Shaykh Google not helping me =(

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


Athar means 'narrations' or 'texts' of the early muslims i.e Qur'an and Sunnah/hadith etc. So people who claim to follow their way [i.e. of the salaf as-saalih] say they are atharis.


Ash'aris and maturidis, these groups were influenced by the greek philosophy which entered the Muslim world during the late period of the salaf. I.e. Imam Ahmad was tortured because of this greek philosophy where he said Allah spoke the Qur'an and the rationalists said that no, Allah cannot speak because humans speak. You've probably read about this already.

You don't really need to go into the issues of this stuff since alot of it is basic alhamdulillah and the Muslim on the fitrah already knows Allah really spoke the Qur'an and that Allah is above His creation and that there is none like Him, that He can see, hear, speak etc. and that all worship is for Him alone etc. So you don't even really need to learn about the philosophy behind what the ash'ari beliefs are. You just need to know the foundations of true Islam by seeing Qur'an and Sunnah.


It would be really good if you studied the aqeedah etc with a teacher obviously who had authentic knowledge. But that fundamentals of tawheed book is good because it covers alot of the stuff briefly, and if you've touched upon Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahaab's books - thats kool (since their brief and to the point), especially the ones with an explanation since they elaborate on what is meant.

There's some good ones here too;
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/tawheed/
http://kalamullah.com/aqeedah.html


If you ever have any questions, you can even ask here insha Allah;

http://ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/forumdisplay.php?f=4 [theres a scholar there and alot of students of knowledge alhamdulillah].


ps: no i'm not offended.

 

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

Hmm I'm learning loads today alhamdulillah.

I've bought that book just placed my order now btw, the fundamentals of tawheed one btw. Also I didnt know that Ibn Taymiyyahs was aqeedah al wasitiyyah. I only knew of Imam Abu Ja`far al-Tahawi's aqeedah tahawiyyah.

One other question is that Fiqh and aqeedah is seperate na'am so in abu Haneefah's fiqh al akbar I'm pretty sure -unless I'm mistaken- that it says the same things about the attributes of Allah (swt) that the atharees take. I.E. similar to what you said before:

Whereas the salaf said that Allah speaks without His speech being similar to the creation. And that Allah really spoke the Qur'an to us.

But what about the people who claim to be hanafi in fiqh but ashari/maturidi in aqeedah? Dont the two contradict since you just said that Ashari's do not believe that Allah (swt) spoke etc

I hope my Q makes sense insha'Allah

WassalamuAlaykum

 

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


The issue on books such as Fiqh al Akbar is something more detailed and some say its attributed to imam abu hanifah while others say its not. I dont know myself so i'm going to stay quiet on it. Even then, i prefer to stick to aqeedah books which aren't controversial and prefer my beliefs which are backed with Qur'an and Sunnah and are clear and apparent. So books like the ones i linked to above


About the issue of madhabs, they're there to get your fiqh life sorted out. So basically, if you want to become a scholar - you learn under one madhab as a student of knowledge. For the layman who doesn't really have knowledge on fiqh, and just needs a fatwa - they go to any scholar who is trustworthy of any madhab and follow his ruling.

That makes logical sense and its well known through examples of lay people from the salaf. There's stories on this like two brothers got married to two women, but they slept with the wrong person on the first night. They only realised they had got married to the other person the next morning. So they got a fatwa from Sufyan al-Thawri, and he said that they should go to their original partner [who they did the nikah with], and then they heard the view of Abu Hanifah and he said that they should divorce the one they did nikah with and get married to the one they slept with [probably to make their future easier]. Obviously they weren't sinful because it was error. But it shows that these people asked two imams [who both had their own madhabs - sufyan had his own madhab too and they were both from iraq - contemporaries.] So these people asked two shaykhs from different madhabs for a fatwa. Then they chose Abu Hanifahs since it would be more wiser in the situation.

Allahu a'lam.



Anyway, so in regard to aqeedah - the truth is one. You follow that truth so long as it is the belief of true Islam. Later in history the madhabs got influenced by the different philosophies due to the nations they were spread in, due to the rulers, and other issues. The hanbali madhab stayed firm alot on Sunnah because of the firmness of Imam Ahmad during his trial - so the aqeedah of the imam was well known and firmly recorded in history.

So if someone claims to be hanafi and is ash'ari, they're straying from the way of the salaf in aqeedah matters. They're even straying from imam abu hanifah himself and the other imams. So they should really fear from that and follow the true aqeedah of the salaf (which includes the aqeedah of their imam). How can someone be ash'ari and claim to be following imam abu hanifah in aqeedah when ash'ari came after imam abu hanifah (and even the other imams)? lol.



