﷽
There are many empirical, scientific, and rational arguments that demonstrate that matter originates out of matter (or energy) and is not merely subject to rearrangement. My favorite is an argument by Ibn Taymiyyah from the impossibility of infinite actual division. (1/10)

https://twitter.com/Shakespear20412/status/1900026616043962811

When a piece of material is sufficiently divided, it eventually becomes very small and changes substantially into something else upon further division. This argument is fully explained in "Ibn Taymiyyah on Creation ex Materia". (2/10)

daral-arqam.co.uk/products/ibn-t…

﷽
Ten years ago, I approached a prominent Salafi shaykh (whose name I do not wish to mention) for clarification in regards to the blanket takfir of Muslims who ignorantly fall into what I conceived at the time to be a shirki practice. (1/10)

https://twitter.com/AbdulAzeez1924/status/1893328146126037060

I explained to him that some of my relatives were not free from this error, but nevertheless had good works, e.g. they had love for the religion and consistently read the Qur'an. I expressed my desire to consider my relatives as believers. (2/10)

﷽
In this video, Abdul Rahman suggests that Ibn Taymiyyah believed that God must have always been creating from eternity (as is evidenced by His necessary wisdom), but did not believe that God creates strictly by way of material causes. I believe Abdul Rahman is mistaken. (1/80)

https://twitter.com/abdul_now/status/1876271066961653947

I hold that Ibn Taymiyyah maintained a more rational view, which states that creating something without a prior material cause is impossible absolutely. This is evidenced by a unique section which Ibn Taymiyyah wrote in his late work Kitab al-Nubuwwat. (2/80)

Assalamu alaikum.
You say: "Yes there are metaphysical laws which are necessary... But by definition, the metaphysical is different to the physical, such as the laws of natural sciences." (1/27)

https://x.com/MuhibAldyn/status/1798794313868169521

I say: You are correct in that Ibn Taymiyyah has differentiated between axiomatic universal premises, ones which cannot be contradicted, and others which he calls natural (i.e. "scientific") premises, none of which he affirms are truly universal. (2/27)

Assalamu alaikum shaykh.
I appreciate your advice, and I ask Allah to reward you for your good intention. I disagree with your statement wholeheartedly. (1/14)

https://x.com/MuhibAldyn/status/1798763050985771162

Ultimately, there must be a set of universal laws of metaphysics that demarcate what is possible from what is impossible concerning the evolution of the universe, laws which cannot be contradicted and must be compatible with Allah's creative agency. (2/14)

Hello @stephenlaw60 Consciousness is an attribute just like power, motion and size, and it is therefore not self-subsisting. Instead, it must subsist in a clearly defined physical object in order for it to exist. (1/6)

https://twitter.com/stephenlaw60/status/1790688674692129176

According to Islamic Scripture, this physical "object" is composed of two components: (i) a material body which we can sense, and (ii) a spatiotemporal soul which we do not have the means to sense but which can be observed in principle. (2/6)

The Many Theological Advantages of Ibn Taymiyyah’s View of Perpetual Creation – Part 1

– A thread 🧵 {In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful} - {﷽} (1/24)

﷽
Allah has created Adam in His image in the plain sense that is accessible to children, but His attributes are maximally perfect and are unequalled by the attributes of created beings. Allah has two blessed hands, five fingers in *each* hand, *two* shins, and two feet. (1/17)

https://twitter.com/Lubnanix/status/1784637321481945388

The narration which mentions Allah leaning on a rock is an Israelite narration, and we ought not accept it or believe in it. (2/17)

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful ﷽
I recently replied to a post by Haroun Kanj in which he accused the Atharis of believing that God has two feet and only one shin. (1/26) Such accusations have been circulating on the internet for some time now, thanks to the work of anti-Muslim apologists. They would present caricatures of hideous entities that have multiple hands on one side or only one shin, claiming that this is the God of Islam. (2/26)

Assalamu alaikum shaykh.
If by "time" we are referring to the temporal relationship between two events, then it is not ontological but rather a purely relational attribute. It is meaningless to say that such a meaning of time is created or uncreated, because it doesn't exist. 1/6

https://twitter.com/DrShadeeElmasry/status/1747982933040808423

However, if by time we are referring to the measure of motion, then this is an extra-mental attribute that must subsist in a moving substrate. Because it exists extra-mentally, this meaning of time must either be (i) created, or (ii) existing without being created. 2/6

In a recent discussion with a brother, I pointed out that a genuine ignorance of the message of Islam is a valid excuse that will prevent some of the unbelievers (who died upon unbelief) from entering the Hellfire. (1/24) This is because this valid excuse opens up the possibility for them to enter Paradise in the Hereafter once they are tested by Allah subhanahu wa taala. These people are known as Ahl al-Fatra. (2/24)

﷽
الإمكان الخارجي إما للفعل وإما للحدوث. ووجودية إمكان الفعل، وهو الاستعداد للفعل، أمر بديهي. فإن الاستعداد للفعل إما أن يكون هو القدرة على الفعل وإما أن يكون إمكانا هو صفة من لوازم القدرة على الفعل.
(1/10) وعلى الحالين لا بد أن يكون وجوديا. فإنه لا بد من الفرق الثبوتي بين الذات القادرة والعاجزة، كما لا بد من الفرق الثبوتي بين الذات التي يمكن عنها الفعل والذات التي يمتنع عنها الفعل.
(2/10)

Assalamu alaikum. You are correct that compound creations must be preceded by simple elements. More generally, if something is "from" another in any meaningful sense, then the existence of that other cannot be like its nonexistence. The element must be a condition instead.
(1/10)

https://twitter.com/MuhibAldyn/status/1653819965789577223

I assumed you did not know this because you seemed to agree that Ibn Taymiyyah was saying in Kitab al-Nubuwwat that God has been exclusively creating things through istihala (substantial change).
(2/10)

Generally speaking, this is a beneficial and much needed discussion, but not without its mistakes. The speaker argues that Ibn Taymiyyah always held that creation ex nihilo is possible, which is not true.
(1/25)

https://twitter.com/MuhibAldyn/status/1653584887494979585

Ibn Taymiyyah originally believed that creation ex nihilo is possible, even clearly articulating this position in Mas’alat Huduth al-‘Alam. However, he later accepted in Kitab al-Nubuwwat that ex nihilo creation is impossible.
(2/25)