On The Entailment of Apophatic theology, Shaykh al-Islam said:

For this reason, the Salaf and the Imams referred to the deniers of attributes as Mu‘aṭṭilah (negators), because the reality of their position is the nullification (ta‘ṭīl) of the essence of Allah Almighty

1/12🧵 even if they themselves are unaware that their claim necessarily entails such nullification.

They describe God with mutually contradictory statements. They say: “He is existent (mawjūd), eternal (qadīm), and necessary (wājib),”—yet they go on to negate the necessary implications

This is the most neglected point, though it is the most crucial—the point that highlights our fundamental clash with the Mutakallimīn. Many get caught up in the chaos of interpreting this word or that, or speculating about what this scholar or that one said—

1/9

https://twitter.com/abdul_now/status/1929904955470545272

discussions which, I believe, barely scratch the surface of a disagreement that has spanned over a millennium.

If the issue were truly about some secondary or trivial matters, would it have taken this long to settle? It must therefore lie on a deeper methodological level.

We are witnessing shocking statements from wannabe theology readers who casually express that God is not good or benevolent, that God does not really love the believers or even the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), that God loves blasphemy and polytheism,

1/12🧵 that God does not have a wisdom or a purpose behind anything, and many other inappropriate, devastating beliefs they hold.

As much as one may exploit this to expose the opponents of such beliefs — and the anti-revelation irrational foundations upon which they are built —

There is an intricate detail in what Imam Ibn 'Abdelbarr said here namely "a place in relation to us". This is precisely the view of Ahl al-Hadith if they say "God is in a place, and that is over his Throne" as they refer to his existence in relation to the universe.

1/9

https://twitter.com/RaadTheShepherd/status/1920882390395678987

That is why the Imam himself in another quote responds to those who argue" "But God was in no place before the world!" He says "God was in no place then he became in a place." meaning: He was in no relation to the world before its creation;

Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī against Sufi Quburis [Part2].

In his Tafsir on the verse, "Say: Who provides for you from the heavens and the earth?" (Yūnus 10:31) he said: "Know that once God the exalted had exposed the scandals of the idol-worshippers,

1/24🧵

https://twitter.com/AbdelbarrMalki1/status/1919949787031327052

He followed that by presenting evidences pointing to the falsity of their creed […] This indicates that those being addressed by this verse already acknowledged the existence of God and affirmed belief in Him. They were the very ones who claimed that their worship of idols

Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī against Sufi Quburis.

In his Tafsir, he draws a parallel between grave worshippers in his time, and ancient idolaters, affirming the prohibition of supplicating to other than God. Below is his commentary on two verses:

1/10🧵 Allah said: {They said, "O Moses, make for us a god just as they have gods." He said, "Indeed, you are a people acting ignorantly."} [al-A‘rāf: 138].

Al-Razi said: “Know that it is impossible for any rational person to say to Moses,

11k likes for such nonsense! Perhaps Muslims should tighten up their connection to the Qur'an to appreciate its actual linguistic beauty.

1. Only Hafs from 'Asim read it as ('alayhu), while the rest read it as ('alayhi), which does not make this some sort of mystery.

https://twitter.com/aliasad1998/status/1905320801622261925

Rather, pronouncing the Dammah as Hafs did is the Asl in the language, thus it is kept as it is, while reading with kasra is the actual diversion from the Asl due to the letter being accompanied by the (Ya’) with sukun, and that is for facilitation.

After mentioning the doubts and confusion philosophers and Kalamists have, Ibn Taymiyyah said:

"If this is the state of their arguments, then what greater nonsense, and futility could there be?! How could such people deem themselves fit to criticize Ahl al-Hadith wa Sunnah—

1/4 those who are the most knowledgeable, the most certain, the most tranquil, and the most composed? They know, and they know that they know; they are firmly convinced of the truth, harboring no doubt or hesitation.

Ibn Tumart was a direct student of your "master" al-Ghazali. He was influenced by al-Juwayni and baqillani, and authored Kalam books is support of Ash'arism, which his gang enforced in the regions they deemed Mujassima; slaughting Merrakesh from the first to the last.

1/28🧵

https://twitter.com/Haqiqatjou/status/1901008584281924094

Ibn Tumart traveled to East, where he absorbed Ash‘arī theology and became thoroughly convinced of its doctrines and principles. Upon returning to the Maghreb, he called the people to adopt this creed, declaring those who opposed it not only misguided but outright disbelievers.

Imam al-Bukhari said:

As for the act of reciting (tilāwah), people differ in its abundance and deficiency, in increase and decrease. It is said: "So-and-so has a beautiful qirā’ah (recitation)," but not "[a beautiful] Qur’an," for the Qur’an is the speech of the Lord—

1/30🧵 exalted is His mention—whereas reciting is the action of the servant. The distinction between the two is manifest and is only obscured to one whose heart Allah has blinded, one whom He has neither granted success nor guided to the path of rectitude.

After @Haqiqatjou, by the grace of Allah, has been humiliated by everyone who refuted him, he is resorting to projecting his own insecurities and situation onto his opponents. So, he said Wahhabis are attempting to rebrand themselves as Ahl al-Hadith wa al-Athar.

