shaykh asrar, arnold mol and nazzam

Discussion in 'Aqidah/Kalam' started by Aqdas, Nov 30, 2017.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    https://www.themaydan.com/2017/11/myth-intellectual-decline-response-shaykh-hamza-yusuf/
     
    Bazdawi and Unbeknown like this.
  2. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    if only the troll had looked up the meaning of Mu'tazili, he would have come to the conclusion that the ahle-Sunnah existed BEFORE them, and not vice versa.

    The name Muʿtazili is derived from the root (ع-ز-ل) "separate, segregate" (as in اعتزل iʿtazala "to separate (oneself); to withdraw from)".

    Their name itself means that they withdrew from the main body of Muslims; they did prefer not to remain with the Jama'ah.

    The Holy Prophet (Allah's blessings and peace be upon him) was asked, "Who are the saved sect?" The Holy Prophet responded, saying: “Those who are upon that which me and my companions are upon today.” (Tirmidhi)

    Allah’s Apostle said, “I fear for the misled rulers over my ummah.’ He also said, “A section of my ummah will never cease to be on the right. They will prevail and they will not be harmed by those who desert them till the command of Allah comes.” (Tirmidhi, Muslim)

    So even when the Mu'tazili did not exist, this Ummah followed the Ahle-Sunnah school of thought, BEFORE them; and that was & is the right (and saved) group.
     
  3. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    that is the difference, perennialsts, neo-mutalizalah, salafiyyah, deobandiyyah, they all maraud classical books for quotes without understanding the context or knowing author's own view about the issue.

    brother aqib has said it right in another thread

     
  4. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    as i had translated ad-hoc and posted without review, there were grammar and punctuation errors. i have fixed some of them.
     
  5. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    [​IMG]



    ======
    about being the 'middle-nation' many scholars, if my memory serves well even ibn taymiyyah, said that ahl al-sunnah are between khawarij and rawafid, between the mutazilah and the mushabbihah, between jabriyyah and qadariyyah.

    so we the ash-aris and maturidis are the ahl al-sunnah.

    wa'lHamdu lillah.
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2016
    Umar99, Haqbahu, Harris786 and 5 others like this.
  6. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    it could be quite possible that kawthari said so in some place, or he even told abu zahrah in person. but what we find in kawthari's writing is that he did not put ash'aris between muHaddithin and mutazilah. rather he placed them between Hashwiyyah and mutazilah. Hashwiyyah meaning the anthropomorphists.

    it is my surmise that shaykh abu zahrah approximated this to muHaddithin, wAllahu a'alam.


    ---
    in his preface to imam ibn asakir's tabyin kadhib al-muftari, kawthari says p27-28:

    kawthari,tabyin p27.jpg


    the ash'aris are between the mu'tazilah and the Hashwiyyah; neither did they distance themselves from naql [textual proof/revelation] as the mu'tazilah did; nor [stayed far from] intellect in the manner of the Hashawiyyah. they took the best from those who preceded them and rejected the false [beliefs] of every sect and safeguarded that path which was trod upon by the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam and his companions - and they [ash'aris] filled the world with knowledge...


    then talking about maturidis he says:

    kawthari,tabyin p28.jpg

    and his [ash'aris] contemporary the Leader of Guidance [imam al-huda] abu manSur al-maturidi, the shaykh of [ahl al-]sunnah in ma wara al-nahr did not fall in [arguments etc.] because, in that area, the ahl al-sunnah had the upper hand and had totally prevailed upon heretics and muted their clamour. therefore, he followed a fully balanced approach - and he gave the textual proof [or revelation/naql] its due and also acknowledged the role of the intellect.

    thus, the maturidis are between the ash'aris and the mu'tazilah and rarely are sufis found among them.

    the imams ash'ari and maturidi - both are the two leaders [imams] of ahl al-sunnah wa'l jama'ah in the entire world - from the east to the west and [their followers] have written numerous books.

    however most of the difference that remains between these two imams is mostly semantic differences; and many books have been written on this subject. this issue has been summarised best by bayaDi in his: "isharat al-maram fi ibaraat al-imam".


    =====
    see? kawthari's opinion is no different from abduh's opinion [even if we have reservation about abduh].

    so those who try to portray that maturidis are closer to mutazilah than the rest just lack perspective. a few simple diagrams explain kawthari's statement better:

    kaw-1.png

    --------------------------------------------------------

    kaw-2.jpg

    --------------------------------------------------------

    kaw-3.jpg
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2016
    Umar99, Harris786, abu nibras and 6 others like this.
  7. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    first, before it gets lost in the rest. with due respect to shaykh abu zahrah who was an excellent academic, he was a laid back and an easy-going sunni, whose opinions appeared to be accommodating others and who admired ibn taymiyyah and ibn Hazm [check out dedicated bios of both written by him], in contrast to imam zahid al-kawthari who was vehement in his opposition to ahl al-bid'ah, particularly ibn taymiyyah and the wahabis. and he took things personally - you can feel that his writings reflect his own belief and from deep within.

    as for abu zahrah, i have read his books. he is a very good writer, a modern writer and historian. but he is also equivocal in places where one expects a scholar to take a stand. rather he chooses to tell it like an impersonal story-teller who doesn't really care about the issues. that is my opinion, but i like his style of clear and crisp writing.

    in this attribution to his friend, shaykh abu zahrah actually bowderlised kawthari's statement. we will examine that shortly. in sha'Allah.

