certain he was not!. Ibn Taymiyyah generally held very conservative views which makes this view of his all the more surprising. One thing is for sure is that he was a highly intelligent and articulate scholar who was not afraid to challenge a view if he thought it was wrong. What this book shows is that he recognised the incongruity of a God who is omnipotent, omniscient, wise and good, yet who created beings to suffer eternally when by definition, he had an infinite amount of alternative options to achieve what he wants.
Hi, just wanted to say that i believe to be the mahdi. I know this sounds insane and im probably insane. I dont know. Strange things happened. Just want you to know not to give up. There might be a god.
Mt friend I hope you're doing well. I brought you an awesome source (book). I'm very interested in it and I found it great . The Book named ( مصباح الشريعة - الامام الصادق عليه السلام ) You will se the huge difference. Why I loved this book because gives you sense and logical reason for everything. I wish you take your time to read it closely and make a video about your thoughts it it.
للمعلومة الدقيقة ، هذا الكتاب شبه كتاب نهج البلاغة من حيث الجمع . جمعت فيه اقوال الامام الصادق ونسبت اليه ، ليس بالضرورة ان يكون كل شي موثوق بالكامل ، ولك حسب قرائتي له الكثير منه دقيق وجيد
You will understand if you look at the verses from the perspective of WARNING. i know human psycology, and due to not fully graping or comprehending the things which are really big.... We struggle to even understand geological timescales, or evolutionary timescales.... Let alone cosmic timescales..... So what about eternal... "Never ending".... The answers are there in Gods description of himself. The nature of humans os if I were told i will be punished for a short time... But live eternally in fire.... The stakes become serious.... Whereas if i know a time period will come to an end and i will thereafter "live eternally" elsewhere..... I could be tempted to think, "what the hell, i might as well do this its not like i will be punished for long (relatvistic terms)
@@HassanRadwan133 mind games? It's communication. Communicating a message, across time and to many different peoples/civilizations...... Most believers they will be satisfied with the literal readings and won't need to delve into the subtle differences that hint to something else. In summary, it's human nature to do some relatavist comparisons..... Eg. Well if i did x (for immediate gratification) and punishment is Y (but that y is miniscule in terms of eternal reward) - well in that case, the motivation to stop myself may not be as strong.....
@@HassanRadwan133 who said the Quran says something it doesn't mean? For me, it's very simple. It's communicating a message. A concept of "eternal" and "time" are things that humans can't grasp. Even today in science "infinity" means mathematic rules fail, physics fail once "infinity" comes in to play. In fact it's considered a sign something has gone wrong. "time" too, is one of those things science till this day can't define. What is time.
question for you - you used the word "kufu" date stamp 3min:38sec is one who rejects the word of Allah. But if you read the entire Quran and was not convinced it was the truth is this also called "kufu?" . I thought when you read the words of Allah and if you DO believe it BUT you want to "conceal its truth(s)" this is what kufu ment?
This is a joke. You are using a book that actually refutes your claim just by reading its title. And I'm pretty sure this is the reason why you did not quote from it, and you did not read it, You have been lying and fooling your audience as if you are presenting ibn taymiyyah's argument. The shock is that ibn taymiyyah wrote this book to refute those who say hell will come to an end, and presented all what's been said about the matter and finally brought the opinon of ahl sunnah wa al'jamaa and supported it with evidences from both Quran and sunnah, 1)This means ibn taymiyyah did not hold this opinon 2)he refuted this fraud idea 3)he listed the opinons and explained why they contradict themselves 4) you lied when you attributed o him saying that this matter contradict God's mercy bcz he himslef quoted what those who hold this opinon think (not his own opinion) if you are in this level not able to even distinguish between what ibn taymiyyah says what the others say then you are either a liar or a ignorant fraud, And i encourage everyone to read this book of ibn taymiyyah to see your lies .
I did quote from the book and in fact you can read what Ibn Taymiyyah said for yourself. I have translated it here: www.academia.edu/44717485/Ibn_Taymiyyahs_Response_to_Those_Who_Say_Heaven_and_Hell_Will_Pass_Away_
@@HassanRadwan133 I have read it in it's original language and here you are translating it which just shows you needed to twist it, I'll make a thread responding to you, cause ibn taymiyyah's book itself refutes you, and i can't believe you concluded through this book that he believes hell isn't eternal, that's why i assume you don't even realize that he quoted many opinions about the matter and finished with the correct one Morover you claimed there is ijmaa on this issue and ibn taymiyyah broke it, that's another lie or a reflection of your ignorace cause there is no ijmaa . Anyway, you video disappointed me as you should respect your age or if you don't know how to read ibn taymiyyah then don't read for him until you learn better
@@HassanRadwan133 The issue isn't about ibn taymiyyah saying this, the issue is you concluding something out of it That contradicts what evrn al-jahm ibn safwan himself thought ! Because even those who hold this opinon quote from the Qur'an and they have evidence.. But you claimed thereis ijmaa on this and ibn taymiyyah broke it, Please show me where is this ijmaa (consensus) when we have ibn masud and umar and other tabe'een holding this opinon?
I agree not all scholars consider it a matter of ijma' - particularly these days. However in the past most classical scholars from mainstream orthodoxy did and Ibn Hazm made it one of the doctrines that there is consensus on and those who deny it have gone out of Islam, in his well known book on matters of consensus "maraatib al-ijma' مراتب الإجماع للإمام ابن حزم And Taqi al-Din al-Subki, a contemporary of Ibn Taymiyyah who wrote a refutation of his treatise, said: “The doctrine of the Muslims is that the Garden and the Fire will not pass away. Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm has transmitted that this is held by consensus and that whoever opposes it is an unbeliever by consensus.” (al-i’tibar bi-baqa’ al-janna wa al-nar - Taqi al-Din al-Subki) I agree some don't consider that there is consensus and Ibn Taymiyyah certainly strongly rejects that there is a consensus, nevertheless many classical scholars did indeed consider it a matter of consensus.
even sheikhul islam rahimullah tala had troubles haha ... very interesting. even he is not friend of many muslims and non salafi shujukh he was on a different level . thanks for sharing :) . in the end ex muslims madee things not up
Many will tell you to use pascals wager in order to believe in god. I use a different one for justifying atheism. There are in total 4200 religions, and alll of them are exclusive, meaning if one has to be true others can't be. Now imagine choosing the wrong one. So if islam is the true religion , then everyday you go to church, you are spiting the god even more and vise versa. We atheists are at a natural advantage that while we are not worshipper's of god, at least we Don't worship God's. Rival
It was - and still is - the consensus amongst mainstream Sunni (and Shi'a) scholars. But as with all aspects of Islam you will find those who hold a different opinion.
The bible calls josephs and Moses’ kings ‘pharaoh’ while ‘pharaoh’ wasn’t used until AFTER joseph. However, the Quran doesn’t make this mistake as it calls Joseph’s ruler a ‘king’ and Moses’ ruler a ‘pharaoh’. How did muhammad ﷺ know this? Muhammad ﷺ clearly couldn’t have copied the bible otherwise he would’nt have made this mistake.
The title King wasn't used in Ancient Egypt: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egyptian_royal_titulary#:~:text=The%20royal%20titulary%20or%20royal,even%20changed%20during%20the%20reign). The Qur'an appears to assume Pharaoh is the actual name of the ruler at the time of Moses and so uses the generic word "King" for the ruler at the time of Joseph. Had the Qur'an indeed used one of the actual titles used by Ancient Egyptians at the time, then one would have grounds to claim it was significant. But the use of a generic word like "King" doesn't signify anything extraordinary. As I have said before, if one is going to make claims of miraculous historical accuracy then one must have accurate language to back it up.
There is no contradiction. Because when Allah says As for those who are wretched, they will be in the Fire, sighing in a high and low tone. They will dwell therein for all the time that the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord wills. Verily, your Lord is the Doer of whatsoever He intends (or wills). And those who are blessed, they will be in Paradise, abiding therein for all the time that the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord wills: a gift without an end.” [Hood 11:106-108] Allaah says about paradise 'a gift without an end' but as far as hell is concerned, Allah has not said made an exception and further said He is the doer of whatsoever he intends.
Well Yasir Qadhi speaks of Ibn Taymiyyah's view on finite hell in this lecture but apparently he considered both views to make sense. ruclips.net/video/PA4JYRsFGj4/видео.html A lot of salafis get upset when people point this out though and start denying he ever suggested something so preposterous.
