The internal contradiction of the later Ash‘aris’ Equivocal Predication.

It is well known that later Ash'aris deny the rest of attributes after affirming the seven they label as "Sifat al-ma'ani". But have you considered in what way these seven are affirmed?

1/30🧵 You may have asked yourself or asked an Ash'ari, invoking some sense in them as to why they reject some of God's attributes due to anthropomorphism, yet you see them affirming meanings that they agree are found in creatures as well, such as: Power, will, knowledge, life, and on.

Why are some individuals unfair towards Ibn AbdelWahhab?

The phenomenon of criticizing an individual for their actions or character while simultaneously benefiting from the fruits of their contributions can be described as historical ingratitude or contributory amnesia.

1/25🧵 This refers to the failure to acknowledge or fairly evaluate the role someone played in causing a benefit that is now taken for granted. It manifests as an unfair minimization of their efforts, often accompanied by an erasure of the difficulties they faced in achieving such goal.

Ash'ari Sophists ask this question a lot, and I received it many times. Here is my brief answer:

Salam, when you have any discussion, make sure to reflect on what the person is saying, because the answer always lies there. All you have to do is find the inconsistency.

1/15🧵 However, it is not befitting for one to argue while trying to find answers on the spot. You should have a foundation first; then you won't have an issue with any questions, inshallah. So I urge you to refrain from fruitless discussions and invest the time to learn.

In defense of Sharh al-Sunnah and its attribution to Imam al-Barbahari (D. 329AH). This view is the strongest for several reasons:

First: Imam Ibn Abi Ya'la attributed this book to al-Barbahari in his work Tabaqat al-Hanabilah [2/18]. Ibn Abi Ya'la passed away in 526 AH,

1/42🧵 and he transmitted from al-Barbahari through two intermediaries, as evidenced by several reports in the biography of al-Barbahari and elsewhere. The only extant manuscript of the book (the one that includes a chain going to al-Bahili D.275 AH),

Why do heretics criticize Ibn Tamiyyah for the categorization of Tawhid when their scholars have done it? What is the real reason for that Hypocritical criticism? And what agenda feels threatened by it, and wishes to be pushed in doing so? This post tackles these points.

1/30🧵 It is paradoxical that the critic of Ahl al-hadith regards dividing monotheism into Lordship (Rubūbiyyah) and Divinity (Ulūhiyyah) as an innovation attributable to Ibn Taymiyyah, with their objection being the division itself rather than its substance,

After admitting defeat and affirming that istighatha is kufr and shirk akbar, as Salafis say, @Haqiqatjou is completely losing his mind and desperately trying to cover for himself. Now, he claims that he has been agreeing with us all along, but was mocking Ahl al-Sunnah..

1/21🧵 for declaring istighatha to be kufr for about three months—supposedly because, according to him, it does not fall under the category of matters that are ma‘lum min al-deen bi darurah!

Have you ever witnessed humiliation greater than this? Does this man have any Haya' left?

D. @Haqiqatjou attacks Ibn AbdelWahhab for saying Shirk in His time was worse than pre-Islamic Arabia in some aspects.

Dan also claims Al-Alusi [a contemporary of Ibn AbdelWahhab] is his imam who represents his view on istighatha. Let's read his identical testimony:

1/15🧵

https://twitter.com/Haqiqatjou/status/1878185923139023187

In his commentary on the verse in Surah Yunus:
"It is He who enables you to travel on land and sea until, when you are in ships and they sail with them by a favorable wind, and they rejoice in it, there comes a stormy wind and waves come upon them from everywhere,

This is what I call effeminate hypocrisy. It occurs when an individual likes to be put on a pedestal, teach their deviance, spread their views, advocate for them, and thoroughly explain them through hours and hours of courses and podcasts. Yet, when faced with opposition

1/20🧵

https://twitter.com/Haqiqatjou/status/1872785544805261714

and harsh criticism, they resort to a cheap tactic: pointing the finger at the opponent, who is in a reactive position, and invoking a seemingly agreed-upon principle that they themselves unequivocally violated in the first place—thereby activating that reaction.

1. First, @Haqiqatjou I must say it would be better, more productive, and fruitful for us to actually engage with the arguments as they are and refrain from strawman arguments and misrepresentations. If this is established, it'd be easier for us to understand each other.

1/28🧵

https://twitter.com/Haqiqatjou/status/1869123817232064751

2. There was no change in my tone nor in my position. The fact of the matter is that I have been struggling this whole time just to make you aware of our position and what we actually believe, so that if you have a legitimate criticism, it is based on reality and not sophistry.

Question to Ash‘aris:

Adhering to your Aristotelian epistemological framework, you assert that knowledge is acquired through ḥadd (definitive definition), which necessitates māhiyyah (quiddity or essence). However, given that it is unknown when it comes to the Lord

1/8🧵 you settle for rasm (descriptive definition) concerning the meanings you affirm for Him.

Given this, why do you demand knowledge of the māhiyyah and reality of attributes you reject, claiming that you cannot conceptualize in reality

On the virtues of Sham, Shaykh al-Islam said:

"It is established that Sham and its people possess virtues proven by the Quran, Sunnah, and traditions of the scholars. This was one of the foundations upon which I relied in encouraging the Muslims to fight the Tatars,

1/21🧵 ordering them to remain steadfast in Damascus, forbidding them from fleeing to Egypt, summoning the Egyptian army to Ash-Sham, and strengthening the resolve of the people of Ash-Sham to remain firm. Multiple events followed regarding this.