    ----
    coming back to his describing the maturidiyyah, which you have quoted. actually, you should read a few pages earlier for context. let me help you:

    abuzahrah,tarikh 1-p168a.jpg


    and maturidi relies upon intelligence (rational faculties) by the guidance of the shariah. because it imposes an obligation to think; he opposes the jurists and hadith scholars [fuqaha, muHaddithin] who say that it is obligatory to rely upon the revelation* alone and seek the truth [Haqq] from revelation [naql - i.e., qur'an and hadith] and nothing else beyond it. this, they said fearing that the mind [`aql] is prone to lapses and could therefore fall into misguidance.

    refuting this, he [maturidi] says in his kitab al-tawHid: "these are ideas of the devil and his whispering - and those who reject rational examination [naZar] have no proof except from looking at it rationally.** this requires them to admit that it is necessary to admit rational [proofs]. moreover, how can they reject it when Allah ta'ala has Himself exhorted His slaves to reflect and commanded them to think and ponder; and has obligated them to take lessons and warnings [by reflecting]***. this is the proof that rational examination and thinking is a source of knowledge."

    * naql - i have used revelation, though textual proof would have been a standard translation.

    **because there is no text that forbids this - so those who say that we should stay only within confines of revelation are doing so by reflecting upon it and finding analogies. which is an exercise in exerting the mind to find answers.

    *** numerous verses that exhort muslims to think, to reflect. see next posts for a few samples, in sha'Allah.


    ======
    then shaykh abu zahrah explains

    abuzahrah,tarikh 1-p168b.jpg

    and we see that he has a distinct opinion on the argument in seeking knowledge concerning belief: is there only one source which is revelation? or does it have a source other than revelation, and that is intellect? we find [maturidi's] opinion thus: he acknowledges that revelation is one of the sources; and similarly intellect is another source [of knowledge].

    however, along with his acknowledgement that intellect is a source among sources of knowledge, he fears that it [intellect] is prone to committing mistakes. yet, this apprehension that the intellect can commit mistakes should not lead to prevention of rational examination [entirely], like the hadith scholars and jurists did. rather it should lead one to be cautious and to seek protection from error, by relying upon the revealed proofs together with rational examination.

    and he says: "one who rejects this [that is one should be cautious and seek protection by relying upon revelation] seeks to explore that which is concealed from the mind, and aims to comprehend Divine Wisdom entirely by his own flawed and limited intellect; and he tries to do this without any guidance from Messengers - thus oppressing his mind to bear, that which it cannot endure."

    the result of this statement is that he allows accepting rational proof where it does not oppose the shariah; and if it opposes the shariah, then there is no other recourse except to bow down to the ruling of the shariah.


    ========
    it is in this context he says further:

    abuzahrah,tarikh 1-p169.jpg

    this [concept] led him to agree with the mu'tazilah in some of their rational arguments, though he opposes them in many. the issues in which he [maturidi] agrees with them are:

    1. on the necessity of rational examination/reflection
    2. knowing of Allah ta'ala by intellect
    3. that good and evil [lit. beautiful and ugly of certain things] can be perceived by the intellect.

    these issues are governed by the framework* as we have mentioned a little earlier.

    *so long as any of this does not oppose the shariah; if it does, the shariah is paramount and supersedes rational judgement.


    ------
    NOW, what nawaz quotes:
    as he has explained, those who rejected rational proofs and rational examination totally - as opposed to mutazilah who rejected naql - textual proofs, maturidis are in between because we accept rational proof/examination where it doesn't contradict the shariah.

    it is in this context that kawthari was probably misquoted by abu zahrah.

    [a minor translation error corrected.]
     
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2020
    Umar99, Shahzaib, Haqbahu and 6 others like this.
  8. Arshad ul Qadri

    Arshad ul Qadri New Member

    It means only that Asha'irah are more zahiri based, just like in Qubh and Hasan. They set their rule up by Nass don't interfere with Aqli. More athari style Muhaddith.

    Maturidiyyah are more Aqli (muarraf) although within borders of Ahlus-Sunnah, more Aqli.

    Mutazili only aqli (mujib).

    It doesn't mean Asha'irah is a mix-up of their non sense or take them as a Base.

