Firstly, Ibn Kathir was a devout student and an admirer of Ibn Taymiyya, and would follow him in many of his views and opinions, as he would also accompany him on his Hisba missions of commanding good and forbidding evil. Anyone who reads Ibn Kathir’s account of Ibn Taymiyya in his Bidaya will be aware of this, in particular, when Ibn Kathir proudly relates how Ibn Taymiyya punished a Sufi Zindiq at his time and made him repent, in Ibn Kathir’s presence.
Ibn al-Imad in his Shadharat quotes Ibn Qadhi Shuhba from his Tabaqat: ‘He (Ibn Kathir) had a special relationship with Ibn Taymiyya, whom he would defend and follow many of his views. He would issue verdicts according to the view of Ibn Taymiyya in the issue of Talaq, due to which he was tested and harmed. He died in Sha’ban and was buried in the Sufi cemetery next to his Sheikh Ibn Taymiyya’.
Secondly, what Ibn Kathir says in tafsir of Allah’s Hands, etc, is not the Ta’wil which involves the negation of the dhahir.
The Salaf affirmed two things from the verses regarding the Attributes:
The Attribute itself, and
The meaning of the Attributes plus the context.
For example, with the verse: ‘Lo! The bounty is in Allah’s Hand’
The Salaf affirmed:
1) Allah has a Hand, and
2) Allah is the ultimate owner of all bounties.
If Ibn Kathir, or any of the Salaf for that matter, negated the dhahir, then the Ash’aris might have a leg to stand on. However, Ibn Taymiyya gave the Ash’aris of his time three years to search through the heritage of the Salaf to find one scholar making ta’wil, and they were unable to comply.
All they could bring were statements of the Salaf regarded verses that had nothing to do with the Sifat.
For instance, the verse: ‘The heavens that We Created with Aydin’, many of them say that the Salaf made ta’wil of the word Aydin by saying it refers to power.
Yet, the verse has nothing to do with Allah’s Attributes, because the word ‘Aydin’, literally and linguistically refers to power, and not hands.
The word ‘Aydin’ is a verbal noun (masdar) for the verb ‘aada’, meaning ‘strengthened’, and therefore completely different to the word ‘yad’ (hand), linguistically, morphologically, let alone literally.
But the Ash’arite problem is ignorance of the Arabic language.
Another verse which clarifies the meaning of Aydin is: ‘Remember our servant, Dawud, the one with Aydin’
Aydin here, linguistically refers to power and not hands, for if it literally meant ‘hands’, the verse would surely sound strange:
‘Remember our servant, Dawud, the one with hands’!
In this regard the Shafi’i Imam Ibn Khuzayma says: ‘Some of the Jahmites claimed the meaning of the saying: ‘Allah Created Adam with His Two Hands’, i.e. with His power. Hence, they claimed that al-Yad (hand) refers to al-Quwwah (power), and this is also from changing (the wording/meanings). This is also ignorance of the Arabic language. For power is called ‘al-Ayd’ in the language of the Arabs, and not ‘al-Yad’ (a hand). Therefore, the one who cannot differentiate between ‘al-Yad’ and ‘al-Ayd’, he is more in need of education and enrolment in a school, than seeking leadership or a theological debate!’ (al-Tawhid p. 87)
Thirdly, and lastly, Ibn Kathir often in his Tafsir makes clear cut affirmation of Allah’s Attributes, which the Ash’aris negate the dhahir of.
For example, in the Tafsir of Allah’s verse: ‘Allah mocks them’ (2:15) quotes the statements of the Salaf and Ibn Jarir affirming literally that Allah mocks them in retaliation.
Ibn Kathir also says in his Tafsir of the verse: ‘And when your Lord Comes, and the angels in rows after rows.’: Hence, Allah will Come on the Day of Judgement, as He Wills, as will the angels in front of Him, in rows after rows’.
Here, Ibn Kathir literally affirms that Allah will Come on the Day of Judgement, and not His decision, reward and mercy as the Ash’arites and the Jahmites claim. It is also very important to note here, that all of the Ash’aris formed a consensus on negating sifat ikhtiyariyya from Allah. In other words, they believed that Allah cannot do what He likes, whenever He likes, because they will oppose Allah’s especial quality of being qadim, eternal. Yet, for Ibn Kathir to disagree with the Ash’aris on such a fundamental issue clearly demonstrates that he was not an Ash’ari.
In his tafsir, Ibn Kathir also affirms that Allah’s Speech is literally heard, another fundamental point of disagreement between the Hanbalis and Ash’aris.
Source: https://aqeedah.wordpress.com/2006/09/3 ... -of-allah/
Statistics: Posted by AbuAbdurRahman — Fri Jul 17, 2020 10:26 pm
]]>
I think we rest our case
Statistics: Posted by AbuKhuzaimahAnsari — Mon Jun 29, 2020 10:14 pm
]]>
Al-Ghazali wrote 5 books, 2 on Mantiq (logic) 2 on Refuting Philosophy and 1 on nominal Ash'arite creed (iqtisad) based on Kalam, all before and until 488H.
What happened after?
Well just 6 months later al-Ghazali suffered a huge nervous breakdown, a crisis of faith which lasted 6 months, he wasn't able to eat or even talk. He left his position as professor of Shafi'i Fiqh and LIED to get away from Baghdad. He travelled for 2 years (ibadah and writing) He then returned to his native land and went into semi retirement until 499H when he wrote his منقذ من الضلال (Deliverance from Deviation) so, for almost 11-12 years al-Ghazali was AWOL. On top of that he came out REFUTING & LAMBASTING Kalam and philosophy.
And the most Interesting part of all of this is,
AL-GHAZALI HIMSELF SAID ALL OF THIS, in his Munqidh Min al-Dalal.
This was just one point.
So, you have the novice Sufi Ash'ari, who hasn't even got the badge yet, telling the Sunni world that we MUST use logic, philosophy and kalam To approach, understand and derive Aqidah. The same neophyte of yesterday saying the tools of Ash'arism are well equipped to deal with atheism!
My friends, wake up! Your biggest champion, al-Ghazzali had a wobbler and a crisis of faith from the same tools, until Allah Guided him to the Madhhab of the Salaf as he says, again, himself in his last tract he wrote 2 weeks before he died, Iljam al-Awam Ann Ilm al-Kalam, warning from kalam.
If your al-Ghazali was confused and upon deviation, then who are you?
sincere advice - follow the Salaf.
Statistics: Posted by AbuKhuzaimahAnsari — Mon Jun 22, 2020 1:23 am
]]>
الحمد لله رب العالمين
والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله
وعلى آله وأصحابه أجمعين
Imam Ibn Jarir at-Tabari (rahimahullah) was from the earliest authorities on the explanation (tafseer) of the Quran. He died in the year 310.H, which makes his tafseer one of the earliest and most trustworthy, along with the fact that he was Salafi in aqeedah. This can be demonstrated in many ways, however I would like to mention in this small article one way in which the imam expressed the aqeedah of the Salaf which opposses the aqeedah of the Asharis. The methodology of Imam at-Tabari in his tafseer is well known, he explains the Quran with the Quran, or with the Sunnah, or by way of what the Sahabah understood or the statements of the tabi'een, along with explaining certain words by way of the pure arabic language.
The Asharis either make ta'weel (interpretation) or tafweedh (denial of the meaning) of the attributes of Allah if it is in contradiction to their rationale. They also label those who affirm the attributes upon their literal (dhaahir) meanings (which is the way of the Salaf*), as "Mushabbihah/Mujassimah" -anthropomorphists. They also label falsely likewise anyone who affirms a supposed direction for Allah, so we ask; will they declare the scholars such as Ibn Jarir at-Tabari as such?
*(note: when we say "literal (dhaahir) meaning" we do not mean to say that these attributes resemble the attributes of creation)
From Tafseer at-Tabari:
1.) ثم استوى على العرش: فإنه يعني: علا عليه
"Then He (Allah) istawa over the throne." (Surah 13:2) Meaning He (Allah) rose over it.
2.) الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَى: يقول تعالى ذكره: الرحمن على عرشه ارتفع وعلا
"The Most Merciful above the throne istawa." (Surah 20:5): the Most High mentioned: The Most Merciful (Allah) above His throne rose and is over.
3.) :وَهُوَ مَعَكُمْ أَيْنَ مَا كُنْتُم
يقول: وهو شاهد لكم أيها الناس أينما كنتم يعلمكم، ويعلم أعمالكم، ومتقلبكم ومثواكم، وهو على عرشه فوق سمواته السبع
"And He is with you wherever you are" (Surah 57:4). And He is witnessing you all, O mankind, wherever you are. He knows you, and He knows your actions, and your movements and your abodes, and He is over His throne above His seven heavens.
4.) .مَا يَكُونُ مِن نَّجْوَىٰ ثَلَاثَةٍ إِلَّا هُوَ رَابِعُهُمْ
"And there is not a third from them except that He is the fourth of them." (Surah 58:7).
وعني بقوله: (هُوَ رَابِعُهُمْ )، بمعنى: أنه مشاهدهم بعلمه، وهو على عرشه
And what is meant by His statement: "He is the fourth of them" that He witnesses them with His knowledge and He is above His throne.
الضحاك، في قوله: (مَا يَكُونُ مِنْ نَجْوَى ثَلاثَةٍ) إلى قوله: (هُوَ مَعَهُمْ ) قال: هو فوق العرش وعلمه معهم
Ad-Dhahaak said in regards to His statement "And there is not a third...except that He is the fourth of them" He is above the throne and His knowledge is with them.
5.) أَمْ أَمِنْتُمْ مَنْ فِي السَّمَاءِ: وهو الله
"Or do you feel secure that He who is above the heaven..." (Surah 67:17). And it is Allah.