@Icelerate could you please tell me the exact point in time on that video, where he says that? I heard him say he was asked about Ibn Taymiyya's view of a finite Hell, but I can't see where Yasir Qadhi says that "Ibn Taymiyya thought both views make sense" btw I previously made a response to that video by Yasir Qadhi here ruclips.net/video/T1raAMO3ipw/видео.html
You can never have true understanding of Islam unless you follow the Quran AND Ahlulbayt together. Leave one or the other and you will continue lost and never arrive at the true message...
So most people who are not lucky enough to born into your type of family or get in touch with 'Ahlulbayt' are doomed? Why do you think people can understand rocket science/brain surgery just by following books/lectures but can't understand your version of Islam?
@@manobik No one said anything about people being doomed (that is contrary to God). But without the complete message, there will always be confusion and unease. I wasn't born into anything, it was extensive investigation that lead me to what I am sure is truth.
@@soniaallam4522 good for you.. Tell me what method did you use? See most people I met were very confident re: their research method.. However extensive honest questioning points their blind faith like this teenager.. Search on RUclips using 'cordial curiosity Tia'
What a liar Why did u not continue with the quote ? He clearly states later that it is the position of the jahmiyya So u want me to follow a liar atheist?
You don't have to believe me. This is Yasir Qadhi explaining the views of Ibn Taymiyyah on the externality of Hell and he says pretty much the same as I said in this video. ruclips.net/video/hLTNfBCxBTo/видео.html
@@HassanRadwan133 i already saw yasir qadhi And yaser did not affirm it He said he might aconowledge the non eternity of hell fire So Nice try watch from min 40 onward 😉😉 And again why did u not give thr full quote? And on min 25 onwards he says that ibn taymiyya says what is the hikma of it He never said what u said He never said what u said 🤣🤣🤣 So do u want me to believe a liar atheist? But if u have read ibn al qayyim u would have understood ibn taymiya position on the erternity of hell But u never did and will never do
Ibn Taymiyyah says that it is because of this contradiction that Jahm denied that God is the Most Merciful of the Merciful. That doesn't mean that Ibn Taymiyyah himself didn't consider it a contradiction. On the contrary, he clearly does, which is why he argues against eternal Hell. Here is the whole passage: "Eighth: It is established that apart from the fact His Mercy is all-encompassing, He is also All-Wise and the All-Wise only creates according to His overall wise purpose. Just as His wise purpose is mentioned in several places. For so long as it is understood that those He punishes, He punishes for a wise purpose, then this is possible. In this world, there is a wise purpose behind Divinely ordained punishments. Likewise, there are profound wisdoms behind what He decrees of calamities. Amongst them; cleansing of sins, purification of souls, deterring the perpetrator as well as others in the future and in it lies a cautionary lesson. And the Garden is pure and no one enters it except the pure. For this reason he said in the Sahih hadith: “After they have crossed the sirat they will be confined at a bridge between the Garden and the Fire. Then when they have been cleansed and purified they will be permitted to enter the Garden.” Evil and unjust souls - who if returned to this world before the punishment, would simply go back to what they were forbidden - are unfit to dwell in the Abode of Peace which is incompatible with lies, injustice and evil. However if when they are punished thoroughly by the Fire, their souls are cleansed of that evil, then this is rationally consistent with wise purpose, just as is the case with suffering of this world. Creating those who have evil in them that is eliminated by means of punishment, is perfect wisdom. But as for creating souls who commit evil in this world, while in the Hereafter they will only exist in torment, this is a contradiction, in which appears a contradiction of wisdom and mercy that does not appear in anything else. For this reason, when Jahm saw that, he denied that God is the Most Merciful of the Merciful and said; rather He does whatever He wills. And those who followed his path, such as al-Ashʿarī amongst others, hold the opinion that, in reality, there is no Wisdom or Mercy, but He has Knowledge, Power and Will with no preponderance given to any one of the two aspects (of Wisdom and Mercy). For that reason when they are asked to acknowledge that He is Wise, they interpret it as He is Knowing or Powerful or Supporting - but none of these three things require Wisdom. However when it is proven that He is All-Merciful and All-Wise and the falseness of Jahm’s view is known, then it is obligatory to affirm the requirements of Mercy and Wisdom. The views of the Mu’tazilah are also false and the views of Qadariyyah, the Mujbirah and those who deny His Wisdom and Mercy are false. Amongst the major things that completely undermines them is their position of endorsing Jahm, because that obligates what they say and the iniquity of the incumbent necessitates the iniquity of the obligated - and God (S) knows best." You can read Ibn Taymiyyah's treatise for yourself. "www.academia.edu/s/42e2252093?source=news"
@@HassanRadwan133 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Gd one Have u read his book درء التعارض؟ It is his last book He clearly states that hell is eternal Ibn al qayyim explains his position There are 2 hells For believers which is non eternal And 1 for non believers which is eternal Again u can lie on your english audiance as much as u want So the quote u gave he is explainibg the position of jahm Not his So why did u give that quote as if it is his position Well because u are a liar
Link to my translation of Ibn Taymiyyah's treatise:
www.academia.edu/49229114/_Response_to_Those_Who_Say_that_Heaven_and_Hell_Will_Pass_Away_by_Ibn_Taymiyyah
Link to the original Arabic:
waqfeya.com/book.php?bid=9510
Thank you for this, will be very interesting to read.
Hi Hassan Radwan I am new to your Video's ..I just watched other 2 Video's of yours they made sense to me ....And I am practitioner of Bhakti Yoga commonly known in western World as Hare Krishna"s ...we have our own Philosophy from our Scriptures and we have our Interpretaions why Exclusivist religions like Islam / Christianity exist and we believe in Mercyful God...
11:107staying there forever, as long as the heavens and the earth will endure, except what your Lord wills.Surely your Lord does what He intends.
11:108 And as for those destined to joy, they will be in Paradise, staying there forever, as long as the heavens and the earth will endure, except what your Lord wills1-a ˹generous˺ giving, without end.
The verses explain that both hell and paradise eternity is subject to gods will but difference is that paradise is promised to be without end.
Many salafis deny that Ibn taymiya held this view
@@shahirreturns I know
Clicked on this video faster than Zakir Naik can say: "brother asked a very good question"
Brother is right!
Even faster than he could say: "brother makes a good point" ?
@@mreza84 even faster before he could sit after answering a question while another person is asking a question...
😄 🤣 😂 faster than he can say " I'm a medical doctor "
Brozzer*
The everlasting torment of hell is one of the main reasons I left as well. The idea that so many innocent and well minded people will go to hell simply because they won’t believe is just absurd. When I was a Muslim I had and still do have a Christian friend who was amazingly intelligent. We would study ap history together and get into theological and philosophical discussions which was simply rewarding. He knew what Islam was but did not believe in it. Why? Because he was Christian.
One of the things I realized when I became an ex Muslim is what humanity truly is. It is a collection of societies made up of individuals in which each society has its own norms, axioms, narratives, and perceptions of the world around it. The individual grows up and adopts these ideas and norms from the society they grow up in and accepts it as if it’s a universal or inherent truth. The individual then becomes biased to his society’s views, axioms, and world views, because after all, it is the correct point of view about the world right?
When applied to me and my friend, we both grew up in our respective societies, adopting its norms, it’s claims on nature, and we accept it as the inherent truth of the universe. Because of this, when we learn advanced ,much more nuanced topics we adopt them to our world view because of the idea that nothing can contradict our inherited truth, thus the information we learn is wrong or is different then the consensus. That is why a religious person like my friend can be so smart but still religious, and most importantly, that is why he stayed Christian when I tried to convert him, and that’s why I stayed Muslim when he tried to convert me.
When we are exposed to an individual who grew up in a whole different society with their own norms, claims, and perspectives, we are unconsciously, cognitively, biased to reject their view and support ours, this is an indisputable fact. Though some may try to analyze different societal view points objectively, we are always biased in our own. This affect is much stronger when we add religion to the mix.
The Christian is only Christian because he grew up with a Christian world view. The Muslim is only Muslims because he grew up with a muslim worldview. When you add the possibility of damnation in hellfire for eternity to the mix, the cognitive bias of these two religions is ten fold. As such, there is little chance of any of them converting to the other religion do to fear of damnation.
