THE ATHARI CREED - “WHATEVER BEFITS ALLAH’S MAJESTY!” يليق بجلاله

[@IslDt]

if I understand everything correctly, confirm it to me, brother @BroHajji

[@KnowledgeNorth]

May Allah increase you in all good

[@ryancooper3449]

I really really appreciate the end part. As a layman who comes from a maturidi background but have little to no knowledge about it id rather not have to defend a position. If its sufficient for me to say I believe in what Allah affirms for himself and nothing more its so much easier.

[@mashallah1635]

Bro you don’t even need to go into these stuff unless your a scholar, if your a normal Muslim then that’s it you don’t even need to know, Duno why people who don’t study engage in arguments lol even scholars barely do this so we shouldn’t

[@ryancooper3449]

@@mashallah1635 I never indulged into this until extremist salafis started aqeeda checking us and confusing us.

[@IslDt]

I would like to clarify brother I understand athari do not believe that Allah is exalted on the throne of place or direction, they just believe that "Allah is above the throne(الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَى) - no "how". I am from Dagestan, my brother, and I do not speak English very well, I clarify. Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.

[@zakirnaikahmaddeedat3651]

Masya Allah Allaahumma Baarik

[@sohail6759]

Mashā'Allāh 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽 Excellent video, best series on KZbin on athari creed 👏🏽

[@ShaykhGoogle]

asalaam alaykum, akhi Your statements/reading about Ibn Rajab (r), shows a version of tafweed. This takhsis, "2 different realities", "one for humans and one for Allah", is, in effect, tafweed al ma'na. This is a similar approach to ibn Qudamah al Maqdisi (r). But ibn Qudamah explicitly said tafweed al ma'na. You guys, 'Taymiyya type Atharis', state that you know the meaning of these words, *as they relate to Allah*, not just linguistically in the Arabic language. Now, if you follow up on this statement with a statement like "but we don't know the reality", you're effectively negating the meaning you just claimed you knew. Further, I don't remember seeing ibn Taymiyyah make this type of takhsis of "2 realities". Now, you can claim that when he says "not like humans", that's the same as making the takhsis, but that would be flawed. Because you can't affirm Allah is "up" in the same reality as the human understanding (which you guys do), and then claim its a different reality for Allah's, azza wa jal, other Attributes. Have you ever heard an ibn Taymiyyah type Athari, today, ever say something like "we affirm these Attributes but there are 2 realities to them"? Think about it. If it was just as simple as affirming a word, and then saying but we don't know the reality of it, as it relates to Allah, this would effectively be similar to Maturidi tafweed. The problem with you guys is saying "we know the meaning of the word [as it relates to Allah]." You and I both know that you guys aren't just affirming the meaning linguistically. Lastly, I will leave you with a quote from Ibn Rajab to help you understand the point: "What is meant by it is that His Nuzul (lit. descent) is not spatial movement from place to place, like the descent (Nuzul) of created things.” -Fath al Bari (the same book you were quoting from) Now, please tell me what the is the meaning of descent that you guys claim to "know" and affirm for Allah? Because ibn Rajab clearly affirmed "Nuzul" and negated the meaning. Ibn Taymiyyah-type Atharis claim that the meaning of Allah's Nuzul ("descent") is known. If you try to tell me that your belief is: just affirming the word, and it's meaning in Arabic (but NOT the meaning that applies to Allah), + you don't know the reality of the Attribute, then MashaAllah you've been a Mufawwid the entire time; an actual Athari, similar to the belief of the actual Salaf. If my comment sounded rude or sarcastic, please accept my apologies. Sometimes I get a bit carried away with these topics. I don't like the word games and misreprentations. Your audience trusts you to be honest and sincere, so let's try to maintain that. May Allah bless you.

[@narmi218]

Excellent explanation brother as I couldn’t agree more. I don’t see how they are affirming a literal meeting like descend and ascend while at the same time denying that it constitutes movement or displacement when it pertains to Allah. Because to deny movement for these words is to strip them from their apparent meanings. So in actuality they are only affirming the words and negating the apparent meaning so the end result seems very much like tafwidh.

