Yes this is the website - They seem to be more of the pseudo Ahlul-ḥadīth type, imitating the likes of al-Muʿallimī and even those "scholars" found in Pakistan like Badiuddin al-Rashidi and even Muqbil bin Hadi who wrote erroneous things about Imām Abū Ḥanīfa and his madh-hab.
I assume you're talking about this website: https://ww w.al-aqeedah.com/ When I stumbled upon this website earlier today (by accident), I initially thought it was a hanbali/sunni website (which seemed to avoid usual references to salafi elders like ibn taymiyya et al). Only when I chanced upon the sections on filthy diatribe against Imam abu Hanifah (rahimahullah) that I realised the extent of deception.
right now, i have taken up an additional task in ramadan. maybe after ramadan - in sha'Allah, and we will post in detail about "naqD" with analysis.
Asalam alaikum Shaykh Al-Ibanah al-Sughra by Ibn Battah Kitāb al-Sunnah from Harb bin Ismaʿīl al-Kirmani It would be extremely helpful if you could give an insight into these two books aswell, as they have been translated into english by some hardcore salafis, who also have hatred fro Abū Ḥanīfa and they champion these books. Also what is the actual status of the book attributed to Imām Abū Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī al-Ibānah is its attribution correct or false or their a middle ground which the book is his but people interpolated into it. Jazakallah Khair
intrigued, i searched for opinions on the net - and just a while ago (even as i was replying to you) i came across a post on aslein forum. have quickly skimmed the first post and the author 'azhari' has some good comments. some coincide with my own opinions. let me read it. sharing with you: http://www.aslein.net/showthread.php?t=97
all of the above, if the book attributed to him is indeed his. however, if the book attributed to him was only in name - and the contents were forged by some later mujassim, this makes sense - why bayhaqi and khatib and hakim and ibn asakir - and most of all tajuddin subki made no comments of his tajsim!
apparently even albani distanced himself from the opinions of this darimi (he is not the same as the imam abu muhammad abdullah al-darimi)
in fact, imam bayhaqi in his al-asma wa'l sifat narrates thru' him that qur'an is neither khaliq nor makhluq - from ali al-mada'ini. in ibn asakir's tarikh dimashq - he mentions various narrations - some via hakim, some via khatib. and as you know they were all ash'aris. i wonder why they didn't slam him.
what was his explanation for "and then He (i.e. Allah) "came" to their buildings to their foundations"? if He "came" down here to their foundations - then who was on the arsh at that time? al-iyadhu billah. the whole book is full of tajsim and kufr. he is an outright mujassim. [that is if the attribution to the book is correct and this was indeed his own book]
a brother asked about the status of the book. uthman ibn sayid al-darimi is a contemporary of imam bukhari and is a muhaddith, d.280 AH. but he was an outright anthropomorphist if you read his book naqD which you ask about. imam kawthari refuted him in the footnotes to imam subki's book "al-sayf al-saqil" (printed in a collection of books on ilm al-kalam) --- ==== and in the book itself - he comes across as any of the modern bloggers. name calling and offers no proof for his so called 'naqD'. it is just the literary version of "i will shout louder. i am right." check this: he believes that Allah ta'ala can make 'movements'. can move or descend or rise if He wishes and can stand or sit if He Wills - because the difference of living and dead is in "movement". EVERY living being will inevitably be capable of movement. and inevitably, every dead cannot make a movement. it is stupid - and his hadith scholarship aside (because bayhaqi, hakim and others have narrated from him) - this shows how dense he was and thoroughly incompetent to speak on these issues. of course, IF this book is indeed his. he only puffed and bluffed - offered no counter argument.
