Islam's Greatest Debates: Al-Ghazali & Ibn Taymiyyah Face Off

[@galibahmed1818]

Ibn Taymiyyah, "Yes, the Quran commands rememberence. But this should be done prescribed by the Prophet (PBUH), not through rituals that were introduced later" End of debate!

[@Electroripper1]

But then imama Gazzali did clarify that he doesn't also vouch for the extremist and extremism in sufism which are out from the Shariah, rather he was making stance for what is within Shariah.

[@sissitOoO]

He makes a good point but this phrase can be interpreted in so many ways that's why islam is not an intellectual prison and allows different interpretations And that's why so many people in the world practice it even tho they're completely different

[@sissitOoO]

Also Ibn taymiyah contradicted himself he did "tajsim" by saying that God exist in space and have a shape Wich AbduAllah Ibn Abbas ra clarified it was not the case so Ibn taymiyah introduced a concept that was not prescripted by the Allah, the prophet not his compagnons

[@Abdulhaqq7148]

Do you think imam ghazali dont know that?? This debate happen to discuss about this matter, of course..

[@wiilwaalarawelo5795]

Only knuckle Heads say End of Debate in other words our way and no other way. When confronted by Knuckle Heads the best policy is to just leave them gracefully and pray for them

[@naveedpasha2502]

Seeing Islam through the eyes of philosophy❎ Seeing Philosophy through the eyes of Islam✅

[@marzgaming7176]

💯 establish your iman first, then get philosophical

[@Kirk-d7v]

@@marzgaming7176 We need an established imam or a scholar to debate on the *God Logic* podcasts

[@Solopernuer1]

you dont mix islam with philosophy , islamis divine guidance , Allah perfected the deen

[@Solopernuer1]

you dont mix islam with philosophy , islamis divine guidance , Allah perfected the deen

[@HistoryBasis]

TBH before going to philosophy, people need to be sound on the religion

[@M0E.O_O]

This is one of the best things an AI can be used for , It shows two Scholars wanting the best for Islam but have different thoughts on how to do so, I wished if our Scholars nowadays can respectfully debate with the intention of finding the truth without being closed minded. Great Work Brother ❤

[@YahyaMohammed14]

This shouldn't be a thing the scholars are dead

[@Ahki_AbuBakr]

Lol it's the sunni salafi athari scholars on truth and a scholar of bidah aka a sufi who would be in hellfire

[@Kirk-d7v]

@@YahyaMohammed14 Dead? Why? Not the *God Logic* podcasts debates again?

[@Kirk-d7v]

@@M0E.O_O Would it resolve Sunni vs Shia debating a disagreement?

[@mohtashimshomu7404]

Well Ghazzali (ra) and Ibn Taymiyyah(ra) both had good command over English ❤

[@nitian1]

but a little poor in translation it seems. 😂

[@mohdrizwan1719]

​@@nitian1you mean ibn taymiya?😅

[@acecream1411]

Two brilliant minds I lean more towards Al Ghazali‘s standpoint but can’t deny that Ibn taymiyya has some valid points which we see nowadays with all these different sects deviating from ahlus sunnah wal jamaah

[@alhassanmudasiru4066]

Ibn taimiyya is not judging people who are indiscipline and or innovative but seeking to criticize the mulhid sufis for directly and indirectly promiting them to the detriment and or division of islam into sects. WalLaahi listening to this debate makes me feel sufis are out there to both directly and indirectly defend and promote indiscipline, innovative acts and beliefs, and madness. If people knew who mulhid sufis are, they would have preached to them to stay away from their no-shari'a habit and heed the rebuke in Qur'aan 6:153 and 6:159. If you know the aforementioned verses and how they were interpreted and applied by the Prophet (S.A.W.), the majority of the companions, and the majority of the greatest scholars of Quruwn Al Mufaddala, you would drive any mulhid sufi away who comes to you to market his innovation.

[@Xirsiev]

I am truly fascinated and grateful; both of them have great knowledge, mashAllah. May Allah have mercy on them all.

[@hatcher921]

This video is showcasing an reductionist take of their views. Ibn taymiyyah was against using kalam or logic as a first principle to derive Aqidah or creed. He himself used to kalam and formal logic to refute his opponents, and his main critique of the kalamists is the fact that they use logic to derive their views on creed when the only thing to derive Creed should be the Quran and sunnah. He himself critiqued logic but considered it a tool like any other. But never to derive creed.

[@akserayi]

True.

[@M7ner08]

Yes he is oversimplifying it

[@Innominate74949]

Except he literally did what he was against. Creation ex materia is not found within either of the two yet he held its view. Same with temporality of hellfire and perpetual creation.

[@M7ner08]

@@Innominate74949 temporality of hellfire is lie about him.

[@Innominate74949]

@@M7ner08 it isnt. Ibn Qayyim has said it about him and this was in his latter life.

[@Andras999]

Islam is the highest and purest form of philosophy. Eastern and western philosophers throughout the ages wrote volumes upon volumes attempting to understand life and the human existence resulting in complex and at times incomprehensible explanations where as in the Holy Qur’an Allah swt gives the answer in just one short ayat 51:56 “I have not created the jinn and men except to worship me”

[@عبدالله-ن6ه2ص]

bn Taymiyyah's books are considered references by Muslim scholars in criticizing Christianity, Shiism, Sufism, Greek philosophy, etc. Ibn Taymiyyah was a sea of ​​knowledge and the books he wrote constitute a very large library

[@j.r.r.tolkien8724]

Ar-Razi did much more than that. The amount of knowledge that Ar-Razi has produced drowns that of Ibn Taymiyyah. Same thing goes with An-Nawawi whose books are being taught to every student of knowledge to this day regardelss of creed.