[@narmi218]

@Path of Sahaba It suffices to say “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”

[@narmi218]

@Path of Sahaba I can understand life as it pertains to Allah without appealing to a biological definition of life which only pertains to created beings. I can also understand life as it pertains to Allah by what is opposite from it which is non-life or death. Allah is ever living, ever lasting and death does not overcome him. I can also understand life as it pertains to Allah as existence for Allah exists, he is one, without beginning and without end. So negating a biological definition for life as it pertains to Allah does not negate the attribute of life for Allah. Allah descends and ascends but does not constitute movement or displacement. Since the apparent meanings of these words indicate movement which we do not ascribe to Allah, I say that I believe in them in accordance with what Allah and his messenger intended by them. I am inclined to think this is the safest position according to my limited understanding and recognize the possibility that I may be in error and maybe Allah has granted you closeness to the truth and veiled me from it. If that is indeed the case, then I hope in Allah’s forgiveness that if I should die upon this, then he would not take me to account for the more abstract points of theology which the scholars themselves have differed in explaining. And Allah knows best

[@narmi218]

@Path of Sahaba With all respect, you are making sweeping generalizations and judgements ascribing things to me I did not assert or claim. I did not say nuzul is not nuzul or criticize the descending of Allah in a literal way. I questioned the claim of affirming an apparent meaning for Nuzul while at the same time negating movement. In that case you are not affirming the apparent meaning and in fact you are unable to give an apparent meaning for the word as it pertains to Allah. So to say we believe in Allah’s nuzul in a manner that best befits his majesty. Alhamdulillah no problem and I really see no need to say anything more than that but you keep on digging. So as a reminder to the both of us from the Quran “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]” You asked about life as it pertains to Allah and I believe I have provided a sound understanding of the attribute of life that is consistent with the belief of a Muslim concerning his lord. Neither did I say anything about Allah’s speech or anything about letters or sounds. I affirm the speech of Allah. The Quran is the uncreated speech of Allah. Allah spoke to Moses and I need not have to say anything over and beyond that. It is curious however that if you are claiming an apparent meaning for descent that need not necessitate movement, then by that principle you should also have no issues in affirming speech for Allah without letter or sounds (not a claim I made by the way). But you obviously do have a problem with the latter position while it is no different to the principle you applied in the case of descent. So maybe you ought to reflect on your own contradictory line of reasoning.

[@narmi218]

Dear brother, you just stated you negate the literal meaning of descent in which case you are not affirming an apparent meaning. You also claim that you “don’t say that I do not know what it means” but then do not offer any meaning either. So not sure exactly how you are affirming a ‘mana’ but if that’s what you think, then so be it. Part of knowledge and wisdom is to know when to stop. I think it suffices to say we believe in allahs nuzul as best befits his majesty. If you want to add that you know the meaning (which you are unable to provide) then that’s your prerogative. I just decide to stop before that. I do not accuse you of tashbih as I’m sure you are sincere and have no intention of comparing Allah to his creation and I would hope that you also extend the same courtesy to your Muslim brothers who are not Jahmis and do not deny attributes for Allah. As for the prophets statement, it can be clearly understood that the overriding sentiment in the Hadith of nuzul is to encourage the believers to seek his blessings and forgiveness by worshipping him in the last 3rd of the night. A message lost on many of us in trying to dissect exactly what is meant by nuzul while neglecting worship of him like an arrow that misses its target.

[@ryancooper3449]

no issue at all with the ideologies etc. But why would you say the opposition are playing with words? Because the implication is the famous scholars of the asharis were playing the game too? That implies the opposition are disgenuous. Why would they throw away heaven for semantics?

[@ryancooper3449]

@Path of Sahaba As you said they hide their kufr belief are you happy here to confirm that you make takfeer of all Asharis?

[@ShafiAshari]

@Path of Sahaba are you saying sahaba didnt made ta’weel? sbout sifat of Allah

[@ozairtahir9276]

@@Ahmad_DEno one played with words more than ibn taymiyyah 😂 The whole “apparent not literal”

[@mashallah1635]

Doesn’t allah say to something be and it becomes?

[@ShafiAshari]

your aqeedah bro hajji contradict the aqeedah of shaykh ibn qudamah al maqdisi and shaykh at tahawi. Many more athari scholar believe in the tafwid al ma’na as per say by many ashari scholar like shaykh as subki describing the aqeedah of shaykh abu al hasan al ashari.

