Response To the Mistakes of Hanafi Fiqh Channel || Part 3 ||

Sign up now to AMAU Academy: www.amauacadem...
AMAU Academy: www.amauacadem...
AMAU Junior: amaujunior.com/
Instagram: / amauofficial
Patreon: / amau
Telegram: t.me/amauofficial
KZbin: / amauofficial
Twitter: / amauofficial
iTunes: podcasts.apple...
Spotify: open.spotify.c...
Get in Touch: amau.org/getin...

[@ozairtahir9276]

[3:50] Abdur Rahman Hasan begins with a lie and a contradiction in one. He states that the position of tafwidh is that the characteristics mentioned in the Qur'an are mere words and letters. However previous to this he stated in his definition of tafwidh, that it means to consign the meaning of the said characteristics to Allah. If it means to consign the meaning to Allah then how is tafwidh nullifying or negating these characteristics so that they are nothing but letters and words since it is acknowledged that they have a meaning? Shaykh Mohammad Yasir has clearly stated that tafwidh is not to make the words meaningless or just blank letters but rather that these characteristics are ambigious and instead of getting into confusion about their meanings, we consign it's meaning to Allah. Either Abdur Rahman Hasan is ignorant of this or he is making himself ignorant of this, both are as bad as each other. [6:00] Again in his faulty explanation of what tafwidh is, Abdur Rahman Hasan says the meaning is consigned then yet again goes on to say that there is no meaning it. We suggest that he and whosoever reads this, sees the concise and comprehensive definition of tafwidh that Shaykh Mohammad Yasir gave in his series from Lisan al-Arab, you may see and be assured yourself that it does not state that the intent of tafwidh is to say there is no meaning behind a thing as Abdur Rahman falsely claims. [6:21] Here he states the modern characteristic of the Ashaa'irah of not wanting to accept certain characteristics is inherited from Jahm ibn Safwan. Again Abdur Rahman Hasan is either deluded himself or is choosing to be ignorant of the truth. Shaykh Mohammad Yasir has stated clearly in the series that the characteristics are affirmed and accepted as they have come and the meaning is consigned to Allah. Just because the Ashaa'irah choose to consign their meanings to Allah and do not take them on the apparent or literal meaning, the neo-salafis of this age falsely accuse them of negating/refusing to accept these said characteristics and this is nothing short of slander. If only Abdur Rahman Hasan watched Shaykh Mohammad Yasir's entire series before getting excited to record a refutation attempt he may be the wiser (evidence that he has not watched the entire series will be given below). [8:42] Here Abdur Rahman narrates a story from Imam al-Bukhari's Khalq Af'al al-I'bad about Jahm ibn Safwan saying that he wishes he could remove the verse "The Most-Merciful Rose over The Throne" and that he kicked the mus'haf after reciting about Allah speaking to Musa (alayhisalaam). After stating this story, Abdur Rahman states that the hating of these characteristics and the mentioning of these verses is from the methodology of deviants. We ask, where have any of the Ashaa'irah demonstrated any dislike or any actions such as the one mentioned in the story that we should be likened to Jahm ibn Safwan in such a way? Rather if one reads our works they will see that we accept Allah's Istiwa over the arsh and Allah's speaking to Musa (alayhisalaam). Once again, just because we do not submit to the twisted interpretation that the neo-salafis want to enslave us with, we are accused of disliking these ayat and sifat of Allah, a further wretched slander. Let Abdur Rahman come forward and show us from our books where we have attempted to remove these ayat and speak against them. As mentioned earlier in this thread, we mention it again for the relevancy to what Abdur Rahman has stated: Imam Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani al-Maliki (b. 310 - d. 386 AH) mentioned in his Kitab al-Jami, translated into English by Abdas Samad Clarke under the title: “A Madinan View on the Sunnah, courtesy, wisdom, battles and history” (Taha publishers, London, 1999, p. 30): Someone said, ‘What about one who narrates the hadith, ‘Allah created Adam on his form,’ and that ‘Allah will unveil His shank on the Day of Resurrection,’ and that ‘He will put His hand into Jahannam and bring out whomever He wills out of it’, and He (Malik) rejected them strenuously, and forbade anyone to narrate them. Someone said, ‘Ibn Ijlan has narrated it.’ He said, ‘He was not one of the people of fiqh.’ Malik did not reject the hadith of ‘descent’ nor the hadith of ‘laughter.’ Someone said, ‘What about the hadith that ‘the Throne shook because of the death of Sa’d?’ He said, ‘It should not be narrated, and what call has a man to narrate that when he sees what danger it contains?’” Will Abdur Rahman also call Imam Malik (rahimahullah) a jahmi or a deviant? [9:46] Here Abdur Rahamn states that negating (ta'til) the characteristics of Allah is the methodology of the Jahmiyyah, a statement for which he would be correct. However he then says at [9:59] right after it that tafwidh is the methodology of the Jahmiyyah and that it has no place among the salaf. Yet again, another contradiction; is ta'til (negating) the methodology of the Jahmiyyah or is tafwidh (consigning) the methodology of the Jahmiyyah, it cannot be both and with this we are sure that Abdur Rahman is confused. As for his claim that it has no place among the salaf, we will see how he fairs with his claim against the 60 quotes from the salaf on tafwidh. [10:18] Abdur Rahman states that the salaf were known to do Ithbat al-Sifat (affirmation of the attributes), can he show us where any Ash'ari has negated the sifat of Allah. Notice also how he said that the salaf were known to have affirmed the sifat but he did not claim that the salaf affirmed them upon their apparent as the neo-salafis usually claim.