[@dcanebreezy5784]

@@j.r.r.tolkien8724 Smelling asharite pagan plato philosophy

[@cano5063]

@@dcanebreezy5784 you ignorant fool to equate ashari methodology with platonian philosophy and shirk. Insulting many of our great scholars that even you pseudo salafis hold in great esteem. You have no knowledge what so ever. Go study history a bit instead reading pseudo salafi forums and copy pasting the lies that are spread there.

[@skythepro1236]

ironic how the ashari scholars were the ones fighting against philosophers. e.g imam ghzalis books against philosophers and mutazilites ​@dcanebreezy5784

[@thetruth2493]

😂😂😂

[@abdulrahmanabdulkadri4825]

It would be great with more quotations from Quran and Sunnah and their individual books

[@AshKhan-v1y]

UNIQUE & INVALUABLE! Thank you ❤

[@ahxd951]

Wild that you called Imam Ghazali rh. just a philosopher

[@cano5063]

@@ahxd951 the ignorance of the internet.

[@ahxd951]

@@cano5063 indeed, may Allah protect us all

[@cano5063]

@@ahxd951 just on the side brother your profile pic is very.. let’s say unfitting. From so many possibilities it is surely not the only picture left. Don’t be offended I wish you the best.

[@ahxd951]

@@cano5063 I agree 😂, this was my signature from over more than 7 years ago. I usually dont comment often so I didn't mind but you are right, I will change it, Jazak Allahu Khayran ❤️

[@ReachByteBurst]

​@@ahxd951bro changed nothing 😭🙏

[@MohamedShou]

I will never DISRESPECT any of the great Ulama in Islamic history especially Al Ghazali and Ibn Taymiyyah. These two had amazing minds and they delved into philosophy, even Ibn Taymiyyah loved going into philosophy from the Greeks and other Muslim philosopher works. Unlike certain followers of the Najdi Dawah sect of today and the last century that think Ibn Taymiyyah had a pre MIAW mentality, Ibn Taymiyyah got nothing to do with the Najdi sect sorry 🤷🏾‍♂️

[@amirulrusli2953]

Ibn Taimiyah delved into philosophy to defeat the philosophers, not to adopt philosophy as his belief

[@sksajjad7847]

But many of the aqeedahs are picked from ibn taimiyah by the najdis, though najdis also introduced a lot after taimiyah and they are a complete heretic.

[@syedahmadmuhajiralhaddad6091]

@@amirulrusli2953 no different than Alghazali then.

[@amirulrusli2953]

@@syedahmadmuhajiralhaddad6091 no disrespect to al ghazali as he is a big scholar in Islam, but the Ashairah aqidah itself is an islamisized greek philosophy

[@alancient8463]

@@amirulrusli2953 Asharis literally uses philosophy to defend Islam from those criticizing it, when ibn Taymiyyah does it you're happy when we do it you get upset wtf is that hypocracy?and just so you know it's not limited to just greek philosophy.

[@mdtwfq]

Ibn Taymiyyah allrounder, may Allah grant him highest level of jannah

[@altamashbaibars9477]

He was the mujadid

[@dilawarjoemman5543]

you must be a wahabi.

[@mdtwfq]

@@dilawarjoemman5543 Yes I'm, ex-hanafi maturidi 💣

[@AbdallaAmeri]

@@dilawarjoemman5543 You do know that wahabi is basically used as a slander right? There is no real islamic sect called wahabi, nor do wahabis exist. It's all in your head.

[@gardenvillas2704]

Excellent Approach🤲🏻 MaashaaAllah☝🏻 The nuances of circumstances they lived, create “the crutches” in the approach of each Maulana, but in essence they complement each-other along the indefinite Time🤔

[@theghost7537]

Brother, this video comtains a lot of good infos, don't ruin it by adding music. May Allah guide us all

[@PeaceChanel]

Thank You for All that you are doing for our Planet Earth.... Peace.. Shalom.. Salam.. Namaste 🙏🏻 😊 ✌ ☮ ❤

[@arsalanshaikh3763]

Very informative I really learn a ton from these beautiful discussions, thanks a lot.

[@hajrospio8091]

Ibn Taymiyya was truly a gigant of his time and many lies are spread about him. He fought on more sides in the way od da'wah and even on the battlefield

[@Shaheed_Azhary]

I think AI misunderstood whole thing. Gazzali was pro Philosofy and refuted greek philosphy and invented Islamic philosophy. While Ibn taimiya was blindly opposing philosophy

[@esswasim]

Blindly opposing philosophy? Did you hear the whole thing? What does Allah say about believers? That they hear and they obey. RIGHT? So Allah is clear with instruction to believers that what comes from Quran and Sunnah, in that matter there is no questioning rather obedience. But Allah talks about disbelievers that don't they reason, reasoning to leave the false beliefs of worshipping idols and anything besides Allah is for the disbelievers, for those who believe they hear and they obey that is because they are Muslim meaning they submit to will of Allah entirely and they know that Quran and Sunnah are Haqq and cannot be challenged.