6.) وَقَالَ فِرْعَوْنُ يَا هَامَانُ ابْنِ لِي صَرْحًا لَّعَلِّي أَبْلُغُ الْأَسْبَابَ أَسْبَابَ السَّمَاوَاتِ فَأَطَّلِعَ إِلَىٰ إِلَٰهِ مُوسَىٰ وَإِنِّي لَأَظُنُّهُ كَاذِبًا: وإني لأظنّ موسى كاذبا فيما يقول ويدّعي من أن له في السماء ربا أرسله إلينا
"And Pharaoh said: 'O Haman, construct for me a tower that I might reach the ways- The ways into the heavens - so that I may look at the deity of Moses; but indeed, I think he is a liar'." (Surah 40:36-37). Pharaoh said: I think moses is a liar in that which he says and claims that he has a Lord above the heavens that sent him to us.
These are some of the many quotations that we can cite from the great imam establishing the belief that Allah is above the throne. Will the Asharis now accuse Ibn Jarir at-Tabari of anthropomorphism? Did he not use explicit words such as over, above and rise for Allah's istiwa, that you say and deem is tajseem?! Or will they in their typical old-fashional way interpret the imams words to mean something else?! Such are the deluded in self denial!
May Allah the Most High over His throne keep us firm upon the way of the Salaf, ameen.
-Abu Abdillah Ehsan.
Statistics: Posted by AbuAbdillah — Sat Jun 20, 2020 10:12 pm
]]>
]]>
]]>
If I told you that I have a book that has no pages, no binder, no ink, no cover, no colour, along with that it isnt in this creation or outside of it, it isnt up or down or left or right. But it exists without a place and is eternal with no beginning or end.
What do you think of this book? Would you say...
A.) It actually exists in reality.
B.) It doesnt exist in reality, only in the mind.
(dont worry if this speech confuses you, it confuses alot of people, quite suprisingly. Sometimes people just accept it and try to make it make sense just for the sake of reconciliation).
Before the answer is given, I'd like to mention a short intro which will answer some of the questions of why I did this exercise/survey in the first place and what relevance it has.
Simply: to test your logic.
The correct answer is B, with a majority of 55 votes.
Answer A got 9 votes. But many who chose A reverted to B after they thought about it again and pondered over it. Suprisingly, no one from B reverted to A.
The responses to this open survey were given by normal people. Not philosophers, intellectuals or professors. Just normal people.
Those who answered A did so for a number of reasons;
•It made sense to them.
•They were overthinking, adding in their own ideas to the scenario.
•They thought I was refering to the Quran or book of deeds so they didnt want to say anything wrong.
•Literally taking my word for it without question.
(and thats why I believe they got it wrong, due to these factors).
Lets dissect the answer.
So, theres a "book". We all know what a book is, dont we? But this book, as the scenario states, has "no pages, no cover, no binder, no colour, no ink." Pause. You ever seen a book like that? All books have these things, so without pages, a cover, a binder, colour and ink how can it be a book? If one of these things are missing then we say the book is deficient and not complete.
The example continues: "...it (this book) isnt within creation nor outside of it, it isnt up or down nor left or right. But it exists without a place and is eternal without a beginning or end." Can you even comprehend that?! Lets give it a whack.
So this book isnt with us here on earth, or in space. Its not even outside creation itself (sounds fishy). And it isnt up or down, or left or right?...But at the same time its eternal and and has no beginning or end? How can that be? Something that isnt inside the creation or out of it, nor up or down or left or right...this hurts my brain!
You know what. I've got it! This "book" doesnt even exist! The mind cant comprehend something that has no features or isnt within or out of creation. Its non-existent. It only exists in your head. Abit like the tooth-fairy people speak about. Or father christmas.
And just because it was called "eternal and having no beginning or end", doesnt mean it has to be that way. It also doesnt prove its existence. You can say that about anything!
Whatever parameters I mentioned in the scenario dont have to be true. Who said it was factual and true? I just said it. Would anyone be that gullible to believe whatever they hear without verification?
This exercise can teach us alot:
-Not everything that someone tells you is truth. Rather look it up and question. Find the evidence.
-Dont overthink things! Take your time, read, understand, if not read and repeat. Theres no need to over complicate things.
-Not everyones "logic" is the same. It clearly varies. Many things are just universally correct or wrong.
Now to the important part and objective of the survey.
What if you changed the word "book" to Allah? Woahhh. Wait wait. That would then mean that Allah...na'udhubillah. We seek refuge in Allah from such falsehood. Truly Allah Most High exists. How? You may ask. We know this by way of divine textual evidence and our logic (and these two do not contradict each other).
But there are those from amongst the muslims who actual say such stuff! They say Allah exists, but He is neither in or out of creation, he exists without a place, along with denying many of His attributes. Its as if Allah is but a thought in their minds rather than a real being. These are the people who deny the attributes of Allah, from the deviant sects; Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah.
However, there is another group who affirm 7-20 attributes of Allah only and deny the rest by way of Ta'weel (interprering them) or Tafweedh (denying their meanings). They are known as the Ashaa'irah.
As we know, Allah informed us about Himself by way of His attributes:
-He created adam with His two hands (Surah 38:75).
-He rose over the throne (Surah 7:54).
-He decends to the lowest heaven every night (Bukhari).
-His Face will remain forever (Surah 55:27).
Among His many perfect attributes found within the Quran and Sunnah. We believe in these attributes:
-Without deny them.
-Without questioning 'how?'
-Without resembling them to the creation.
-Without interpreting them.
-Without denying their meanings.
-Without comparing them to the creation.
Otherwise, if we didnt, it would lead to heresy.
"There is nothing like Him, and He is the all-hearer the all-seer."-Surah 42:11.
But a person may ask: But Allah isnt like the book, nor can He be. He is the creator, the Ever lasting, the Living. Yes, all of this is based on our imaan/faith in what He told usabout Himself. He doesnt resemble the creation at all. But at the same time He has these attributes that He Himself told usabout. Upon us is to believe them and not reject them.
Just as we believe Allah hears and sees, and it isnt like our hearing and seeing, likewise He has other attributes that are not like ours. Is that too hard to understand?!
Do you see the danger in negating the attributes of Allah? It can lead to describing Him with nothingness, just like the book in the survey was described. The only thing stoping us from denying Allah is our imaanin His existence and what He told us about Himself via revelation. And that very same imaan should also stop us from denying His attributes or likening them to the creation. He has attributes, not like ours, simple. Mankind has this arrogance about himself that he knows better, and that his logic is superior. Clearly not!
The attributes of Allah Most High indeed without doubt perfect, divine, uncomprehendable and befitting His Majesty, belief in them is obligatory.
If someone says to you "Allahs Hearing means His knowledge" would you accept that? Never. Then why would one interpret His Hand as His power? "Because hands are limbs, hearing isnt!" Wait, we're talking about Allah, not creation. Do you think Allah's attributes are like that of creation? Do you think Allah was refering to limbswhen He said that He created adam with His two Hands? No. So you was the one who thought that. No one else did. Youhave told yourself that the Hand of Allah has to mean a limb or a body part. I never said that.
I said it is an attribute of Allah that is perfect, divine, uncomprehendable and befitting His Majesty, just like His Seeing, and Hearing, and Speech, and Will is etc.
Take note of this principle: the belief in one attribute of Allah is the same in all of the attributes of Allah. (Just like the way you believe in His Hearing and Seeing etc believe the same way about His Hands and Face etc, dont let that philosophical whisper of shaytaan lead you to deny His attributes).
So denying all the attributes is disbelief, and denying some attributes can lead to disbelief, or at the very least ascribes imperfection to Allah. Now you understand the danger of denying the attributes of Allah, and this is the mistake that many deviant sects fell into, from them:
-The Jahmiyyah.
-The Mu'tazilah.
-The Ashaa'irah.
-The Maturidiyyah.
These groups tried to define Allah using their faulty logic adopted from the disbelieving greeks. It is a rejected innovted mechanism called: ilm al-kalam (theological rhetoric). Something which the early Muslim generations rebuked and deemed a heresy. It resulted into them either:
-Denying the attributes of Allah all together.
-Denying some attributes while affirming others.
-Interpreting the attributes metaphorically.
-Claiming that the meaning of the attributes are unknown in their meaning.
All of this is falsehood and in opposition to the Quran, Sunnah and methodology of the Salaf/Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah.
Just as Imams Abu Hatim and Abu Zur'ah ar-Raaziayn (in the 3rd century) said in their treatise of aqeedah: "The person of kalaam (theological rhetoric) will never succeed."
To say Allah exists without a place, not up or down or left or right, while denying many of His attributes is to essentially dictatethat He doesnt exist. It reduces Allah to being but a thought in the mind, as opposed to a real entity and being. Basically, describing Allah with nothingness.
This is why the Salaf famously said:
المشبه يعبد صنما، والمعطل يعبد عدما
"A Mushabbih (a person who says Allah's attributes are like creations) worships an idol! And a Mua'til (denier of Allah's attributes) worships nothing!"
Allah the Most High is seperate and distinctfrom His creation, He is as He said: "The Most Merciful rose over the throne." -Surah 20:5. There is no creation/nothing above the throne except Allah. Seperate and Distinct from His Creation. Evidence for this is ample.
There is alot we can say. Too much to mention now. This is but a taster. But I hope it clears up a few misconceptions. I know there will be people who disagree with all of this, but thats okay (well, not really) but the facts are the facts and they cant change.
"Exalted is your Lord, the Lord of might, above what they describe. And peace upon the messengers. And praise to Allah, Lord of the worlds." -Surah 37:180-182.
And Allah knows best.