1/15🧵 1. I do not know a single individual whom this lowlife could identify as a Wahhabi, or even Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab himself, to have initially said that they were attempting to create a new creed or a new methodology for their followers,

Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi reported with his chain:

"al-Khaffaf, said in Bukhara: 'One day, we were in the presence of Abu Ishaq al-Qaysi, accompanied by Muhammad ibn Nasr al-Marwazi. The mention of Muhammad ibn Isma‘il al-Bukhari arose, whereupon Muhammad ibn Nasr said:

1/18🧵

https://twitter.com/Haqiqatjou/status/1899991261307629831

'I heard him say: Whoever claims that I have stated that my utterance of the Qur’an is created is a liar, for I have never said such a thing.' I then said to him [ibn Nasr]: "O Abu ‘Abdullah, people have spoken much on this matter.' He replied:

Humans both love and detest conflict, the latter of these feelings being what they are mostly aware of, while the former manifests itself in their actions, not necessarily in their epistemic awareness.

1/7 One may never be successful in ending conflict; thus, the aim is directed toward shifting people from one side to another in the hope of saving them from falsehood to truth. The evaluation of this success is not immediate, nor is its fruit—perhaps part of it is—

Imam al-Bukhari said: “Whoever claims that I have said: ‘My utterance of the Qur’an is created,’ is a liar, for I have never said this.” (Sharḥ al-Uṣūl, Lalakai, 2/396)

Ibn Taymiyyah Said: “Some with ulterior motives falsely attributed this statement to al-Bukhari.

1/18🧵 However, it has been reliably transmitted from him with an approved chain of narration that he said: ‘Whoever claims that I have said: My utterance of the Qur’an is created, has lied.’”

(Majmūʿ al-Fatāwā, 12/572)

The Prophet (S) said: "The most hated of men in the sight of Allah is the twisted argumentative, the contentious disputant."

And said: "There are four traits, whoever has them is a pure hypocrite, and whoever has one of them has a trait of hypocrisy until he abandons it:

1/23🧵 when entrusted, he betrays; when he speaks, he lies; when he makes a covenant, he breaks it; and when he disputes, he becomes wicked."

(Bukhari and Muslim).

The twisted argumentative, and contentious disputant (al-aladd al-khasim) is one who is characterized by obstinacy

What is the Salaf's stance on the Jahmiyyah, and those inflicted by some of their heresies?

Shaykh al-Islam said: "The transmitted tradition from the Salaf and the imams is to declare general Takfir upon the pure Jahmiyyah—those who categorically deny divine attributes.

1/30🧵

https://twitter.com/Haqiqatjou/status/1897792198424588783

While the essence of their doctrine is that God neither speaks nor is seen, nor is He seprate from creation. He possesses neither knowledge nor power, neither hearing nor sight, and in fact claim the Qur’an is created, and the inhabitants of Paradise will not see Him—

Love is the strongest mover of hearts towards The Beloved of Truth.

Shaykh al-Islam said: "It is necessary to emphasize a principle that moves hearts toward Allah, Exalted is He, making them seek His refuge, and thereby reducing or entirely eliminating their afflictions,

1/5 by His power and might. We say: Know that the driving forces that move the hearts toward Allah are three: love, fear, and hope. The strongest of these is love, for it is sought and wanted in and of itself, as it is desirable both in this world and the Hereafter. T

Ibn Taymiyyah said:

"knowledge that God, the Exalted, is above His creation is more ingrained in natural disposition, more evident in the revealed law, and more firmly established among the Salaf and the leading Imams of the ummah than the knowledge of His being seen.

1/5 The Jahmiyyah would conceal their denial of this reality, instead outwardly reject vision and similar doctrines, using such denials of vision and the claim of the createdness of the Qur'an as a means to [establish] their hidden belief in negating God's existence above the Throne.

Maturidis stated that denial of takwīn (origination) and the claim that creation (khalq) is identical to the created (makhlūq) necessarily entails KUFR, as it nullifies the role of Allah, and implies the world is eternal and not His creation.

Abū al-Muʿīn al-Nasafī said:

1/15🧵 "The assertion of most of the Muʿtazilah, as well as all of the Najjāriyyah and the Ashʿariyyah, that takwīn and the mukawwan (that which is originated) are one and the same, is an impossible claim. This is because equating takwīn with the mukawwan is akin to claiming that

Those who affirm an essence, life, knowledge, and will for God, though they exist in creatures, but without the implications of creatures are required to extend such principle to all other attributes, or else contradict themselves.

Ibn Taymiyyah said:

1/22🧵 "For the apparent meanings of these attributes in the case of a created being are either a contingent substance or an accident subsisting within it. Thus, knowledge, power, speech, volition, mercy, pleasure, wrath, and the like are, with respect to a servant, accidents;

A Comprehensive Refutation of The Allegation That Shaykh al-Islām Advocated the Annihilation of Hell.

Opponents of Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) frequently raise the issue of the annihilation of Hell when listing the controversial matters attributed to him.

1/75🧵 They present the claim that Ibn Taymiyyah categorically affirmed annihilation of Hell as if it were his unequivocal stance which he held no other besides it. Al-Ḥiṣnī (d. 829 AH) states: "Know that among the criticisms against him is his assertion that Hell will cease to exist,