@@amarabidali5316 oh, so when the pious early generations believe in literally taking the attributes and names in a way that befits Allah SWT only are ascribing a body to Allah SWT ? Are the early traditional Scholars who believed in the same thing also are mujassima ? If you call us anthropomorphists, you are not only insulting us but all of Orthodox Islamic Scholarship, Fear Allah SWT ! If you want proof, look at this : islamqa.info/en/answers/301643/approach-of-the-four-imams-regarding-the-divine-attributes-and-some-books-to-refer-to-concerning-that Imam Abu Haneefah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Allah has a Hand, a Countenance and an Essence as He, may He be exalted, mentioned in the Qur’an. Whatever Allah, may He be exalted, has mentioned in the Qur’an of His having a Countenance, Hand and Essence, these are attributes of His which we affirm without discussing how. It cannot be said that His Hand is His power or blessings, because that is denying the attribute, and is the view of the Qadaris and Mu‘tazilah. Rather His hand is a divine attribute, and we do not discuss how it is; His wrath and His pleasure are divine attributes, and we do not discuss how they are. End quote from al-Fiqh al-Akbar, with commentary by Mullah ‘Ali al-Qaari, p. 85. www.abukhadeejah.com/the-names-and-attributes-upon-their-apparent-meanings-fingers-descending-ascending-and-image-by-al-barbahaaree-explanation-of-al-fawzaan/ Imaam Abu Muhammad Al-Hasan b. `Alee b. Khalaf al-Barbahaaree (died 329H, rahimahullaah) stated in his Sharhus-Sunnah (point 42): Everything that you hear from the Prophetic narrations which your intellect cannot comprehend, such as the saying of the Messenger (salallaahu `alaihi wassallam): “The hearts of the servants are between the two Fingers from the Fingers of the Most Merciful, the Mighty and Majestic.” And His saying: “Indeed Allaah descends to the nearest Heaven.” And He descends on the Day of `Arafah, and He will descend on the Day of Resurrection. Also people will not cease to be cast into the Hellfire until Allaah, may His praise be exalted, places His Foot over it. And the saying of Allaah, the Most High, to the servant: “If you come to Me walking, I will come to you hurriedly.” And the saying of the Messenger (salallaahu `alaihi wassallam): “Allaah created Aadam upon His image.” And the saying of Allaah’s Messenger (salallaahu `alaihi wassallam): “Indeed I saw my Lord in the most excellent image.” And the likes of these narrations (ahaadeeth). So upon you is to submit to these texts, believe in them, and to consign [how they are] to Allaah [without engaging in speculation], and to be pleased with these narrations. These narrations must not be explained by your desires, rather Imaan (belief) in them is an obligation. Anyone who comes and explains them according to his own desires, and thus rejects them is a Jahmee.” www.abukhadeejah.com/ahlul-kalam-and-the-asharis-are-ahlul-bidah-philosophy-to-establish-his-religion/ Imam Adh-Dhahabi stated in his work, Siyar A’lām An-Nubalā, that Ibn Fawrak who was an imām of the Ash’ariyyah entered upon the ruler Mahmūd Ibn Sabkatkīn (d. 421H) and said to him: “It is not allowed to describe Allah as being above (fawqiyyah) because that would necessitate describing Him [also] with being below…” So the ruler said: “It is not me who described Allah [with being above] such that I am necessitated [by your assertion]. Rather, it is He (Allah) who has described Himself [with being above].” So, Ibn Fawrak was dumbfounded, unable to respond. And when he left the ruler, he died. It was said that his gall-bladder split apart. (17/487) Ibn Abdul-Barr stated in At-Tamheed (7/129): “In this is a proof that Allah (the Mighty and Majestic) is above the sky, over the Throne, above the Seven Heavens as the Jamā’ah has stated. And this is their proof against the Mu’tazilah and the Jahmiyyah who say: ‘Indeed Allah is everywhere! And He is not over the Throne.’ The evidence for the correctness of what is stated by Ahlul-Haqq (the people of Truth) is the saying of Allah: ‘The Most Merciful ascended over the Throne.’ (Tāhā: 5) and His saying: ‘Then He ascended over the Throne. You have no protector besides Him nor any intercessor.’ (As-Sajdah: 4)“ Ibn Abī Zamanīn Muhammad Ibn Abdillāh Al-Māliki (d. 399H) stated in his book, Usūl As-Sunnah: “From the sayings of Ahlus-Sunnah is that Allāh (the Mighty and Majestic) created the Throne, and He distinguished it with highness, and elevation, above everything that He created. Then He ascended over it however He willed
@@theelahmed2682 yes exactly, the Salafi God is from sahih muslim and sahih bukhari from the hypocrites who introduced Israeli narrations to Islam. @Abu Humayd your bro just gave you evidence about your God having body parts. Allah created everything, His spirit is a creation of His the same way His house the Ka'ba is a creation of His. He created "where" and created "when", He created every physical thing and everything we perceive. The Salafis like the first "Sunni" scholars took metaphors to be literal and therefore committed shirk as saying God has different body parts is removing Him from Oneness as one day you can worship His foot which apparently He will put in Hellfire and the other His face which we will apparently be able to see like we see the moon in the Hereafter.