Statistics: Posted by AbuAbdillah — Tue Jun 16, 2020 11:06 pm
]]>
]]>
]]>
3. He mentioned that differences in creed are narrow and that the people who claim that the Madh-hab (School of Jurisprudence) of Al-Asha`irah is false should be asked to refer to the Fatwas of Ibn Taymiyyah and read what Ibn Taymiyyah wrote about ‘Aboo Al-Hasan Al-Ash’aree so that we could perceive how ignorant those people are. (End of quote)
Answer: It should be said that many sects undoubtedly went astray due to the difference in creed, such as Al-Mu`tazilah (a deviant Islamic sect claiming that those who commit major sins are in a state between belief and disbelief), Al-Jahmiyyah (a deviant Islaamic sect denying some Attributes of Allaah, claiming they are ascribed to people and cannot be ascribed to Allaah), Al-Raafidah (a Shee`ah group denying the caliphates of ‘Aboo Bakr Al-Siddeeq and `Umar ibn Al-Khattaab and making accusations against them and many other Companions of the Prophet), Al-Qaadariyyah, and others. Likewise, Al-Asha`irah went astray regarding the issues in which they disagreed with the Qur’aan, the Sunnah, and the eminent scholars of this Ummah and the Imams of guidance, i.e. the Companions (may Allaah be pleased with them), the Taabi`oon (the generation after the Companions and the Prophet) and those who righteously followed them, and the guided Imaams. They (Al-Asha`irah) interpreted Allaah’s Names and Attributes wrongly. However, ‘Aboo Al-Hasan Al-Ash’aree (may Allaah be merciful to him) was not one of Al-Asha`irah, even if they associated themselves with him. He gave up their Madh-hab and embraced the Madh-hab of Ahl-ul-Sunnah (adherents to the Sunnah and the Muslim mainstream). Thus, the praise of Imams to him is not praise to the Madh-hab of Al-Asha`irah
Moreover, it is incorrect to charge whoever objects to Al-Asha`irah, regarding what they opposed of the creed of Ahl-ul-Sunnah, with ignorance, since the reality of ignorance is to speak about Allah (Exalted be He) without knowledge. Yet, the one who derives rules from the Qur'an and the Sunnah and from the established rules of the Shari`ah, following the path of the Salaf (righteous predecessors), and denouncing those who allegorically interpret the Names and Attributes of Allah in a mistaken way, should not be charged with ignorance.
Source:
Statistics: Posted by Shehzad Sattar — Tue Jan 10, 2017 11:45 pm
]]>
by Shaykh Saalim at-Taweel
All praise is due to Allaah alone; may peace and blessings be upon the one after whom there is no Prophet. Thereafter,
I read an article by a writer, it appears that he has been used by the callers to the innovated beliefs of rhetoric; I found him deceived and at the same time he wants to deceive the people with what he has been deceived by.
He mentioned in his article that the great [scholars] of the Ummah of Muhammad were Ash’aree. [Al-Watan newspaper, Saturday 11th Rajab 1435, corresponding to 10/05/2013; entitled: Have a good opinion of us, O author of the article]
What he claims is not strange if it comes from a person who has no knowledge, however what is strange is that this occurred from somebody with an intellect!
Every intelligent Muslims knows, by necessity and without any introductions; without the need to list evidences, proofs and Aayaat that the Messenger of Allaah (sal Allaahu alayhi wa sallam) was the most knowledgeable of people regarding Allaah (the Most High) and His religion; he is the one who Allaah chose, revealed His Book to and gave him wisdom.
The Mother of the Believers ‘Aaishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) said, “The Messenger of Allaah (sal Allaahu alayhi wa sallam), when he would command the people, he would only command them with actions they were able to fulfil. The people said,
We are not like you, O Messenger of Allaah, Indeed Allaah has forgiven what has already occurred from your sins and any sins that may occur in the future.
So he became angry to the extent the anger could be seen from his face. He replied.
Indeed I am the most pious and knowledgeable regarding Allaah. [1]
His noble companions (may the pleasure of Allaah be upon them) took this knowledge from him directly. The Scholars have unanimously agreed that the most knowledgeable of people after the Prophet (sal Allaahu alayhi wa sallam) are the companions (may Allaah be pleased with them). The most knowledgeable of the companions, without exception, are the Four Rightly Guided Caliphs: Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthmaan and Alee (may Allaah be pleased with them all).
[The most knowledgeable] after the Four Rightly Guided Caliphs were the scholars of the companions such as Ibn Mas’ood, ‘Aaisha, Mu’aadh ibn Jabal. Abu Hurayrah, Ibn Abbaas, Ibn Umar and others (may Allaah be pleased with them).
Thereafter their students, and the students of their students amongst the Taabi’een and the Atba’ at-Taabi’een such as Ibn al-Musayyib, az-Zuhree, Tawoos, an-Nakha’ee, ‘Alqamah, Sa’eed ibn Jubayr, Mujaahid, ‘Ikrimah, Qataadah,Makhool, Fudhayl ibn ‘Iyaadh, Abdullah Ibn Mubaarak and others amongst the scholars of Hadeeth and Tafseer, as well as the Scholars of Fiqh: at-Tabaree, Sufyaan ath-Thawree, Sufyaan Ibn Uyaynah, al-Awzaa’ee, al-A’mash, al-Hasan al-Basaree, Abu Haneefah, Maalik, ash-Shaafi’ee, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, al-Bukhaaree, Muslims – may Allah have mercy upon them all. After them, there came thousands of scholars whom only Allaah, the One who created them, can enumerate.
Additionally, whoever has with him the basics of knowledge knows that the first three generations [of scholars] were the best and most virtuous of generation; this was the golden era, adorned with knowledge, major scholars; it was the era that prospered with writings and compilations; an era singled out with scholars and Imaams of Tafseer, Hadeeth, Fiqh. Whoever came after them, are in need of them.
All of these [virtuous scholars and great Imaams], there was never a single Ash’aree among them. Why not? How?
This is because the person who founded the school of Ash’arees is: ‘Alee ibn Isma’eel Abul Hassan al-Ash’aree – may Allaah have mercy upon him. He was not born at that time, he was born 260h and died 324h. So he was born in the last third of the third century, and he died in the first quarter of the fourth century. How can it be therefore be said that most, majority or greatest of the scholars of the Ummah of Muhammad were Ash’arees!?
Do you not understand? What is wrong with you that you speak with falsehood?
If the author thought for a little, he would shy away from making such statements. His example is of a person who claimed that the Prophet of Allah Ibraheem (alayhi salaam) was a Jew or a Christian! Even though Allaah says,
{O People of the Scripture, why do you argue about Abraham while the Torah and the Gospel were not revealed until after him? Then will you not reason?} [03:65]
Moosa and ‘Eesa (peace be upon them) were not created until after Ibraheem, (peace be upon him), so how could he be a follower of them?
Allaah (the Most High) said,
{Or do you say that Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants were Jews or Christians? Say, “Are you more knowing or is Allah?” And who is more unjust than one who conceals a testimony he has from Allah? And Allah is not unaware of what you do} [02:140]
Also, the poor deceived author wants to promote and give justification to the way of the Ash’arees, he said:
“Indeed Imaam Abul Hassan al-Ash’aree (may Allaah have mercy upon him) is from the progeny of the companion Abu Moosa al-Ash’aree (may Allaah be pleased with him).”
This is exactly what he wrote, Abul Hassan and Abu Moosa, whereas the correct [form of grammar] is to say: ‘Abal Hassan and Abee Moosa.’
I say: Even if Abul Hassan al-Ash’aree was from the progeny of the companion Abu Moosa (may Allaah be pleased with him), what does this mean?
Does this necessitate that anybody who is from the progeny of a companion will be upright in his Aqeedah?
Of course not, by the One in whose Hand is my soul, even if a person was from the progeny of a Prophet from among the Prophets, this does not necessitate an evidence for the correctness for his belief.
Also, was the companion Abu Moosa al-Ash’aree (may Allaah be pleased with him), was he an Ash’aree in belief?
Every intelligent person will say: No. However, by Allaah, I fear that this deceived author will say: Yes, Abu Moosa (may Allaah be pleased with him) was upon the Aqeedah of his son Abul Hassan, even though Abul Hassan was born almost three centuries after him!
Yes, I do not deem it too far-fetched that he would say this, in fact it has been heard from some of the misguided people that all the companions were Ash’arees! The help of Allaah is sought. It is just as is said: Insanity comes in different forms!
Rather, by Allaah, this nonsense is actually worse than the speech of the insane. The responsibility from the insane has been lifted, however those misguided and misguiding individuals are arrogant in their misguidance.
Hafs ibn Sulaymaan ibn al-Mugheerah narrated the Qur’an from ‘Aasim ibn Abee Najood, from Abu AbdulRahman as-Silmee, from Uthmaan ibn Affaan (may Allaah be pleased with him) from the Prophet (sal Allaahu alayhi wa sallam). However the Aqeedah of the Ash’arees is not like this. [2]
So the belief of the Ash’arees is innovated, it came about in the fourth century and it is in opposition to the ‘Aqeedah of the Prophet (sal Allaahu alayhi wa sallam) and his companions in most issues. I do not say except: All praise is to Allah who pardoned us.
Yes, all the intelligent people understand that the companions, the Taabi’een and the Atba’ Taabi’een – to the end of the third century, there is not a single strand of the Ash’aree Aqeedah in them. This is because the Aqeedah of the Ash’arees was not born at that time – neither the Aqeedah nor its founder. What is wrong with how you judge?!
This deceived author reminds me of the Soofi Ash’aree who repented from singing [with music] and instead went into singing Nasheeds in a masjid from the Masaajid of the Minister of Charitable Endowments in Kuwait. His recording was broadcasted, [he was in the Masjid singing Nasheeds] whilst those around him were nodding their heads singing innovated eulogies!
I say: The author reminds me of this person who repented from sins but instead fell into innovations, when he stood up in a masjid in the area of Mishraf in Kuwait; he stood up after the Jumu’ah Prayer in front of everybody saying to the preacher in the Masjid – Shaykh Abbaas (may Allaah have mercy upon him) –
“I ask the Shaykh in front of you all, who explained Saheeh Bukhaaree? Was it not Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaanee, and he was an Ash’aree; and who explained Saheeh Muslim? Was it not an-Nawawi, and he was an Ash’aree”
I say: Glory be to Allaah, this is another sacrificial lamb who has been deceived, they have taught him that Ibn Hajr [died: 852h] and an-Nawawi [died: 676h] were Ash’arees. However they missed that fact that Bukhaaree Muhammad Ibn Ismaa’eel, the author of the Saheeh [died 256h] and Muslim ibn Hajaaj the author of the Saheeh [died 261h] were themselves not Ash’arees.
