I find it odd, a guy like Mohammed Hijab, seemingly rational and refuting atheists. Yet he still denies Ashari view of Allah's Fawqiya... those speakers corners people are a joke. There was this guy named Firas Zahabi discussing philosophy and such in an online call, that guy seemed very pro-ash'ari though and has met with the SC bunch.
Asalam Alaikum Is it possible to set out a thread in regards to this topic (refutation of the wahabbiyah in regards to the attributes of Allāh ﷻ). because this seem to be one of the major focal points especially in places like speakers corner.
an example, ibn uthaymin in his sharh al bukhari, hadith 7407/vol 10, writes; (as for the doubt of those who reject eye, hand, foot, and face and other parts[for Allah]), because they claim with their own rationale that affirming this necessitates a body, and (entails) that Allah Ta'ala is a body because we cannot think of anything that has a face, hand, or other parts except that it is a body. we (noori: i.e. wahabies), in reply to this, say to them who said to you that body is denied for Allah, who said this? do you have any proof that the body is disproved? hence, if affirming these attributes necessitates that Allah is a body then it is true (that He is a body), but He is not like other bodies, and if it does not necessitate (a body for Him) then it is prejudice and injustice to ascribe a meaning to us which does not entail (from our belief/statements). but this is nonsense and total madness.
I see. What about 1)mu'tazilah who say the Qur'ān is created? and 2) the so-called salafīs who say the Qur'ān is uncreated but then go on to say Allāh's speech is literally a letter followed by a letter (emergent but not created, which is contradictory)? in fact the second question applies to the whole so-called salafī methodology as they believe Allāh has emergent attributes (He is not angry then becomes angry, he has many successive wills, etc...) is this kufr or just bid'ah?
it is the ugliest bida'h, but we do not rule them kafir because they also add "laisa kamithlihi shay". the difference between our aqidah and their's is this; - we say that yad, wajh, saaq are sifat of Allah Ta'la and He knows the meanings, we do not confirm the literal meanings we know - salafi/wahabi say that these are His attributes but they also affirm the literal meanings for Him, yet at the same time proclaim "laisa kamithlhi shayun" to prove the literal meanings they have so many ugly statements and examples that lead to tajsim. the same applies to the other two questions, i.e. they are innovators. the kufr may return upon them when they call us mushrik because of istighatha and tawassul, but we do not do takfir of them because they do ta'wil in nusus, and do takfir due to incorrect understanding. it does not mean that they may not be kafir near Allah Ta'ala, we just hold our tongues to avoid the ruling to come back to us if they are not.
I have the same question regarding the first points, as for the latter, I am almost certain that those things make them innovators. You know some of those early hanbalis who were antropomorphists like Al barbahari Or even the famous antropomophist ibn Karram. Are they considered kuffar or severe innovators in creed?
Are so-called salafīs kuffār if they believe Allāh is above the throne literally in terms of direction or place, or has literal yadayn, wajh, sāq, etc...? The same question if they have the same approach on the descent of Allāh. Also, do they become kuffār for saying tawassul and istigātha are shirk?