Alhamdulilah for salafiyyah. It’s a simple concept that any religious person should strive for. If you are a follower of Moses, then you should only wish to understand the teachings that Moses taught the same way that those around him did. If you follow Jesus, then you should only want to know exactly how those who heard jesus speak, understood things. Similarly, if you follow Muhammad peace be upon him, then you need to understand how the companions understood Islam and follow that way. Not to mention the numerous Hadith that directly tell us to follow the way of the companions. It cannot be the case that a person who came along hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years later, somehow understands the religion better than those who walked and talked with the Prophet peace be upon him.
I stopped labelling people the moment I learned more about my own deen. We always have a yardstick; The Quran and the Sunnah. So I learned to listen to the evidence first. I'm well aware of the huge sin of takfir and dividing the ummah. May Allah guide us all the haqq.
@@MH-ys4io your words are Quran and sunnah tell us to be salafi! What a claim. What imaginary world did you find this in? If said imams were the greatest as you claim and were salaf you modern day salaf resemble anything BUT great. I associate more respect to Zionist then you. Why your type breathes today is beyond me.
@@pecknarmpekky1871 Salafi's invalidates anyone's interpretation of the mutassyabih verses of the Quran outside of the Prophet's and Aslaf's interpretations. So, no. That's why I don't like labels, because there are certain rules/traditions attached to it. I am a Muslim, and that's it. Do not divide Allah's deen.
The only people who divides Allah's Deen are the ones who aren't upon what the Companions were upon. Our understanding and methodology should be their understanding and methodology. They learned directly from the Prophet, and the first 3 generations of Believers are the model for Islam. Allah preserved the religion through them.
@@BloggingTheology True, and Islamic universities, especially Salafis, graduate students are keen to invite scholars to discuss their thesis. Unlike Western universities, which do not know who the debaters of the message are, nor the extent of their knowledge, nor his understanding of religion and his love for following the approach of the Prophet Muhammad.
Asharism is salifism. Asharism is another way of looking the early creed or looking salafism from another angle. Asharism has more interpretation of the sifat than the early salafism and the need for that was avoiding misconception of the sifat, not rejecting the sifat. That is all. The interpretation has also base in the early salaf.
My brother . If the interpretations of the attributes of God are not from God or the Prophet Muhammad .. its place is the trash. Because religion is taken from the words of God and the words of His Prophet only. Theories and explanations do not need them. Companions of the Prophet Muhammad died and did not know Al-Ash’ari or Al-Rumi, and they are the best of people and the highest ranks in Paradise
@@عبدالله-ن6ه2ص here we go again, you keep saying trash if it is werent interpreted by the salaf, I advise you go study kitab out there, You’re truly speaking out of your ignorant about the aqaid. okay stop your bigotry akhi learn from Islamic university.
I just defended you because Muslims shouldn't say things without evidence, anyway I would love to see you have a podcast where Christians can phone in and debate or ask questions, we need as many Dawah channels as possible. May Allah bless you and reward you for the work you are doing. My Salaams
We have to distinguish between the (salaf) and (salafis) (Salaf) means the early generations of muslims while the modern term (salafi) means those who follow Ibn Taymiyyah. the modern salafis who follow Ibn Taymiyyah have different creed from the earliest creed of salaf. The earliest creed was to believe in the text without explaining it (تفويض) while Ibn Taymiyyah believe in it literally giving it anthropomorphic (تجسيم) meanings.
So you’re one of those people who thinks of Allah as having body like humans with your sick mind and you’re blaming your sickness on ibn taymiyah who never did such thing and you’re accusing salafis of not following salaf you liar
Brother Paul, I am a Salafi, and I love you in the sake of Allah for your fairness and objectivity. May Allah show us the truth as it is, and help us to pursue it.
There is a difference between CREED and the “ salafi movement” - the movement includes the creed but other stuff too. This video is JUST TALKING about the creed which is actually called “athari creed” but just so everyone knows what he is talking about he named the video “ salafi creed “
I am a salafi but i think it got a bad name due to a small fraction of its followers are known to be harsh and blindly following their teachers. Be a balanced Salafi
Interesting work, and the channel has very high quality content. I would like to point out however that Yale should not really be taken as a reference when it comes to validating Islamic Theology :-)
Dr. Yasir Qadhi only did doctorate from Yale i think. But he graduated from Madina Islamic University. This is his field hence knows better than most of the Ummah currently.
I think the main problem with the Islam today is the over-analysis and the over-indulgence of the Islamic scholars of the main tenants of Islam which are in reality very simple and should not be made complicated by opinions of different scholars. This results in the formation of different sects despite their basic beliefs being same. Islam is not that complicated. You just have to believe in the absolute authority of Allah, all the prophets, their scriptures and the judgement day. Thats it. This much is enough. No need of different sects in Islam. Sorry for my bad English.
@Glorious Quran you want to follow the messenger? How so ? According to YOUR opinion? According to whose authority, Your own??? Then you enter disputed matters to "tip your toe in" and acclaim your self to following the Prophet what do you think Hanafis or Shafiees or Maliki or Hanbali have been practicing all these years !? What do you think the Muslim Sunni has been doing up until the new-aged Muqatili Khaariji decided to come up with their own religion as attributed to Muhammed bn AbdulWahhab by group of scholar , verified by AbdurRahman bn Mohammad bn Qasim AlAasimi AlNajdi ?