Allah knows best.

 

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

SubhanAllah what confusion!

And what is the Aqeedah of Imam Ahmed? Athaari?

What I was trying to say at al fiqh al akbar is the literalist argument. Doesnt it say the same thing as the athari aqeedah?

Ok I'm confusing myself.

Aaand....so you're saying being hanafi in fiqh and ashari in aqeedah is incorrect then are you saying one should be hanafi in fiqh and athari in aqeedah?

WassalamuAlaykum

 

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


Yeh, the aqeedah of Imam Ahmad would be athari simply because he accepted the hadith and texts [Qur'an and Sunnah] over philosophy and other things which oppose the Qur'an and Sunnah.

The people of the athar were differentiated by the other groups by this name simply because they stuck to the texts, while other groups most of the time preferred philosophy or desires over the texts.

Aaand....so you're saying being hanafi in fiqh and ashari in aqeedah is incorrect then are you saying one should be hanafi in fiqh and athari in aqeedah?

Yeh. You don't have a choice in aqeedah matters, since the imams of fiqh had the same aqeedah [of the athar - i.e. Qur'an and Sunnah], and they only had different fiqh due to their different methods of interpretation of the islamic law of fiqh. There's way more flexibility in fiqh matters compared to aqeedah.


The aqeedah of islam is one. But in fiqh, there are different methods of understanding the fiqh of the texts to get a ruling on certain matters i.e. whether camel meat breaks wudhu or something.

Since there are differences in fiqh on matters such as these - it won't prevent you from getting to jannah. However, to have wrong beliefs on whether Allah speaks or not, or whether Allah is mixed with His creation or not can be a matter of disbelief vs belief. Wouldn't a person be denying Qur'an if they rejected some parts of it?

 

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

Ah okay I totally understand what you're trying to say now. JazakAllah khayr.

However, I'm not sure if I've asked this before but I'll ask it again insha'Allah. Just imagine for a second that fiqh al akbar was correctly attributed to Imaam Abu Hanifah rahimahullah...in there the concepts are atharee e.g. when Allah (swt) says He (swt) will get angry you take it literally and take His word for it rather than interpreting the anger as His punishment as the ashari's would...So how then do Hanafi Ashari's argue their point and backup their aqeedah? Since their Fiqh and aqeedah is saying two different things? =s

WassalamuAlaykum

 

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


That's what i find strange too sister, most of the time these ash'aris [trust me i've seen alot on http://forums.islamicawakening.com] say they are strict followers of abu hanifah but they oppose his teachings in aqeedah, the same is in regard to malik, and even al-shafi'ie (alot of hanbalis stick to the aqeedah of imam ahmad easily like mentioned above).

I really don't know why this is, its probably because their shaykhs tell them this so they accept it blindly. Its like imam abu hanifah saying that if i find an authentic hadith which contradicts my madhab - it is my madhab. But people will still blindly prefer abu hanifahs opinion over an authentic hadith. They again, blindly follow what their shaykh teaches them. It really reminds me of christians saying we love jesus, but then they stray from his teachings of worshipping Allah alone. Or some sects saying that 'W'/salafis don't love Allah's Messenger (salAllah alaihi wasalam) simply because salafis say we shouldn't overpraise people or pray at graves etc [which was commanded by Allah's Messenger himself in numerous authentic ahadith].


What i've noticed is that its a pattern in Allah's creation. History repeats itself and many people who claim to excessively love someone may say it by mouth without following or knowing the true teachings of the one they claim to love.



Allahu a'lam.

 

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

JazakAllah khayr, I've been studying the Bilal Philips Aqeedah notes, the Islamic Online University ones and I found that some of it was similar to Fiqh al akbar. Wallahu A'lam.

JazakAllah khayr again akhee ima just talk to an asharee insha'Allah and then come back to clarify any doubts if thats ok.

WassalamuAlaykum

 

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

Quick other question insha'Allah.

For more reading on the atharee aqeedah do I read aqeedah wasitiyyah?

And what is more important....fiqh or aqeedah? Not studying wise...Just...And people who call themselves Salafee....On what grounds do they call themselves salafee, that they dont attach themselves to a particular imam and disallow taqleed?

