[laperuzdfhami]

Asslamo Allaikum All,

Whats wrong with this conversation? Can anyone point the errors out?




Salafi: What is your belief about the attributes of Allah (SWT)?

Non-Salafi: I profess the same belief about the attributes of Allah (SWT) which I was taught as a child

آمَنتُ بِاللہ کَمَا ھُو بِاسمَائھِ وَصِفَاتِھِ وَقَبلتُ جَمِیع اَحکَامِھِ

I have faith in Allah (SWT) as He is known by His (beautiful) Names and (lofty) Attributes and I accept all His commands.

Salafi: What is your belief about the Wajh, Yad, Saq of Allah (SWT)?

Non-Salafi: I accept that Allah (SWT) has Wajh, Yaq, Saq and consign its true meaning to Allah (SWT). Only Allah (SWT) knows what they exactly and precisely mean. I confirm all of the attributes which Allah (SWT) has confirmed for himself in the Qur'aan and also confirm those which have been authentically tranmissed to us through Sayyidina Muhammad (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam).

Salafi: Do you deny their apparent meanings?

Non-Salafi: I explicitly deny any resemblance of Allah (SWT) to the creation as stated in the Qur’aan:

لَيۡسَ كَمِثۡلِهِۦ شَىۡءٌ۬*ۖ وَهُوَ ٱلسَّمِيعُ ٱلۡبَصِيرُ

[42:11] Nothing is like Him. And He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing.

Salafi: Do you deny that they have a meaning?

Non-Salafi: How can I deny that they have a meaning and then say “I consign their meaning to Allah (SWT)”? That ‘s an oxymoron, don’t you think?

Salafi: Do you consider yourself Ashari, Maturidi, Athari or Salafi?

Non-Salafi: I consider myself what Allah (SWT) has declared me in the Qur’aan:

هُوَ سَمَّٮٰكُمُ ٱلۡمُسۡلِمِينَ مِن قَبۡلُ وَفِى هَـٰذَا
[22:78]…He (Allah) named you as Muslims, earlier and also in this (Qur‘an)…

What these names mean and what they entail you have to take this question to people who are knowledgeable in these matters.

Salafi: But what do these attributes mean?

Non-Salafi: I affirm my belief in them, reject any resemblance to the creation and consign their exact and true meaning to Allah (SWT). If you can describe them to me perhaps it will help us discuss their meanings.

Salafi: I consign their description to Allah (SWT)

Non-Salafi: I consign their meaning and description both to Allah (SWT), rejecting any resemblance with the creation, without denying that they have a meaning.

Non-Salafi: Can I ask you a question?

Salafi: Sure, brother.

Non-Salafi: Can you show me evidence from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah and from the life of the Salaf where a Muslim was put to questioning after he declared his belief in the attributes of Allah (SWT), negated any resemblance to the creation and consigned their true and exact meanings and description to Allah (SWT) without denying that they actually have a meaning?

Salafi: Asslamo Allaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh

Non-Salafi: Wa-Salam Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh

[Terinalo]

Asslamo Allaikum All,

Whats wrong with this conversation? Can anyone point the errors out?




Salafi: What is your belief about the attributes of Allah (SWT)?

Non-Salafi: I profess the same belief about the attributes of Allah (SWT) which I was taught as a child

آمَنتُ بِاللہ کَمَا ھُو بِاسمَائھِ وَصِفَاتِھِ وَقَبلتُ جَمِیع اَحکَامِھِ

I have faith in Allah (SWT) as He is known by His (beautiful) Names and (lofty) Attributes and I accept all His commands.

Salafi: What is your belief about the Wajh, Yad, Saq of Allah (SWT)?

Non-Salafi: I accept that Allah (SWT) has Wajh, Yaq, Saq and consign its true meaning to Allah (SWT). Only Allah (SWT) knows what they exactly and precisely mean. I confirm all of the attributes which Allah (SWT) has confirmed for himself in the Qur'aan and also confirm those which have been authentically tranmissed to us through Sayyidina Muhammad (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam).

Salafi: Do you deny their apparent meanings?

Non-Salafi: I explicitly deny any resemblance of Allah (SWT) to the creation as stated in the Qur’aan:

لَيۡسَ كَمِثۡلِهِۦ شَىۡءٌ۬*ۖ وَهُوَ ٱلسَّمِيعُ ٱلۡبَصِيرُ

[42:11] Nothing is like Him. And He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing.

Salafi: Do you deny that they have a meaning?

Non-Salafi: How can I deny that they have a meaning and then say “I consign their meaning to Allah (SWT)”? That ‘s an oxymoron, don’t you think?