But when you dip your toe in speculative theology or you harbor unorthodox doctrinal misconceptions and misperception then it becomes incumbent upon the patient to visit a circle of AhleThikr and examine yourself and your thoughts and treat them with the textual proofs in line with the traditional predecessors and rational proofs and sound reasoning that ONLY the Arabic language allows or follows or what supports the Arabic rhethoric.
@@TheMercifulAndJust Few words about the term "Authority". As long as Messenger (SAW) was among us, he was 'The Authority'. Through him Allah gave us Deen. He taught us how to perform essential practices (Salah, Saom, Hajj, Jakat) which the entire Ummah is performing as living tradition without any basic difference. And he left us the ' Ultimate Divine Guidance' & 'The Supreme Authority' the Holy Qur'an. What else a common Muslim needs?
Thank you for the video, what is interesting is that a period of popular Salafism also emerged in 16th century Ottoman Istanbul as well. they were popularized by Qadizade Mehmet and his followers were known as Kadizades. So the sudden emergence of 'salafism' isn't a new thing.
May Allah guide you to Islam. Thank you for making Muslims aware of this topic "Creed of the salafi" may Allah be pleased with them. First, I believe we need to know & understand the term "salaf", linguistically and technically. The term salaf was not invented by Imam Ahmad or Ibn Taimiyah, but it started at the time of the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him, when he used the term talking to his daughter on his sick bed saying to her "verily I'm your best predecessor" you can check the hadith in Bukhari & Muslim (وَإنِّي لا أُرَى الأجَلَ إلَّا قدِ اقْتَرَب، فاتَّقِي اللَّه واصْبِرِي، فَإنَّهُ نِعْم السَّلَف أَنَا لكِ). So, Muslims shouldn't be strangers to this term because term is also mentioned in the Qur'an and they need to have proper understanding & the correct knowledge because knowledge is based upon trust. (Knowledge is Trust). From Prophet Adam to Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon them, they are our pious predecessors. Their creed was the same, which was to Worship Allah alone & what is upon us is to affirm like how the Prophets & Messengers affirmed the existence of Allah etc, without addition or subtraction. From Abu Hanif, Malik, Shafi'i & Ahmad, all of them their creed was the creed of the salafi & they are our salaf. Whoever follows the Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him according to how his companions understood him then that person is amongst the followers of the methodology of the pious predecessors (salafi creed). The Qur'an & the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him were revealed in the time of the sahabas (companions) & the sahabas taught the ones who saw them, but never saw the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him, & the ones saw the sahabas taught the ones who never saw the sahabas. Those are the best three generations, like it comes in a hadith collected by Bukhari and Muslim, "The best people are my generation..." These generations where taught to affirm like how the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him affirmed & that the creed of Islam is not based on logic, but on evidence, which is the Qur'an & the teachings of the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him. Meaning Islamic takes the evidence first then logic follows. Why? so that we cannot change anything in the Islamic creed & Islam in general. Even if the evidence goes against our logic, it is a must to accept it because Allah is the All Wise. The saying of Ali may Allah be pleased with him that if the religion (Islam) was based upon logic we would've whipped under our leather sock. In conclusion, the salafi creed is the Islamic creed. The creed that teaches us to Worship Allah alone. The creed that teaches us to be dutiful to our parents. The creed that teaches us to be kind to our neighbors. The creed that teaches us to show mercy to the creation & spread peace & love. Hence, when we meet & depart we say: "Asalaam alaikum (Peace be upon, actual meaning is No harm will befall you from me) warahmatullahi (& the mercy of Allah be with you in this life & hereafter) wabarakatuh (and may He bless you).
@@MusaMills1 I found this information in Samer Akkach's book: Islam and the enlightenment. It is also easily found on the internet, search Qadizade Mehmet efendi.
Ended up liking before watching 😅 but am gonna hear completely ~After hearing completely~ Somehow your British accent felt more nuanced this time 😅 I had originally felt that Salafism is the right thing, because of their premise that following the religion of the first three generations is following Islam. As of last or last to last year, I have just washed my hands off anything that ends in an -ism or is anything like that, because by their very nature they are limited. I have also listened to Dr Yasir Qadhi a lot, and in one of these sessions where he was forced to discuss creed, he said in the end something similar to that this discussion is not too fruitful because whether athari or ashari, people still do not show any major differences in righteousness, closeness to religion etc. i.e. the outcome is not very different for being ashari or athari 😅
@@mohammadtahir3140 I am sorry dear brother, I do not know about these understandings. What I can tell only from your comment is that these understandings trace back their origins to the people they are named after. Since I see all humans to be limited by their intellectual capacities, I find it a red flag that these understandings are named after their people. If you would like, you may inform your understanding of these understandings, but please please please keep in mind that trolls, haters, and those who love disputing can disrupt our conversation and we will need to generally avoid them for they keep on asserting their points at the expense of love and mercy and forgiveness. I'll in shaa Allah discuss your understanding of these understandings in a manner that is discussion and not debating.
@@shahfaisalislam8719 brother I am not very good at English speaking that's why it is very difficult to me to make you understand what is my my beliefs and understanding. But I strongly recommend you to listen to javed Ahmed ghamdi and I hope if you not biased about sectorism or any other. Ism you won't be disappointed
Great comment. Though I would still encourage learning about these theologies as it is to do with the history of Islam and enables to understand where we come from. I would like to follow the way of the salaf as much as possible but wouldn't put myself in a group. That's just humans being tribalistic (what a surprise 😄)
Paul, You really impress me on how your critical mind finds its way through very complex, controversial and delicate issues. Many Muslims who read Quran and study religion identify themselves as following the original faith when they are actually following a version that came later in history and does not capture the pure Aqieda and the way of the prophet. I guess Allah knew that, if he leaves religion preservation to man, the man will eventually alter it. Preservation of pure religion requires divine intervention, IMHO.