[@ozairtahir9276]

[10:28] He claims that the majority of the Qur'an are names, attributes and characteristics of Allah, and that for somebody to claim that the majority of the Qur'an's meaning is not known goes against the reason why Allah has revealed the Qur'an. As much as it is a false claim that majority of the Qur'an is mention of Allah's attributes, it's also very clear that Abdur Rahman has no idea where tafwidh is applied. Tafwidh is applied in those ayat that are mutashabih (ambigious) as Allah has mentioned there are ambiguous and clear (muhkam) ayat in the Qur'an, Allah says in Surah Al-Imran, verse 7: It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah. But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding. [Sahih International] We are saying we only do tafwidh in those verses which are ambigious (mutashabih) and Allah is saying in the Qur'an that majority of the Qur'an is clear and precise, so how have we rendered the majority of the Qur'an meaningless. Once again, we advise Abdur Rahman Hasan to watch the series thoroughly before he jumps ahead of himself. [11:58] He states that at the end of every verse of the Qur'an you will find a name or an attribute of Allah and that Allah mentions a characteristic in just about every verse of the Qur'an. We ask, which Qur'an have you been reading brother Abdur Rahman? Indeed Allah makes mention of His names and attributes often but is it not an exaggeration to say that its the case in just about every verse of the Qur'an? Abdur Rahman should understand the differenced between the sifat al-khabariyya and sifat al-aqaliyyah that Shaykh Mohammad Yasir has explained and he can understand that among the sifat of Allah, those which tafwidh is applied upon is narrowed down even further to a very small number; further proving that his claim is baseless. [11:36] He states that the salaf would affirm Allah's characteristics and all those after them would affirm all of Allah's names and attributes, believing in their meanings and their realities. There is no dispute here, we do not deny that any of the salaf or khalaf were upon the above, indeed we too are upon this! To claim that we deny Allah's characteristics or that we do not believe in them is a slander and had Abdur Rahman put his bias to a side and read even some of the most basic of our books he would know this. Either he is ignorant or he is making himself ignorant of the truth, both are as bad as each other! [12:15] A quote of Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr is given wherein he claims that it is an ijma' (consensus) that all the sifat of Allah are taken literally. Firstly the consensus that Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr brings is not a consensus from the salaf. Secondly Imam Abd al-Barr's statement here regarding taking the sifat "ala'l haqiqa" means to accept the reality of the sifat, not to take the meaning literally. This is further enumerated by other statements of the Imam: Imām Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr - may Allah have mercy upon him - said: "And a group ascribed to the Sunna said that He, the Exalted, descends with His Essence! This statement is rejected, because He, Exalted is His mention, is not a locus for movement and He has nothing from the signs (characteristics) of the creation." [Al-Istidhkār: 8/153] He also said in his refutation against someone who said that He descends with His Essence: “This is rejected [laysa bī shay’in] according to the people of understanding among Ahl al-Sunna because it is a modality [kayfiyya], and they flee from that because it is only suitable for something that is directly encompassed, and Allah, the Exalted, is transendent above that.” [Al-Tamhīd: 7/143] He also said in Al-Tamhid 18:345: وأما قوله (يضحك الله) فمعناه يرحم عبده عند ذاك، ويتلقاها بالروح والراحة والرحمة والرأفة، وهذا مجاز مفهوم 'And as for his statement (Allah 'laughs'), it means He has mercy on His servant at that, and receives him with repose, comfort, mercy and affection; and this is a well-understood metaphor.' So here the Imam is giving a metaphorical explanation! Salafi Shaykh Hamd Al-Tuwaijiri (of King Sa'ud University), after rejecting Ibn Abd Al-Barr's statement comments: لكن لعله يلتمس لابن عبدالبر عذر في ذلك، أنه فسر الصفة ببعض لوازمها ومدلولاتها، وهذا سائغ عند السلف 'However, perhaps Ibn Abd Al-Barr can be pardoned for this; he explained the Attribute as per one of its [various] connotations and considerations, and this is warranted according to the Salaf.' So even a salafi acknowledges that giving metaphorical meanings is warranted according to the salaf, in fact Imam Ibn Rajab even states that Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr was opined to the view of ta'wil (allegorical interpretation) of Allah's attributes: "A part of Ahl al-Hadith had inclined towards [Ta’weel] regarding the Hadith of Descent, specifically, among them: Ibn Qutaybah, al-Khattabi, and Ibn Abd al-Barr; it has been advanced on authority of [Imam] Malik, and there is dispute regarding its authenticity on his authority; a party among our companions, of those who inclined towards the discussion, adopted it .." [Ibn Rajab in Fath al-Bari 9/279] Take note Abdur Rahman! [14:58] Next he brings a quote of Imam al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi and then interpolates his own words "the meaning" in reference to taking the sifat on the dhahir (exterior), nowhere does the Imam make mention of "ma'na" so why is Abdur Rahman putting words into the Imams mouth? He even says in [15:30] that the Imam said "go over its apparent" which means affirm the literal words but go over them without meaning, this is a proof for tafwidh which Abdur Rahman is distorting as an evidence for affirmation according to the literal meaning! The proof that he meant take it on the literal words and not meaning is that after saying the above, he says: "And we do not say that they [the attributes] are limbs/parts (jawarih) and we do not liken the hands, the hearing and seeing to the parts and limbs (adwat) of actions." If those attributes were to be taken on their literal meanings, they would all necessitate limbs and parts and therefore proves that he did not mean take the literal meaning.