Salafi: Do you consider yourself Ashari, Maturidi, Athari or Salafi?

Non-Salafi: I consider myself what Allah (SWT) has declared me in the Qur’aan:

هُوَ سَمَّٮٰكُمُ ٱلۡمُسۡلِمِينَ مِن قَبۡلُ وَفِى هَـٰذَا
[22:78]…He (Allah) named you as Muslims, earlier and also in this (Qur‘an)…

What these names mean and what they entail you have to take this question to people who are knowledgeable in these matters.

Salafi: But what do these attributes mean?

Non-Salafi: I affirm my belief in them, reject any resemblance to the creation and consign their exact and true meaning to Allah (SWT). If you can describe them to me perhaps it will help us discuss their meanings.

Salafi: I consign their description to Allah (SWT)

Non-Salafi: I consign their meaning and description both to Allah (SWT), rejecting any resemblance with the creation, without denying that they have a meaning.

Non-Salafi: Can I ask you a question?

Salafi: Sure, brother.

Non-Salafi: Can you show me evidence from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah and from the life of the Salaf where a Muslim was put to questioning after he declared his belief in the attributes of Allah (SWT), negated any resemblance to the creation and consigned their true and exact meanings and description to Allah (SWT) without denying that they actually have a meaning?

Salafi: Asslamo Allaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh

Non-Salafi: Wa-Salam Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh

Dear Brother Muad, Assalaamoalaikum.

I find all the answers full of wisdom. This is exactly how one should answer such questions. I personally see no error in the answers given.

Brotherly yours
farook

[ClorrerVeks]

Asslamo Allaikum,

I have been thinking about this long and hard.

I quoted the following to Sr Musleemah about not debating about the meaning:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...6&postcount=62

To which she replied:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...&postcount=116

Her reply perhaps explain the quote of Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal (RA) but not the second one by Abu Muhammad Ibn Qudama A-Mqadisi (RA) because it says about all which is mentioned in the Qur'aan and Authentic traditions and Shaykh (RA) says to affirm the word and not to engage in discussions about meanings and that is precisely what we udnerstand "Dhahir" to be :


لمعة الاعتقاد الهادي إلى سبيل الرشاد
أبو محمد بن قدامة المقدسي

وكل ما جاء في القرآن أو صح عن المصطفى عليه السلام صفات الرحمن وجب الإيمان به وتلقيه بالتسليم والقبول وترك التعرض له بالرد والتأويل والتشبيه والتمثيل وما أشكل من ذلك وجب إثباته لفظا وترك التعرض لمعناه ونرد علمه إلى قائله ونجعل عهدته على ناقله اتباعا لطريق الراسخين في العلم الذين أثنى الله عليهم في كتابه المبين بقوله سبحانه وتعالى ‏‏(والراسخون في العلم يقولون آمنا به كل من عند ربنا)‏‏ آل عمران 7 وقال في ذم مبتغي التأويل لمتشابه تنزيله فأما الذين في قلوبهم زيغ فيتبعون ما تشابه منه ابتغاء الفتنة وابتغاء تأويله وما يعلم تأويله إلا الله آل عمران 7 فجعل ابتغاء التأويل علامة على الزيغ وقرنه بابتغاء الفتنة في الذم ثم حجبهم عما أملوه وقطع أطماعهم عما قصدوه بقوله سبحانه وما يعلم تأويله إلا الله ‏.‏
The Salafees disagree with this definition of Dhahir and says that it means to affirm the word and to give it a meaning.

I honestly don't believe that there is any evidence of debating with someone who is affirming the word and consigning the meaning (without denying that meaning exists) to Allah (SWT).

These deabtes will never end and people will provide quotes to back their respective position so this thread isn't designed to start a debate, rather how to come to common grounds (for laymen) who are not well versed in these issues (such as myself to start with).

The issue of Istiwa of Allah (SWT) is dealt with in here:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=46114

The second Fatwa very clearly negates the inclination of assigning a physical direction and that is the whole bone of contention.

Allah (SWT) knows best.

P.S: We (Muslims) can't agree but perhaps we can come to common ground.

Still looking for errors in what I have written, Insha'Allah

[EliteFranceska]

I wonder how would one react if someone (probably a mujasami) were to say that Allah has a Jism (nauzubillah) but not like the jism we can think of...? Would such a person be called a mujassami?

[JanetMorris]

assalam-o-'alaikum

dear bro what do you say about ta'wil of His sifat ? and those who engaged themselves in it ?

[Zesavenue]

assalam-o-'alaikum

dear bro what do you say about ta'wil of His sifat ? and those who engaged themselves in it ?