It's important to note that the mantle of being 'salafi' is claimed by multiple groups that have their differences and by people who don't follow any particular group. I feel being 'salafi' has been hijacked by groups like SPUBs and the followers of Rabee' Almadkhali who claim it for themselves while spending almost all their time criticizing people sometimes justly and a lot of the time unjustly. A lot of people who call themselves salafi and adopt the salafi creed don't like SPUBs at all. What is common between those who call themselves salafis is their creed and I think it's inaccurate to criticize salafis in general for something only a small part of salafis do. At the end of the day, what matters is not the label but the belief and actions. We are called Muslims in the Quran and that's sufficient as a label as long as we have the correct creed and follow Allah's law to the best of our ability and knowledge.
My brother . The criterion for truth is to return to the texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah and to follow the companions of the Prophet Muhammad and those who understood Islam from it. Many of those who criticize Salafism are Sufis, Ash'aris, Shiites, or parties that have political ambitions in Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries and do not accept Salafism because they defend these governments. So when you watch someone criticizing Salafism, you have to know what his sect, ideas and party he belongs to.. Then analyze what he says on the ground.. and what is the alternative offered by those who criticize Salafism.. Then you will improve to choose what is correct. good luck brother
It’s interesting you mentioned Ibn Taymiyah never came up with anything new. While not everything he said was wrong, he did believe in things which none of the authorities of the Salaf ever said. The belief of Ibn Taymiyah does not absolutely equal the belief of the Salaf.
The Athari creed definitely predates Asharism/Maturudism. Also Asharism has changed a lot. The early Asharis have beliefs that would be unpalatable by modern Asharis. To be fair the Athari creed also developed over time. But it is more or less the same. The statements of some of the early Asharis would scare most Asharis today - maybe they might even consider some of it blatant disbelief. I don't know alot about the Maturidi school - if it went through changes like the Ashari school or not?? What i do know is that they consider each other sister schools now; whereas historically they used to refute each other. They kind of ganged up on the Atharis now. Great video by the way.
-The Prophet (S) was neither a theologian nor a philosopher, but a lawgiver. He called people to the worship of one God, preached against polytheism & injustice. He called people to be accountable for their actions & warned them of judgement. And he finally established laws for humanity to accrue benefits & avoid harm. -The priority of the sahaba after the Prophet (S), was the common good of the ummah, & the futuhat (entry) of Islam into other lands; they deemed it necessary to establish the caliphate in order to do this. In time things got more & more political & this lead to civil war. -The priority of the tabieen was fiqh, & even with the emergence of many innovators & heretics, besides Imam Abu Hanifa, many of the prominent fuqaha refused to get involved in discussions & debates about aqeedah, & even forbade it, as the harms far outweighed the benefits. -With the increase of innovators & heretics, & the circulation of Greek philosophical works in Arabic, scholars got more & more involved in discussions & debates about aqeedah, in order to set parameters. Some did this by reason, namely the Mu’tazilites, others by tradition, namely the Hanbalis, whereas Imam Ashari set the parameters for a balanced aqeedah. -In the East, Imam Maturidi sought to espouse the authentic aqeedah of Imam Abu Hanifa, & set the parameters of his aqeedah using reason. The Ashari school became widespread & considered orthodox by the 11th century, with further developments & parameters being set by the likes of Imam Ghazali. Whereas both the Asharis & Maturidis considered each other to be orthodox by the Ottoman period. -Later Asharis considered the actions of Imam Ashari & the earlier Asharis to be a necessary evil but no longer necessary. However, constant challenges by some of the Hanbalis kept these discussions & debates going. On the hand, other later Asharis considered taqleed (imitation) in matters of aqeedah, namely the blind faith of the masses, to be either sinful or disbelief, depending on their capacity to investigate. -This view on taqleed was challenged by the Sufis, who believed the faith of the masses to be superior to the faith of these Asharis, as the masses already possessed firm faith without investigation, whereas these Asharis needed rational investigation & this implied weak faith. Any deeper understanding of aqeedah could only be achieved by spiritual struggle, to the point one reaches a state in which he can gain knowledge through kashf (unveiling). -After European colonialism, the classical schools fell & this had severe consequences for the development of fiqh, & religious/intellectual academia in the Muslim world in general. Many reformers & puritans began to emerge to influence religious thought among the Muslims. -The reformers blamed widespread superstition among the masses of Muslims on the Sufis. As Sufis deemed taqleed in aqeedah acceptable, & asserted that no one is tasked with investigation. Moreover the Sufis were vastly popular among the masses, as people would much prefer to see saints perform miracles as opposed being told what to do, how to live, how to think, etc. by other people simply because they know more/have learnt more. The reformers also blamed the theologians in general for having the wrong priorities. -And of course, finally the Wahhabis appeared & challenged the orthodoxy of the Asharis, Maturidis & Sufis, & espoused a puritanical Hanbali school of thought. Their thought entered into mainstream Islam in the mid 20th century due to Saudi backing. Overall, after the Prophet (S) & the sahaba, I believe the Sufis & the fuqaha (until the 17th century) were correct, although whether the Sufis are to blame for intellectual sterility among the masses is another question.