Look how he tried to prove the validity of the Aqeedah of the Ash’arees with a weak feeble evidence ie that those who explained Saheeh Bukhaaree and Saheeh Muslim were Ash’arees, and yet he missed the fact that the ones who actually authored the two Saheeh were not on the Aqeedah of the Ash’arees!
It is as Allaah (the Most High) said,
{He to whom Allah has not granted light – for him there is no light} [24:40]
I ask Allaah (the Most High), just as He has guided him away from music and instruments to reading the Qur’an and Tajweed, that He also guides him to abandoning innovations and holding firm to the Sunnah.
Then the author mentioned in his article approximately names of the scholars of the Ash’arees. I will mention them how he mentioned them however I will chronologically organise them and mention the date of their deaths.
Note, O my brother, O reader, that most of their scholars – rather all of them – are from the latter centuries and there is not a single one of them from the first three centuries. This is a matter which is natural, as the founder of the Ash’aree way – Abul Hassan al-Ash’aree – died in the fourth century: 324h.
First: The Ash’arees of the Fourth and Fifth century:
Muhammad ibn at-Tayyib al-Qaasim, al-Qaadhee Abu Bakr al-Baaqilaani [died: 403h]
Abu Muhammad al-Juwaynee [died: 438h]
AbdulKareem bin Hawaazin an-Naysabooree al-Qushayree [died: 465h]
Abu Is.haaq Ibraheem ash-Shiraazi [died: 467h]
Abul Ma’aalee AbdulMalik al-Juwaynee, (Imaam al-Haramayn) [died: 478h]
Secondly: The Ash’arees of the fifth and sixth centuries
Abu Haamid al-Ghazaalee [died: 505h]
Abul Wafaa ibn Aqeel al-Hanbalee [died: 513h]
Al-Qaadhee Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabee [died: 543]
Ibn’Asaakir [died: 581h]
Thirdly: The Ash’arees of the sixth of seventh centuries
Fakhrudeen ar-Raazee [died: 606h]
Abul Qaasim ar-Raafi’ee al-Qazweeni [died: 623h]
Abul Hassan ‘Alee ash-Shaybaanee al-Juzaree, ‘Izz ad-Deen ibn al-Atheer [died: 630h]
Al-‘Izz ibn AbdisSalaam [died: 660h]
Abu Zakariyyah Muhyideen Yahya ibn Sharaf an-Nawawi [died: 676h]
Fourth: The Ash’arees of the seventh and eighth century
Abul Hajjaaj al-Kalbee al-Muzanee [died: 742h]
TaqiUdeen as-Subki [756h]
[His son] Taaj ad-Deen as-Subki [771h]
Fifth: The Ash’arees of the eighth and ninth century
Abul Fadhl Zayn ad-deen AbdurRaheem al-‘Iraaqee [died: 806h]
Abul Fadhl Ahmad ibn Alee ibn Hajr al-Asqalaanee [852h]
Sixth: The Ash’arees of the ninth and tenth century
AbdulrRahman ibn Abee Bakr, Jalaal ad-Deen as-Suyooti [died 911h]
Shihaabad-Deen Abul Abbaas Ahmad ibn Hajr al-Haytami as-Sa’adee [died 974h]
My brother, noble reader, after this clarification it will become clear to you that false notions that the deceivers – and those who have been deceived – who claim that most, greatest or the majority of the Ummah of Muhammad (sal Allaahu alayhi wa sallam) were Ash’arees.
After this, you should know that the difference between Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah who are the pious predecessor of this Ummah and between the Ash’arees who falsely claim to be Ahlus Sunnah is not only in the subject of the Names and Attributes of Allaah, as has become commonly widespread. Rather the difference between us is in many different topics. This is something which is ignored, even by those who ascribe themselves to the Ash’aree school of thought, including the author of the original article – as I will clarify in an upcoming article inshaAllaah.
May Allaah benefit me and you with the truth, and make us firm upon it.
All praise is due to Allaah, in the beginning and ending and in open and hidden. May the peace and blessings of Allaah be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family and all his companions.
Footnotes
[1] Narrated by ‘Aaishah; Collected by Bukhaaree
[2] Meaning: the Aqeedah of the Ash’arees has not been transmitted or narrated throughout the generations.
أيها المخدوع: أكبر علماء أمة محمد ﷺ لم يكن فيهم أشعريٌّ واحدٌ
المرجع: http://www.saltaweel.com/articles/337
الحمد الله وحده والصلاة والسلام على من لا نبي بعده، أما بعد:
فلقد قرأت مقالاً لأحد الكتّاب ويبدو أنه ضحية لبعض دعاة العقائد الكلامية المحدثة فوجدته مخدوعاً ويريد أن يخدع الناس بما خُدِعَ به فذكر في مقاله بأنَّ عظماء أمة محمد ﷺ من الأشاعرة!! [جريدة الوطن عدد يوم السبت ١١ رجب ١٤٣٥ الموافق ١٠ / ٥ / ٢٠١٣ بعنوان (أحسن الظن فينا يا صاحب المقال)]، وهذا الذي زعمه ليس غريباً إذا صدر عمنْ لا علم له لكن الغريب حقاً أن يصدر عن منْ له عقل!!
إذ كل مسلم عاقل يعلم بالضرورة من غير مقدمات ولا كثير من الإقناعات ولا حاجة لسرد الأدلة والبراهين والآيات أن رسول الله ﷺ اعلم الناس بالله تعالى وبدينه وهو الذي اصطفاه الله تعالى وأنزل عليه الكتاب وآتاه الحكمة.
وفي الحديث عن أم المؤمنين عائشة رضي الله عنها قالت: «كان رسولُ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم إذا أمرَهم ، أمرَهم من الأعمالِ بما يُطيقون ، قالوا: إنا لسنا كهيئتِك يا رسولَ اللهِ ، إن اللهَ قد غفر لك ما تقدم من ذنبِك وما تأخر ، فَيغْضَبُ حتى يُعْرَفَ الغضبُ في وجهِه ، ثم يقولُ: إن أتقاكم وأعلمَكم باللهِ أنا» [رواه البخاري في صحيحه عن عائشة رضي الله عنها، رقم (٢٠)].
وقد أخذ عنه العلم غضاً طرياً أصحابه الكرام عليهم من الله الرضوان، وقد أجمع العلماء على أن أعلم أمة محمد ﷺ بعده هم أصحابه رضي الله عنهم وأعلم الصحابة على الإطلاق خلفاؤهم الراشدون الأربعة أبو بكر وعمر وعثمان وعلي رضي الله عنهم اجمعين.
ثم علماء الصحابة كابن مسعود وعائشة ومعاذ بن جبل وأبي هريرة وابن عباس وابن عمر وغيرهم رضي الله عنهم اجمعين، ثم تلاميذهم وتلاميذ تلاميذهم من التابعين وتابعي التابعين كابن المسيب والزهري وطاووس والنخعي وعلقمة وسعيد بن جبير ومجاهد وعكرمة وقتادة ومكحول والفضيل بن عياض وعبدالله بن المبارك وغيرهم من المحدثين والمفسيرين والفقهاء كالطبري وسفيان الثوري وسفيان بن عيينة والأوزاعي والأعمش والحسن البصري وأبي حنيفة ومالك والشافعي وأحمد بن حنبل والبخاري ومسلم رحمهم الله جميعاً، وخلق كثير آلاف من العلماء الذين لا يحيط بهم علماً إلا الله تعالى الذي خلقهم.
وأيضاً كل من عنده أولويات العلم وأبجدياته يدرك أن القرون الأولى الثلاثة هي خير القرون وأفضلها وهي العصور الذهبية الزاخرة بالعلم والعلماء الأكابر العظماء هي القرون المزدهرة بالمصنفات والمؤلفات والمختضة بالعلماء والأئمة الأعلام من المفسرين والمحدثين والفقهاء وكل من جاء بعدهم فهو عالة عليهم وهؤلاء لم يكن فيهم اشعري واحد قط لماذا؟ وكيف؟
لأنّ مؤسس مذهب الأشاعرة وهو علي بن اسماعيل أبو الحسن الأشعري- رحمه الله- لم يكن قد خُلِقَ آنذاك بعدُ، فقد ولد سنة ٢٦٠ هجرية وتوفي سنة ٣٢٤ هجرية أي ولد في الثلث الأخير من القرن الثالث وتوفي في الربع الأول من القرن الرابع فكيف يقال أكثر أو أعظم أو معظم أو أكبر علماء أمة محمد ﷺ اشاعرة؟!
أفلا تعقلون؟ وما لكم بالباطل تنطقون؟!
لو فكر هذا الكاتب قليلاً لاستحى أن ينطق بهذا الكلام فمثله كمثل من زعم أن نبي الله إبراهيم خليل الرحمن عليه السلام كان يهودياً أو نصرانياً والله يقول:
﴿يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لِمَ تُحَاجُّونَ فِي إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَمَا أُنْزِلَتِ التَّوْرَاةُ وَالْإِنْجِيلُ إِلَّا مِنْ بَعْدِهِ أَفَلَا تَعْقِلُونَ ﴾ [آل عمران: ٦٥]
فموسى وعيسى عليهما السلام ما خلقوا إلا بعد ابراهيم عليه السلام فكيف يكون تابعاً لهما؟
وقال تعالى:
﴿ أَمْ تَقُولُونَ إِنَّ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَالْأَسْبَاطَ كَانُوا هُودًا أَوْ نَصَارَى قُلْ أَأَنْتُمْ أَعْلَمُ أَمِ اللَّهُ وَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنْ كَتَمَ شَهَادَةً عِنْدَهُ مِنَ اللَّهِ وَمَا اللَّهُ بِغَافِلٍ عَمَّا تَعْمَلُونَ ﴾ [البقرة:١٤٠].