I had realized this truth when during my Muslim phase when I considered the question “if I was born in a Christian family, would I still convert to Islam?” When I realized the truth that I most likely wouldn’t, I went down a rabbit hole of anxiety and doubt. If people like my intelligent friend are going to burn in hell simply because they grew up in a whole different society and religion that are biased against Islam because they too worry about going to hell, then that is simply cruel and unfair. But god says in the Quran that he is wise and just, but the existence of hell and the fact of human bias shows unfair expectations of humans finding truth. This fight in my head continued for weeks and some nights I cried in trauma praying to god to save my friend and not to burn him in hell, or maybe I can sacrifice my self for disbelievers. However, by the end I had just accepted, that god was going to burn good people forever while I live with my nice hot babes in Jinnah while good people scream and suffer for eternity simply because they didn’t believe, including my friend. From that time until my deconversion I fell into a melancholic and pessimistic mood. I still fought to defend my faith despite knowing my own cognitive dissonance and I tried to justify my belief through scientific miracles or linguistic miracles, but by the end of it it all came crashing down and I resorted to believe on faith. Unsurprisingly I apostated and no longer believed.
After that, I began going down another rabbit hole such as the origins of human life and what it means for our identity, why we do the things we do, why we are the way we are, what is our purpose, what do we see as goals, if our societal norms are wrong how do we find truth, etc. For some I have answered and I am pleased with it but for others I still contend with. However, where I am know is a 1000 times better then being forced to believe in an eternal hell where good people go.
As a side note, a lot of these topics may seem similar to you because they are influenced by your videos. When I found your channel, you articulated thoughts in my head so well, better then I ever could. Thank you for making this channel and congratulations on where you are now!
That's an excellent write-up
put. NiceBravo
@LolyGagger Thank you so much for sharing. This deserves to be pinned to the top!
The same situations happened to me a month ago
@a1
Lol... You ar so into yourself, aren't you?
As I pointed out, this book was only relatively recently published in 1995 from manuscript, so a great many Muslims are not fully aware of its contents.
Great
In fact in this book, Ibn Taymiyyah argues there wasn't a consensus amongst the early generations. But I doubt I will be making any more videos on this topic. I think I've done it to death. You can check out some previous videos on the topic. In my view the Qur'an definitely presents the view of an eternal Hell. I don't think the verses quoted for a finite Hell are enough to say the Qur'an's view is a finite Hell (ie لابثين احقابا and ما دامت السموات والأرض ...) As I said in the video, at best one could argue the Qur'an contradicts itself. Perhaps Muhammad was in two minds on the topic. Allah knows best ;)
@Ishmaelite Wanderer I respect your view, but it's not one I share and I have no interest in making a video on the topic.
@@HassanRadwan133
Nice and simple question and i assume you would respond balanced and sensibly.
You mentioned at the beginning of the video that this was one of the main reasons you lost faith in Islam.
So since there are qualified scholars who state, and explain that hell is not eternal, how can you force an interpretation contrary, given your not a scholar?
So I find it invalid that you could reasonably justify leaving Islam because of your assumption that hell is eternal. (That's because you're imposing your own interpretation regardless if other scholars say hell is everlasting).
Let's say there are multiple models as to the existence of the universe and its nature etc. You (or i) as a layman in the field of physics hold a view also (let's say).
Now, our view corresponds with some physicists. Why should we reject all of physics (as a science)? The reasonable thing to do would be to follow those scholars whom our view corresponds (In this case Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn Arabi) etc.
If I've missed something please explain your rationale behind it. You can't just say, "because the Quran is clear on it " when clearly some qualified authorities disagree with you.
Maybe you just found out that there are scholars who hold this view.
Thanks
I was always aware some scholars said Hell was finite (ie ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya). The problem for me is that a perfect divine book cannot present a contradictory view on such a central and fundamental issue. In other words; if it is true Hell is eternal, then I reject Islam on that basis. If it is true that the Qur'an really meant to convey the meaning that Hell is finite, then I reject Islam on the basis that the Qur'an is not the perfect divine speech of God as it is incapable of clearly stating something that is not difficult to say.
Dude I freaking love your videos please don’t stop come back to RUclips we need you
Brother Hassan, i left Islam years ago and gained awareness of the absurdities set forth within the islamic dogma. Yet i am still having recurrent nightmares and redundant thoughts about the atrocious tales of hell and Aadab alqabr i have been told in my childhood. Sometimes i feel tempted to take on the wager in order to calm my nerves and have calmer nights of sleep but my conscience takes over, it reminds me that fear is the factor which allows political islam to thrive and to oppress people in lands in which the power dynamics are favoring Islam.
Why not apply Pascale wager in the sense that u may believe in God but not follow any religion so become an agnostic theist
@@techieshu9553 i refuse to take the pascal wager for the islamic god on who's name many are being oppressed and forced into silence to this day, the god which allowed slavery and institutionalized it or the God who allowed his prophet to marry Aicha at 9 knowing that it could have killed her considering that more than 40% of pregnancies of girls that age issue into their death, and more importantly the god who would eternally torture my neighbor for the mere fact that he did not believe in him.
@@empereurjustinien2082
This persisting fear of hell is not uncommon, I've heard many ex-Christians offer accounts of such suffering with similar anxieties after becoming atheists, in some sense it is the best example I know of why people like Dawkins talk of childhood religious indoctrination as child abuse.
I've heard an ex-muslim offer that after he left, he had a terrible accident , immediately his mind fell back into old habits and he became concerned this was a sign , a punishment for his apostasy. He rather than surrender to the fear internally challenged god right then and there to do his worst , nothing happened , and he gained a little bit of control over his reactions.
I feel for you , I hope you can get a handle on this .
@@tdsdave sometimes, it is not only about the doctrine. The society where this traditional values is uphold is more intimidating ten fold. It is like, if you come out as an unbeliever now, the people will bring hell to you, and if you die God Almighty will torture you forever in the more real hell...
That thought is lingering and excruciating every non-believer who commits apostasy.
Pascal didn't know much about Islam or he'd've hit this problem. If you accept that Jesus is part of the Trinity, orthodox Muslims say you are absolutely damned for believing that. If you don't accept that Jesus is the Son of God and part of the Trinity, orthodox Christians say you are damned for *not* believing it. If you're just "playing the odds" you've got a problem...
There's a clever chart on the subject here: markhumphrys.com/atheism.arguments.html#pascals.wager
I got an answer for every muslim and non muslim that satisfied me:
Allah is the most merciful, he will forgive your sins if you repent and do good deeds. What happens to those who knowingly do bad and dont care? They get to go to jannah to? No, they go into hell. Not everybody stays in hell forever, it depends on the person and their actions.
Brilliant and elegant as ever. Well done brother
Extremely interesting. Have been afflicted with the same confusion over how God could permit eternal Hell and found myself unsatisfied with every argument that could be given. I never expected that the archetypical scholar that every traditionalist hardliner references would arrive at the same conclusion on eternal Hell.
I was intrigued when I read it. I'm certainly no fan of Ibn Taymiyyah, but I appreciate he was an deep thinker. His modern fanclub on the other hand are an insidious cult who ironically don't understand him like they think they do.
I read you comment that you are considering retiring from producing this sort of content.
I just want to say thankyou so much Hassan, for everything that you have done over the years. It has meant much to many people, including myself. I hope you enjoy your retirement and the rest of your life both in your own personal capacity and in the company of your friends and family.
What a nice comment!
Thank you for such kind words ❤
@@HassanRadwan133Lol enjoy while it may last.
This is all temporary. We, you and us, will see it soon what the delusional reality of this worldly life was, and how it was merely enjoyment of a delusion (Tafsir Quran - 57:20). Rather we should have focused for afterlife, as this worldly life was a test from Allah. Signs of the end of this world, as predicted by Islam, are all lining up and happening in real-time. You better be prepared. Cheers.
So happy you're still making videos! You're the OG sir, accept no substitutes
You have captured the essence of atheism: If you want your scriptures taken seriously there is no way around these problems. This goes for any religious text.
And if I may say so, you articulate it beautifully, without prejudice and hostility.
Thank you.
Well atheism requires faith so I questioned it and now I’m a theist
I love you so much brother Hassan!
I've only discovered you recently and I would like to say what you're saying is simply brilliant. Unlike many athiests or muslims who come off as apologetics; your arguments are always middle ground. You defend islam when need be despite being exmuslim. You are the epitome of maturity and I would like to become someone like you when I grow up. I would love to see more of your content, please upload more.
There are many issues with this book, •only 3 pages of manuscript of this book were found.
•And the publishers normally (Darul masriyyah) have an issue with grabbing later manuscripts and sometimes every falsely attributed manuscripts.
•the original chain doesn’t even lead back to ibn qayyim and neither ibn al wazr. As the book tries to claim.