Alot of what you said here was wrong. No modern day ashari scholar would consider any view (generally) of the early Ash’aira to be deviant, or even kufr. Regarding the maturidi and ashari schools, both schools durings its beginning refuted each other, but during these refutations realized the majority of their differences are semantical in nature, and nothing which entails kufr or innocation.
The real problem is that most muslims don't differentiate between the Athery creed , also known as Hanbaly creed ,and Ibn Taimeia opinions. Yes, Ibn Taimeia creed is build upon the Hanbaly one , but he has certain main differences which most people don't know. We must distinguish between the Hanbaly creed ,Ibn Taymia opinion and Salafi (Wahhabi) creed.
There are details that Yasir Qadhi brushes over in his paper. What some have already mentioned in the comments is that the original athari creed accepted the attributes of Allah as is, leaving the meaning to Allah as He Himself knew best what He meant by them. One of them being ibn taymiyyah being representative of the athari creed "in general". but either one is or isn't the same as the other. The issue with the salafi approach is the literalist approach of the siffaat (attributive names). And you clearly see in the earlier works of the Atharis that no meaning was ascribed what so ever and even Imam Ahmad who the athari methodology of deriving theology comes from stated negation of meanings or negations of possible logical conclusions i.e. "He is not a body". Where as the taymiyyan/salafi creed does have the issue of anthropomorphism or at least that their statements logically follow to that extent, and no negation is made, and if one is made or superimposed on to their creed, they say that it is a negation of the attribute. Where as the original athari creed specifically did have negations of such. More over ibn taymiyyah delved even deeper philosophically (even though he was opposed to Kalam as a method) and had greater creedal issues. I do agree with the athari creed being the earliest however in meaning none of the 3 schools differ on the meaning in key creedal issues, they only differ on the method. You can check out Shaykh Yusuf bin Sadiq al-Hanbali al-Athari who holds to the athari creed and has an ijazah (permission to teach) from the Islamic University of al-Azhar. And he affirms this as well that the ash'arites preserved the meaning of beliefs of the atharis even though as an athari he disagrees with the methods. I think that would be a more assessement to measure academic honesty, since islamically we would go by chains of transmission and the chains of transmission of al-Azhar go back to the original scholars.
mashaa Allah, akhi, the salafussaliheen were athari mufaweeda, not one of them go and say the dzahir ul ma’na of the sifat. yet the salafist nowadays almost dwelving into anthromorphic.
Each time I watch a video on this channel I feel more appreciation and love for Paul. I have been following Dr. Yasir Qadhi for a few years now and I watched hundreds of hours of content, including methodical lectures, interviews, and series like the excellent ~150 hours Seerah series in English. I come from a traditional training in Asha’ri creed and I find him to be fair in a lot of how he addresses controversial topics, but I’m not academically trained rigorously enough for my view to have much weight. Just wanted to share. Also, it would be great if we can get an interview with Dr. Yasir and Paul and I believe it can be very beneficial to learn more and see the two amazingly genuine brothers together. Thank you, Paul. You work is amazing, your energy is inspiring, and this channel is such a gem. ❤
Great video sir as usual. May I suggest you read a book called 'Najhul Balagha'which means Peak of Eloquence. I'm very sure you will find it a very interesting read. It's a compilation of lectures and sermons one of the prophet Mohammed's( peace be upon him) close companions . Right at the beginning of Islam.
Mr MO you mean Najhul Balagha which is a book claimed by "" SHIAS "" that It contains lectures and sermons of hazrat ali peace be upon him yes or no ???
Oh shia look what ali has to say Verily, the people who payed allegience to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, have payed allegience to me based on the same principles as the allegience to them. So anyone who was present has no right to go against his pledge of allegience, and anyone who was absent has no right to oppose it. And verily shura (consultation) is only the right of the Muhajirs and the Ansar. So if they decide upon a man and declare him their imam, then it is with the pleasure of Allah. If anyone goes against this decision, then he must be persuaded to follow the rest of the people. If he persists, then fight with him for leaving that which has been accepted by the believers. And Allah shall let him wander misguided and not guide him. (Nahjul-Balaghah, Letter #6)
@@saidhashi2856You can say that about everyone today. Everyone tries their best to follow the Salaf. Of course if you are talking about some people like SPUBS or TROID that hijacked this name then yeah but don’t generalize.
Mr. Williams I would very much appreciate, as I believe many others would, a list of books that you endorse or recommend reading. If this exists already, my apologies.
On theology, Moderation in belief by Al ghazali is good text focused on god attributes. Mind you this is heavyweight philosophical reading. There are a couple other books they may pop up on amazon if you search for this book
Abu Khadeeja from Birmingham. Brother Paul your weigh above this. True Salafis and the Athari, Asharis and Maaturidis. They have semantical differences but in reality are the same.