[@ukholida8320]

Thank you. We need to be critical of these AI videos.

[@gafooret]

@@esswasim Allah asks the capables to think,research, and explore through his Aayats instead of a blind belief. Blind belief is only related with ghaib which can't be proven by human minds. So try and find reasons if it's there it's good to enrich your faith if it's not possible believe blindly, realizing it can be a ghaib. Wallahu a‘alam

[@latusalihyasalim4872]

Al ghazali changed his mind on some issues before he died, just like Abu hassan Al-ash’Ari. that says a lot.

[@abdulbasithsg]

Al Ghazali changed his views on philosophical matters well before his death. Then he wrote Ihya. This is mentioned in his autobiography. Al Ashari left Mutazila, formed Sunni theology school of Ashariyya and destroyed deviant schools. Whereas Ibn Taymiyyah deviated in matters of Aqida and sought forgiveness before his death (according to his student Al Dhahabi).

[@latusalihyasalim4872]

@@abdulbasithsg what are you talking about? Al-Ahari changed his views two times, after he left the mutazili group and after he met ibn Kulkab he also changed his views that he adopted from him, which is also the case with Aljuwayni, and some say A-Rrazi too. they might not let go of everything they used to adopt but looking at the things the say about kalam later on is very crucial. this is what happens to those who follow their minds and ignore the clear textual resources from kitab and sunnah. by the way don’t mention ibn taymiyyah, he’s a soldier of Allah who destroyed this entire sick ideology of kalam.

[@TheGEOPOLITICIANGUY]

@@latusalihyasalim4872hes right in many ways

[@shoebkhann307]

​@@latusalihyasalim4872😂😂ibn taymmiyah was devient ! Now cope

[@latusalihyasalim4872]

@@shoebkhann307 👋

[@AlMujadidiaSydney]

The power of AI now going to assist more towards in the disunity of the Ummah.

[@crazykindor6439]

I don't think so. Presenting those paradoxes can either be a call to reflection, inner medidation and deepening of iman and understanding or be a call to make war of ideas. The good believers will take the first path, while the astrayed ones will take the second. It is not due to the AI debates, but due to the lack of iman of the bad believers. That's why we must establish prayer and be constintently asking Allah 15 times a day: "Ihdinas-Siraatal-Mistaqeen". Salaam Alaikum ya habibi.

[@bazeeg]

AI-Ghazali's approach is more practical and rational than Ibn-e-Taimiyyah's approach, which is conservative and rigid. Al-Ghazali here is addressing the real-world problems of man, he is addressing the grey area which is our reality. No perfect black and white exist in this world that's why the door of repentance (Taubah) is open till one's last breath. Ibn-e-Taymiyyah, however, is asking for an absolute black-or-white approach, an ideal way as one can say, which is impossible in the real world. This debate was fantastic. Keep it up.

[@shayumrahim7882]

The Quran was revealed to a Jahilee world full of grey areas, and the Prophet SAW embodied the Quran with his actions. It would be sacrilegious to think that the Quran and Sunnah in their pure form are inadequate to deal with the “realities” of this world.

[@ДжонДжонсон-ж2ж]

'I stay on on your lord' once one suffi said to people before entering a mosque. The people were shocked by his words. Centuries later it turned out to be that he was standing on some gold treasure.

[@3amopr638]

Barakallaho feek for this video

[@asemyamak3984]

Thanks man big video

[@tahsinaaron5563]

A conversation that took place in other form of time… Beautifully performed by logic and anti logic. Both’s date of departure create attachment of another form of “Blackout” btw However, all together of ‘em is “splendid” and Strongly informative from a revolutionary perspective. Requesting Dr. Zakir Nayek or this generation’s best one’s to acknowledge this one please.

[@OmerTamer]

I would tend to think, judging by the arguments, that the characters should be opposite: Gazai advocating the fate and Ibn Tamiyya advocating the use of philosophy.

[@aliumustapha4222]

I know right

[@PantheraPardus-Fk]

Both are great scholars ... Allah have mercy on them.

[@ousmansanneh128]

I agree with ibn Tamiya but likewise imam Ghazali makes a point weakness of faith is possible too...the prophet said a strong believer is better than a weak on the side of God although their is goodness for both

[@3kbschannel288]

It seems that they agree more than they disagree.

[@AbrarManzoor]

Great video and well researched.

[@yassersharif]

It was all done with ai. They just copy and pasted some text from both scholars and let ai do the rest

[@AbrarManzoor]

@@yassersharif i know it but it also requires hardwork

[@Muwahid999]

@@yassersharif You're making it look so easy , as if Ai was programmed by another Ai with no human hardwork.

[@hamzaboghdadi1764]

my conclusion after watching the video... reason and logic are important tools to differentiate between Islam and other religions because what I believe Islam has the best logics and reasons over any other religion and it's also important for inviting other people to Islam, but we should know our limitations as a human that we can't get answers of everything and struggling to get answers of everything can lead to overwhelming experience.