ثم هذا الكاتب المخدوع المسكين يريد أن يلمع مذهب الأشاعرة ويروّج له فقال: ((إن الإمام أبو الحسن الأشعري رحمه الله تعالى وهو من نسل الصحابي أبو موسى الأشعري رضي الله تعالى عنه)) هكذا كتبها أبو الحسن وأبو موسى والصواب في هذا السياق أن يقول إن الإمام أبا الحسن ويقول: من نسل الصحابي أبي موسى.
وأقول: حسناً حسناً وإذا كان أبو الحسن الأشعري من نسل الصحابي أبي موسى رضي الله عنه فماذا يعني هذا؟
هل بالضرورة كل من كان من نسل صحابي يكون مستقيما في عقيدته؟!
كلا والذي نفسي بيده بل حتى لو كان من نسل نبي من الأنبياء فليس بالضرورة يكون ذلك دليلاً على صحة اعتقاده.
ثم هل كان الصحابي أبو موسى الأشعري رضي الله عنه اشعري العقيدة؟
كل عاقل سيقول لا، لكن اخشى والله أن يقول هذا الكاتب المخدوع: نعم كان أبو موسى رضي الله عنه على عقيدة ابنه أبي الحسن وإن ولد بعده بنحو ثلاثة قرون.
نعم لا استبعد أن يقول هذا، بل قد سُمِعَ لبعض الضُّلال من زعم أن الصحابة رضي الله عنهم كلهم كانوا أشاعرة !! وقال: الصحابة اشاعرة كما يقال قراءة حفص وهي قراءة النبي ﷺ وأصحابه، الله المستعان حقاً كما قيل: الجنون فنون.
بل والله هذا الهراء أسوأ من كلام المجانين؛ لأن المجانين مرفوع عنهم القلم أما هؤلاء الضالون المضلون فيكابرون في ضلالهم، فحفص بن سليمان بن المغيرة روى القرآن عن عاصم بن أبي النجود عن أبي عبدالرحمن السلمي عن عثمان بن عفان رضي الله عنه عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، وأما العقيدة الأشعرية فليست كذلك.
فالأشعرية عقيدة محدثة ولدت في القرن الرابع ومخالفة لعقيدة النبي ﷺ واصحابه في معظمها لكن لا اقول إلا الحمد لله الذي عافانا.
نعم كل العقلاء يدركون أن الصحابة والتابعين وتابع التابعين إلى آخر القرن الثالث ليس فيهم شعرة من العقيدة الأشعرية، لأن عقيدة الأشاعرة إذ لم تولد بعدُ لا هي ولا صاحبها ما لكم كيف تحكمون؟يذكرني هذا الكاتب المخدوع بذلك المطرب التائب الصوفي الأشعري، الذي تاب من الطرب إلى الإنشاد في مسجد من مساجد وزارة الأوقاف في الكويت كما في المقطع المصور نُشَر عنه وحوله من يهز رأسه بالطرب المحدث المسمى بالمديح.
أقول ذكرني الكاتب بذلك التائب من المعصية إلى البدعة لما قام في أحد مساجد ضاحية مشرف في الكويت بعد صلاة الجمعة بعصبية يرد على خطيب المسجد الشيخ (عباس) رحمه الله امام المصلين قائلاً: (أنا اسأل الشيخ امامكم من شرح صحيح البخاري؟ أليس ابن حجر العسقلاني وهو اشعري؟ ومن شرح صحيح مسلم؟ أليس النووي وهو اشعري). أقول: سبحان الله هذا الآخر ضحية أيضاً خدعوه فلقنوه أن ابن حجر المتوفى سنة ٨٥٢ هجرية والنووى المتوفى سنة ٦٧٦ هجرية أشاعرة وفاتهم أن البخاري محمد بن اسماعيل صاحب الصحيح المتوفى سنة ٢٥٦ ومسلم بن الحجاج صاحب الصحيح المتوفى سنة ٢٦١ هجرية- رحمهما الله- لم يكونا اشاعرة، فانظر كيف استدل على استقامة عقيدة الأشاعرة بحجة عليلة واهية وهي كون شراح الصحيحين اشاعرة وفاته أن صاحبي الصحيحين ليسا على عقيدة الأشاعرة !!
لكن كما قال تعالى: ﴿ وَمَنْ لَمْ يَجْعَلِ اللَّهُ لَهُ نُورًا فَمَا لَهُ مِنْ نُورٍ ﴾ [النور: ٤٠].
اسأل الله تعالى كما هداه من الطرب والغناء إلى قراءة القرآن وتجويده أن يهديه إلى ترك البدعة والتمسك بالسنة.
ثم ذكر الكاتب في مقاله نحو عشرين اسماً لعلماء من الأشاعرة وسأذكرهم كما أوردهم لكن سأرتبهم واذكر تواريخ وفياتهم. ولاحظ أخي القارئ الكريم أن عامتهم بل كلهم من القرون المتأخرة وليس فيهم واحد من القرون الثلاثة الأولى وهذا أمر بدهي لأن أبا الحسن الأشعري مؤسس المذهب نفسه توفي في القرن الرابع ٣٢٤ هجرية.
أولاً : الأشاعرة في القرن الرابع والخامس:
١- ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﻴﺐ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺳﻢ، ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺑﻜﺮ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﻗﻼﻧﻲ توفي ٤٠٣ هـ
٢- ﺃﺑﻮ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺍﻟﺠﻮﻳﻨﻲ ﺗﻮﻓﻲ ٤٣٨ هـ
٣- ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻜﺮﻳﻢ ﺑﻦ ﻫﻮﺍﺯﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻴﺴﺎﺑﻮﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻘﺸﻴﺮﻱ توفي ٤٦٥ هـ
٤- ﺃﺑﻮ ﺍﺳﺤﺎﻕ ﺍﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺮﺍﺯﻱ توفي ٤٦٧ هـ
٥- ﺃﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻤﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﺠﻮﻳﻨﻲ (ﺍﻣﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺮﻣﻴﻦ) توفي ٤٧٨ هـ
ثانياً : الأشاعرة في القرن الخامس والسادس:
٦- ﺃﺑﻮ ﺣﺎﻣﺪ ﺍﻟﻐﺰﺍﻟﻲ توفي ٥٠٥ هـ
٧- ﺃﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﻮﻓﺎء ﺑﻦ ﻋﻘﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺤﻨﺒﻠﻲ توفي ٥١٣ هـ
٨- ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺑﻜﺮ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻲ توفي ٥٤٣ هـ
٩- ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺴﺎﻛﺮ توفي ٥٧١ هـ
ثالثاً :الأشاعرة في القرن السادس والسابع:
١٠- ﻓﺨﺮ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﺯﻱ توفي ٦٠٦ هـ
١١- ﺃﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺳﻢ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﻓﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺰﻭﻳﻨﻲ توفي ٦٢٣ هـ
١٢- ﺃﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﺤﺴﻦ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺒﺎﻧﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺰﺭﻱ، ﻋﺰ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺍﻷﺛﻴﺮ توفي ٦٣٠ هـ
١٣- ﺍﻟﻌﺰ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﺴﻼﻡ توفي ٦٦٠ هـ
١٤- ﺃﺑﻮ ﺯﻛﺮﻳﺎ ﻣﺤﻴﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﻳﺤﻴﻰ ﺑﻦ ﺷﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﻨﻮﻭﻱ توفي ٦٧٦ هـ
رابعاً : الأشاعرة في القرن السابع والثامن
١٥- أﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﺤﺠﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﺒﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺰﻱ توفي ٧٤٢ هـ
١٦- ﺗﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﻜﻲ توفي ٧٥٦ ﻫـ
١٧- ﻭﺍﺑﻨﻪ: ﺗﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﻜﻲ ٧٧١ ﻫـ
خامساً : الأشاعرة في القرن الثامن والتاسع:
١٨- أﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﻔﻀﻞ ﺯﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﺮﺣﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺍﻗﻲ توفي ٨٠٦ هـ
١٩- ﺃﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﻔﻀﻞ ﺃﺣﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺑﻦ ﺣﺠﺮ ﺍﻟﻌﺴﻘﻼﻧﻲ توفي ٨٥٢ هـ
سادسا : الأشاعرة في القرن التاسع والعاشر:
٢٠- ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ ﺑﻦ ﺃﺑﻲ ﺑﻜﺮ، ﺟﻼﻝ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﻮﻃﻲ توفي ٩١١ هـ
٢١- ﺷﻬﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﻌﺒﺎﺱ ﺃﺣﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺣﺠﺮ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺘﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﺪﻱ توفي ٩٧٤ هـ
أخي القارئ الكريم والآن بعد هذا البيان يظهر لك تزوير الخادعين والمخدوعين الذين زعموا أن اكثر أو أعظم أو معظم علماء أمة محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم من الأشاعرة.
ثم اعلموا أن الخلاف بين أهل السنة والجماعة الذين هم سلف الأمة وبين الأشاعرة الذين يتسمون زوراً بأهل السنة ليس في باب الأسماء والصفات كما هو مُشاع فحسب بل في أبواب كثيرة وهذا ما يجهله حتى من ينتسب إلى الأشعرية ومنهم هذا الكاتب المخدوع كما سأبين ذلك إن شاء الله تعالى في مقال قادم فتابعني نفعني الله وإياك بالحق وثبتنا عليه.
والحمد لله أولاً وآخراً وظاهراً وباطناً وصلى الله وسلم وبارك على نبينا محمد وعلى آله وصحبه أجمعين.
Source: http://www.madeenah.com/the-greatest-sc ... r-asharee/
Statistics: Posted by Shehzad Sattar — Wed Dec 07, 2016 11:06 pm
]]>
To proceed:
We have been asked by our brother Raza Hasan to write a short introduction in his defence of Shaikh ul Islām ibn Taymiyyah in an issue of creed, being a critique of the miskin Deobandi Yasir Hanafī Jahmi, Mātarudi Sūfi Asharī. May All reward our brother for his noble efforts and accept his work before him as a means of allowing him to enter Al-Jannah. Āmīn.