Paul! I feel there is a very subtle nuance that is lacking and that you might appreciate. We have to differentiate salafism from atharism. For traditionnal scholars, Salafism began in the 18th century and wrongly interpreted athari creeds by introducing anthropomorphist understanding to it. Asharis don't have any problems with the Athari creed. On the contrary, they all agree on the creed of Imam At-Tahawi for example. They only say that the Asharis expanded the Athari creed to make the Sunni creed a relevant response against there contemporary anthropomorphists and Mu'tazili rationalists of their time. The same with sufism. The majority of sufi masters are Asharis-maturidis. Yet they all recognized Sh.Abd el Qadir Al Jilani as one of the greatest Imam ever even though he was a hanbali-athari scholar. The critic of the traditional sunnis today against salafism (and you find the same critic in the past centuries against some extreme-deviant Athari who were accused of anthropomorphism) is that 1-Some salafis deformed the original Athari creed. They took it as a way of justifying an anthropomorphic vision of God saying the like of "God have a hand which is a body but different than the kind of hand we know". 2- Salafis rejected the madhabs methodology which impose the following of one of the four school of law as long as someone is not a complete Mujtahid (Independent legal Scholar of the divine law who reached the highest level). Because of that, they claimed that almost anyone could interpret the law as long as he have evidence from the Qu'ran or the Sunnah. For traditional scholars, this is the greatest way of destroying the religion. Why? Because I can't use the Qu'ran as an evidence for legal rulings since I didn't master the highest the level of it's arabic language like did Imam Shafii who traveled 15 years to acquire it and I didn't master all the tools of legal methodology that Imam Malik inherited from the salaf who took them from the Sahabas. The same way I can't use an authentic Hadith as I didn't master the whole corpus so that there might be another one that say the exact contrary which might be explained by a specific context, etc. The results of their legal methodology was a complete disaster as it justified any ignorant one (who taught he wasn't ignorant because he had memorize texts) to make his own legal understanding which resulted in the propagation of takfir (accusing muslim of rejecting islam) and accusations of shirk (accusing muslim of associating other to God). All of this caused huge disasters since the very beginning of there movement until our very days, the greatest of which was the emergence of islamic terrorism justifying the killing of innocents, muslim and non-muslims alike, on that basis. Even if we agree that salafis in general don't preach terrorism, we have to acknowledge that all contemporary islamic terrorist movements emerged from the Salafi methodology. From Boko Haram, to Daesh, to Al Qaeda, you can't find one single terrorist movements who emerged from the traditional sunni understanding: "Research has shown how apolitical Saudi-backed schools in Somalia in the early 1990s, known as Ittihad schools, mutated very suddenly into nurseries for the movement that became known as Shabab. Similarly, Boko Haram founder Muhammad Yusuf began his preaching at the Ibn Taymiyya mosque in Maiduguri having been instructed in Madkhalism by graduates of Madina University, but converted to a Nawaqidi interpretation. Abd el Rahman Abd el Khaliq, one of the most newsworthy Egyptian radicals, also studied in Saudi universities; as did Turki Bin' Ali, the "senior scholar" of Daesh" (Travelling Home, Abdel Hakim Murad, p230). And we can continue applying this to all the other movements... How weird would it be than that the revivers of the true creed brought the greatest calamity to the muslim world which is division, violence, intolerance and the shedding of blood in the name of the message of our beloved Prophet (peace and blessings upon him) For us, when you associate the Athari creed (which all Asharis respect) with salafism, you are confounding the noble athari creed with the critics of anthropomorphism made by the Asharites against some extreme-deviant hanbalis who misinterpreted atharism. As well, you are associating the noble Athari creed with the dangerous legal mind set built by the Salafis school that open the doors for takfir and accusations of shirk which then open the doors for violence and the spread the shedding blood. With all love and respect Paul, the reason why we love your channel is because you are mastering the christian theology and you're able to make us reflet on great islamic response to it in the contemporary time. This bring us all together. But if you start to deal into the most dividing subject that divides muslims nowadays before having really master the islamic tradition, it will brake this great harmony that we feel on your channel. I would recommend you (applying this to myself first as I'm in Egypt stydying): try to really study seriously the sunni tradition for the next years and than see after a while what kind of subject like that you feel to share as your opinion. You will be doing it with a far deeper consciousnees of the issues you're dealing which will avoid any possible confusion like the one I felt on this video. Please forgive me if I did say anything wrong. We love you! Ma Salam from Cairo!
nice post. İ am from Turkey and what you say is fact. Mr. Paul has a very complete understanding of christian theology and who jesus really was and we greatly respect that. On the other hand he compared the salafis to protestant christians( who have a massive population....) Wahhabi-salafis are less than 1 percent of the total muslim population of close to 2 billion people. This ideology came into existence in the 17th century when mr wahhab and MBS(the g8 grandfather) of todays saudi king decided to start an uprising against the ummah at the time. They pretty much overnight declared 99.9 percent of the muslims as heretics... This was a blessing to the pope and western countries. You are from Egypt so you must know the history of The Egyptians putting down this rebellion. The british crown kept supporting this movement monetarily in order to destroy islam from within. And after WW1 they were partially succesful in doing this. They kept saudi as a satellite state and used them to keep spreading this false concept after the 50-60s.... Ofcourse when people went to pilgrimage they would force these books on people from all over the ummah... But thankfully people arent gullible nowadays. İt is much harder to trick people with the advent of the internet.