WassalamuAlaykum

 

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


like said before, its way better to learn under someone. you can read the book on the link above insha Allah, it only took Ibn Taymiyyah like an afternoon to right that book mashaAllah and so its well known that its brief. you can read that and you'll see how simple and straightforward the aqeedah is of the salaf [athariyyah] is, and it wont take you too long either (you'll be surprised and say 'this is what i believed in already' inshaAllah since the beliefs of true Islam are the fitrah of human nature.)

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/introduction/wasiti/taimiyah_1.html


Or you can read a sharh/explanation of it;
http://www.islamicboard.com/tawheed-shirk/37031-sharh-aqidatul-wasitiyyah.html


Aqeedah is so important in Islam because its knowledge thats required by every muslim to get to jannah. Whereas for fiqh, a muslim needs to know the basics to fulfill the duties i.e. salah, fasting etc. but the details of fiqh and 'usul is for the scholars or students of knowledge.


Salafis say they want to follow the way of the salaf in aqeedah, in regard to fiqh, and all issues of islam. [since they were the best generations]

Since the imams of the salaf said that they would follow the way of Allah's Messenger, and keep striving until they reached the true ijtihaad/correct ruling, even if this new ijtihaad opposed the teaching of their shaykh. That's why the imams who had their own madhab may have opposed the teaching of their teacher for a stronger evidence [and their teacher never hated them for it].

 

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


this link provides some evidences for hanafis [classical and even contemporaries] who aren't salafis (some of them are deobandis - who have some practises of sufism and have maturidi aqeedah somewhat) who actually did ijtihaad which differed from their own madhab;

http://ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=2877


its kind of useful, so check it out. its brief too alhamdulillah.

 

[Al-Hanbali]

:salamext:

^yh mashaAllaah some really good stuff...

...also to add; Shaykh Saifur-Rahmaan al-Mubarakpuri (rahimahullaah), who was a famous Hanafi Deobandi 'aalim in Madinah, author of the famous 'Ar-Raheeq al-Makhtoum'; regarding the issue of combining the prayers; he made ijtihaad differing from his madhab, and would combine the prayers when travelling .

 

[Aqeel Ahmed]

May I recommend that you use a Islamic base source like islamq&a.com if there is no results on those topics you are speaking up maybe suggest a question. If it doesn't get accepted or takes to long try asking on yahoo answers because the answers might not be what you expect but click that link google main words of website and that website should show and click the link called " similar pages". It should work inshAllah.
Aqeel

 

[SixTen]

:salamext:

this is useful insha Allah;
http://islamtoday.com/show_quest_section.cfm?main_cat_id=16&sub_cat_id=149


The doors to ijtihaad closed for a few reasons and Bilal Phillips has a book on it which is really good called 'the evolution of fiqh'.

read here;
http://www.kalamullah.com/knowledge.html [go down the page]


If you can get hold of that, it will be really good insha Allah since it has all the answers to your questions on a basic level and easy to understand.


He explains that closing the doors to ijtihaad caused alot of harm to the ummah so the ummah stopped advancing, and people relied on old fatwas which never took consideration into new factors/technologies etc. in the muslim world - so the muslims became slightly backward since they stuck to old fatwas without doing new ijtihaad for newer matters.

Doors of itjihad was closed on issues which were without a doubt sealed, such as the wearing of hijaab being compulsory, or alcohol is definately prohibited (the doors are closed on such issues to avoid deviance, as many had done so, going against the Qur'an/sunnah with extrovert interpretations and so fourth). The idea that ijtihad on new technology and whatnot being not allowed is false. You are referring to those who adopted culture into religion, hence resulting in backwardness in many nations, it has nothing to do with closing of itjihaad.

Also, sectarian issues increased because people started dividing based on the madhabs. Some 'ulama even saying that its haraam for people of different madhabs to get married to each other! [whereas nothing in Islam forbids marriage between different madhabs, infact - muslim males can even marry jews and christians.]

Again, it seems like you are saying half truths, you should source this because, I would bet, it goes back to some nutters, and you have nutters everywhere.

There was even warfare between the different madhabs where an 'aalim from one madhab could be imprisoned by people from another madhab, and his books burnt. Ibn Qudamah who was a Hanbali scholar was about to be assasinated in Egypt, because the Egyptians were predominantly Shaf'ie in madhab.

I doubt any respectable madhabis would assassinate purely because of that - if someone does it is as previously stated - nutters. You can't discredit madhabs on what extremists do. Its like discrediting Islam because of Osama.