[@mahdisultan3546]

ISLAM GIVES ANSWERS TO EVERYTHING, THE PROBLEM IS THAT DIFFERENT PEOPLE MAINLY SCHOLARS HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS ON DIFFERENT PROBLEMS THATS WHERE THE CONFUSION IS CREATED…. SO THE ANSWER OF ANY PERSON FOR A PROBLEM WHICH IS MORE CLOSER TO QURAN AND HADITH IS THE ONE TO BE ACCEPTED AND TO BE DONE…

[@mogamadridwaan1809]

This debate makes as if Imaam Al Ghazali didn’t rely upon Qur’an, Sunnah, then Ijma’, because he is defending the use of reason or philosophy. Ibn Taymiyyah was Athari, which mean he interpreted beliefs based only on texts in the most literal sense. Imaam Al Ghazali was Ashari, so he referred to beliefs within the rationalist framework of kalaam, whilst taking first from Quran and Sunnah. Ibn Taymiyyah diverged from the ijma’ in specific points, especially attributing human body parts to God. Ibn Taymiyyah was a Sufi also and referred to Sh Abdul Qadir Al Jaylani as Our Shaykh and he wore a cloak of his Shaykh as well. His student Ibn Al AlQayyim also wrote a book about Tasawwuf or Sufism and the path to Allah. He also approved of some good innovations like Mawlid and Nabi. Ibn Taymiyyah as claimed here is not from his own writings. He was a true Sufi, unlike the modern Wahabbiyah as presented here. Also it seems to be made like Sufis don’t follow Quran and Sunnah & only follow bidah. Imaam Al Ghazali wrote a book called the beginning of Guidance, which took all the practices from Sunnah and then tells students this is the beginning of the path to Allah. Very poorly done as a computer cannot understand, rather it regurgitates information in papers written by Wahabbis claiming that Ibn Taymiyyah said such.

[@HabibUllah-dt4tr]

Please use some quotations from their books.

[@Juice715]

Very interesting video, could you do an athari vs ashari one?

[@Esotericperson]

Sheikh ibne taimiya consider himself khalifa of Abdul qadir jilani a Sufi saint and even speak highly of juanid boghdadi

[@cineshop2529]

Very informative video and at the end Clearly imam taymiyah wins the debate

[@shihanafridhi9517]

I lean towards Ibn Taymiyya as he opposed bid'ah

[@huzaifah4016]

I love this my brother

[@LemiKubsa-p3o]

Great Debate ❤

[@akserayi]

Islam is simple. Worship God. These debates are of secondary order. And anyone who is unconscious of this fact remains a fool ignorant of scripture.

[@cvhashim]

👆truth

[@Thrawnio]

Excellent channel

[@buFFlosouljah1]

Im a revert of three years. What I heard was "we should follow the Quran and sunnah" vs "I feel like my feelings and desires should take precedence over what the prophet peace be upon him said we should do" Why don't the people who disagree with our prophet peace be upon him, just drop the name muslim and come up with what they consider better? Their own new religion with their own prophets and scholars? Allah doesn't need us and as many people stop practicing islam (may Allah protect us) just as many like myself come in.

[@syedahmadmuhajiralhaddad6091]

this statement by itself is a fallacy. You misrepresent Alghazali's approach into something he never said nor advocate for. Even Ibn Taymiyah himself resort to philosophical arguments when dealing with non-Islamic arguments which further proves Alghazali's point that it can used to affirm revelation. All knowledge belongs to Allah it is how we utilise that knowledge that is important. Even the khawarij during the time of sahabah used the Quran as source doesn't mean their actions are all in accordance with what is intended by Allah and His messenger.

[@buFFlosouljah1]

@syedahmadmuhajiralhaddad6091 one is arguing to follow the prophet peace be upon him and any other argument means they disagree with the prophet peace be upon him. Am I correct?

[@BlazySM-qp4yn]

@@buFFlosouljah1 Could you point me where Imam Ghazali contradicts the prophet pbuh and replaces revelation with philosophy?

[@omarayoubi7861]

Neither of them disagree with the prophet. You can be a fond of philosophy without rejecting the prophet. Let me give you one critic of Alghazali. According to him if the prophet didn’t engage in a discussion then we shouldn’t either. Based on his logic, we shouldn’t engage in physics and chemistry because he says everything that happens is because god order however saying that fire changes paper to Ashes doesn’t mean you reject the role god plays in this process

[@HoA1207-n8b]

​@syedahmadmuhajiralhaddad6091 Subhan Allah! A revert knows the essence of Islam more than someone who learns Kalam and philosophy. Ibn Taymiyyah did not use philosophy or Kalam to show how contradictory philosophers are in their philosophy or Kalam. Al-Ghazali also hated philosophy and wrote against it.

[@salman0ansari]

quotations from the original source would be great

[@TobinFrost]

Thanks for sharing

[@enimal524]

There are many mistakes in this conversation, you should have based it on more material to actually get more accurate depiction. Ibn Taymiyyah Rahimahoullah was a Sufi himself of the Qadiriya, it's stated in his major work of Majmoo' Al Fatawa, so making it seem like he was against it doesn't make sense. He was indeed against certain forms of Sufisms in which he believed there were innovations, but he wasn't at all a refence in the field. Secondly making Ibn Taymiyyah look as an older man in dumb, as you stated he was born 200 years after Imam Al-Ghazali and in matter of impact for the Muslim Ummah he is like a child compared to him.

