[CHEAPPoem]

agreed.. so he doesnt represent hanbali madhab.. what is the salafi stance on him.. is he negating the dhahir ma'na? Is he misguided?

comeon. i meant that hanabils as whole have been at war (acadamically) with ash'aris. Imam Ahmad is their head. and i said that Imam Ahmad didnt do tafweed of meaning. why would i consider him misguided. Indeed he rahimahullah was imam of ahlus sunnah.

If it is ta'weel sahih then ther is no blemish on them. Perhaps you do not know the definition of "ta'weel".. could you please post the the definition in absolute wording from aslaaf.

firstly, stop being judgemental about my knowledge. did i say that i am an 'allamah or fahhama.

Perhaps you do not know the definition of "ta'weel".

please ask the person who gave you this text to confuse you


I am really starting to wonder if you even know the basics in Asha'iri Usools or not

why what is this.

secondly, i am not discussing that ayah from al-qasas because we will surely enter into a loop. like when we discuss istiwa' and ma'iyyah. also i am going brain dead. partly because it is quite easy to read posts but very difficult to write here. specially handling quotes. and partly because of our constant exchange of posts from last night.

thrdly, as far as i know ta'weel means to interpret, explain or divert the apparent interpretation. if you think that it is not the right representation of ta'weel then please correct me. also i will try to bring the definition from authentic acceptable sources.

let me put it as simply as i can. if you accept that ta'weel means any of the above istated then mutakallimon inevitably gave meaning to sifat which Allah didnt tell them. so you should refute them as well.