No need to get into this discussion and as it is clearly stated that it should be referred to scholars.

People shouldn't become spokemen and start defending or refuting things NEVERTHELESS Mufti Ibraheem Desai (DB)'s clearly says:

http://www.albalagh.net/qa/matrudies_ahlus_sunnah.shtml

...) The Madhab of majority of the Salaf and a few Mutakallimeen is to believe in the reality of the Sifaat of Allah in accordance to whatever is appropriate for Allah. The apparent known meanings of those Sifaat are not meant. No Ta'weel (interpretation) should be made in the matter.

2) The Madhab of most of the Mutakallimeen and a few of the Salaf like Imaam al-Nawawiy and Imaam al-Awzaa'ee is that Ta'weel will be made.

Both these Madhabs are unanimously accepted.

Actually, our Aqeeda is in accordance with the first Madhab...

[greekbeast]

Jazak Allah for your reply brother.

since those who do tafwid say that we consign the meaning to Allah and mutakallimon do ta'weel, arent they in opposite camps. can you see the contradiction ?


Both these Madhabs are unanimously accepted.
hanbalis have always been against ta'wil (even if you say that hanbalis do tafwid). ijma'... i think its far fetched.

[Nikkytas]

Jazak Allah for your reply brother.

since those who do tafwid say that we consign the meaning to Allah and mutakallimon do ta'weel, arent they in opposite camps. can you see the contradiction ?




hanbalis have always been against ta'wil (even if you say that hanbalis do tafwid). ijma'... i think its far fetched.

W-Salam,

As implied in the the first post you are intending to corner people by putting words in their mouth and you want to catch people out.

This isn't put forth to end debate but to help people save their Akhira against Salafi Spanish inquisition.

You an use the search feature to seek answers if you so wish. If you already know the answers no point in starting a discussion, is there?

This subject has been exhausted to death.

[quedry36]

W-Salam,

As implied in the the first post you are intending to corner people by putting words in their mouth and you want to catch people out.

could you please tell me what did i force into your mouth ?

This isn't put forth to end debate but to help people save their Akhira against Salafi Spanish inquisition.

many new people come here, attracted by the name of this sitem to learn their deen. these are not stagnant forums. even some people do change their mind when they think about things after sometime. nothing is more important than tawheed of our Ilaah. they should do hard to learn and implement it.

but i agree that one must not stuck here forever.

and what a comparison of 'your presumed' salafi inquisition with that of spanish christian inquisition ? great.

[9V4i8xw1]

could you please tell me what did i force into your mouth ?



many new people come here, attracted by the name of this sitem to learn their deen. these are not stagnant forums. even some people do change their mind when they think about things after sometime. nothing is more important than tawheed of our Ilaah. they should do hard to learn and implement it.

but i agree that one must not stuck here forever.

and what a comparison of 'your presumed' salafi inquisition with that of spanish christian inquisition ? great.

Bismillah,

I think my brother Muadh is referring to the Salafi method of making Takfeer on anyone who denies their ideology by cornering them into 'submission'. For example, inventing 5 forms of Shirk and then accusing a Shaykh of all 5 of them (This is how Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab 'rolled'). Or constantly asking a Muslim theological questions hoping he'll make a mistake eventually and you can pounce on him. You are playing with words here. It reminds me of the man who came to Imam Malik:

From Ja`far ibn `Abd Allah: "We were with Malik when a man came and asked him: ‘O Abu `Abd Allah! "The Merciful is established over the Throne" (20:5): how is He established?’ Nothing affected Malik as much as that man’s question. He looked at the ground and started prodding it with a twig he held in his hand until he was completely soaked in sweat. Then he lifted his head and said: ‘The "how" of it is inconceivable; the "establishment" part of it is not unknown; belief in it is obligatory; asking about it is an innovation; and I believe that you are a man of innovation.’ Then he gave an order and the man was led out."

[Kausilwf]

Bismillah,

I think my brother Muadh is referring to the Salafi method of making Takfeer on anyone who denies their ideology by cornering them into 'submission'. For example, inventing 5 forms of Shirk and then accusing a Shaykh of all 5 of them (This is how Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab 'rolled'). Or constantly asking a Muslim theological questions hoping he'll make a mistake eventually and you can pounce on him. You are playing with words here.

like many of the ash'aris/maturidis include many sunnis among 'mujassimah' ?