We have many other instances where ibn Taymiyyah affirms hell has no end
Big fan of your channel, as I'm sure you've noticed from all the comments I leave. Keep up the good work friend
Well articulated as ever Hassan. I remember this business from when I was a Catholic, followers will look for any explanation other than the most obvious one, that it's all man made.
Mainstream Catholic thought also now embraces universal salvation.
That's because you are ignoring another obvious choice. You are unable to comprehend God's wisdom. You cannot claim your choice is any more valid than the latter.
@@user-ks1hp2pb5g Why is your option more valid?
@@aidankenny2022 Why did you kill that person?
Another solid Hassan Radwan production. Your questions are always highly intelligent. More power to you, sir.
You are definitely a hindu
@@SM-ly5tf Wrong. Keep guessing though.
Great as ever Hassan. Thanks for this awesome video!
You are an absolute gift. I just love your work
As usual. Brilliant ❤️❤️
Sir you have a very eloquent presentation style ..this presentation style is helpful for viewers
Dear Hassan, I've been following your works for the last two years now. Big fan of your works. I come from Indonesia with the largest muslim population. I'm a radio announcer here in Jakarta, Indonesia. Wish I could translate your works and had a freedom of speech here to spread the truth. Great job, Sir!
Halo bang
Thank you Hassan for everything you did for humanity and wish you good health and happiness 😢 ❤ Happy retirement 😅
Hell is indeed a contradiction with a merciful god but not with an evil god that claims to be merciful. You should consider this aspect as well
Punishment is also God's mercy for our sins
Thank you. That was fascinating.
you are doing really deep work. its unique in all respects. i immediately subcribed your channel and expecting more research from you. . amazing
There's a very simple solution to the whole problem:
The text was written by a man (or woman) who was not intelligent enough to realise they either needed to allow for their own failings, or carefully review the whole work for inconsistencies and contradictions before sharing it (which was probably an impossible task for a single person).
This scholar is the religious mentor of the modern jihadist movement, so i've heard.
Ignorant
Yes, indeed, which makes his views on this topic even more ironic as they are quick to denounce the slightest deviation from their creed as apostasy. Which is why they have such a hard time accepting that their poster boy held such views and have to twist in the wind trying to deny it.
aah religion, anything can mean anything.
Dang why you gotta be so savage?
I mean anything can mean anything; meanings are literally MAN MADE & entirely subjective in nature. Postmodernism ironically is a deadly weapon against you anti thiest nutjobs.
@@user-ks1hp2pb5g In science, anything can't mean anything. In math, anything can't mean anything. The only way garbage man-made ideologies stick around for a thousand+ years is by being so vague that anything can mean anything, the favorite parlor trick of "psychics". Fuk religion, there are no answers to the big questions of existence. Be an adult and deal with it.
@@brianclone9583 That's literally not true, in both science; anything can mean anything. Scientists are human beings, subjective beings therefore; prone to error & their subjective biases. Scientists CHOOSE to study something. They also CHOOSE to construct their data around a methodology CREATED BY HUMAN BEINGS. The production of the data regardless of the claims asserted by positivists is still prone to error. That doesn't mean I discard of a peer-reviewed empirically based study because of it but it means I should be aware of the subjective human aspect in-built into those studies and their possibility of being false. You also conveniently ignore quantum mechanics, which literally debunks positivist epistemology. Showing that the existence of everything is all probabilistic.
If you really want though, I'll happily have a verbal discussion with you about this topic. I have Discord or Skype.
@@user-ks1hp2pb5g You either seem to be confusing two entirely different topics, one on how a sequence of words in a particular language should be interpreted, and the other as to how scientists use their own judgement and choice in investigating matters. This probably constitutes a straw-man argument if it is being used to justify the claim, "anything can mean anything", as far as a language is concerned.
So as far as scientific language goes, the word "plant" cannot refer to anything, like say the ATP molecule. We are talking about linguistics here, not about whether or not we can choose to investigate certain questions while consequently choosing methods to investigate as well.
It is true that it's humans that create languages themselves, but once the grammar and meanings of various words have been established within a language, a user of that language has to abide by those norms to make sense in communication.
To say otherwise is to say that either the user does not know the basics on how to communicate, or that he wasn't well acquainted with the language itself, or that he was intentionally misleading people about what he wanted to say. This is, of course, incompatible with the notion of being a Perfect, All-Wise Being.
Besides, if anything can mean anything, wouldn't that quite literally mean that all your responses themselves here can mean anything? This would render communication meaningless.
This is really awesome you focus more on basic believe of Islam.❤️
Ibn Taymiyya believed in universal salvation. Funny thing is, this is pretty popular in Catholic circles today.
The Quran is the literal word of Allah ! As long as one unflinchingly believes in that, the scope for any "positive " interpretation is severely limited !
Excellent video. Hassan Radwan thanks for the video.
Can I upload your video to my channel?
Yes.
@@HassanRadwan133 thank you.
Meanwhile on the Dawah scene;
'muh Ibn Taymiyyah'.
If what I have read is true, Ibn Taymiyyah's idea of Hell is the same as that of Zoroastrianism (which is where Islam gets the "Bridge of Sirat" narrative anyway). If you accept that Zoroaster is one of those hundred thousand earlier prophets whose teachings were later lost or corrupted, maybe you could take "temporary Hell with purification" as one of the true teachings that got through unscathed.
Many early Christians took a similar view also, ie "Origen of Alexandria."
Very nice video. I've actually read this book a while back, and though I consider ibn Taymiyyah (and shudder at the common title "Shaykh al-Islam") to be the single scholar who has done, and continues to do, the most damage to the Muslim world - with every violent fanatic/extremist group having him as a major figure, while other figures may come and go - yet still in this book I remember he brought a lot of decent arguments, combining traditional with some actual philosophy (don't tell the Salafis!). What I have always hated though in all these arguments is, oddly, the appeal to God's Mercy ... that it is God's Mercy that will not allow eternal punishment ... its almost as saying that it takes God's Mercy to stop God's injustice. I find it ludicrous. Even if God was bereft of all Mercy and were just going to punish people for their crimes on the basis of His Justice, still as the Qur'an says explicitly none will receive even an "atom's weight" of injustice. And yes the understanding of justice and injustice with God is the same we have in this world, which He has enjoined upon us in this world, and has given us as part of our unchanging fitra. There is no other.
This isn't a dispute between mercy and injustice. God's Justice is enough, and His injustice is non-existent. No mercy is required.
@@mohamedmusthafa6182
We will finally be breaking up from work in two weeks so things are slowing down now. About to start a translation and deciding what my next "scripted" video will be.
hi could u provide evidence why his justice would be same as our worldly justice? and why that is part of our unchanging fitrah?
@@beluga9744
The evidence is that He commands us towards justice without much explanation ... Which means it's the same justice.
@@QuranicIslam verses number about judgement and unchanging fitrah? if u could write ur argument in order.. it would be easier to understand
@@beluga9744
(۞ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ یَأۡمُرُ بِٱلۡعَدۡلِ وَٱلۡإِحۡسَـٰنِ وَإِیتَاۤىِٕ ذِی ٱلۡقُرۡبَىٰ وَیَنۡهَىٰ عَنِ ٱلۡفَحۡشَاۤءِ وَٱلۡمُنكَرِ وَٱلۡبَغۡیِۚ یَعِظُكُمۡ لَعَلَّكُمۡ تَذَكَّرُونَ)
[Surah An-Nahl 90]
(۞ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ یَأۡمُرُكُمۡ أَن تُؤَدُّوا۟ ٱلۡأَمَـٰنَـٰتِ إِلَىٰۤ أَهۡلِهَا وَإِذَا حَكَمۡتُم بَیۡنَ ٱلنَّاسِ أَن تَحۡكُمُوا۟ بِٱلۡعَدۡلِۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ نِعِمَّا یَعِظُكُم بِهِۦۤۗ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ سَمِیعَۢا بَصِیرࣰا)
[Surah An-Nisa' 58]
(فَأَقِمۡ وَجۡهَكَ لِلدِّینِ حَنِیفࣰاۚ فِطۡرَتَ ٱللَّهِ ٱلَّتِی فَطَرَ ٱلنَّاسَ عَلَیۡهَاۚ لَا تَبۡدِیلَ لِخَلۡقِ ٱللَّهِۚ ذَ ٰلِكَ ٱلدِّینُ ٱلۡقَیِّمُ وَلَـٰكِنَّ أَكۡثَرَ ٱلنَّاسِ لَا یَعۡلَمُونَ)
[Surah Ar-Rum 30]
These and others.All of that is justice ... it is known to us and God commands to it.