    Arnold is a person who supports amina wadud, a person who wants to revive the Mutazilah movement.
     
    Umar99 likes this.
  9. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    trust me, i was expecting someone to quote this [kawthari's quote], but didn't expect it from you.

    and nawaz sahib, old habits die hard. a bit busy now, but will be back, in sha'Allah, to examine your quote.

    wa's salam.
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2016
    Harris786 likes this.
  10. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    It requires a great deal of time to investigate the claims about the differences between ashaira and maturidiyah; and the best way to deal with it is to bring forth a significant issue and contrast the implications. It is my humble opinion that the differences are insignificant and some have made a mountain out of a mole hill. However, Shaykh Abu Zahra in his book about various Islamic sects cites two opinions on the issue. The first from Shaykh Mohammed abdhuhu:
    maturidi 2.PNG

    It claims that the differences are nominal as brother asrar rashid had said.

    The other opinion stated is by Shaykh Zahid al-Kawthari al-Hanafi and Shaykh Abu Zahra concurs with it:

    maturidi.PNG

    " the ashaira fall between Mu`tazila and Muhaddithin, and Maturidiyah fall between mu`tazila and ashaira"
     
  11. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    would you answer from whom did abu jubai learn kalam, then his teacher and then his teacher and so forth?

    your question is quite stupid one. do you claim that mutazalies are those who invented/introduced kalam to islamic theology, and ahlussunah learnt from them? if yes then you should furnish your proofs for this rather than asking stupid questions. any sane mind can understand that imam ahlussunah rejected the rationalism of his teacher and accepted which complies with ahlussunah wa'l jama'ah; from whom he learnt it is pointless.

    indeed you are not good at reading, otherwise you would have pondered on this.

    and this

     
  12. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    who were the first teachers of Sayyeduna Moosa - alayhe asSalaam??
     
  13. qadribarakati

    qadribarakati Banned

    only if you can answer one question:

    Where did Imam Abul Hasan Al-Ashari learn theology (ilm usul ilm kalam) ? (name the teacher who taught him)

    then you may kick my back as you like.
     
  14. Arshad ul Qadri

    Arshad ul Qadri New Member

    Ok so when Abul Hasan ashari took as outer limits the Quran and Sunnah, and all that resides between these boundaries, even if some mutazili stances are within these boundaries, this Arnold will say Abul Hasan adopted the mutazili stance instead of what was inside the Ahlus-Sunnah?

    Abul Hasan ashari merely understood the validity of a stance within the boundaries of Ahlus Sunnah, it doesn't make these Mutazili the Base of Ahlus Sunnah
    Which Abul Hasan followed in some points.

    Rather since Abul Hasan rejected them and verified if a stance was within the boundaries it suffices to say the creed of Asha'irah and Maturidiyyah are based on its Usul, everything within the boundaries is Ahlus-Sunnah even if Kuffar for example say something which conforms to it. It doesn't make it a kafiri stance but an Islamic one.
     
    Umar99, Ghulam Ali and Noori like this.
  15. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

  16. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    you are an idiot and a brainwashed idiot, who does not know the basics and you are trying to convince me (or others) that all these years ash'aris and maturidis were only - umm..having a different opinion. no hard feelings.

    tell your jahil shaykh arnold to apologise first - he who thinks atabek the donkey is a "leading hanafi scholar" in the world.

    soundly refuted and buried the mutazilah heresy. pretenders like you or atabek or arnold will not be able to revive it. it is dead. period. and so will your enthusiasm.

    nonsensical allegories. you may as well say that there is only 'difference' of opinion between muslims and christians. either go back to learning or focus on your financial problems. don't waste everybody's time.

    ---
    actually, he refuted hanafi positions. not in the best manner, may Allah ta'ala forgive us and him, but he refuted hanafis. so also did kawthari in his iHqaq al-Haqq, where he went overboard.

    but this is what you cannot get in your thick skull. refutation of hanafis on furu' is not the same of refutation of mutazilah on usul. clutter man, clutter. your mind is cluttered. sort it out first.

    ---
    yeah, like the wonderful quotes provided by your shaykh arnold.

    what a shameless minion you are. i am still not done with your shaykh arnold's post. because an illiterate idiot interrupted me. (hey that is you i am talking about in case you look over your shoulder).

    now that we know who you are and you spilled the beans, we will kick you back in your place and get to work.
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2016
    Umar99, Harris786, CHISHTI and 5 others like this.
  17. qadribarakati

    qadribarakati Banned

    Soundly refute or disagree ? there is a difference between the two. Take a look at the book of Imam Hafiz Bayhaqi Khilafiyaat, did he refute Hanafis in his book or disagree with hanafis ? or take the the book of Imam Juwayni Mughith al-Khalq, did he refute Hanafis or disagree with Hanafis.