It reminds me of the man who came to Imam Malik:

From Ja`far ibn `Abd Allah: "We were with Malik when a man came and asked him: ‘O Abu `Abd Allah! "The Merciful is established over the Throne" (20:5): how is He established?’ Nothing affected Malik as much as that man’s question. He looked at the ground and started prodding it with a twig he held in his hand until he was completely soaked in sweat. Then he lifted his head and said: ‘The "how" of it is inconceivable; the "establishment" part of it is not unknown; belief in it is obligatory; asking about it is an innovation; and I believe that you are a man of innovation.’ Then he gave an order and the man was led out."

that man asked a question which required wahi. and He swt didnt tell us about its 'howness'. did i do anything similar ? we know that mutakallimon do ta'weel. we dont need wahi here. and Muadh termed salafi position 'drastic and dramatic'. i was merely asking for his position on mutakallimin. your qiyas was quite irrelevant.

[v74ClzKY]

[COLOR="Red"]Asslamo Allaikum All,

Whats wrong with this conversation? Can anyone point the errors out?

Muadh bro can you clarify something they claim you removed ''Imam al-Mizzi - IMPRISONED by the Ash'aris for Reading Out Imam al-Bukhari's Book''

http://forums.*********************/...is-book-24751/

the site is islamicawakening forum under the section beliefs

[fil_nurser]

Muadh bro can you clarify something they claim you removed ''Imam al-Mizzi - IMPRISONED by the Ash'aris for Reading Out Imam al-Bukhari's Book''

http://forums.*********************/...is-book-24751/

the site is islamicawakening forum under the section beliefs

Asslamo Allaikum,

This is insane

1) Firstly, I am not a Moderator and don't have the power to delete anything

2) Secondly, my reply was to the issue of "Ahlus-Sunnah response to "Hanbali Butcher Shop" and nothing to do with Imam Al-Mizzi...If my memory serves me well then I don't think neither I nor the person who initiated the thread discussed Imam Al-Mizzi (RA)...If someone mentioned Imam Al-Mizzi "after" my reply and thats why the thread got deleted, I wouldn't know

3) Thirdly, I think I was banned whenever this happened (whatever happened) as I usually am most of time

Here is a search from google Cache (take a look at the topic)

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...meta=&aq=f&oq=

In response to Hanbali Butcher Shop issue I posted a reply and quoted Imam Nawawi (RA) about pointing to the sky and what it implies. We all point to the sky when making dua, so what? What does that prove, exactly?

Kitchen sink??? Whatever...

Jazakullah Khairun

[idobestbuyonlinepp]

i was merely asking for his position on mutakallimin. your qiyas was quite irrelevant.

Isn't that exactly what I said? What difference does his position make to you?

[sam]

Isn't that exactly what I said? What difference does his position make to you?

1) he said in the first post of this thread:

Unlike Salafees they don't give Fatwaas of misguidence about those in the Ummah who have done Taweel I accept that point if thats what you are saying but the preffered opinion is Tafweedh Al-Mana.

since only Allah knows the meaning and he didnt tell that meaning to the creation, salafis are on the wrong path. but mutakallimon despite ta'weel of sifat are not misguided. CONTRADICTION.

by the way it didnt cost me a limb or money. we are here to learn, discuss and defend what we hold as the truth.

[Chooriwrocafn]

1) he said in the first post of this thread:


2) He holds salafi position (knowing the meaning) ' dramatic and drastic ' and ' approaching close to tashbeeh '.

3) later on he revealed his (actually deobandi) position:



since only Allah knows the meaning and he didnt tell that meaning to the creation, salafis are on the wrong path. but mutakallimon despite ta'weel of sifat are not misguided. CONTRADICTION.

by the way it didnt cost me a limb or money. we are here to learn, discuss and defend what we hold as the truth.

Once again for the umteenth time.. Ta'weel made by the Asha'ira is "ta'weel Saheeh" i.e in the presence of qareena. I am really starting to wonder if you even know the basics in Asha'iri Usools or not. You keep on saying "Ta'weel" has no merit at all.. yet the Salaf made ta'weel upon ta'weel in many instances.

Ta'weel in presence of an acceptable daleel is acceptable. Do you disagree?

Also do you deny that the Salafis have not issued fatwas of misguidance of Asha'ri and Maturidis? classifying them OUT of Ahl Sunnah Wal Jama'ah?

[VINPELA]

Once again for the umteenth time.. Ta'weel made by the Asha'ira is "ta'weel Saheeh" i.e in the presence of qareena. I am really starting to wonder if you even know the basics in Asha'iri Usools or not. You keep on saying "Ta'weel" has no merit at all.. yet the Salaf made ta'weel upon ta'weel in many instances.


Ta'weel in presence of an acceptable daleel is acceptable. Do you disagree?

i dont want to discuss dhahir vs. ta'weel because i feel that for this particular contradiction it is not required. it has been discussed several times. you must have seen that. You are the third top poster here. it will only expand the discussion unneccesarily. as for the salaf's 'presumed' ta'wil, it is a misunderstanding it is dhahir at that particular mahal.