[@ozairtahir9276]

[15:42] He now claims to give a quote of Ibn al-Qayyim and this is an ultimate fail. Of course he would opine to the view that the sifat are taken on the literal meanings, the series that Abdur Rahman is responding to is demonstrating against Ibn al-Qayyim so how can he be used as a proof?! All of a sudden, it becomes a quote of Imam Ibn Kathir! Even then its just a statement about accepting the sifat as they came which turns out to be another evidence for tafwidh as theres no statement whatsoever about taking the attributes in the literal meaning! Abdur Rahman cannot be serious at this point! He then goes off on a tangent speaking of the status and manaqib of Ibn Taymiyyah as though praises of other scholars deflects the problematic things that he stated and absolves him of any error. At [21:40] he mentions that a great student of his, Imam al-Dhahabi praised him with some words. However he also harshly reprimanded him which the neo-salafis will not tell you about, take a look here and let me quote just one sentence of what Imam al-Dhahabi said about Ibn Taymiyyah which is relevant here, he says: "What are your followers but hidebound do-nothings of little intelligence, common liars with dull minds, silent outlanders strong in guile, or dryly righteous without understanding?" Here are more critical statements on Ibn Taymiyyah from Imam al-Dhahabi: Imam al-Dhahabi mentions that ibn Taymiyya’s followers weakened, and that he was forbidden from issuing fatawa due to his views on talaq, yet he remained stubborn on his views: “His followers weakened and he involved himself in weighty questions that neither the intellects of his contemporaries nor their learning could bear, such as: the question of the expiation of the oath of repudiation (talaq), the opinion that repudiation (talaq) uttered three times is valid only once, and the opinion that repudiation (talaq) during menstruation is not valid. He composed writings about these topics in the order of some forty quires. Because of this, he was forbidden to issue legal opinions (fatawa). He controlled himself in a strange way and held firm to his own opinion.” [al-Dhahabi, Nubdha in Bori, “A New Source“, 336, (Arabic Text) - 342 (English Translation)] Imam Adh Dhahabi (D. 748AH) describes the position of Ibn Taymiyyah’s closest companions and “fans” from the unique opinions that he has: Dhayl Tareekhil Islam pg. 328 - 329 www.archive.org/download/alhelawy06/tiz53.pdf ولا ريب انه لا اعتبار بمدح خواصه والغلاة فيه فان الحب يحملهم على تغطية هناته بل قد يعدونها محاسن. أهـــ “And without doubt, no consideration should be given to the praise of his closest companions or those who are extreme in their admiration for him. Their love for him will make them cover his mistakes, nay they may even count them to be from his good deeds.” Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani: forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117 Imam al-Dhahabi (D. 748AH) said in Dhuyool Al ‘Ibar fee Khabari man Ghabar, page 84: s203841464.onlinehome.us/waqfeya/books/10/0923/0923_4.rar وله مسائل غريبة نيل من عرضه لأجلها “And he has strange (rulings on) issues, due to which his repute was under fire” Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani: forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117 Imam al-Dhahabi (D. 748AH) said in Al Mu’jam Al Mukhtass bil Muhadditheen, on page 25 (pg 45 in the PDF reader), bio #22: www.archive.org/download/waq1281/1281.pdf وانفرد بمسائل فنيل من عرضه لأجلها, وهو بشر له ذنوب وخطأ ومع هذا فوالله ما مقلت عينِي مثله ولا رأى هو مثله نفسه. أهــ “And he went alone on issues that, because of them his repute was under fire. And he is a man. He has sins and mistakes. Yet despite this, by Allah, my eyes have never seen the likes of him, nor has he seen the likes of himself.” Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani: forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117 In his book, Tadhkiratul Huffaadh pg 1497, Al Imam Adh Dhahabi (D. 748AH) mentions about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah: www.archive.org/download/waq1331/1331.pdf وقد انفرد بفتاوى نيل من عرضه لأجلها وهي مغمورة في بحر علمه, فالله تعالى يسامحه ويرضى عنه فما رأيت مثله. وكل واحد من الأمة فيؤخذ من قوله ويترك فكان ماذا؟ أهـــ “And he went alone to make unique fatawas, due to which his repute came under fire. Yet they are submerged in the ocean of his knowledge. So may Allah forgive him and be pleased with him, for I have never seen anyone like him. And since the case with everyone in the Muslim Ummah is that some of their statements may be accepted and others may be rejected, what is the problem?” Courtesy of Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sondalaani: forum.aslein.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=117 Imam Adh Dhahabi (D. 748AH) said about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah: مع أني مخالف له في مسائل أصلية وفرعية “However I disagree with him in creedal and legal issues.” See pg 329 of Dhayl Tareekh Al Islam: www.archive.org/download/alhelawy06/tiz53.pdf