Abul Hasan Hussain Ahmed has been refuted and exposed for the fraudster that he really is on numerous occasions by us. He has clearly demonstrated his ignorance in every aspect of the sacred sciences and as such he should be warned against for his opposition to the manhaj and creed of the Salaf.
This said, we also have refuted the likes of his ‘run-arounds’ Yasir Jahmi and the new kid on the block Ibn Nur al-Shanti disgracefully known as Usamah Muttakin, both of whom are on vacation undergoing hormone replace therapy in Deoband. These people are upon the methodology of the Mutakallimin and the Mu’tazilites.
Raza Hasan has comprehensively answered everything and his effort has left us not much to comment upon, nonetheless we would like to, very concisely outline a few points as to why the Deobandis and their madhab Hanafiyyah is nothing more than a cauldron of falsehood, misguidance and wretchedness at its very route. In order to mask their falsehood, the Deobandis have always attacked the scholars of Ahl us-Sunnah and the Salaf who have exposed and contradicted their deviant ways and beliefs.
Imam Abu al-Muzaffar al-Sam’ani [409H] mentioned some incredible words concerning the Mutakallimin, the way of Abul Hasan Hussain Ahmed, Yasir and Mutakin, he said that Allah sent his Messenger Sallalahu Alayhi Wasallam to convey and propagate the Din and from the most essential and mandatory aspects of the Din that were commanded is the Aqidah of Tawhid. Tawhid is the foundation and the Din in itself. The Messenger of Allah Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam conveyed everything from the Usul and Qaw’aid without missing anything. You will not find in the whole Din that he called and propagated the call and the way of the Mutakallimin in deducing from Jawhar and Ard (ie atoms and particles) in fact a single letter is not established from the companions. Thus, we can surmise from this that the Mutakalimin are upon a path which totally contradicts and opposes the way of the Messenger of Allah Sallalahu Alayhi Wasallm and his companions. Further, the principles and opinions they adhere to while opposing the aforementioned path they have concocted themselves. What is further depraved is that they target and insult the Salaf after formulating this futile way; they accused the Salaf of lacking knowledge and labelled their way as Tashbih. We warn everyone from the way of the Mutakallimin and to stay away from them as they have nothing but pure opinion and they even contradict and oppose each other in their writings. [Fath al-Bari [13:504]
Shaikh Abul Abbas Ahmad bin Ali al-Maqrizi [845H] wrote in detail concerning way of the Mutakallimin and their shenanigans. He rocked the foundations of the Ashariyyah and Kullabiyyah, he says, “All of the Arabs whether they were town people or bedouins heard the Sifat (of Allah) but they did not question the Prophet Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam about them just as they would question him about the prayer, zakah and hajj.”
He goes onto say, “If any of the companions had asked the Prophet Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam about any of the Sifat of Allah then indeed they would have been transmitted to us as well as the answers just as they have in numerous other issues like the Ahkam, Halal and Haram etc…”
He also said, “The person who has deep research into the Prophetic Hadith and the reports of the Salaf us-Salihin he will clearly know that it is not established from a single companions via an authentic or even a weak chain that they asked the Prophet Sallalahu Alayhi Wasallam about the meaning of Dhat of Allah with regards to his Sifat as mentioned in the Quran and Hadith….. The reality is they understood the apparent Dhahir meaning of the Sifat, did not delve into Kalam and remained silent.”
He goes onto say, “Not a single companion made Ta’wil of any of the Sifat of Allah and in fact they were all united on the belief (Aqidah) that the Sifat are to be left on their apparent ie Dhahir meaning just as they were transmitted.” (Refer to al-Muwa’iz Wa’l Ei’tibar Bi-Zikr al-Khitat Wa’l Athar [2:356]
The Ahl ul-Bidʿah throughout the ages have employed various means in order to attack and vilify Ahl us-Sunnah. If one was to consider the books written by the Salaf which deal with rudūd and naqd then it as clear that one of the greatest way to attack Ahl us-Sunnah is to attack, it’s scholars. In reality, the attack on the Ahl us-Sunnah scholars by Ahl ul-Bidʿah is to attack what they carry by way of knowledge from the book, Sunnah and Salaf. Ahl ul-Bidʿah are fully aware that once the scholars honour is taken then the ignorant masses will have a seed of doubt put in their hearts
We say, one should not be surprised that the Deobandi Jahmi speaks ill of Shaikh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah as they have spoken ill of those far more superior than Ibn Taymiyyah such as the companions of the noble Prophet Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam and indeed our Lord Allah himself.
An example,
“Abū Hanīfah said that the Imān of Iblīs and the Imān of Abu Bakr is one as Abu Bakr said ‘Yaa Rabb’ [Oh My Lord] and Iblīs also said ‘Yaa Rabb’” [Tārīkh Baghdād [13:376]. It’s chain of narration is Sahīh].
We free the noble Imām from such a statement but ask where is the Deobandi Jahmi Yasirs and his sidekicks critique of this belief regardless of whether it is ascribed correctly to the Imām or not so? How can he critique this when he himself is a burnt Murji who believes Iman is that which is only found in the hearts whilst actions are not a part of Imān.
Those whose foundation is built upon speaking ill of the greatest scholar of this Ummah, Abu Bakr, whilst likening his Imān to Iblīs then what hope do the likes of Imam Ibn Taymiyyah have in being secure from such wretched tongues?
We say, the Deobandi Jahmi Yasir Hanafi saw fit to play on the words of Imam Ibn Taymiyyah accusing him of blaspheming Allah suggesting that the Prophet Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam will be seated next to him on his Throne then has he not seen the blasphemy being committed in his own home or does he just wish to remain blind? An example,
“Abū Hanīfa said that if one were to worship the shoe in order to get closer to Allāh then I see no issue with this.” [Tārikh Baghdad [13/374], Kitāb al-Marifah Wat Tārīkh [2/784], Kitāb al-Majrūhīn [3/73].
So where is the Deobandi Jahmi Yasirs critique of this belief regardless of whether it is ascribed correctly to the Imām or not so? InshaAllah we give husn al-dhan to Imām Abu Hanīfah over such statements and hold him in high esteem but sufficient it is to say that the likes of Yasir Deobandi Murji have never refuted or explained such statements but yet lie on other scholars of Ahl us-Sunnah.
We say, the books of the Hanafis are no better and have put the Ummah to trial and tribulation. You will see that the Hanafīs are only interested in preserving their madhab even if this means twisting meanings of the book and Sunnah as well as defaming the scholars. Some examples:
Abul Hasan Karkhī states: “Any verse which conflicts with the sayings of our companions [Hanafee scholars] then we will consider it as being abrogated or an issue of paramount consideration of evidence. It is better for an interpretation to be made so that the conflict can be resolved between the verse and the saying.” [Usūl al-Karkhī [pg.18]
And,
“Anyone who refutes the saying of Abu Hanīfah may there be as much curse on him equating the grains of sand upon the earth” [Haskafi, Durr al-Mukhtar [1/63].
And,
“When the Prophet Esa (Alayhis Salam) shall return to earth he shall give legal verdicts based upon the fiqh of Abu Hanīfah” [Khaskafi, Durr al-Mukhtār [1/55]
And,
“The Prophet said [of course he did not as this is a complete fabrication],There will be a man from my Ummah who will be called Abū Hanīfah and he will have between his shoulders a sign and All will give life to the Sunnah through him” [Reported via Nadharī in Manāqib Abī Hanīfah [1/16].
Commenting on this Allamah Mu’allamī Said, “It is not hidden that the mentioning here of the sign between the shoulders is a reference and similarity to the seal of prophet hood between the shoulders of the Prophet Sallalahui Alayhi Wasallam.” [Mu’allamī, at-Tankīl [pg.216].
And,
As for the dreams and mysticism of the elders of Deoband then by the honour of all if we were to write and continued writing many volumes would be produces showing the pathetic manhaj of the Deobandīs in trying to fool the Ummah and also blaspheming the prophet in the process. Just one example suffices.
Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi and or Khalil Ahmed Saharanpuri write in their joint venture, al-Barahin al-Qatiya against their fellow Hanafi Sufi Barailwi [The real Mawlid Imam] Abdul Sami Rampuri about the superiority of the Madrasah (school) of Deoband:
“A noble person was blessed with a vision of the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam), in which he saw Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) speaking in Urdu. The noble person asked, ‘How do you know this language, while you are an Arab?’ He (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) said, ‘From the time I have been in contact with the scholars of the school of Deoband, I’ve known this language’.” Rasheed Ahmad Gungohi comments, “From this we understand the greatness of this Madrasah (school).” [al-Barāhīn al-Qātiya, Urdu Bazār, Karāchi, [pg.30]
So in order to propagate the prestige of a primary school the elders of Deoband claim to meet the Prophet just like there brother Tāhir Qādrī insists he invited and met the noble Prophet Sallalalhu alayhi Wasallam in Pakistan who was upset with the people.
Why does Yāsir Jahmī not free himself from the statements that we have mentioned? He can rest assured that by rebuking and freeing himself from such statements his hanafiyyah will remain intact if that is something that is worrying him. Or will he defy Allah and his Messenger seeking the pleasures of his cult rather than the face of Allāh?
And?
Well is there any point in quoting further? Inshāllah the above suffices for the one who wants to ponder and reflect.