Knowing that al-Ashʿarī died in 936 which is 324 H, and he is the founder of the Ashʿarism, and Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal died 855 which is 241 H the one known as Imam Ahel Assunnah and as the "Defender of Orthodoxy", you will know for sure that the Asha'ri creed is not the first creed for Sunni Islam, nor was it the way of Imam Ahmad and every Imam before him since the Sahabah of the Prophet PBUH. Good video Paul! 👍🏻
This so called “first creed” had to be developed over time due to the many innovators & heretics that appeared, such as the khawarij, rafidis, murjias, jabaris, qadaris, jahmis, etc. Because of all these different fringe groups, two trends of scholars emerged. One known as Ahl al Kalam (people of discussion) & the other known as Ahl al Hadith (people of tradition). The Ahl al Kalam emerged around the time Greek philosophical works were translated into Arabic & circulated in the Muslim world, their aim was to prove Islamic orthodoxy by reason, but the first of them were Mu’tazilites who themselves had a few controversial beliefs. Then you had the Ahl al Hadith who were basically a knee jerk reaction to all the above, they stressed the importance to hadith as evidence above everything else. They espoused this so called “first creed” & the above was the reason why, it doesn’t necessarily make this creed the true orthodox creed. Imam Ashari basically resolved the above problems via a “middle way” between the Ahl al Kalam & Ahl al Hadith, based on many hadiths where the Prophet (S) said the middle way, or moderation is the best way. Historically, his followers, the Asharis were the first to call themselves Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama’at.
@@786AbdulSalamKhan I agree with most of what you said, until you wrote the last thing "Historically, his followers, the Asharis were the first to call themselves Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama’at. " This is ABSOLUTELY NONSENSE!!! 1- Sufyan al-Thawri died 778 AD - 161H said : How few are the people of Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama'at" And Sufyan is from the 2nd H. century and using the full name as Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama'at!! 2- Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari died 923 AD - 310 H wrote in his book "Sareeh Al-Sunnah- صريح السنة : As for what is correct in saying that the believers see their Lord, the Almighty, on the Day of Resurrection, which is our religion to which we owe God, and that we have come to realize by the people of -in Arabic: Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama'at- the Sunnah and the community..." 3- Abu Ja'far Ahmad al-Tahawi died 933 AD - 321 H wrote in his famous book "Statement of the belief of Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama'at" بيان عقيدة أهل السنة والجماعة: This stated the belief of Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama'at" And more and more. I've only given you the full name "Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama'at" from a few people before Alashari himself; but the word "Ahl al Sunna" alone, is actually everywhere among those Imams before Alashari! Also, being in the middle where the first generation was not, is not a good thing to do. You can not understand the creed better than the Sahaba who were taught is by the Prophet PBUH himself! Being the "first creed" means being on the same creed of the Sahaba, it's absolutely makes it the true one as the Prophet PBUH said " the path which I and my companions follow" Tirmidhi (2641)
@@yosefofarabia508 The phrase existed, but wasn’t widespread. People referred to themselves as “Ahl al Hadith” for example much more so, prior to to referring to themselves as “Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama’at”. Also...you should provide a source for those quotes, are they from early sources, later sources, what? The sahaba didn’t concern themselves with creed, neither did many of the early scholars besides Imam Abu Hanifa. The early scholars avoided & even forbade people to get involved with discussion & especially debates about creed (kalam), as the harms far outweighed the benefits. However, as the innovators & heretics became widespread, some scholars needed to set parameters. That’s what creed is, setting the parameters/limits for beliefs so people could not assert whatever they desired to be the teachings of Islam. The Mu’tazilites set the parameters using reason, as this also happened to coincide with the circulation of Greek philosophical works in Arabic. The Hanbalis set the parameters using tradition, a combination of hadiths from the Prophet (S) & what was passed down to the Muslims from generation to generation, however they set these parameters as a reaction, not for its own sake, in other words just like the Mu’tazilites they had external influence. Imam Ashari set the parameters using both reason & tradition, in order to set forth a balanced creed. This was seen as a necessary evil by many later Asharis, however some of the Hanbalis, especially the likes of Ibn Taymiyya, & now modern Salafis, won’t stop the obsession with creed; so this evil of discussing & debating creed (kalam) won’t go away anytime soon.
@@786AbdulSalamKhan Brother, you said "Historically, his followers, the Asharis were the first to call themselves Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama’at. " and that was not true at all as a I showed you; now you're saying no "The phrase existed, but wasn’t widespread" what does that even mean!? If Sufyan (2nd century Imam) used the phrase to refer to people who aren't people of bidaa, meaning, the phrase was known to people and widespreaded. The phrase you are mentioned "Ahl al Hadith" were also used but not as a phrase against the kalam groups, it was used against "Ahul al Raii" like Imam Abu Hanifa and his school of thought of Iraq. Ahl al Hadith like Imam Malik and the school of Ahl Al Madian and Ahl Makka, the school of Al Hijas. They were the 2 main school of thoughts at the time: Ahl al Raii أهل الرأي and Ahl al Hadith أهل الحديث both were fiqhi schools of thoughts. " they set these parameters as a reaction" I agree! Muslims knew the "creed" as a part of the believe in Allah swt by how they were taught generations to generations since the sahaba until the kalam appears and the "how" questions about the sifat of Allah swt, then came the need to form into books and called "the creed of the salaf" by which they mean: You can't ask "how" about Allah's sifat because Allah said about himself "there is nothing like Him".
@@yosefofarabia508 I will ask again, please provide the source for the quote by Sufyan al Thawri, is it an early source or a later source? Secondly, the quote you cited by Sufyan al Thawri states the Ahl al Sunna were very few, please explain how very few means widespread. I am already aware of who the phrase “Ahl al Hadith” was used against. Thanks. There is a difference between simply listing the beliefs of the Muslims, & setting parameters against others who did. The Hanbalis did the latter, so no it does not truly reflect what the sahaba believed. The Prophet (S) was neither a theologian nor a philosopher, he was a lawgiver. You will find in the Qur’an, that the “creed” taught by the Prophet (S) was simple, and the priority of the sahaba after the Prophet (S) was not creed.