A low-IQ take by a woman who seeks to position herself as a legislator instead of God. Who cares what you detest or love? Who are you to dictate what should be banned or what should be allowed? Besides that, this position is rationally incoherent. Here is how:

1/24🧵

https://twitter.com/koffeeTalkss/status/1863989427325763922

1. If your premise is that all women should be “known,” and you propose this as a universal law, thereby suggesting that the niqab should be banned, we ask: what is the limit of that “knowledge” a woman is entitled to have about herself, or that others should have of her?

Abū ʿUbayd al-Qāsim ibn Sallām [157 - 224 AH] may Allah be pleased with him said:

"These are the names of those who say, 'faith is both word and action; increased and decreases.' Among the people of Mecca: Ubayd ibn Umayr al-Laythi, Ata ibn Abi Rabah, Mujahid ibn Jabr,

1/14🧵

https://twitter.com/ShamsTameez/status/1863623599397191898

Ibn Abi Mulaykah, Amr ibn Dinar, Ibn Abi Najih, Ubayd Allah ibn Umar, Abdullah ibn Amr ibn Uthman, Abdul Malik ibn Jurayj, Nafi ibn Jamil, Dawud ibn Abdur-Rahman al-Attar, and Abdullah ibn Raja.

The Qur'an in its entirety is Allah's uncreated speech. 🧵1/20

I was asked: (If what pharaoh spoke is his created speech, is it uncreated when quoted by Allah?)

The answer is: Such question arises from a misunderstanding of what it means for Allah’s speech to be uncreated. The uncreated nature of His speech does not pertain to the specific words spoken by another being but rather to the speech that He Himself initiated, uttered, and expressed. Allah’s speech is uncreated because it subsists in His essence, encompassing both meaning and expression.

1. You confirmed the accusation of your opponents that you discard hadith when your scholars' opinion conflict with it. You are using the same reasoning employed by hadith rejectors—namely that Quran is definitive, implying that the hadith is not—to justify its rejection.

1/23🧵

https://twitter.com/YasirAlHanafi/status/1862778127614980411

Interestingly, the person you were criticizing did so because they may have assumed that your scholars did not understand the Quran or hadith. Yet, by this same reasoning, you implied that the majority of Muslims throughout history did not understand what you have derived

Wa alaykum salam,

1. Ahl al-Hadith wa al-Sunnah do not fundamentally employ terms such as hulul al-hawadith nor defend the concept, as the term itself is convoluted and carries numerous philosophical implications. It was the philosophers, and later the kalamists,

1/24🧵

https://twitter.com/abutalhahashemi/status/1862679845488271430

who introduced this concept and labeled it as hulul al-hawadith. Those well-versed in these discussions eventually replaced it with the term qiyam al-hawadith. The reason for this shift lies in the presuppositions of the original term,

Here is an example of one attempting to sound relevant and aware of the intricacies of Islamic creeds and groups while they are ignorant of basic fundamentals and completely enveloped in preconceived notions that barely scratch the surface of research and understanding.

1/23🧵 Perhaps the most glaring error, among the many nonsensical statements in this person's thread, is what causes second-hand embarrassment: the claim that Ash‘aris are the rationalists, while Ahl al-Hadith are positioned on the other end of the spectrum,

Are the letters of the Qur'an created or uncreated?

Imam Ibn al-Qayyim said:

If it is said that the letters of the alphabet are either eternal or created, the response is that letters are of two kinds: the letters found in the speech of created beings are created,

1/23🧵 whereas the letters of the Quran are uncreated.

If it is then asked, "How can the same letter be both created and uncreated?"

The reply is that it is not the same letter in particular (bi al-‘ayn), even if it is the same in type (bi al-naw‘),

To understand the topic of Kalam Allah we should present the differences between sects regarding two issues:

1. Their views on the concept of "Speech" and who is considered "Speaker."

2. Their views on "the speech of Allah."

1/35🧵 The intention here is to define these terms in their absolute sense, noting that each sect's stance on the speech of Allah is based on their interpretation of these terms.

A) There are four main views regarding the concept of "speech":

The reality of the Ashʿari doctrine ultimately leads to a denial of the existence of God. 🧵

There is a question that none of them wish to answer, it raises numerous issues and poses significant challenges for them. They claim that God’s existence is not merely conceptual

1/13 but external and objective. I say if that is the case, I must then be able to ask about this "external entity" with "Where" ! They respond that it is impermissible to ask "where" regarding God, as such a question implies direction, which entails place and consequently extension

The Ashʿaris' Acknowledgement of Their Agreement with the Mu'tazilah on the subject which the Salaf condemned the Mu'tazilah for:

Ash’ari scholars explicitly admit that the dispute between Ash’aris and Mu'tazilis regarding the attribute of speech is merely verbal.

1/21🧵
I will quote a few:

Al-Juwayni said:

"Know that the debate with the Mu'tazilah and other dissenters on this issue pertains to affirmation and negation. What they [Mu'tazilah] have affirmed and designated as 'speech' is, in essence, established, and when their statement that