As for Shaikh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah then we suffice with the words from Allamah Uthaymīn concerning him and those like him who were put to trial by Ahl ul-Bidʿah due to their adherence to the book and Sunnah. He commented,
‘Allah has sent Muhammad Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam with guidance and the true religion. He sent him as a mercy to the world, as an example for the workers, and as a proof against all the servants. He (Muhammad) fulfilled the trust, conveyed the message, advised the Ummah, and he clarified for the people all of what they need regarding the foundations of their religion as well as its detailed matters. He left no good except that he clarified it and encouraged it, and he left no evil but that he warned the Ummah from it so much so that he left his Ummah upon a clear, white path ‐ its night as clear as its day. His companions traversed this path, shining and radiant. Afterwards, the best generations took it from them in the same state until oppression frowned upon them with the darkness of various innovations by which the innovators conspired against Islaam and its people. The people then wandered in confusion purposelessly, and they began building their Aqidah beliefs upon a spider’s web. However, the Lord upholds His religion with His close helpers upon whom He bestows Eemaan, knowledge, and wisdom by which they prevent these enemies. They repel their plot back against their own throats. So no one ever comes out with his innovation except that Allaah ‐ and for this deserves praise and thanks ‐ destines to send someone from Ahlus‐Sunnah who refutes and disproves his innovation and extinguishes it. There was from the foremost of those who stood up against these innovators ‐ Shaikh ul‐Islam Taqi ud Din Ahmad ibn Abdul Halim ibn Abdus Salam ibn Taymiyyah al‐Harani, al‐Dimashqi. He was born in Haran (in Iraaq) on Monday, the 10th of Rabi al‐Awwal in the Hijrah year of 661 and he died whilst being imprisoned oppressively in the fortress of Damascus in Dhul‐Qa’dah in the Hijrah year 728 ‐ may Allah have mercy on him. He has many works on the clarification and explanation of the Sunnah, the reinforcement of its pillars, and the destruction of innovations.’ [al-Uthaymīn, Fathu Rabb al-Bariyyah bi‐Talkhis al-Hamawiyyah [pg.8].
What wise and profound words Imam Abu Muhammad al-Juwaini, the father of Imam al-Haramin said whilst advising the Ashariyyah and let the modern day Ashariyyah and Kullabiyyah ponder over this, “The person who despite studying so much is still ignorant of the Jihah of his creator yet a sheep herding slave girl knows Allah more than him. Thus the heart of that individual (who has studied so much) will always remain in darkness and will never be blessed with Iman and Ma’rifah.” [Majmu’ah al-Rasa’il al-Muniriyyah [1:185]
Once again may Allah reward our brother for his defence of the pristine and clear Aqidah of Ahl us-Sunnah Wa’l Jama’ah and indeed we pray that Allah rewards him immenselyand to accept it from him. Thus, this epistle also serves as reference point when these ignorant and lost Asharis and Kullabites raise unfounded accusations against Ahl us-Sunnah and Imam Ibn Taymiyyah.
Abul Hasan as per usual in his 10 pence remarks unable to answer any of the main points boasts that he alone writes his articles etc without any help. He alludes to our thanking of Abush-Shaikh, a brother from Birmingham who at our request picked up a book for us and from the bab of the one who does not thank others does not thank Allah, we mentioned his name. Abu Hasan Hussain Ahmed wants to praise himself and tried to highlight this as a point attempting to say we had help in writing our response to him!!!! Seriously when is this guy going to grow up , even after all these years he behaves like a immature teenager.
He fails to read our words in which we intended a recourse to his protege and the underling Yasir Jahmi who has since gone into hiding, and so he should due to his ignorance and obnpxious remarks which are unfit for any audience let alone the seekers of the truth. However this is unsurprising as these like minded digressional tacticians are peas in a pod. Abu Hasan Hussain Ahmed goes onto mention some other profanities which are not even worth responding to as he himself knows how immature and infantile they are.
To end, we have advised the like of Yāsir many times before about taqwa and seeking the truth and that his time would be far better spent in promoting the true Aqīdah and way of the Salaf whilst freeing himself from statements of his elders which can truly have no justification behind them. We also advise our brother the author of this treatise to spend his time more wisely in defending Ahl us-Sunnah rather than replying in every minute issue to every Bakr, Amr and Zaid who is possibly not worthy to be responded to. May Allah guide us All.
The ones in need of the pardon of Allāh the Almighty.
Abu Hibban & Abu Khuzaimah Ansari
28th Rabi al-Thani 1437 / Monday 8th February 2016
Birmingham, England
Statistics: Posted by AbuKhuzaimahAnsari — Sun Nov 20, 2016 11:07 pm
]]>
Ibn Kathir said:
وفي يوم الاثنين ثامن رجب حضر القضاة والعلماء وفيهم الشيخ تقي الدين بن تيمية عندنائب السلطنة بالقصر وقرئت عقيدة الشيخ تقي الدين الواسطية وحصل بحث في أماكن منها وأخرت مواضع إلى المجلس الثاني فاجتمعوا يوم الجمعة بعد الصلاة ثاني عشر الشهر المذكور وحضر الشيخ صفي الدين الهندي وتكلم مع الشيخ تقي الدين كلاما كثيرا ولكن ساقيته لاطمت بحرا ثم اصطلحوا على ان يكون الشيخ كمال الدين بن الزملكاني هو الذي يحاققه من غير مسامحة
On Monday 8th of Rajab Judges and Scholars came and Ibn Taymiyyah was also present in the palace with Deputy Empire. The Aqeedah al Wasatiyah of Shaykh Taqi ud din was read and its many of the parts were discussed and others were left for next sitting. They gathered on 12th of same month. Shaykh Safi ud din al Hindi also came and argued with Shaykh Taqi ud din about many things but his (Hindi's) small stream pushed a vast Ocean (Ibn Taymiyyah).Then, they agreed that Kamaal Al-Deen ibn Az-Zamalkaani whould debate the Shaykh (Ibn Taymiyyah) unbiasedly. [Al Bidaya wal Nihaya 14/52]
Note: Safi ud din al Hindi was from India Dehli and then went to Damishq in 685 h, He was Mutakallim, but was a pious person.[Al Bidaya wal Nihaya 14/93]
What Happened after the full debate of 3 Majalis?
a) Ibn Kathir mentioned:
فتناظرا في ذلك وشكر الناس من فضائل الشيخ كمال الدين بن الزملكاني وجودة ذهنه وحسن بحثه حيث قاوم ابن تيمية في البحث وتكلم معه ثم انفصل الحال على قبول العقيدة وعاد الشيخ إلى منزله معظما مكرما
Then they (Ibn Taymiyyah and Kamal ud din bin Zamalkani) engaged in a debate and people commended the merits of Shaykh Kamaal Al-Deen ibn Az-Zamalkaani, his wittiness, and careful researching as he debated Ibn Taymiyyah and talked with him. Finally, he accepted Al-'Aqeedah (Al-Waasitiyyah) and Ibn Taymiyyah went home honored and revered.” [Al Bidaya wal Nihaya 14/52]
b) Ibn Rajab mentioned that after the three majalis on the Aqeedah of Ibn Taymiyyah:
وقع الإتفاق بعد ذلك على أن هذه عقيدة سنية سلفية
They (all the scholars present in the majlis) agreed that this is the SUNNI and SALAFI Aqeedah. [dhaylh Tabqaat al Hanabilah of Ibn Rajab hanbalee 4/396]
c) Ibn Abdul Hadi said regarding this debate:
وقد أظهر الله من قيام الحجة ما أعز به أهل السنة
وانصرف الشيخ تقي الدين إلى منزله
Allah gave victory and honored Ahlus sunnah through the evidences, and Shaykh Taqi ud din departed to his home. [al Uqud ad-durriyah, Ghayat al Eemani 2/232]
d) Mur`ee bin Yusaf al Hanbali said:
وقد أظهر الله من قيام الحجة ما أعز به الشيخ ابن تيمية، واختلفت نقول المخالفين للمجلس وحرفوه ووضعوا مقالة الشيخ على غير موضعها، وشنع ابن الوكيل وأصحابه بأن الشيخ قد رجع عن قيدته فالله المستعان.
Allah gave victory and honored Ibn Taymiyah through the evidences, the nuqool of Ibn Taymiyah they (the opponents) provided were fabricated by them, they provided wrong meaning to the maqalah of shaykh, Ibn Wakeel and his companions even said this ugly thing that Shaykh did rujoo from his Aqaid. Allahu Must`an. [Kuwakib ad-Dari page 115]
Statistics: Posted by asimulhaq6 — Fri Sep 16, 2016 2:03 pm
]]>
Ibn Hajr al Asqalani said:
مُحَمَّد بن أَحْمد بن عبد الْهَادِي بن عبد الحميد بن عبد الْهَادِي بن يُوسُف ابْن مُحَمَّد بن قدامَة المقدسى الحنبلى شمي الدّين أحد الأذكياء ولد فِي رَجَب سنة 705 وَقيل قبلهَا وَقيل بعْدهَا وَسمع من التقي سُلَيْمَان والمطعم وَابْن سعد وطبقتهم وتفقه بِابْن مُسلم وَتردد إِلَى ابْن تَيْمِية وَمهر فِي الحَدِيث وَالْأُصُول والعربية وَغَيرهَا قَالَ الصَّفَدِي لَو عَاشَ كَانَ آيَة كنت إِذْ لَقيته سَأَلته عَن مسَائِل أدبية وفوائد عَرَبِيَّة فينحدر كالسيل وَكنت أرَاهُ يُوَافق الْمزي فِي أَسمَاء الرِّجَال وَيرد عَلَيْهِ فَيقبل مِنْهُ وَقَالَ الذَّهَبِيّ فِي مُعْجَمه الْمُخْتَص الْفَقِيه البارع الْمُقْرِئ المجود الْمُحدث الْحَافِظ النَّحْوِيّ
لحاذق ذُو الْفُنُون كتب عني واستفدت مِنْهُ وَقَالَ ابْن كثير كَانَ حَافِظًا عَلامَة ناقدا حصل من الْعُلُوم مَا لَا يبلغهُ الشُّيُوخ الْكِبَار وبرع فِي الْفُنُون وَكَانَ جبلا فِي الْعِلَل والطرق وَالرِّجَال حسن الْفَهم جدا صَحِيح الذِّهْن وَقَالَ الْحُسَيْنِي درس بالصدرية والضيائية وتصدر وَقد حدث الذَّهَبِيّ عَن الْمزي عَن السرُوجِي عَنهُ وَقَالَ المزى مَا التقيت بِهِ إِلَّا واستفدت مِنْهُ وَنقل الْحُسَيْنِي هَذَا الْكَلَام عَن الذَّهَبِيّ أَنه قَالَ فِي جنَازَته وَله كتاب الْأَحْكَام فِي ثَمَان مجلدات وَالرَّدّ على السُّبْكِيّ فِي رده على ابْن تَيْمِية وَالْمُحَرر فِي الحَدِيث اخْتَصَرَهُ من الْإِلْمَام فجوده جدا وَاخْتصرَ التَّعْلِيق لِابْنِ الْجَوْزِيّ وَزَاد عَلَيْهِ وحرره وَشرح التسهيل فِي مجلدين وَله مناقشات لأبي حَيَّان فِيمَا اعْترض بِهِ على ابْن مَالك فِي الألفية وَغير ذَلِك وَله كَلَام على أَحَادِيث مُخْتَصر ابْن الْحَاجِب وَشرع فِي كتاب الْعِلَل على تَرْتِيب كتب الْفِقْه وقفت مِنْهُ على المجلد الأول وَجمع التَّفْسِير الْمسند لم يكمل أَيْضا قَالَ الذَّهَبِيّ مَا اجْتمعت بِهِ قطّ إِلَّا واستفدت مِنْهُ وَكثر التأسف عَلَيْهِ لما مَاتَ وَحضر جنَازَته من لَا يُحْصى كَثْرَة وَمَات فِي عَاشر جُمَادَى الأولى سنة 744
Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Abdul Hadi bin Abdul Hameed bin Abdul Hadi bin Yusaf Ibn Muhammad bin Qudama al Maqdasi al Hanbali, Shams al din.