Ibn Taymiyyah was one of the 'ulama who revived Ijtihaad [he was a mujtahid], although he was hanbali in madhab - he would prefer the Qur'an and Sunnah over all matters. And for this, he was imprisoned many times, sometimes people even attempted to assasinate him. But Allah revived ijtihaad a great deal through him alhamdulillah so that you see it becoming more common nowadays alhamdulillah.

Incorrect, he was prisoned for having extremist/flawed beliefs and spreading it. (i.e. regarding Allahs attributes)

 

[Aqeel Ahmed]

I apology because I cannot edit my post but heres the answer to your last question, the second question is complex and needs critical thinking so I would choose that one.

 

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

Can I just say that since Qatadah started posting in this thread the topic of discussion has nothing to do with my assignment, I'm asking for my own knowledge bi'ithnillah.

I have several more questions insha'Allah. Sorry if they're lame.

1) This question I'm asking because somebody said that the athari Aqidah is not Literalist aqidah, Athari Aqidah falls under Ashari/Maturidi as a sub category. But isnt Aqeedah Wasitiyyah based on the athari aqeedah just as Aqeedah tahawiyyah is based on ashari/maturidi aqeedah...so arent they (athari and the wasitiyyah work) one and the same?

2) What does it mean by the athari aqeedah being literarist? I think I'm confusing things but how does the athari aqeedah differ when it coems to the paragraph below:

And this is tafwid:

The Divine Attributes and the way of Consigning (tafwid) the meaning to Allah
The preferred position of both the Ash`aris and Maturidis when it comes to understanding those Divine Attributes that may appear to indicate some similitude between the Creator and creation is:

[1] Affirming what Allah has affirmed, such as istiwa' or His Hand or Eyes, not more and not less.
[2] Negating what Allah has decisively negated, which is any similitude whatsoever between the Creator and creation--a negation that the sound intellect readily discerns, and which was affirmed by Allah's words, "There is absolutely nothing like unto Him." [Qur'an]
[3] Consigning (tafwid) the specific meaning and details of such matters to Allah Most High.

[Bajuri, Tuhfat al-Murid `ala Jawharat al-Tawhid; Nablusi, Sharh Ida'at al-Dujunna; Abu Mu`in al-Nasafi, Tabsirat al-Adilla; Qari/Abu Hanifa, Sharh al-Fiqh al-Akbar; Maydani/Tahawi, Sharh al-Aqida al-Tahawiyya; Bouti, Kubra al-Yaqiniyyat]

From here: [URL]http://qa.**************/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=13016&CATE=1[/URL]

3) Are the opinions regarding the attributes of Allah (swt) the major points of contention when it comes to the athari and ashari aqeedah? If not, what else is there?

4) Final question insha'Allah. Somebody recommended the Fundamentals of Tawheed by Bilal Philips and said that he'd recommend it to anybody regardless of Aqeedah or madhab etc etc but since Bilal Philips works seem to be based on the athari aqeedah and tawheed falls into topics on aqeedah then its incorrect to say that just anybody could take from that book since it'd contradict the ashari aqeedah sa7?

WassalamuAlaykum

 

[- Qatada -]

Doors of itjihad was closed on issues which were without a doubt sealed, such as the wearing of hijaab being compulsory, or alcohol is definately prohibited (the doors are closed on such issues to avoid deviance, as many had done so, going against the Qur'an/sunnah with extrovert interpretations and so fourth). The idea that ijtihad on new technology and whatnot being not allowed is false. You are referring to those who adopted culture into religion, hence resulting in backwardness in many nations, it has nothing to do with closing of itjihaad.

We agree that there is ijmaa' on certain issues i.e. the obligation of salah, and the pillars is something we're united upon - that there is ijmaa' on them.

But like you say - there were other issues which there was differences on, like the talaq [divorce] - whether its 3 talaqs in one sitting (i.e. 3 talaqs said at one time) or if they are 3 talaqs only if done at 3 different times. So why did Ibn Taymiyya get imprisoned for having a different view?


Furthermore, if the early salaf and Muslims united that we should pray behind one imam for salaah, no matter what his madhab - then why did the khalaf differ to this and separate the unity of the muslims based on their madhabs? You know that the early Muslims did have differences in issues of salah (i.e. whether fatiha should be read or you should stay quiet etc), but they still prayed behind each other and never caused disunity amongst themselves.