When God commands us to "be just" it is assuming we know what is justice and what is injustice. And indeed we do. It's one of the most basic senses. A child knows when they are being treated unfairly. If there are twin kids and you give one a third of a cake and the other two thirds, they know it isn't fair.
I mean I'm not sure what you are expecting other than what I've said? Are you expecting that God has a Justice that we would not recognize as just?
No. The Justice we know and understand both through reason and fitra is the same sort of justice God has because it is that justice (ie His justice) that He imbibed us with knowledge of when creating us. We only recognize justice because our sense of justice comes from Him. The only difference is that His is perfect ... It can balance on a pin ... and it is linked to His perfect knowledge, while ours is not.
Are you Syrian? The "Ja" sound in Jannah which you spoke is on point...
He's Egyptians I thinkkkk?
Of Egyptian descent
نص مصري
Half Masri, half English, full time legend 😍
Excellent video as always 👍🏾
Excellent as always! This, for me, is the most obviously false element of Abrahamic faiths, & the reason I could never really buy Christianity growing up (although I tried to force myself to believe, since I went to a C of E Primary school & Jesus was never far from any lesson or conversation!)
The idea that a merciful God would know you will go to hell if he creates you, & does it anyway, is just absurd. Honestly when I talk to religious people I find this whole concept so off putting. How can I be genuinely friendly with someone who believes I deserve to burn to ashes over & over again for eternity?!"
I love how you end your videos, I'm an agnostic now , and i like how you focus on one point proving through it that islam can't be the word of omnipotent and most merciful entity.
I always ask myself when i hear such arguments and mental gymnastics from muslim, "did Allah verfiry your answer? Are you just saying something that suits to your understanding"?
I really like your videos as they are neutral and well made, as you are an educated person in Arabic, religion and science, I have stumbled upon discussions on Quora that claim that Qur'an and islam don't conflict with the theory of evolution, is this true?
It depends on which version of Islam one follows. Traditional and orthodox versions reject human evolution. More progressive versions accept it.
@@HassanRadwan133 how can they accept evolution even though the Qur'an said we were created from Adam and Eve?
People find ways to interpret their holy texts in the ways that suit them.
@@nabilrady6767 they say that the story of adam and eve is metaphoric however the evidence that suggests that god did create adam and eve is very strong .
@@moizabdul5384 like what
Mr.Radwan can you please add an Arabic transition or I could do it for you because it is might be so helpful for People who live in Arabic countries ...thank u
People ask me to do this all the time but I find it laborious and don't have time, but please feel free.
A couple of Hassan's earliest videos on the "CEMB Forum" channel are also available in Arabic there. This one's on Hell: ruclips.net/video/dpElNJbJfwc/видео.html
@@josephw.1463 thanks
I have translated now here:
www.academia.edu/44755946/_Response_to_Those_Who_Say_that_Heaven_and_Hell_Will_Pass_Away_Ibn_Taymiyyah
@@HassanRadwan133
Iam really really thankful , i wish you all the best in your life and even after life 🙏
This is just a pathological degree of cognitive dissonance.
Very interesting, thanks! Is it available in English?
Not yet
@@HassanRadwan133 Mate, get cracking! :)
EDIT - OK I translated it - happy now lol
www.academia.edu/49229114/_Response_to_Those_Who_Say_that_Heaven_and_Hell_Will_Pass_Away_by_Ibn_Taymiyyah
@@HassanRadwan133 just want to say I really enjoy your work; voice, pace, tone, logic and arguement. You are very talented and doing all a great service. At your pace, and as you are inspired, we will impatiently wait.
@@TheRationalizer Do you still follow jinn and tonic show and stop spamming?
Can't we do a compromise? Merciful Torture...
Looool
Asharis make takfir on him for this
I think we can make a new justification that god lied in Quran it is eternal to make people worship him
My justification for god saying that there is eternal hell is: what if god says you will go to heaven after purifying yourself in hell, then most people would not hesitate to do bad things.
So God doesn't really mean what he says? What else does God say that he doesn't really mean? Eternal Paradise? Do we just pick and choose what God really means?
@@HassanRadwan133 That's a nice objection and I can't answer that objection.
@@HassanRadwan133 Even if hell is not eternal and everyone will be in heaven at one point in time in full happiness, then the concept of hell and heaven will be more useless in my opinion.
Just sharing a thought I had..
The Qur'an promises eternal hell to the unbelievers. And you cannot rely on your own limited knowledge to determine the nature of God, other than what God reveals about Himself. God tells us that He is both Merciful and Just - merciful to the believers who repent their mistakes and just in punishment of rebels who arrogantly assume they know best. The only question is "do you feel lucky"?
When you say that we cannot rely on our limited knowledge to reason about the nature of God, is that just to say that we can't make sense of these religious claims? This strikes me as a strange thing to say
@@armand9120 What's so strange about the reason that a limited being like yourself with a tiny lifespan cannot comprehend the infinite , ever-living God?
@@AnalyseThat I think it's strange for two reasons. One worry is that you're relegating all these religious claims to nonsense when you grant that we can't make sense of them. Another general worry is that whenever you throw logic/reasoning/critical thinking out of the window, that's usually not truth-conducive. That's truth-detracting.
@@armand9120 your logic is not gonna help you much if you lose track of the topic - the nature of God.
@AnalyseThat I was talking generally but you can apply it to religious claims about the nature of God. Why would you grant that they're all nonsense? And assuming that there is something coherent to be said about the nature of God, you're denying that we can use logic to consider its implications or think critically about it. That is your position, right? Or am I not tracking?
Yes this is a true explanation
All those who left for that reason haven’t understood God. God is merciful and Just. Dont try to belittle His knowledge of what Mercy really is by using your limited created brain. Allah guide you all.
(1) eternity is allegory for long period of time.
(2) time outside the universe does not exist. Thus everything existing outside time could be said to be eternal.
Those who do not believe in God will cease to exist after their punishment. - This is what i think.
Dear Hassan Radwan can you make a video about sheikh ahmed al gubbachi? His most video are in Arabic. He makes a lot of video about why Quran can not be the word of God, and why prophet Muhammad is a false prophet. Quite interesting. Since many of us don't understand Arabic we are missing his wisdom.
I hope you make new videos too
Does the book have a translation in English?
Not yet
I have translated it now here:
www.academia.edu/44755946/_Response_to_Those_Who_Say_that_Heaven_and_Hell_Will_Pass_Away_Ibn_Taymiyyah
Not saying that I believe in Yahweh but if you look at the ten commandments it is very simple and clear. You cannot say that you did not understand it and there is very little need for scholars and interpretations. If it is said to have come from God then it would make some kind of sense. The Koran on the hand is a complex, confusing and contradictory document
Do you think Ibn Taymiyyah believed that apostates has no punishment if he/she doesn't participate in war against muslims.I heard that Taymiyyah believed apostate punishment is only exist in afterlfe plus I also heard he believe that apostate should be killed even if he/she doesn't do war against Muslims.
It remember me the Jews believes the torment in Hell is temporarily before going to Heaven. Have you look at that?
hi Hassan, please do not spread lies, if u decided to go out of Islam, i am sad for you, but do not lie.
A CLARIFICATION and CORRECTION:
Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Qayyim did NOT say that Hell is temporar. That was a slander against them.
In their own books they always say its eternal.
Ibn taymyiya: Dar at taarud, volume 2, page 358:
وقال أهل الإسلام جميعاً: ليس للجنة والنار آخر، وإنهما لا تزالان باقيتين، وكذلك أهل الجنة لا يزالون في الجنة يتنعمون، وأهل النار في النار يعذبون، ليس لذلك آخر
And all the people of Islam said: There is no end to Heaven and Hell, and they are still there. Likewise, the people of Paradise are still enjoying in Paradise, and the people of Hell are in Hell being tormented, and there is no end to that
Ibn Taymiyya also says in his books
(مجموع الفتاوى)) (18/307)؛ ((بيان تلبيس الجهمية)) (1/581
وقد اتفق سلف الأمة وأئمتها وسائر أهل السنة والجماعة على أن من المخلوقات ما لا يعدم ولا ينفى بالكلية، كالجنة والنار والعرش
The salaf and its imams and ahlu sunnah wal jamaah agree, that some creation like the Arsh, jannah, and Hell will never cease to exist
Ibn Taymiyya authored a book refuting those who claim that Hell is temporar
The book is called: الرد على من قال بفناء الجنة والنار
There is no evidence that Ibn Taymiyya hold that view.