[@abdurrehmankhan2590]

Great debate , but this doesn't encompasse the whole truth about the views of these two most revered imams of our faith . I have just finished the Ahia by Imam Ghazali and found him completely against Philosophy and Kalam . He has written two books on Philosophy, in the first book he explains about the Philosophy to the extent that people of his age concidered him as Imam of Philosophy but than he wrote its antithesis and condemned the Philosophy. So to understand we should read the books written by Ghazali or Ibn e Timia otherwise we are likely to loose their real teachings and pt of view n concepts. JazakumAllah

[@zeeshansheikh6012]

Imam Ghazzali Such a genious ❤ Ibn Tayymiyyah top class Scholar ❤

[@FarhanMahdi-hb8kn]

only one is haqq

[@HelloWorld-rg8ee]

@@FarhanMahdi-hb8kn ibn Taymiyyah is right

[@virtualwanderer]

​@FarhanMahdi-hb8kn Imam Al Ghazali whilst on the wrong aqeedah is still considered as a great scholar of his time. His work is invaluable and we lean heavily upon him in matters of ilm of hadeeth.

[@zulfizakarya5703]

​@@HelloWorld-rg8eesays a brain dead wahabi

[@FarhanMahdi-hb8kn]

@@virtualwanderer Fiqh and Aqeedah are totally different bro. broken aqeedah = broken iman broken fiqh means nothing at all.

[@you7tube7Abukhaled]

Ibn Taymiyyah did not bring anything new; rather, he revived what the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions practiced, especially after the spread of Islam. In essence, it is Islam as understood by the righteous predecessors, without innovations or superstitions.

[@AfrozQureshi-j3b]

I shared it with my beloveds

[@waleabdulhamid4522]

Please give us imam suyutti and ibn taymiyyah

[@momenshtayeh67]

I agree with al-imam Al-Ghazali on philosophy but agree with al-imam Ibn Taimyya on the rest of the debate topics

[@ryangolden8522]

The great debate? They were 150 yrs apart.

[@jonascarlsson3]

Dude it's not real. It's AI's take on how a debate between them might have sounded like

[@aLone114]

Is there such debate between Ibn Sina and Ghazalli?

[@Abdullah-qd1zv]

Beautiful, May Allah bless the team...How can we contact with the content creators of this channel

[@Dekker-l2x]

Ibn taymiyya had a student and that was the mountain scolar ibn al qayyim. Belief that

[@annuruddinlomotos730]

Al-Ghazali and Ibnu Taymiya did not meet because of the difference in their times. Al-Ghazali (1058-1111 CE) lived during the Abbasid Caliphate, while Ibnu Taymiya (1263-1328 CE) lived during the Mamluk Sultanate.

[@AtticBooks]

thanks for the clarification!

[@Paksufi1]

​@@AtticBooks😊

[@MustafizulIslam-o9g]

Imam Gazali was around 10,11. Century and Sheikh Ul Islam Imam Ibn Tayyimiyah was around 12,13 century, so how could this debate possible 😂

[@AtticBooks]

this is a simulated debate based on their respective works.. as it has been said in the beginning..

[@salman0ansari]

are you born dumb?

[@Electroripper1]

I think telling it debate is kinda wrong rathe it was sharing their ideaology and interchange ideas and both shared their ideaology and tried to come to a common ground as the debate was delving deeper it was not that they were allineated or allineating.

[@damascus6155]

This is an extremely poor & frankly poor representation of Ghazali and ibn Taymiya. The tone of voice affects perception also. Both Muslim philosophers Al-Ghazali and Ibn Taymiyyah articulated the dominant philosophical theory of knowledge. The Difference: Ibn Taymiyyah held that knowledge is justified true belief or a set of beliefs presented by Prophet Muhammad Peace be upon him. While Al-Ghazali claimed that God creates knowledge in us without changing the creed of Islam. Basically Al Ghazali says we need to evolve our system to evolve as people while Taymiya says no stick to the knowledge of the prophet in 600 AD which is fine. but we aren't there. if Al Ghazali thought had prevailed, Muslims would be in a better place. there is other knowledge. What Ghazali says is that the Creed given to us by God Via prophet doesn't change. but instead the system of studying and evolving our spirituality. If u even wonder why Muslims tend to be backward and haven't pushed their generations to study until the 1900s. well that might give u insight on how thought affects the manifestation of self.

[@Kirk-d7v]

I don’t think they could do anything more except discussing it on the *God Logic* podcasts.

[@jackj357]

sufism is very deep connection with god and Prophet Muhammad (SAW) there are two types in sufism one is deobandi and the other is naqashbandi which was passed down from hazrat abu bakar (RA) whose rank was extremely high in saints legacy, Naqashbandi is the legacy of hazrat abu bakar (RA) which was ten passed down to the later generation because after prophets are awliya (saints) who will keep glorifying prophet muhammad (SAW) because the miracles of prophets are an awliya (saints) karamat, If someone want to learn about sufism they should learn from a trusted person because in internet everything is against sufism.Hazrat abu bakar (Ra) said that I showed only the first part of the knowledge if i should the other part these people will come for my throat so because somethings are very complicated.

[@Kirk-d7v]

@ *Acts 19:13-16*

[@designexecution8995]

This is completely wrong what we are seing they were both scholars who submitted their life for islam ...there is always been differences of opinion from the time of prophet pbuh...its about the reasoning and the acceptance ...not to win arguments and create sects...plus what we are seeing in this video is against islamic thoughts which create difference in ummah n deviate from right path n creat confusion leading to weakening of faith...May Allah guide us ...

[@szlyar]

Is it fair to say Ibn Taymiyyah won the debate?