Imam Ahmad held the opinion that eating camel meat nullifies ones Wudhu, an opinion that the majority of scholars differed from. Some students asked him, "If you find an Imam eating camel meat in front of you and - without first making Wudu - then leads the Salah, would you pray behind him?" Imam Ahmad replied, "Do you think I would not pray behind the likes of Imam Malik and Sa'eed ibn Al-Musayyab?"

http://www.islamfortoday.com/differences.htm

Thats a pure example of how Imam Ahmad [who had his own madhab] was willing to pray behind the imam of another madhab [Imam Malik ibn Anas] - even though their fiqh was different in regard to the prayer itself.



Just look at the pic below of Masjid Al Haram a few centuries ago, there were 3 different minbars for each madhab, with different adhans, different imams, different congregations.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh162/speed2kx/mak3.jpg


I'm from a sufi family background myself, and i've heard the hanafi 'shaykhs' from india/pak say that you shouldn't pray behind the imams in the haram, and if you do - you pray separately to them after that.

Is this the unity Islam is trying to achieve? Is this the way of the salaf who were the most rightly guided of people?

Again, it seems like you are saying half truths, you should source this because, I would bet, it goes back to some nutters, and you have nutters everywhere.

The new ruling was made by the famous Hanafee scholar titled, “Muftee ath-Thaqalayn”, who allowed the marriage of Shaafi’ite women on the basis of the allowance of marriage to christian and Jewish women (Zayn ad-Deen Nujaym, quoted by the 16th century CE Egyptian Hanafee scholar in his eight volume work entitled al-Bahr ar-Raa’iq.

However, this ruling implied that Hanafite women were still not allowed to marry Shaafi’ite men just as they cannot marry chiristian and Jewish men!

Evolution of Fiqh p.143 by Bilal Phillips.

I doubt any respectable madhabis would assassinate purely because of that - if someone does it is as previously stated - nutters. You can't discredit madhabs on what extremists do. Its like discrediting Islam because of Osama.

We don't discredit madhabs, but we know that a madhab derives an opinion from the texts. Therefore the authentic texts take precedence over an opinion of a scholar from a madhab.

Incorrect, he was prisoned for having extremist/flawed beliefs and spreading it. (i.e. regarding Allahs attributes)

Akhi you should read up on Ibn Taymiyya's beliefs. http://saheefah.org [a site which refutes ash'aris based on the texts and beliefs of the salaf].

He was imprisoned for a fiqhi matter, a famous one being in regard to triple divorce and whether that is one divorce or three in one go [him saying that 3 talaqs in one sitting = 1 divorce].


If you say he went against ijmaa';

Imam Muslim narrated in his Saheeh on the authority of Ibn Abbaass RAA:

Muslim Book 009 [book of divorce], Number 3491:

The (pronouncement) of three divorces during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and that of Abu Bakr and two years of the caliphate of Umar (was treated) as one.

But Umar b. Khattab said: Verily the people have begun to hasten in the matter in which they are required to observe respite. So if we had imposed this upon them, and he imposed it upon them.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamen...m/009.smt.html
​

 

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:


Try asking that person how the athar come as a subsection under the Ash'aris if the athar [texts i.e. Qur'an and Sunnah] were existent before them. The same can be said about the imams of ahlus sunnah who had the beliefs which i've mentioned earlier i.e. that Allah spoke the Qur'an, that Allah will be seen on Judgment Day with the believers own eyes because Allah says [translation of meaning];

Some faces, that Day, will beam (in brightness and beauty);-

Looking towards their Lord; [Quran Qiyamah 74:22-3]
​

It's amazing how Allah makes the part in bold the 23rd aayah, separate to the part before (22nd verse.) Maybe emphasizing on the 'looking towards their Lord' part.




I don't want to go into details, but i'll tell you that certain ash'aris reject authentic [mutawatir - with so much chains of narration that it couldn't be a lie] ahadith! simply because it contradicts their philosophy. i.e. the philosophers will say that you can't see Allah because you are attributing a 'direction' to Allah i.e. that He is somewhere, and you are saying that the human eye can perceive Allah.

But if Allah says it, then why isn't it possible? Subhan Allah this is why we are believers, because we accept the Qur'an and Sunnah even on things which we can't comprehend.




To go one step further, the other sects say that the 'W'/salafis are evil because they take the Qur'an literally. Then they jump directly to the false conclusion that we give Allah human attributes [anthromorphism].

That's a lie, what the salaf say is that we accept Allah's attributes as they are apparent (dhahir). i.e. Allah says that He created Adam with His hand, so we say that Allah has a hand - that's the most apparent meaning.

