If Abdal Hakim Murad wrote any of this he would be crucified on Social Media.

The fact of the matter is these perspectives are not unique to him.

Even in "Decolonial" Circles there are people who genuinely believe their Academics understand Islam better than "Mullahs". ImageImageImage
I am not joking. There are *Decolonial" folks I have seen who use even worse tones against Muslims generally with no actual nuance or consideration.

They genuinely believe they are saving Islam from backwards village Mullahs.
There is a level of hypocrisy that goes unnoticed in Western circles and the white convert is disproportionately blamed for being a fascist or racist.

This is not to deflect the legitimate criticisms of Abdal Hakim Murad, but something to consider.
Muslim academia and so called Decolonial circles is just as much negatively influenced by Islamophobia and the Western lens as much as the so called Neo-Traditionalists.
I am not going to pretend to be better than them as a lot of my cultural preferences are decidedly Western because of the environment I grew in.

And there were days when I dismissed many folks as village idiots without affording them any hint of nuance.
If Abdal Hakim Murad simply targeted his critique of Tanfirism at Daniel Haqiqatjou and his fan base I don't think many of us would have had an issue with it.

In fact I'd argue there would be an Ijma.
There are a lot of things wrong with our Ummah as a whole obviously. But as believers we are supposed to show mercy to our brethren.

And if not that, then understand that a lot of the hatred is also fueled by the Neo-Colonialist project of forcefully liberalizing Muslims.
Not because that people are automatically patriarchal.

I know there are some genuine nutcases. But again, if we dismiss them wholesale, how is that any different from how Abdal Hakim Murad frames Tanfirism in his book?
Oh and I have seen "Decolonial" people afford spaces and nuance to people who have said,

"Islam did nothing for Muslims."

"Islam is as bad as Christianity."

"Muslim Mufassirun are patriarchal."

But they get away with all that because attack white men for their "caucasity".

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Ahmad Ibn Mosharraf 🏴‍☠️

Ahmad Ibn Mosharraf 🏴‍☠️ Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @IbnMosharraf

22 Feb
Imam Razi's "repentance".

1. Razi still holds on to the basic Ashari positions on Sıfat.

2. No Ashari on this planet today or in the existence of history ever believed that their books are in any shape or form superior to the Quran. Because that would be heresy. ImageImageImage
And here is the key part.

He doesn't explicitly forbid others from reading the works he apparently condemned.

The Wasiyya argument by the Hanabila while it has certain basis, does not tell us the whole story. Image
Another important article(Arabic) analyzing his Wasiyya.

Both the Asharites and the Hanbalites have their respective agendas when it comes to this issue.

Imam Razi is one of the most scholar oc prominent of all time.

wisdom.ihcs.ac.ir/article_5419.h…
Read 5 tweets
22 Feb
There is good reason to believe Abu Hanifa censured Kalam because obstinate people were engaging in it for vain reasons.

Rather than establishing clarity it was becoming ego contests.

This is something that has been echoed by many scholars through the centuries. Image
Al Ghazali's Al Munqidh Min Dalal was directed at the misuse of not just Kalam but all other sciences.

Similarly Razi's repentance not an explicit condemnation of Kalam. Rather he laments the lack of time he dedicated to Ibadah.
Similar repentance tales are often directed at rulers like Aurangzeb by modernists who claim that Aurangzeb repented his religious zeal or that he was secretly impious.

These repentance tales are appeals to emotion. Not rooted in facts.

But regardless.
Read 6 tweets
22 Feb
Early Shia polemics against the Sunni view of the 7 Ahruf of the Quran. ImageImageImage
Al Baqillani's response to the Shia polemics.

So certain Academics and Ismailis claiming Baqillani to be unorthodox in his understanding of the Quran is utterly baseless and a gross forgery. ImageImageImage
ImageImageImage
Read 6 tweets
21 Feb
This guy is flatout lying about Ghazali.

Only in academia hacks like these have relevance because they contradict the "trads".
Ismailis aren't considered part of the Islamic Tradition.

They aren't even considered Muslims by even Ashari or Maturidi standards.

This gross distorter trying to claim the Sunni Kalam tradition is just a pathetic reach.
No Sunni cares about what Ismailis have to say.

Except well our Decolonial looney bins trying to save "Islam" from the "Trads" and the big bad "Islamists".
Read 6 tweets
21 Feb
Neither Ghazali nor Ibn Taymiyyah were against using Aql.

Ghazali didn't shun Kalam completely. That's a misreading of his Al Munqid.
Please watch this video with an open mind.

Regardless of what you feel about Kalam, you need to understand how we should be framing these discussions now in light of how Zindiqs are becoming more and more emboldened in their distortions.

And IT's core contention was true rationality cannot contradict the divine texts in his criticism of rationalists.

It's something both Asharis and Maturidis have said in a different manner.
Read 4 tweets
21 Feb
Yeah, Shaybani and Mawardi never existed. It was only Ibn Taymiyyah who made it all up.

Number one reason why I despise Academics.
Did rulers often do their own thing with little regard for the Ulema and the Shariah?

Yes. But that was never linear and there was always a push to Islamicize the barebones legal code that rulers implemented.

One of the modernist misconceptions is we had "systems".
The loose collection of Muslim communities at large were "governed" by the Ulema, if we can call it that.

Rulers derived legitimacy from how much they implemented Shariah and how they supported the Ulema in their endeavors.
Read 18 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!