[@DevidMatin]

No he was ignorant of what Al ghazali (R.A) was trying to point out

[@user-wr4yl7tx3w]

Who won out in history?

[@Electroripper1]

To tell who won would be wrong as both shared their ideaology and tried to come to a common ground as the debate was delving deeper not that they were allineated or allineating

[@sheikhsuhail2533]

Imam Ghazali rahimahullah was a great personality.

[@ssebitaabawamala6861]

The philosophical path would have saved the Islamic golden age....

[@tirichmirinfotainmenttv6482]

My question to Ibn e Tayemia: how do you see the innovations introduced by Umar such as taraweeh and tableegh introduced by some people in 20th century? So, às per your logic all those rituals are haram which are introduced or adapted latter, it simply implies that the practice of tarawih and tableegh is haram and contradictory to what the Prophet did.

[@syedanaushabinzakirkhan20p50]

Faith cannot simply be without deeds. Part of faith is to believe in the obligatory acts. I'm no one but I think it's illogical to separate iman fram amal!

[@aadilshaukat9073]

This is the creed of Ahlul Sunnah

[@dcanebreezy5784]

In fact, Faith without deeds is an empty account. Faith without proper belief is not faith. (for example christians and jews) This is not even debatable. Period! It's a fundemental of our Deen Quran and Hadiths are clear about this. Such subjects should have never existed. Peoople of whimes and desires will alaways find ways to justify their disobedience.

[@10zz0]

Quran 103:3 “except those who have faith, do good, and urge each other to the truth, and urge each other to perseverance.” Notice how Allah is telling us that faith comes first than actions come after. I wish I could study the Quran more closely and carefully with a qualified sheikh

[@jadeysi4]

I think the point A.I. Ghazali is making is not that deeds and faith are seperate. He even agrees that they are connected and interdependend. The point here is that deeds are not everything and not enough to judge about the faith of a person. While deeds can be a reflection of the faith, they also can be an illusion. For example: there are many people who pray consistently, fast, spend charity and even stand in the night prayer yet they are stealing, lying and commiting sins. There are also people who do not pray, fast or spend charity but yet they refrain from sins and are good, merciful and honest to the creation. These examples demonstrate that people and their deeds and faith are not as simple and black-white as taken. People are very complex and deeds are one aspect of them, the outward reflection of something hidden and much more complex; faith. In the end, it is God alone who knows the intentions and the state of the Heart. If we only go by the outward deeds, we can easily be fooled. For example: someone might not sin at all and do plenty righteous deeds like praying, fasting and charity. Yet they hold much arrogance in their heart. Another one may lack observing the religious obligations through human weakness and falls into sin regularly, but is very humble, regrets and seek forgiveness continuously while hoping in Gods mercy and trying to become better. From the outside the two examples shows a faithful and unfaithful person but we cannot see the inside, which shows that the second one probably is more faithful than the first. These examples just show that while faith and deeds have a relation and connection, they are not the same and are different dimensions of a very complex person. While we can judge the deeds of a person, we can never conclude the state of the heart from it as only God knows what is in the Heart. And thats - I believe - is what A.I. of imam alghazali r.a. is trying to say

[@TheGEOPOLITICIANGUY]

wait who made this video show me one book where Ghazali said to use intercessors…..? smh

[@dcanebreezy5784]

You can not seperate deeds from faith. This is irrational and unislamic. Quran is clear! Hadith is clear! early muslims were clear about such topics. Should not even be a debate, it's a fundemntal. Period

[@roshanburgai3902]

Imam Alghazali is at least 2 centuries closer to the Prophet Muhammad PBUH, that's one of the reasons I would accept Imam Alghazali over Ibn tayemia.

[@virtualwanderer]

That's a fallacious way to measure truth. There were many of those at the time of the salaf as salih that were upon the wrong path. It's like the verse where Allah says the misguided say "I follow what my forefathers did before me"

[@Perozes-gh4lx]

Ghazali’s work speaks for itself, very few scholars have reached such heights

[@FarhanMahdi-hb8kn]

Judaism came before islam with the truth of monotheism go follow monotheism then as it applies with your theory.

[@roshanburgai3902]

@FarhanMahdi-hb8kn U don't like to engage your God-given mind/ brain. I have never seen a single one in Wahabis to have the ability of critical thinking. They are litralist, stupid, and almost all of them.

[@Tarek-f8h]

Abu lahab was in prophet pbuh lifetime what does that mean

[@darkz8015]

Both r great

[@moha-nf8uh]

التعليقات كارثة عوام ويعملون حالهم فاهمين الله يهدينا

[@j.r.r.tolkien8724]

Ibn Taymiyyah considered whatever he could not conceive and justify rationally to be an impossibility. Salafis would be shocked to know this but it's true. All their lives they were taught not to use their brains in issues of Aqeedah only to find that the founder of their manhaj was a philosopher. Read Bayan Talbis Al Jahmiyah.