[@mashallah1635]

These arguments only became more popular between young brothers layman’s in the past 10 years…wonder why…sure we all know the answer…if you believe allah has a hand or that he was talking about his power or wateva it doesn’t matter for a Muslim who is just practicing Islam and isn’t a scholar, you telling them they’re deviant etc causes a lot of destruction in the Muslim society, we should be busy doing worship and protecting Muslims and supporting Muslims not busy tearing into each other and being angry with each other simple because someone has a different opinion, there’s many many great scholars who are ashari and also great scholars who are athari and actually more scholars are ashari than athari yet atharis from what I seen always accuse asharis and others of being deviants and innovators and other stuff

[@mashallah1635]

If you keep presenting evidence from either side then we’d be here for years, if the scholars get it right they get two rewards and if they get it wrong one reward so if allah is forgiving who are you to call people deviants etc just because you have a different opinion, if the prophet told us that’s different

[@adilshah2841]

Alhamdulillah Hajji has finally refuted the Deobandis😂😂😂😂

[@AbdullahAburob24]

I feel second hand embarrassment for you, learn Arabic before making videos like this, this is my polite advice to you. How could you be athari (which is what the followers of Imam Ahmad used to call themselves) yet also be Hanafi at the same time? Are you part of the madhabs at the same time? I highly doubt it, I think you just don't read books in Arabic (Majmoo Al Fatawa - Ibn Taymiyah)

[@BroHajji]

😂 - Hanafi in Fiqh and Athari / Hanbali in Creed dumbo! Imam Dhahabi was a Shafi in Fiqh and Athari / Hanbali in creed. Btw…I haven’t forgot about father’s video and we will see if you comment under that video.

[@AbdullahAburob24]

@@BroHajji No need to insult, that is pretty low when someone is giving you genuine advice. قال: (قلتُ لأبي عبد اللهِ: قَبرُ النبيِّ -صلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلَّمَ- يُمسُّ ويُتمسَّحُ به؟ فقال: ما أعرِفُ هذا. قلتُ له: فالمنبرُ؟ قال: أمَّا المنبرُفنَعَمْ؛ قد جاء فيه المسائل الفقهية من كتاب الروايتين والوجهين)) (1/215) لأبي يعلى الفراء (ت: 458)، وانظر: ((المغني لابن قدامة)) (3/479). قال الأثرم: رأيتُ أهلَ العلم من أهل المدينة لا يمسُّون قبرَ النبيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم المغني 5/ 468. ولا يَمسّ الحائطَ، ويَضَع يدَه على الرُّمَّانة والموضِعِ الذي جَلَس فيه النبيُّ صلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلَّمَ، ولا يُقَبِّل الحائطَ مسائل الإمام أحمد بن حنبل رواية ابنه أبي الفضل صالح (3/61) قال عبد القادر الجيلانيُّ (ت: 561هـ): (وإذا زار قبرًا لا يَضَع يدَه عليه، ولا يُقَبِّله؛ فإنَّها عادةُ اليهود)- ((الغنية)) (1/ 91) « واتفقوا على أنه لا يقبله ولا يتمسح به فإنه من الشرك» (كشاف القناع للبهوتي2/600). قال ابنُ قدامةَ: ولا يُستحَبُّ التمسحُ بحائطِ قبرِ النبيِّ صلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلَّمَ ولا تَقبيلُه، قال أحمد: ما أعرفُ هذا؛ قال الأثرمُ: رأيتُ أهلَ العِلمِ مِن أهل المدينةِ لا يَمسُّون قبرَ النبي صلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلم يقومون من ناحية فيسلّمون » [المغني 3/559 الفروع 2/573 وفاء الوفا 4/1403]. « لأن فيه إفراطاً في تعظيم القبور أشبه بتعظيم الأصنام ولأن الصلاة عند القبور أشبه بتعظيم الأصنام بالسجود ولأن ابتداء عبادة الأصنام كان في تعظيم الأموات باتخاذ صورهم ومسحها والصلاة عندها » المغني 2/507-508 قال المَرداويُّ: (لا يُستحَبُّ تمسحُه بقبرِه -عليه أفضلُ الصَّلاةِ والسَّلام- على الصَّحيحِ من المذهبِ. قال في المستوعب: بل يُكرَهُ. قال الإمامُ أحمد: أهلُ العِلم كانوا لا يَمسُّونه) الإنصاف في معرفة الراجح من الخلاف)) (4/53) قال علي الطيالسي وهو من أصحاب أحمد: «مسَحتُ يدي على أحمد بن حنبل ثُمَّ مَسَحتُ يدي على بدني، فَغَضِبَ غضباً شديداً، وجعلَ ينفُضُ نفسَهُ ويقولُ: عمَّن أخذتُم هذا - وأَنْكَرَهُ إنكاراً شديداً» أ هـ [رواه القاضي في طبقات الحنابلة« (228/1 ط الفقي)، وذكره البهوتي في «كشاف القناع» (130/2) ط دار الفكر بيروت 1402هـ]

[@dawoodmelendez7982]

​@abdullahaburob8202, you wound him up, tho. That's why he responded to you the way he did