Assuming he did, he obviously retracted it, since in every single book he says that Hell is eternal like Paradise
The scholar Ibn Hazm wrote a book where he gathered issues where there is ijmaa' (consensus) of Islamic scholars. Ibn Taymiyya wrote a commentary on it and he criticised some mistakes of Ibn Hazm, because there actually was a difference of opinion in some issues.
But, ibn Hazm claims there is consensus that Hell is eternal and Ibn Taymiyya NEVER critices Ibn Hazm for that.
So, Ibn Taymiyya clearly did believe that Hell is eternal, like all other Islamic scholars.
This is why u should learn Islam from Islamic scholars, NOT from western academics
Thid historian John Hoover accepted subkis account, who was a fierce and biased enemy of ibn Taymiyya.
1. Ibn Hazm in his book "Meratibul Ijma", on which Shaykhul-Islam gave a comment, says, speaking about the eternity of Paradise and the Fire (Jehenna): "The Fire is the truth, it will not disappear (cease) nor will its inhabitants disappear." Shaykhul-Islam did not make any remark on the said speech as he did in other places where he disagreed with Ibn Hazm.
2. Says Sheikhul-Islam: "The Salaf of this Ummah and its Imams agree that among the creatures there are those that will not disappear, such as Paradise, the Fire, the Throne and the like..." (Majmu'ul Fatawa 18/307)
So, after this text, can we say that Shaykhul-Islam conveys the consensus of the Salaf and Imams of this Ummah and then after that he advocates a contrary position?!
3. Ibnul-Qasim, regarding the words of Shaykhul-Islam in his reply to the Jahmiyyah: "And that the rest of Paradise and the Fire are eternal", says: "This, together with what will come, refutes the lie with which his enemies have accused him of the transience of the Fire .” (Bejanu telbisi al-jahmiyah 1/157)
4. Ali al-Qari, a well-known Hanafi scholar, says: "And as for his words that Ibn Taymiyyah al-Hanbali thinks that the disbelievers will eventually come out of Hell - that is a slander on him." (Er-reddu alel kailine bi vihdetil wujud 86).
5. Shaykh Abdul-Aziz er-Rajihi says: "What this misguided person attributes to Shaykhul-Islam (i.e. talk about the transience of fire) is falsehood, a lie and a hoax." On the contrary, Shaykhul-Islam says the opposite... The basis is what Shaykhul-Islam mentioned in his books, and what his enemies attribute to him is not proof. If it were credible, then the hakk would be in his speech that coincides with the proof, which is the speech about the eternity of the Fire." (Kudumu ketaibil jihad 84-85). Then, on page 85, he says: "The attribution of this talk about the transience of the Fire to Ibn al-Qayyim is also invalid because Ibn al-Qayyim holds the opposite opinion..."
6. Shaykh Ibn Jibrin in the preface of the book "Ikaful ferikajni ala huludi ahlid-darayn", says: "From these quotes it is obvious that the one who attributes to two shaykhs (Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim) the speech about the transience of the Fire and the cessation of its azab (punishments) ) - speaks about them without knowledge. Their books are present among people and they also talk about aqeedah, and among other things there are clear texts that they advocate the view of the eternity of enjoyment (in Paradise) and punishment (in Hell)."
Then, apart from the things mentioned above, we did not see that any of the disciples of Shaykhul-Islam attributed this speech to him. What's more, Subki, one of the fiercest enemies of Shaykhul-Islam, did not attribute this speech to Shaykhul-Islam.
tnx for reading,.
Whatever position Ibn Taymiyyah had previously, he clearly revised it in later life.
His treatise; "The Response to Those Who Say Heaven & Hell Will Pass Away," (الرد على من قال بفناء الجنة والنار) was written shortly before his death and so reflects his final position on the matter.
I can only assume you haven't read it yourself, because it leaves no doubt he favoured the position that Hell would eventually cease to exist. I urge you to read it for yourself. It is available online in both Arabic and English.
Here are the links:
www.academia.edu/resource/work/49229114
www.academia.edu/resource/work/44727692
Best wishes.
@@HassanRadwan133 send me the original arabic pdf book. Not your translation, send me the original arabic version of IT.
@@HassanRadwan133 and somehow you in 2023 is a bigger critic of IT than his lifetime rival Imam Subki who never ever attacked or mentioned that IT said this! How ilogical is this? His biggest rival and opposer, NEVER attacked It for this, which is probably rhe MOST CONTROVERSIAL topic and somehow Imam Subki doesnt write a book about this, how stupid this is man??
The second link above is to the original Arabic in pdf
You can also check out Yasir Qadhi's lecture on Jahannam where he talks about the book and says that in his opinion it's fair to say that Ibn Taymiyyah did hold the opinion that Hell would cease. (Yasir Qadhi did his post grad on Ibn Taymiyyah)
ruclips.net/video/hLTNfBCxBTo/видео.html
Have you considered that you just have to accept part of religion as true ? If for example I read the Quran and was inspired by it in someway. Would it not be possible to leave the questions I can't answer on faith ?
The question is not are there some nice bits. The question is: "Is it from God?" If I don't genuinely believe it's from God then I can't call myself a Muslim. Maybe you can. But being true to myself is important to me.
Hi Hassan, what would you say if a muslim tries to solve the contradiction between a Merciful God and Hell by saying that God is Merciful yes but only to believers, he is not Merciful to unbelievers, since the believers will be shown Mercy for eternity in heaven so we can say He is the most Merciful.
I would say that's not Mercy then. Mercy is something you show to those who oppose you or have wronged you. Showering favours on those who obey and worship you is called generosity (or bribes). It's not called Mercy. Saddam Hussein was also very generous to his sycophants.
The true value of mercy like love is that it can not be earned it's selfless the giver of mercy does not consider how he or she is feeling it's a gift going to heaven because you worshiped him as the contract goes you enter paradise reward for job done not an act of mercy you fulfilled a contract and you got paid for it
He stated both views with strong arguments on both sides. He said both may be possible and that Allah knows best, watch Yasir Qadhis video
@Hamid Hussein Fair enough, I'm just stating Ibn Taymiyyah stance more fairly, not agreeing
Read what Ibn Taymiyyah said and make up your own mind.
www.academia.edu/44717485/Response_to_Those_Who_Say_that_Heaven_and_Hell_Will_Pass_Away?fbclid=IwAR39OEUAuHmFrDce_PEgf983bNIXFiD_g8LMhNFgAYkMw8civFXg37m0HDM
Having the knowledge Ibn Taymiyya had about Islam would make it unthinkable for Him to leave Islam. His certainty was far greater that you can even conceive of, because, unlike you, he was not ignorant.
And why would God have to make explicit that He will cause the fire to end? That might only increase rebellious people in rebellion. God's book is a guidance, and His prophet is a giver of glad tidings and a warner. His duty was to warn people from the fire.
Who knows if he left Islam or not. As you can see, the arguments he was making in this book are against the Quran. And going against Quran is a form deviance. We will never know if he died with a shattered Imaan.
Ibn Taymiyyah does not hold the position that Hellfire ends, read dar' al ta'arud. Stop misquoting.
saying that this book is new = false..
the book publish date = 1995.
and ibn taymiyyah view is known and not a secret.
Had anh of actually took yhd time to study islam, you'd kniw eternal hell is only for the worst of creation.
Those who out of Arrogance denied Allah. Plus youd know that Noone would feel unfairly judged. No person would say Allah this is unfair.
I think these points destroy your argument. You're welcome.
لقد قرأت الكتاب
ابن تيمية لم يقل ان النار فانية، بل قام بذكر اقوال الناس في هذا الموضوع وتكلم عن كل قول بأدلة بدون الانحياز أو إبداء رأيه غي هذا الكتاب.
*يجب عليك قراءة الكتاب بنفسك*
والله ضحكتني 🤣 لم أقرأه فقط بل ترجمته الى اللغة الانجليزية
www.academia.edu/49229114/_Response_to_Those_Who_Say_that_Heaven_and_Hell_Will_Pass_Away_by_Ibn_Taymiyyah
@@HassanRadwan133 إذا لا تتهرب ما ردك على كلامي؟
انا قلت ان ابن تيمية لم ينحاز لقول معين في هذا الكتاب، لماذا انت تقول انه كان منحازا لان النار فانية؟
من الواضح لمن يقرأ كتاب ابن تيمية أنه يرى بأن النار فانية وقد قال بذلك كثير من أهل العلم ومنهم ياسر قاضي الذي ناقش الكتاب هنا
ruclips.net/video/hLTNfBCxBTo/видео.html
Why can’t I find this book anywhere but only on a ashari website ?
