A thread on a claim by Ibn Taymiyya regarding Abū al-Ḥasan al-Karājī (d. 532 AH) and what the historical record actually tells us.
Ibn Taymiyya asserts that al-Karājī in his own book stated that Abū Isḥāq ash Shīrāzī was opposed to the Ashʿarīs, and that al-Bāqillānī used to cover his face like a niqāb to avoid al-Isfarāʾīnī.
These are extraordinary claims. Let us examine them with the rigor they demand.
First problem: Shīrāzī was not al-Karājī’s shaykh. This is a basic biographical fact. For al-Karājī to have referred to al-Shīrāzī as “my shaykh” in condemnation of the Ashʿarīs would be a biographical impossibility. The attribution itself is incoherent.
The Shaykh Taught us:
Wahhabis aren’t from the people Sunnah.
As their main enemy is the Sunnah it self.
Wahhabism is indeed a means to give a creature divine attributes so they may worship the antichrist.
They await their master.
If you ponder upon the ideology of wahhabi theology you’ll find they only define attributes in human terms, and never take into consideration any other definitions that involve other creatures.
The God they seek is Man.
Do Asharis support Putin, Bashar, sisi…etc. ?!
No.
But even if we were to say yes.
Don’t we all know for a fact that many others on the opposing side literally support US, UK & the European bloc & Israel!
This type of approach is sick!
No Muslim supports a kafir.
However, there are in each situation a cause to lean towards a direction.
You can’t actually point the finger and say See!
Each individual in each situation plans what they perceive as safe.
As for picking on Ahl Sunnah for doing a seminar in Chechnya; that is just pathetic!
Wahhabis have them in the states monthly half of the time calling us Kuffar!
So why the grief?!
Or should we flip the script and say:
You support the killers of our brothers in Somalia?!
The Jahmyyah & Mu’tazilah said that the 2nd verse of Surah al Anbya is evidence that the Quran is created.
Imam Ahmad said: No, it is referring to the Most recent we have received.
Ibn Kathir also narrated this:
قال ابن كثير أيضا في " البداية " (10 / 327):
عن أحمد بن حنبل أنه أجاب الجهمية حين احتجوا عليه بقوله تعالى: )من ربهم محدث إلا استمعوه وهم يلعبون) قال: يحتمل أن يكون تنزيله إلينا هو المحدث، لا الذكر نفسه هو المحدث.
Again there we have Ahmad refuting the understanding presented by Jahmis & Mu’tazilah.
Very clear very evident!