[@dcanebreezy5784]

Well, let's refute briefly al Muqalida jahmiya First, Ibn taymiyah is not the founder Second, Ibn taymiyah followed the salaf. Third, Ibn taymiyah was not a philosopher but he had to refute them. Fourth, Sahaba and all the early Muslims did not believe or known "Ilm al Kalam" Fifth, The salaf considered "ilm AL kalam" as a heressy and an innovation Sixth, Ahlu Sunnah do not talk in the Unseen Matters but were forced to respond to your Predecessors "Mutazilah and jahmiyah" Shubuhat. Else, they do not talk about it. It's forbiden to talk about what we do not know about. "ولا تقولوا على الله ما لا تعلمون" Seventh, Our understanding come from Quran and Sunnah. Not Plato pagan philosophical Fundementals and principals about The existence of God. Eight, Quran and Sunnah are clear about The attributes and names of Allah swt. Nine, The method of The salaf and early imams : They describe Allah swt with what He described Himself with, and with what His Messenger described Him with: من غير تحريف، ولا ‌تعطيل، ولا تكييف، ولا ‌تمثيل Ten, We do not believe in some Attributes and disbelief or Make ta'atil and ta'wil in others. It's a package u can not take some and leave others because it does not fit your so called rationality^^ or Aristot- plato principals. You take em all or leave them All. You can not try to rationalize some and say "There is nothing like unto him" but reject other Sifat and names ^^ Mubtadiah are all the same

[@Al-Azdi]

@@dcanebreezy5784 ابن تيمية يقول بأن القرآن قديم النوع حادث الآحاد، ويعبر عنه بأنه محدث فما الفرق بينه وبين المعتزلة؟ ابن تيمية يقول بالقدم النوعي للعالم فما الفرق بينه وبين أرسطو وفلاسفة اليونان؟ ابن تيمية وتلميذه ابن القيم يقولون بفناء النار فما الفرق بينهم وبين الجهمية؟ ابن تيمية يقول بإن الله لا يستطيع الخلق من كتم العدم (تعالى الله عما يقولون) في كتابه النبوات، فما الفرق بينه وبين الفلاسفة؟ ابن تيمية أيد نظرية الغريزة التي قام عليها مبدأ أرسطو، والتي هي في جوهرها تخالف قيومية الله على خلقه(والعياذ بالله)، فما الفرق بينه وبين الفلاسفة؟ من يثبت العلو بمعنى الجلوس والاستقرار كابن تيمية، ما الفرق بينه وبين الحلولية الذين يقولون بحلول الله في المخلوقات؟ ما الفرق بين من جعل عمل الجوارح من أركان الإيمان وبين المعتزلة والخوارج؟ قبل أن تتهمنا وار سوأتك ثم استفهم منا عن مذهبنا

[@Al-Azdi]

@@dcanebreezy5784 Ibn tayimiah wasn’t a philosopher? LOL. Oh boy you’re in for a surprise! Just read (النصيحة الذهبية) and (زغل العلم) it’s a message of advice to him by his own student Al-Hafiz Al-dahabi before Ibn tayimiah died.

[@tilahungebretsadik]

Al Ghazali was born in 1058 and ibn Taymiyyah in 1263 yet the latter is the older in the video 😂 Being progressive has nothing to do with age

[@pkimalaysia]

Both are great imams and get my respect. However, ibn Taimiyyah is my favorite.

[@3umar_661]

Do not use drawn images of living things brother, it is haram.❌️

[@bachoundaseddik250]

the sciences of religion are sciences of proof, the debate is inamportant if the Ai will just bla bla bla about their opinions from their books, we dont take the truth from them but we take by evidence the truth from man in general.

[@galaktikhoroz9338]

Gazali can not go near ibn taymiyyahs knowledge in islam. Gazali is a good philosopher tho.

[@M-Ayub-khan]

Al-Ghazali became the Hujjat al-Islam and Ibn Taymiyyah became Hujjat to kill and suppress other Muslims 🤷‍♂. The narrow-minded thinking of Ibn Taymiyyah is so clear even in this AI-generated debate.

[@shoebkhann307]

Shykh ul islam hujjatul islam ! Imam ghazali R.a !

[@shadishehata224]

Ibn Taymiyah's view on sufism and secret knowledge as well as bidaa could be done better.

[@erwinsmith5381]

اللهم صل على سيدنا محمد

[@ServoDeAllah1]

Why music it is haram

[@coachzoro]

How come Al-Ghazali and Ibn Taymiyyah face off, where Al-Ghazali lived in 450 to 505 Hijrah and Ibn Taymiyyah lived 600 plus hijri, how come they face off?

[@Omar-hh2bk]

0:11 'imaginitive'

[@coachzoro]

@@Omar-hh2bk yeah I found it that way, when I look to his channel then I understand, whereas he does the same method with the other scholars in different era and centuries. Such a magnificent work and idea to do this!

[@alhassanmudasiru4066]

WalLaahi listening to this debate makes me feel sufis are out there to both directly and indirectly defend and promote indiscipline, innovative acts and beliefs, and madness. If people knew who mulhid sufis are, they would have preached to them to stay away from their no-shari'a habit and heed the rebuke in Qur'aan 6:153 and 6:159. If you know the aforementioned verses and how they were interpreted and applied by the Prophet (S.A.W.), the majority of the companions, and the majority of the greatest scholars of Quruwn Al Mufaddala, you would drive any mulhid sufi away who comes to you to market his innovation.

[@a-factoracademy]

What is Quran and Sunnah😢😢😢... Muslims are sent Quran and nothing else ... In the Quran is the Sunnah, anything else is confusion upon confusion.