Also do you deny that the Salafis have not issued fatwas of misguidance of Asha'ri and Maturidis? classifying them OUT of Ahl Sunnah Wal Jama'ah?

i never denied that. same is done by ash'aris and maturidis against atharis/hanbalis/salafis. your questions answered.

now answer two of my questions:

1) as a mufawwd do you beleive that besides Allah anybody knows the meaning of sifat (where ikhtilaf occured like YAD, WAJH etc) ?

2) what is your position on mutakallimeen ?

[wrefrinny]

i dont want to discuss dhahir vs. ta'weel because i feel that for this particular contradiction it is not required. it has been discussed several times. you must have seen that. You are the third top poster here. it will only expand the discussion unneccesarily. as for the salaf's 'presumed' ta'wil, it is a misunderstanding it is dhahir at that particular mahal.

You can term it as you wish. Salaf's 'presumed' mahal of dhahir.. is what Asha'ira say Mahal of Ta'weel (Ta'weel Saheeh). Thus tatbeeq is done.. your case closed. Isnt it amazing that all the way until now you have yet ONE example to give of this incorrect ta'weel.. one that can shatter the Ashari claim that they only do ta'weel in the presence of an appropriate daleel..

i never denied that. same is done by ash'aris and maturidis against atharis/hanbalis/salafis. your questions answered. Well for one thing.. you wont find Mutakhireen in Ashari and Maturidi giving fatwa on athari or salafis.. they didnt appear until a long time back. As for the hanbali.. I mentioned already that it is infact the deobandi who take his stance of "la kayf wa la ma'na"..

Also the misguidance and danger of mutashabih have always been looked down from the time of the salaf. Even when Ibn Taymiya r.a made sareeh tahdeed and Sarahat of such actios and claims.. he was heavily made kalam on.

now answer two of my questions: I have been answering and clarifying for you for a good few hours since last night havent i...?

1) as a mufawwd do you beleive that besides Allah anybody knows the meaning of sifat (where ikhtilaf occured like YAD, WAJH etc) ? No.

2) what is your position on mutakallimeen ? Mutakallimeen or Kalam? A mutakalim can very well be according to Quran and Sunnah just like the Ulama were who used kalam to make rad of all the wrong aqaid.

so what position?

[jagxj12]

You can term it as you wish. Salaf's 'presumed' mahal of dhahir.. is what Asha'ira say Mahal of Ta'weel (Ta'weel Saheeh). Thus tatbeeq is done.. your case closed. :

wa'laikum

sunhanAllah, tatbeeq between what ? do the asha'irah like atharis take YAD as Hand like they take It as Power.


As for the hanbali.. I mentioned already that it is infact the deobandi who take his stance of "la kayf wa la ma'na".. i was talking about hanabilah not Ahmad ibn muhammad ibn hanbal (who didnt do tafweed of meaning, ). do you say that their stance is "la kayf wa la ma'na".

No.



Mutakallimeen or Kalam? A mutakalim can very well be according to Quran and Sunnah just like the Ulama were who used kalam to make rad of all the wrong aqaid.

so what position?

sorry i should have explained it.

when you said that nobody knows the ma'na except Allah swt and mutakallimon did ta'weel of Yad (Power). what is your position on them (taking Yad as power) ?

[tipokot]

wa'laikum

sunhanAllah, tatbeeq between what ? do the asha'irah like atharis take YAD as Hand like they take It as Power.

tatbeeq between the quotes.. Asha'ira using their usools ma make appropriate ta'weel using the adilla sahiha which is not munkar from the salaf or the khalaf except those salafis who deem it such.

This ta'weel is acceptable just as you would tell me what ta'weel you make with regards to the the Ayah "Kullu shaii Halikun illal wajhuhu" .. And please do answer this and dont try to run in circles.. Do you take wajh on it dhahir meaning.. thus meaning that from the dhat of Allah all except his face (nauzubillah) will perrish?

If so please post the reference for your stance.

If not please post the reference for your stance.

Do not say ... dont need to get into this.. For this once post it.

i was talking about hanabilah not Ahmad ibn muhammad ibn hanbal (who didnt do tafweed of meaning, ). do you say that their stance is "la kayf wa la ma'na". agreed.. so he doesnt represent hanbali madhab.. what is the salafi stance on him.. is he negating the dhahir ma'na? Is he misguided?

when you said that nobody knows the ma'na except Allah swt and mutakallimon did ta'weel of Yad (Power). what is your position on them (taking Yad as power) ? 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.