I don't know what sites you have visited but the book can be downloaded as a pdf from several sites that are simply repositories for a wide range of Arabic books that are not confined to any one single school of Islamic thought. For example:
waqfeya.net/book.php?bid=9510
In the bible it says hell is everlasting.
" And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."
Revelation 20:10
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." Jude 7
Why should that concern me? I don't believe in Christianity.
I lost all respect for ibn taymiyyah after he straight up invents Bible verses to prove that Muhammad is prophecied in there in his response to Christians
Or you're just ignorant
3:00 No you are wrong there is no ijma on this matter imam nawawi ra in his sharh muslim has mentioned the finite hell view
Did the moon really split in two?
no
@@HassanRadwan133 what about the "proofs" in the hadith ?
Hadith is not proof. It is a claim. Anyone can make a claim. You need *evidence* to prove a claim. There is absolutely no scientific evidence that the moon has been split in two and then reassembled. As NASA scientist Brad Bailey said "No current scientific evidence reports that the Moon was split into two (or more) parts and then reassembled at any point in the past."
sservi.nasa.gov/?question=evidence-moon-having-been-split-two
Yes it did
Not it didn't pal lol
Was ibn taymeyya a closeted ExMuslim?
I'm pretty certain he was not!. Ibn Taymiyyah generally held very conservative views which makes this view of his all the more surprising. One thing is for sure is that he was a highly intelligent and articulate scholar who was not afraid to challenge a view if he thought it was wrong. What this book shows is that he recognised the incongruity of a God who is omnipotent, omniscient, wise and good, yet who created beings to suffer eternally when by definition, he had an infinite amount of alternative options to achieve what he wants.
Hi, just wanted to say that i believe to be the mahdi. I know this sounds insane and im probably insane. I dont know. Strange things happened.
Just want you to know not to give up. There might be a god.
Doctrine over an opinion from every apologist...
Mt friend I hope you're doing well. I brought you an awesome source (book).
I'm very interested in it and I found it great .
The Book named
( مصباح الشريعة - الامام الصادق عليه السلام )
You will se the huge difference.
Why I loved this book because gives you sense and logical reason for everything.
I wish you take your time to read it closely and make a video about your thoughts it it.
thanks
للمعلومة الدقيقة ، هذا الكتاب شبه كتاب نهج البلاغة من حيث الجمع .
جمعت فيه اقوال الامام الصادق ونسبت اليه ، ليس بالضرورة ان يكون كل شي موثوق بالكامل ، ولك حسب قرائتي له الكثير منه دقيق وجيد
You will understand if you look at the verses from the perspective of WARNING.
i know human psycology, and due to not fully graping or comprehending the things which are really big.... We struggle to even understand geological timescales, or evolutionary timescales.... Let alone cosmic timescales..... So what about eternal... "Never ending".... The answers are there in Gods description of himself.
The nature of humans os if I were told i will be punished for a short time... But live eternally in fire.... The stakes become serious.... Whereas if i know a time period will come to an end and i will thereafter "live eternally" elsewhere..... I could be tempted to think, "what the hell, i might as well do this its not like i will be punished for long (relatvistic terms)
So you are saying these verses are 'mind games' and don't really mean what they say? What else does the Qur'an say but doesn't really mean?
@@HassanRadwan133 mind games? It's communication. Communicating a message, across time and to many different peoples/civilizations......
Most believers they will be satisfied with the literal readings and won't need to delve into the subtle differences that hint to something else.
In summary, it's human nature to do some relatavist comparisons..... Eg. Well if i did x (for immediate gratification) and punishment is Y (but that y is miniscule in terms of eternal reward) - well in that case, the motivation to stop myself may not be as strong.....
What else does the Qur'an say that it doesn't really mean?
@@HassanRadwan133 who said the Quran says something it doesn't mean?
For me, it's very simple. It's communicating a message. A concept of "eternal" and "time" are things that humans can't grasp.
Even today in science "infinity" means mathematic rules fail, physics fail once "infinity" comes in to play. In fact it's considered a sign something has gone wrong.
"time" too, is one of those things science till this day can't define. What is time.
But Ibni Tymiya was a believer and you are not
I agree with Ibni Tymiya.
And I am a believer.
All praise is due to Allah.
He did not take this position, repent to Allah.
@@3GHee4erwer proof
question for you - you used the word "kufu" date stamp 3min:38sec is one who rejects the word of Allah. But if you read the entire Quran and was not convinced it was the truth is this also called "kufu?" . I thought when you read the words of Allah and if you DO believe it BUT you want to "conceal its truth(s)" this is what kufu ment?
This is a joke. You are using a book that actually refutes your claim just by reading its title. And I'm pretty sure this is the reason why you did not quote from it, and you did not read it, You have been lying and fooling your audience as if you are presenting ibn taymiyyah's argument.
The shock is that ibn taymiyyah wrote this book to refute those who say hell will come to an end, and presented all what's been said about the matter and finally brought the opinon of ahl sunnah wa al'jamaa and supported it with evidences from both Quran and sunnah,
1)This means ibn taymiyyah did not hold this opinon
2)he refuted this fraud idea
3)he listed the opinons and explained why they contradict themselves
4) you lied when you attributed o him saying that this matter contradict God's mercy bcz he himslef quoted what those who hold this opinon think (not his own opinion) if you are in this level not able to even distinguish between what ibn taymiyyah says what the others say then you are either a liar or a ignorant fraud,
And i encourage everyone to read this book of ibn taymiyyah to see your lies .
I did quote from the book and in fact you can read what Ibn Taymiyyah said for yourself. I have translated it here:
www.academia.edu/44717485/Ibn_Taymiyyahs_Response_to_Those_Who_Say_Heaven_and_Hell_Will_Pass_Away_
@@HassanRadwan133
I have read it in it's original language and here you are translating it which just shows you needed to twist it,
I'll make a thread responding to you, cause ibn taymiyyah's book itself refutes you, and i can't believe you concluded through this book that he believes hell isn't eternal, that's why i assume you don't even realize that he quoted many opinions about the matter and finished with the correct one
Morover you claimed there is ijmaa on this issue and ibn taymiyyah broke it, that's another lie or a reflection of your ignorace cause there is no ijmaa .
Anyway, you video disappointed me as you should respect your age or if you don't know how to read ibn taymiyyah then don't read for him until you learn better
I look forward to it. As always I leave people to make up their own mind.
@@HassanRadwan133
The issue isn't about ibn taymiyyah saying this, the issue is you concluding something out of it That contradicts what evrn al-jahm ibn safwan himself thought !
Because even those who hold this opinon quote from the Qur'an and they have evidence..
But you claimed thereis ijmaa on this and ibn taymiyyah broke it,
Please show me where is this ijmaa (consensus) when we have ibn masud and umar and other tabe'een holding this opinon?
I agree not all scholars consider it a matter of ijma' - particularly these days. However in the past most classical scholars from mainstream orthodoxy did and Ibn Hazm made it one of the doctrines that there is consensus on and those who deny it have gone out of Islam, in his well known book on matters of consensus "maraatib al-ijma'
مراتب الإجماع للإمام ابن حزم
And Taqi al-Din al-Subki, a contemporary of Ibn Taymiyyah who wrote a refutation of his treatise, said:
“The doctrine of the Muslims is that the Garden and the Fire will not pass away. Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm has transmitted that this is held by consensus and that whoever opposes it is an unbeliever by consensus.”
(al-i’tibar bi-baqa’ al-janna wa al-nar - Taqi al-Din al-Subki)
I agree some don't consider that there is consensus and Ibn Taymiyyah certainly strongly rejects that there is a consensus, nevertheless many classical scholars did indeed consider it a matter of consensus.
Dr israr ahmed had said .hell is not eternal for kafirs
Could you direct me to where he said that please.
@@HassanRadwan133 in his Urdu speech i listened few years ago.
ruclips.net/video/6lFaCraINDM/видео.htmlfeature=shared
@@AyaanAyaan-r5f Did he quote any hadiths or quran verses to support this viewpoint? I don't speak urdu so i dont understand
even sheikhul islam rahimullah tala had troubles haha ... very interesting. even he is not friend of many muslims and non salafi shujukh he was on a different level . thanks for sharing :) . in the end ex muslims madee things not up
bruh he did not evn take this position
Many will tell you to use pascals wager in order to believe in god. I use a different one for justifying atheism. There are in total 4200 religions, and alll of them are exclusive, meaning if one has to be true others can't be. Now imagine choosing the wrong one. So if islam is the true religion , then everyday you go to church, you are spiting the god even more and vise versa. We atheists are at a natural advantage that while we are not worshipper's of god, at least we Don't worship God's. Rival
Ridwan you deleted my response. Why ?.