[@muhammadjoshua7464]

مشاءالله

[@Spark12429]

@@ozairtahir9276 if Allah( swbt) only knew the meaning of the ambiguous verses then how did the prophet( swaws) knew about them.... Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Allah will take the whole earth (in His Hand) and will roll up the Heaven in His right Hand, and then He will say, "I am King! Where are the kings of the earth ? " حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ مُقَاتِلٍ، أَخْبَرَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ، أَخْبَرَنَا يُونُسُ، عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ، حَدَّثَنِي سَعِيدُ بْنُ الْمُسَيَّبِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ يَقْبِضُ اللَّهُ الأَرْضَ، وَيَطْوِي السَّمَاءَ بِيَمِينِهِ، ثُمَّ يَقُولُ أَنَا الْمَلِكُ أَيْنَ مُلُوكُ الأَرْ Narrated `Abdullah: A (Jewish) Rabbi came to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and he said, "O Muhammad! We learn that Allah will put all the heavens on one finger, and the earths on one finger, and the trees on one finger, and the water and the dust on one finger, and all the other created beings on one finger. Then He will say, 'I am the King.' Thereupon the Prophet (ﷺ) smiled so that his pre-molar teeth became visible, and that was the confirmation of the Rabbi. Then Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) recited: 'They made not a just estimate of Allah such as is due to Him. And on the Day of Resurrection the whole of the earth will be grasped by His Hand and the heavens will be rolled up in His Right Hand. Glorified is He, and High is He above all that they associate as partners with Him.' (39.67) حَدَّثَنَا آدَمُ، حَدَّثَنَا شَيْبَانُ، عَنْ مَنْصُورٍ، عَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، عَنْ عَبِيدَةَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ قَالَ جَاءَ حَبْرٌ مِنَ الأَحْبَارِ إِلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَالَ يَا مُحَمَّدُ، إِنَّا نَجِدُ أَنَّ اللَّهَ يَجْعَلُ السَّمَوَاتِ عَلَى إِصْبَعٍ وَالأَرَضِينَ عَلَى إِصْبَعٍ، وَالشَّجَرَ عَلَى إِصْبَعٍ، وَالْمَاءَ وَالثَّرَى عَلَى إِصْبَعٍ، وَسَائِرَ الْخَلاَئِقِ عَلَى إِصْبَعٍ، فَيَقُولُ أَنَا الْمَلِكُ‏.‏ فَضَحِكَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم حَتَّى بَدَتْ نَوَاجِذُهُ تَصْدِيقًا لِقَوْلِ الْحَبْرِ ثُمَّ قَرَأَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏{‏وَمَا قَدَرُوا اللَّهَ حَقَّ قَدْرِهِ وَالأَرْضُ جَمِيعًا قَبْضَتُهُ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ وَالسَّمَوَاتُ مَطْوِيَّاتٌ بِيَمِينِهِ سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَى عَمَّا يُشْرِكُونَ‏}‏ Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 4811In-book reference : Book 65, Hadith 333