    Most of the time there is only semantic differences between Mutazila and Asharis, even this is accepted by Imam Fakhr Al-Din Razi and Imam Juwayni. I can provide scanned pages if you want to see it. I hope you admit your mistakes and apologize to Shaykh Arnold Yasin.

    What about the beliefs of Imam Abul Hasan Ashari and Imam Abu Mansur Maturidi when it comes to Faith (Iman) is it same as Mutazili beliefs or different.
     
  18. kaydani1

    kaydani1 Active Member

  19. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    no it is YOU who missed the point.

    the reason why it ends with jubbayi is because - imam abu'l Hasan ABANDONED him. else, it should go further up, if he valued that nisbah or if his followers acknowledged it.

    you are just being mean with the imam of ahl al-sunnah.

    that he abandoned a madh'hab (mutazili) he served for years, to join ahl al-sunnah and then fight for it, speaks volumes of his courage and righteousness. and that generations upon generations of ulama - fuqaha, muhaddithin and mutakallimin proudly refer to themselves as ash'aris is - in my humble opinion - is an indication that Allah ta'ala elevated him and accepted him, in sha'Allah. raHimahullah wa raDiya anhu. people in our time cribbing that he was a student of jubbayi the mutazili cannot hurt it.

    what difference does simnani's quote make?
    when he abandoned all of it, and one or two issues which again are not really of core aqidah and related to responsibilities of a muslim remain - that is hardly 'following' the mutazilah sect. or 'evolving' from the mutazilah sect.

    actually this does not mean that imam abu'l Hasan ash'ari followed the mu'tazilah. agreeing with them in some point doesn't mean following them or evolving from their madh'hab. you will find various heretics among hadith narrators; going by your logic, imam bukhari evolved from the khawarij and the shia! al-iyadhu billah.

    if you are a handler for arnold or the neo-mutazili gang, then this is just a red herring and an attempt to distract from the fact that arnold's claims were proven to be false.

    ----
    again: as for certain issues in which we do not disagree with mutazilah, does NOT mean we 'follow' mutazilah. the bone of contention is that neo-mutazili revivalists (and wahabi imbeciles) seek to fool the common people claiming that asharis and maturidis are mutazilis in origin. my point is that asharis and maturidis are sunnis and the core beliefs remain sunni, though in peripheral issues or certain other non-religious issues we may agree with other sects - whether mutazilah or some other.

    it is also a fact that it was the ahl al-sunnah: imam abu'l Hasan al-ash'ari and his followers; imam abu manSur and his followers who soundly refuted mutazili heresies. [we speak of rational arguments and not the major mutazili fitna put out by imam of ahl al-sunnah, imam ahmad ibn Hanbal].

    learn to read. haytami says "awwalan"; and in the same breath insists he left them to aid the ahl al-sunnah.

    go ahead and enlighten us.

    ----
    Allah ta'ala knows best.
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2016
    Aqdas, Umar99, Harris786 and 3 others like this.
  20. qadribarakati

    qadribarakati Banned

    Shaykh Abu Hasan, you missed the whole point. No one is disputing that Imam Abul Hasan Al-Ashari abandoned Mutazila. You posted here

    The discussion is about if Imam Ashari adopted some Mutazili beliefs. Since, Ashari and Maturidi only differ semantically so what is true for Imam Ashari must be true for Imam Maturidi (that's a claim of some people which needs to be verified. I disagree with this. I am with Shaykh Arnold Yasin on this one)

    The Thabat of Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Hajar Haytami Makki showed from where Imam Abul Hasan Al-Ashari took his theology (ilm usul or ilm kalam). It was from al-Jubbai.

    If it wasn't al-Jubbai, then kindly provide the names of teachers of Imam Ashari from whom he took Theology (Ilm usul or ilm kalam) after he abandoned Mutazili madhhab. That would be interesting to see.


    In the Thabat of Shaykh Al-Islam Zakariyya Al-Ansari, he says Imam Shafi took fiqh all way to Prophet (saws), similarly, show to me, Ilm Usul or Ilm Kalam chain of Imam Al-Ashari or Imam al-Maturidi

    tabat_zakariya_001.jpg

    tabat_zakariya_072.jpg
    tabat_zakariya_094.jpg
    tabat_zakariya_095.jpg



    Can you comment on Shaykh Al-Islam Hafiz Ibn Hajar Asqalani (the seal of Hadith Masters)

    fathbarilsos2.jpg
    fathbarilsos1.jpg

    Shaykh Al-Islam Hafiz Ibn Hajar Asqalani : Abu Jafer Al-Samnani who was one of the leaders of Ashari scholars said, 'This is one of the issues of the Mu'tazilah that remained in the beliefs of Al-Ashari'


    Is the same true for Imam Abu Mansur Al-Maturidi ?
     

Share This Page