(Allah) said: "O Iblis! What prevents thee from prostrating thyself to one whom I have created with my hands? Art thou haughty? Or art thou one of the high (and mighty) ones?"

[Quran Saad 38:75]



​

We say that Allah created Adam with His hands, that's why He said it. The ash'aris say Allah meant power when He said this. But then you have to question, didn't Allah create iblis with His power too? So why was Adam mentioned as one being created by Allah's hands and iblis not? Adam simply had this high position because Allah created him with His hands. Otherwise, everything's created with His power.


The salaf accepted Allah's aayaat with a dhahir [apparent] meaning. What does the term: dhahir mean?



Ibn Qudama says in Rawdhat al-Nadhir (2/25 with Ibn Badran’s comments):

The second type: al-Dhahir (literal), and that is the meaning that comes first to the mind when uttered, while other meanings might also be possible. If you wish, you may say: That which has two possible meanings, one of them more obvious than the other“

more explanation of the term dhahir;
http://saheefah.org/2006/08/16/the-meaning-of-dhahir-apparent/

​

This is what the salaf did, and this is what salafis try to call back to. We say Allah has a hand but it is not similar to that of His creation. We say He has a hand because Allah says He has a hand.



So you see, the muslim on the fitrah already accepts this. But its the philosophers who themselves got confused and used to cry and wish that their minds were like old women (their minds being plain and simple.)

So if i were you, don't even call yourself ash'ari - because you're not. You're fitrah is islam and the beliefs of the salaf, so insha Allah you just accept it. You don't need no deep study, you just need to know what you need to believe in regard to Allah's attributes so you don't fall into the mistakes of the philosophers. Insha Allah if you're truthful to yourself, things will make sense and Allah will make it easy for you to understand.

 

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:

3) Are the opinions regarding the attributes of Allah (swt) the major points of contention when it comes to the athari and ashari aqeedah? If not, what else is there?

Yeh i think the major points are about Allah's attributes, but due to other factors - its effected other points of aqeedah too, such as praying to the people who have passed away for waseelah.


Related to the waseelah thing, ash'aris have this thing with the atom theory. So everything is to do with atoms (i.e. the smallest thing existent is an atom [during that time this was the official belief of science]). They said that since time is also based on atoms, i.e. atomic time [every moment in this world is like a piece of time, an atom piece of time - then they are like layers upon each other to form a history timeline you could say]. Therefore they said that during one atomic time period, Prophet Muhammad was Allah's Messenger when he conveyed the message etc, but when he passed away, atomic time moved forward and he died (Quran 39:30). Which therefore 'meant' that he isn't Allah's Messenger anymore (to the ash'aris), because time has moved forward, and he isnt alive in this world anymore. So how can he be Allah's Messenger?

When they held this belief and portrayed it to others, one of them was executed by the khalifah. Alot of them started fearing this [because its apostasy to say Prophet Muhammad isn't Allah's Messenger.] So they said he is still alive in his grave in the real sense (just to support their theory) and they said he hasn't died [which contradicts what abu bakr said at the day of his death (sal Allah alaihi wasalam)], and therefore they permitted praying to him for intercession, the same way the companions asked him to pray for them when he was in this world.


the refutation to that claim (for arguments sake if it was real) is refuted here;
http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/...-divine-supernatural-705/index2.html#post5460
http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=593


But it shows how their philosophy was used, and they would twist the religion every now and then with their philosophy, which caused fitnah among the people like you see today - so alot pray to the dead.

We know the salaf and those who follow them always believe Muhammad is Allah's Messenger since the time he got his message and even after his death (sal Allah alaihi wasalam.)

4) Final question insha'Allah. Somebody recommended the Fundamentals of Tawheed by Bilal Philips and said that he'd recommend it to anybody regardless of Aqeedah or madhab etc etc but since Bilal Philips works seem to be based on the athari aqeedah and tawheed falls into topics on aqeedah then its incorrect to say that just anybody could take from that book since it'd contradict the ashari aqeedah sa7?

Someone whose ash'ari probably doesn't like The fundamentals of tawheed book, because of the reasons mentioned earlier. Although again, i'd like to emphasise that he produces proofs from Qur'an and Sunnah for what he says.


Allahu a'lam.

 

[Re.TiReD]

AssalamuAlaykum

Ok JazakAllah khayr akhee. Could you explain what ta'weel means please? I was told but I've forgotten and you know how you say that athari's accept the attributes with a dhaahir meaning, isnt tafwid similar?

WassalamuAlaykum