One of the Intelligent, He was born in Rajab 705 h, It is said he was born before, and it is said he was born after that.
He heard from al-Taqi Sulayman, Mut`am bin Saad and others, studied fiqh under Ibn Muslim and then remained with Ibn Taymiyah.
He was skilled in hadith, Usul, Arabic and other sciences of knowledge.
as-Safadi (the student of as-Subki) said: If he was alive today, he would be a sign, I met him and asked him about issues of writing and benefits of arabic, he would reply as if the river is flowing, His opinions are in agreement with al Mizzi (the great muhaddith) with regards to Asma wal Rijaal, sometimes he went against him and other times he agreed with him.
ad-Dhahabi said in "Mujam al Mukhtas": He was the Faqeeh, the brilliant, al Muqri, The Muhaddith, The Hafidh, The Grammarian, The Proficient in the Sciences, I benefited from his books.
Ibn Kathir said: He was Hafidh, The Allama, The critic, He studied those sciences of knowledge which were not informed to the great scholars. He excelled in the sciences, He was a Mountain in "al Ilal" and Turq of Rijaal. He had a good understanding of religion with an extremely authentic mind.
al Husaini said: He lectured in Sadariyah and al Diyaiyah and took the lead..
al Mizzi said: Whenever I met him i benefited from him, al Husaini narrated these words from ad-Dhahabi who said it at his funereal.
He wrote "Kitab al Ahkam" in eight volumes, He refuted as-Subki in response to his refutation of Ibn Taymiyah..
ad-Dhahabi said Whenever I met him i Benefited from him.. When he died countless people visited his funereal, He died on 10th of Jamadi al Awaal 744 h. [ad-Durar al Kaminah 5/62]
Ibn Kathir said:
وفي يوم الأربعاء عاشر جمادى الأولى توفي صاحبنا الشيخ الإمام العالم العلامة الناقد البارع في فنون العلوم شمس الدين محمد بن الشيخ عماد الدين أحمد بن عبد الهادي المقدسي الحنبلي، تغمده الله برحمته، وأسكنه بحبوحة جنته، مرض قريبا من ثلاثة أشهر بقرحة وحمى سل، ثم تفاقم أمره وأفرط به إسهال، وتزايد ضعفه إلى أن توفي يومئذ قبل أذان العصر.
فأخبرني والده أن آخر كلامه أن قال: أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وأشهد أن محمدا رسول الله اللهم اجعلني من التوابين واجعلني من المتطهرين.
فصلّي عليه يوم الخميس بالجامع المظفري وحضر جنازته قضاة البلد وأعيان الناس من العلماء والأمراء والتجار والعامة، وكانت جنازته حافلة مليحة، عليها ضوء ونور، ودفن بالروضة إلى جانب قبر السيف ابن المجد رحمهما الله تعالى.
وكان مولده في رجب سنة خمس وسبعمائة فلم يبلغ الأربعين، وحصل من العلوم ما لا يبلغه الشيوخ الكبار، وتفنن في الحديث والنحو والتصريف والفقه والتفسير والأصلين والتاريخ والقراءات وله مجاميع وتعاليق مفيدة كثيرة، وكان حافظا جيدا لأسماء الرجال، وطرق الحديث، عارفا بالجرح والتعديل، بصيرا بعلل الحديث، حسن الفهم له، جيد المذاكرة صحيح الذهن مستقيما على طريقة السلف، واتباع الكتاب والسنة، مثابرا على فعل الخيرات.
On Wednesday 10th of Jamadi al Awla Our friend the Shaykh, the Imam, The Scholar, The Allama, The critic, The Master in the arts of knowledge (sciences). Shams ud din Muhammad bin Shaykh Imad ud din bin Ahmad bin Abdulhadi al Maqdasee died. May Allah have mercy on him and grant him Jannah. He had a desease of pustule and tuberculosis for three months, His state became bad with Dysentery, he became more weak and he died on this day before Asr. His father told me when Ibn Adul Hadi was dying his last words (were the Shahadah) أشهد أن لا اله الا الله وأشهد ان محمد رسول الله. اللَّهُمَّ اجْعَلْنِي من التَّوَّابِينَ، وَاجْعَلْنِي من المُتطَهِّرِينَ
His funeral was prayed in Jam`e Muzaffari. His funeral was attended by Judges of the city, elders, Scholars, Leaders, Merchants and Public. His funeral was great and packed, There was Light and Nur on it, he was buried beside the grave of Sayf ibn al Majd in al Rawdhah.
He was born in Rajab 705 h, He studied those sciences of knowledge which were not informed to the great scholars. He mastered in syntax (grammar), Hadith, al Tasreef, Fiqh, Tafsir, Usool, History and Qir`at. He had good Majamee and Taleeq (on books). He was a Jayyid Hafidh of Asma wal Rijal and Routs of ahadith. He had knowledge of Jarh wa Tadeel, Expert of Ilal al Hadith. His understandings and memorization were good, His mind was authentic, He was on the path of Salaf, followed Quran and Sunnah, preserver of good deeds. [Al Bidaya wal Nihaya 14/237]
Ibn Abdul Hadi was a martyr inshaAllah according to the hadith as it is mentioned in Ahmad (23804), Abu Dawood (3111) and al-Nasaa’i (1846) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Who do you regard as martyrs?” They said: The one who is killed for the sake of Allaah. The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Martyrs are seven besides the one who is killed for the sake of Allaah. The one who dies of the plague is a martyr, the one who drowns is a martyr, the one who dies of pleurisy is a martyr, the one who dies of a stomach disease is a martyr, the one who is burned to death is a martyr, the one who dies beneath a falling wall is a martyr, and the woman who dies in pregnancy is a martyr.” This hadeeth was classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood.
It says in ‘Awn al-Ma’bood Sharh Sunan Abi Dawood:
( وصاحب ذات الجنب ) وهي قرحة أو قروح تصيب الإنسان داخل جنبه ثم تفتح ويسكن الوجع وذلك وقت الهلاك ، ومن علاماتها الوجع تحت الأضلاع وضيق النفس مع ملازمة الحمى والسعال وهي في النساء أكثر . قاله القارى.
The one who dies of pleurisy: this refers to a pustule or pustules that appear in a person’s side, then they open up and the pain lessens, and that is at the time of death. One of its signs is pain beneath the ribs and difficulty in breathing, along with persistent fever and coughing, and it occurs more often in women. This was stated by al-Qaari. (end quote)
Ibn Abdul Hadi died in the stomach desease and pustule.
Statistics: Posted by asimulhaq6 — Sat Sep 03, 2016 7:43 pm
]]>
He mentioned The debate between brother of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Makhloof Maliki regarding Arsh and Nuzool.
Ibn Kathir said:
وفي هذا الشهر يوم الخميس السابع والعشرين منه طلب أخوا الشيخ تقي الدين شرف الدين وزين الدين من الحبس إلى مجلس نائب السلطان سلار، وحضر ابن مخلوف المالكي وطال بينهم كلام كثير فظهر شرف الدين بالحجة على القاضي المالكي بالنقل والدليل والمعرفة، وخطأه في مواضع ادّعى فيها دعاوى باطلة، وكان الكلام في مسألة العرش ومسألة الكلام، وفي مسألة النزول.
On thursday 27th of this Month both of the brothers of Ibn Taymiyyah i.e. Sharf ud din and Zain ud din were brought to the sitting held by deputy of Sultan Salaar. Ibn Makhloof al Maliki also came and they argued. Sharf ud din was dominant on Qadhi Maaliki in naql, knowledge and evidence. And made his many of the claims false. The debate was on the Mas`ala of Arsh, Kalaam and Nuzool [Al Bidaya wal Nihaya 14/59]
Ibn Kathir praised Hanbalis
He said:
وهم أهل سنة وأكثرهم حنابلة لا يستطيع مبتدع أن يسكن بين أظهرهم.
They are Ahlus sunnah and most of them are Hanbalis and the innovators have no courage to live with them [Al Bidaya wal Nihaya 14/61]
He also mentioned the debate of Abdul Ghani al Maqdasi al Hanbali on siffat of Allah and mentioned that he was heavy on his opponents.
Plenty of times he mentioned debates of Ibn Taymiyah on aqaid and also said scholars accepted the aqaid of Ibn Taymiyah.
Statistics: Posted by Shehzad Sattar — Thu Aug 25, 2016 9:52 pm
]]>