[@TheGEOPOLITICIANGUY]

most of u HAVE NEVER READ Abu Hamid al-GHAZALI (I can tell - do not say you have if you disagree with this because ALLAH knows the truth) - and I would bet HALF of u ibn Taymiyyah lovers have not even read one of his works but rather have listened to his “ideas” through OTHERS if u read BOTH of their works…. You would KNOW Ghazali would wipe the floor with ibn Taymiyyah ….. and I RESPECT ibn Taymiyyah …. but read their works …. actually read and give it a try and get off YT and you will see what I mean one was a great jurist who at times contradicted himself one was an absolute brainiac with a FIRM understanding of Islam btw who do u think u learn ur fiqh from? including Taymiyyah? - no, not shafi’i (ra) … rather Ghazali … all modern fiqh taught in 90% of mudrassas around the world are books BASED off Ghazali’s Mustafasa …..

[@ukholida8320]

Becare using AI infos. Keep being critical & gather your own knowledge. Ask for confirmation from a righteous knowledgable teacher.

[@nawazkhanbaluch9098]

Assalaam alaikum. When will these debates end? And when will we concentrate on worshipping Allah subhana wa taala? We have very little time on this planet, and we are wasting it by arguments that will not be of any profit in the hereafter!

[@dcanebreezy5784]

How can u worship Allah when people believe in Plato principals and ignore clear cut texts ? In fact, u can worship Allah while spreading awareness so peoople do not go astay. How can u seperate deeds from faith? Is faith acceptable without proper belief? ofc; No! Isn't Quran and Sunnah are clear about the Must Do of deeds. THese subjects should have never been started. But, People have whimes and desires and will always try to do whatever they want and take people with them into oblivion. There are people of Whimes and desires and we have to expose them and show the Dalil from Quran and Sunnah. SO people don't go astray.

[@Lebronibnabdi]

Ibn Taymiyyah bodies Ghazali

[@Cricketers.United]

Al ghazali W

[@HelloWorld-rg8ee]

@@Cricketers.United no brohter that was a los... never we can take or brains above the revelation of Allah and the teaching of the Prohet. BIG WIN FOR IBN TAYMIYYAH

[@zulfizakarya5703]

​@@HelloWorld-rg8eeok wahabbi ..now happy ? Lock your brain and declare everyone wrong

[@rhymeflakes]

@@HelloWorld-rg8eeyou two guys just like kids. Both of them are brilliant and defender of ahlu sunnah

[@syedahmadmuhajiralhaddad6091]

@@HelloWorld-rg8ee your statement prove you understand nothing about Alghazali's approach to the issue of reason and revelation then.

[@BlazySM-qp4yn]

@@HelloWorld-rg8ee how do you define "above"?

[@waleabdulhamid4522]

Imam ghazali 🦾

[@ahmedabdi319]

العلم قال الله قـــــــــــــــال الرسول قال الصحابة هم أولو العرفان ليس العلم نصبك للخلاف سفاهة بين قول النبي وبين قول فــلان Ibnu taymiyah point is the safest and most reliable. فَكُلُّ خَيْرٍ فِي اتِّبَاعِ مَنْ سَلَف وَكُلُّ شَرٍ في ابْتدَاعِ مِنْ خَلَفْ وَكُلُّ هَدْيٍ لِلنَّبِّي قَدْ رَجَحْ فَمَا أُبِيحَ افْعَلْ وَدَعْ مَا لَمْ يُبَحْ فَتَابِعِ الصَّالِحَ مِمَّنْ سَلَفَا وَجَانِبِ الْبِدْعَةَ مِمَّنْ خَلَفَا

[@coachzoro]

How he has the safest point and most reliable while the scholars in his time thrown him into Dhalal?

[@dcanebreezy5784]

@@coachzoro so if some scholars call you Dhal, does that mean you are? When these scholars themselves believe in Pagan greeko platonic concepts about Allah Ofc, i will take it everyday Go read about Al salaf and their rejection of Ilm al Kalam and considered it as "INNOVATION" Al mutakalimah base their deen on ILM AL KALAM. They do not believe it's an ijtihad but A FUNDAMENTAL of their creed and beliefs in Allah. Even if going clearly against Clear texts. iLM AL KALAM introduced endless heressies and saying about Allah what he did not say (or his prophet) In fact, contradicting and going against it. Ibn Taymiyah had to use philosophy to refute their philosophies. But his justifications and argument are all from Quran and Hadith. Period!

[@TheGEOPOLITICIANGUY]

Btw I respect u making this video as it is very smart idea that no one has yet tried - SO KUDOS TO YOU - dont want to be harsh - but some of what “taymiyyah says” to ghazali was not even a ghazali ideal?? and using tahafut and ihya is not even two comparable books to bring the table to use AI - use ihya and maybe iqtisad instead if u do this next time

[@abouttoihihoumadi7125]

This impoverish the Man that was Ibn Taymiyya. It's quite the opposition of his words in Majmuʿa al-fatawa 11 where he said Sufi means Ṣ̌adīq. The arguments hereupon are out of date

[@ryojs4286]

This is destructive and not thinking through AI doesnt comprehend anything

[@Mohibnsu007]

In a real life Debate Imam al Ghazali will eat Ibn Tammiyah for breakfast. I respect Ibn Tammiyah, but modern salafist is doing a great harm to his image.

[@jalilsarwar6906]

What harm are salafis doing? By just following the Quran and Sunnah according to the salaf?

[@benhamadouchewalid]

Didn't Ibn Tayymiyah lose by default because he is using reason to prove that we shouldn't use reason?

[@cryptogenie01]

Ghazali❤