I don't recall deleting any response? What did it say?
Majority reached consensus? Is that what a consensus is? Or is that just a majority opinion.
It was - and still is - the consensus amongst mainstream Sunni (and Shi'a) scholars. But as with all aspects of Islam you will find those who hold a different opinion.
The bible calls josephs and Moses’ kings ‘pharaoh’ while ‘pharaoh’ wasn’t used until AFTER joseph. However, the Quran doesn’t make this mistake as it calls Joseph’s ruler a ‘king’ and Moses’ ruler a ‘pharaoh’. How did muhammad ﷺ know this? Muhammad ﷺ clearly couldn’t have copied the bible otherwise he would’nt have made this mistake.
The title King wasn't used in Ancient Egypt: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egyptian_royal_titulary#:~:text=The%20royal%20titulary%20or%20royal,even%20changed%20during%20the%20reign).
The Qur'an appears to assume Pharaoh is the actual name of the ruler at the time of Moses and so uses the generic word "King" for the ruler at the time of Joseph. Had the Qur'an indeed used one of the actual titles used by Ancient Egyptians at the time, then one would have grounds to claim it was significant. But the use of a generic word like "King" doesn't signify anything extraordinary. As I have said before, if one is going to make claims of miraculous historical accuracy then one must have accurate language to back it up.
Hassan Radwan but in this case the Quran corrected the bible
Hassan Radwan also Joseph lived under the Hyksos so he would’ve called them ‘king’
God knows best if Joseph even existed let alone when he lived.
Hassan Radwan but u have to admit that the Quran corrected the bible and Muhammad ﷺ couldn’t have copied it
There is no contradiction. Because when Allah says
As for those who are wretched, they will be in the Fire, sighing in a high and low tone.
They will dwell therein for all the time that the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord wills. Verily, your Lord is the Doer of whatsoever He intends (or wills).
And those who are blessed, they will be in Paradise, abiding therein for all the time that the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord wills: a gift without an end.”
[Hood 11:106-108] Allaah says about paradise 'a gift without an end' but as far as hell is concerned, Allah has not said made an exception and further said He is the doer of whatsoever he intends.
Well Yasir Qadhi speaks of Ibn Taymiyyah's view on finite hell in this lecture but apparently he considered both views to make sense. ruclips.net/video/PA4JYRsFGj4/видео.html
A lot of salafis get upset when people point this out though and start denying he ever suggested something so preposterous.
@Icelerate could you please tell me the exact point in time on that video, where he says that? I heard him say he was asked about Ibn Taymiyya's view of a finite Hell, but I can't see where Yasir Qadhi says that "Ibn Taymiyya thought both views make sense" btw I previously made a response to that video by Yasir Qadhi here ruclips.net/video/T1raAMO3ipw/видео.html
@Time to Reason There is no unjustified fear and saying Islam is not proven shows your ignorance.
@Time to Reason The only problematic fundamentalism I see here is the fundamentals of your conception of Islam.
Isn't ibn taymia considered a liar by muslim scholars!!!
He certainly divides opinion. But he is without doubt one of the most influential scholars of Islamic history
1st 😀
You beat me by 10 secs !
You can never have true understanding of Islam unless you follow the Quran AND Ahlulbayt together.
Leave one or the other and you will continue lost and never arrive at the true message...
Thanks. I always wondered what I was doing wrong.
So most people who are not lucky enough to born into your type of family or get in touch with 'Ahlulbayt' are doomed? Why do you think people can understand rocket science/brain surgery just by following books/lectures but can't understand your version of Islam?
@@manobik No one said anything about people being doomed (that is contrary to God). But without the complete message, there will always be confusion and unease. I wasn't born into anything, it was extensive investigation that lead me to what I am sure is truth.
@@soniaallam4522 good for you.. Tell me what method did you use? See most people I met were very confident re: their research method.. However extensive honest questioning points their blind faith like this teenager.. Search on RUclips using 'cordial curiosity Tia'
who the hell is ahlulbayt ? iam a muslim but have nerver heard of him
2nd!
What a liar
Why did u not continue with the quote ?
He clearly states later that it is the position of the jahmiyya
So u want me to follow a liar atheist?
You don't have to believe me. This is Yasir Qadhi explaining the views of Ibn Taymiyyah on the externality of Hell and he says pretty much the same as I said in this video.
ruclips.net/video/hLTNfBCxBTo/видео.html
@@HassanRadwan133 i already saw yasir qadhi
And yaser did not affirm it
He said he might aconowledge the non eternity of hell fire
So
Nice try watch from min 40 onward
😉😉
And again why did u not give thr full quote?
And on min 25 onwards he says that ibn taymiyya says what is the hikma of it
He never said what u said
He never said what u said
🤣🤣🤣
So do u want me to believe a liar atheist?
But if u have read ibn al qayyim u would have understood ibn taymiya position on the erternity of hell
But u never did and will never do
Ibn Taymiyyah says that it is because of this contradiction that Jahm denied that God is the Most Merciful of the Merciful. That doesn't mean that Ibn Taymiyyah himself didn't consider it a contradiction. On the contrary, he clearly does, which is why he argues against eternal Hell.
Here is the whole passage:
"Eighth: It is established that apart from the fact His Mercy is all-encompassing, He is also All-Wise and the All-Wise only creates according to His overall wise purpose. Just as His wise purpose is mentioned in several places. For so long as it is understood that those He punishes, He punishes for a wise purpose, then this is possible. In this world, there is a wise purpose behind Divinely ordained punishments. Likewise, there are profound wisdoms behind what He decrees of calamities. Amongst them; cleansing of sins, purification of souls, deterring the perpetrator as well as others in the future and in it lies a cautionary lesson. And the Garden is pure and no one enters it except the pure.
For this reason he said in the Sahih hadith: “After they have crossed the sirat they will be confined at a bridge between the Garden and the Fire. Then when they have been cleansed and purified they will be permitted to enter the Garden.”
Evil and unjust souls - who if returned to this world before the punishment, would simply go back to what they were forbidden - are unfit to dwell in the Abode of Peace which is incompatible with lies, injustice and evil. However if when they are punished thoroughly by the Fire, their souls are cleansed of that evil, then this is rationally consistent with wise purpose, just as is the case with suffering of this world. Creating those who have evil in them that is eliminated by means of punishment, is perfect wisdom.
But as for creating souls who commit evil in this world, while in the Hereafter they will only exist in torment, this is a contradiction, in which appears a contradiction of wisdom and mercy that does not appear in anything else.
For this reason, when Jahm saw that, he denied that God is the Most Merciful of the Merciful and said; rather He does whatever He wills. And those who followed his path, such as al-Ashʿarī amongst others, hold the opinion that, in reality, there is no Wisdom or Mercy, but He has Knowledge, Power and Will with no preponderance given to any one of the two aspects (of Wisdom and Mercy). For that reason when they are asked to acknowledge that He is Wise, they interpret it as He is Knowing or Powerful or Supporting - but none of these three things require Wisdom. However when it is proven that He is All-Merciful and All-Wise and the falseness of Jahm’s view is known, then it is obligatory to affirm the requirements of Mercy and Wisdom.
The views of the Mu’tazilah are also false and the views of Qadariyyah, the Mujbirah and those who deny His Wisdom and Mercy are false. Amongst the major things that completely undermines them is their position of endorsing Jahm, because that obligates what they say and the iniquity of the incumbent necessitates the iniquity of the obligated - and God (S) knows best."
You can read Ibn Taymiyyah's treatise for yourself.
"www.academia.edu/s/42e2252093?source=news"
@@HassanRadwan133 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Gd one
Have u read his book
درء التعارض؟
It is his last book
He clearly states that hell is eternal
Ibn al qayyim explains his position
There are 2 hells
For believers which is non eternal
And 1 for non believers which is eternal
Again u can lie on your english audiance as much as u want
So the quote u gave he is explainibg the position of jahm
Not his
So why did u give that quote as if it is his position
Well because u are a liar
@@HassanRadwan133 i don't need tp read treatises i already read his booka in arabic
😉😉😉
Lies