[@ayeee.w]

" He states that the position of tafwidh is that the characteristics mentioned in the Qur'an are mere words and letters. However previous to this he stated in his definition of tafwidh, that it means to consign the meaning of the said characteristics to Allah." You have misunderstood his words. He knows tafwidh is to consign the meaning to Allah and that He alone knows this. However he means that as a consequence of this, you are saying that Allah had revealed it in the Qur'an for absolutely no reason but to confuse the people. If only He knows the meaning of these characteristics, then why has He filled his final revelation to mankind with it? And there are ambiguous verses in the Qur'an, but that does not mean that they are completely unknown to mankind and serve no purpose whatsoever. We obviously cannot know the full interpretation such as the how and why of everything Allah does, but we can affirm it is real, hence "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord". If you say that you do the same, then we are in agreement. However it seems you are trying to imply it could mean other than what is apparent, which would be a problem. If someone finds the verses of Allah's mercy or truthfulness to be ambiguous, can they say only Allah knows the meaning? If you say that we should refer back to the scholars, I say that we do the same regarding Allah's names and attributes, and we refer back to the scholars of the Salaf. If you say we refer to hadith to explain the Qur'an, i will refer you to the many hadith of the Prophet (S.A.W) affirming Allah's names and attributes, whether by pointing above the heavens to refer to Allah's place, or by pointing to his ear to refer to Allah's hearing, or by grasping his hand to refer to Allah's hand on the Day of Judgement grasping the heavens and the earth. This is the purpose of Allah mentioning his names and attributes, so we can reflect on our Lord and direct our worship to an God, rather than an idol, or according to you, a question mark. He has the most perfect names and attributes and His attributes are not like that of his creation at all, nor are they non-existent metaphors reducing Allah to an idol which only exists within itself, rather they are greater than we can comprehend. And also, the majority of the Qur'an is about Allah's description. Unfortunately, people fail to see it as they differentiate between the descriptions they like and the descriptions they do not like, so they assume the names, attributes and characteristics of Allah is only referring to the 99 names or attributes like the hand or the rising of Allah above His throne. Rather, the characteristics of Allah is all of that which describes his nature. The entire Qur'an could even be considered a description of Allah and His beautiful names and perfect attributes. This is because even when He praises the believers, it is a reflection upon His mercy and how He honours whoever He wills. When he disgraces the disobedient, astray ones, it is a reflection upon His wrath and that He is the One who punishes and the One who humiliates and the One to whom all power belongs. To Ahlus Sunnah, there is no distinction between the attributes Allah ascribed to His Self (Sifāt Dhātiyyah) and the attributes ascribed to His Actions (Sifāt Fi’liyyah). We affirm them all and Allah is our Lord, the Most Perfect, the Most Wise. “And (all) the Most Beautiful Names belong to Allah, so call on Him by them, and leave the company of those who belie or deny (or utter impious speech against) His Names. They will be requited for what they used to do.” [al-A’raaf 7:180]. And Allah knows best.

[@MinhajAlislamiyah]

minhaj as salafiyia mashallah refuted the hanafi fiqh akeedah. .

[@fahdfriends]

well done for puncturing the devils deception of pseudo hanafi fiqh channel.....

[@usamaasad6595]

الله اكبر

[@zeynep118]

Haahahah how funny is it when its about Ibn Tayymiyah they cover everything but they can talk so bad about the great imams :D Google more

[@SC-oe9nc]

He is using the famous red herring strategy. What a shame for you as a talafi avoiding every point of the original video no response at all. This is a shame for the whole talafi sect. Shaykh Yasir brought more then 40 quotes from the salafusaliheen books and references regarding the Names and Attributes of Allah and the aqeedah of the salaf. This person who tries to be slick failed historically. But the question is that will he repent and ask for forgiveness?????? and become Ashari?????

[@abumuhamedaleealansari7811]

S C was the prophet alayhi salaam an ashari ?