Imam Tahawi and Imam Maturidi were contemporaries.

Maturidis say that he was Maturidi. Salafis say he was Salafi(i.e. Athari).

Which is actually the truth?
Tahawi's core text is said to be the documentation of the Hanafi Aqeedah which could be traced all the way back to Abu Yusuf, Muhammad Al Shaybani and Abu Hanifa himself.

Salafis use the commentary of Ibn Abi Al Izz to affirm that Abu Hanifa was in fact Athari(Salafi).
However there are a few issues.

I say this prefacing with the fact Ibn Abi Al Izz was a far greater scholar than I'll ever be and whatever was done to him by his opponents is utterly disgraceful and condemnable.

May Allah have mercy on him and elevate his rank.
I have read the core text of Tahawi in Arabic. And there are core issues where both Imam Tahawi and Imam Maturidi agree on.

1. The six directions don't contain him.

Salafis say that this is ambiguous and what it really means is the Throne is below Him and nothing above can
contain Him.

But Imam Tahawi highlights the transcendence of Allah in the absolute sense similar to Imam Maturidi. He isn't dependent on anything and nothing can contain Him.

Both Imam Tahawi and Imam Maturidi affirm the reality of the Throne and the Footstool.
2. Seeing Allah Jannah has no Kayfiyya.

Imam Ibn Abi Al Izz attacks the Mutakallimun fiercely on this issue. However, the solution he offers doesn't align with Imam Tahawi's core text.
If it was just a matter of having a powerful vision to see Him, why would Imam Tahawi say that there is no Kayfiyya? Saying that we will have a powerful enough to vision to see Him is in fact Kayfiyya.
The fact that he Imam Tahawi emphasizes that there is no Kayfiyya alludes to the fact that he does adopt Kalam metaphysics.
And there is more than enough evidence to allude to the fact that Imam Abu Hanifa negated space and spatiality. And the core text of the Tahawi Creed reflects it.

And that is why Salafi commenters say that there is ambiguity in Tahawi's core text.
And they also criticized Tahawi for using Al Qadim stating that Al Qadim was never used as a name for Allah.
So the fact that Salafis have to resort to elaborate commentary to make the Tahawi Creed align with Salafism shows that at the very least that Tahawi's Salafism is debatable.

To me he clearly ascribes to the Hanafi tradition that is distinct from Salafism.
Or the Athari tradition Salafis ascribe themselves to.

This isn't to say that the Salafi Aqeedah is baseless. They have lot Aimmah they can refer to as authorities from the era of the Salaf like Ibn Khuzaymah, Ibn Hanbal and others.

But Tahawi is not really Salafi.
So while there were some differences between Imam Maturidi and Imam Tahawi, as Imam Maturidi engaged in Kalam much more than him.

But on many issues Imam Maturidi deferred to the Quranic reality after exhausting all the rational arguments.
In conclusion Imam Tahawi and Imam Maturidi have more than enough similarities for both of them to be classified as scholars of the Hanafi tradition. In both Fiqh and Aqeedah.

And Maturidis haven't really deviated from Abu Hanifa's principles.
The above is from a full year of studying the Tahawi Creed and all its Sharh.

I also attended the Dars of Mufti Harun Izhar has lectures available online.

To reiterate, I do not wish to belittle Imam Ibn Abi Al Izz. But his Aqeedah differed from Tahawi more than the Maturidis.
And that is the reason why Hanafi Atharis are an anomaly and most modern "Hanafi" Atharis rely on Salafi(or Hanbali) texts for Aqeedah.

I am not saying that it is not possible to be a Hanafi Athari. Ahmadullah is one. But there will be a lot of work involved.
In the west you have Akram Nadwi. His Al Salam offers you that route.

So best of luck. Barak Allah Fik for reading.

• • •

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!


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

23 Feb
And I mean it. Nailing a thesis isn't about actual original research as much as checking list of set criteria by the Peer Review board.

The Academic Peer Review board in the Islamic Studies departments aren't really competent. They see things through an Oriental lens that is
decidedly anti-Sunni.

And I have proof that Khalil Andani is in fact, anti-Sunni.

His research is squarely aimed at subverting Sunni Orthodoxy.
Usually Decolonialist cuckoos and Post Madhabist grifters are anti-Sunni so they ascribe all kinds of ridiculous labels to Sunnis.

What Khalil Andani is saying above is hardly any different from Ammar Nakshawani saying that the senior Sahaba(رضي الله عنهم) colonized Islam.
Read 5 tweets
23 Feb
Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi and Shaikh Said Nursi are two notable reformers who aimed to change society through grassroots Dawah.

The two have remarkable similarities(and notable differences).

Both can be role models for Muslim Dawah initiatives.
Ahmad Sirhindi's uncompromising struggle against Akbar and his heretical Elites without ever raising a sword is exemplary while Nursi's early vision of uniting the diverse Muslim Communities against the West offers a blueprint for Muslims looking to overcome nationalism today.
Nursi heavily drew inspiration from Ahmad Sirhindi and built a unique form of Tasawwuf.
Read 5 tweets
23 Feb
Secular Indian History Enthusiasts love Akbar and promote him as a forward thinking man who promoted pluralism, love and tolerance.

In reality he was a narcissist. Anyone who questioned his authority was brutality suppressed.
The man was illiterate but incredibly arrogant.

His message that is often peddled by secular Muslims is, all religions lead to the truth.

If that was the case then all religions would naturally agree that Allah is one? Right? There is nothing like Him and nothing rivals Him?
Which Vedic religion has the same concept as Islam? Polytheism cannot be the same as Monotheism. It's the height of arrogance to think otherwise.

This illiterate, narcissistic and arrogant perception of religion is often masked with wax lyrical poetry about spirituality.
Read 11 tweets
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.
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.
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.…
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.
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.
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.
Read 6 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!