Atharism is not the problem, it is as legit as Asharism and Maturidism. Those three are the Sunni way. Also the Sunni way are the 4 Mazhabs. So take your pick. We follow the salaf and we are salafis by following the four Imams. Now you will ask why mixing aqeeda with mazhab ? I am but observing the rejection of the mazhabs by the group that calls them selves " salafis". This is the litmus test for a very serious deviation. Which alim ( scholar ) in the past centuries rejecting the mazhab ? Shaykh ibn Teymia and his true followers belonged to a mazhab. So these aqeeda wars are not that naive when viewed from a wider perspective.
Salam brother Paul. I just want to comment on the very last sentence in which you state that "Yale wouldn't have given him[Yassir Qadi] a PhD if he was wrong". In fact, Yale and any other respected institution assists a PhD thesis based on whether it follows the scientific method of research and therefore meets their academic stander. In other words, you as a PhD candidate has the opportunity to claim whatever as long as you represent your case in a scientific method and language. So, the same institution, let us say Yale, might approve a PhD that reputes Yassir Qadi's thesis. thanks
It's Yasir Qadhi actually. However the so called salafism today is flawed. They exposed themselves yet again with their fatwahs about covid lockdown and denial of end time signs.
Aaaaaahh.. I just discovered your channel today (thanks YT recommendation) and after watching a couple of videos, this is THE ONE I was waiting for !!! I'm not sure I caught all the words and names you used (English is not my 1st foreign language).. but I'd love to say that I (as average person) believe that neither Allah swt nor His Messenger have called us sunni, or salafi or ashaari or whatever.. they just called us Muslims. As simple as it is. If one goes through complications such as philosophy, sufism, kalam, weird ideologies, etc. then they're deviating from the simplicity of the message of Islam which must be accessible to the kid as to the adult, to the illiterate as to the educated, etc. *The message is cristal clear. Allah swt is our Creator, we are in this life with a purpose to worship Him and only Him and He sent prophets and messengers to show us the way to worship Him.* So, as long as one sticks to Quran and Sunnah according to the way it was related and interpreted by Muhammad pbuh and his Companions.. we are on the Right Path. *Muhammad (pbuh) said, "The best people are those of my generation (Companions), and then those who will come after them (the next generation : Tabiin : followers), and then those who will come after them (the next generation : tabii attabiin : following the followers), and then after them, there will come people whose witness will precede their oaths, and whose oaths will precede their witness."* So the _Aqida_ Creed is related in Quran and authentic Ahadiths. As simple as it is and as it must be. When Allah swt (or His Messenger) says something about Himself, His Names and His Attributes, we just take it the way it is without complications. He states Nothing compares to Him so why try to understand what goes beyond their limited brain ?! The early trustful scholars (such as Ibn Taymiya) who were following Kitab and Sunnah have written volumes to quench one's thirst (for advanced learners). And they never claim being a part of a group or naming a group by their name. Though, as they are human beings, and they might be mistaken, we took what goes with *evidences* and we leave which doesn't. I (as average person) believe any "new" name or designation of a parti or group or sect or ideology or or.. created after the Messenger is nothing but deviation from Truth (with levels). PS : If my beliefs and thoughts go in line with a name or designation.. Alhamdulillah I still call myself *Muslim* . And Allah knows best,
The term Calam was referring to greek philosophy influence during the early days of the mu3tazila. However, after it has been purged from the ideas that lead to contradictions and inconsistencies, it started referring to the science that defends the creed of Islam using reasoning proofs. The salaf in their negative comments about Calam were not talking about the work of Al Ashari or Al Baqillani or Al Juwayni or Al Ghazali. They were talking about the mu3tazila.
The Athary school is the most authentic and it is the established methodology of the companions and early Imams, however when the Mu'tazilites appeared the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah felt duty bound to respond in the language of the Mu'tazilites which is logic and ilmul Kalam! These schools developed and became part of Ahlus Sunnah! The Athary Aqeedah is the Aqeedah of the Hanbali school I know this because it's my school and in all the accademic catalogues of lineagesأثبات for the Fiqh and Aqeedah and the classical works and their various unbroken chains I find that these 2 other schools were eventually accepted as part of Ahlus Sunnah! One Imam who I have a quite short chain to him and his works is Imam Assafaareeni and in his own explanation of his poem of Aqeedah he clearly states that Ahlus Sunnah is three: The Athariyya, and the asharis and matureedis. However with the advent of modern salafis they went against the Hanabila and started to attack these other 2 schools! This is why I do not subscribe to the salafis though I love Naasir Uddin Al-Albaani and Ibn Uthaymeen who is Hanbali but still very critical of the 2 other schools. Abu khadeeja is not a scholar or an accademic infact he left Madinah half way through because he couldn't keep up. I lived in Birmingham and know the disunity these lot cause they are very extreme indeed in terms of shunning other Muslims. And so the scholars and Imams had matured in their understanding and had accepted each other and then ibn Abdul Wahaab came- who is in many of my chains- and from him the modern salafi movement and regressed which in turn caused a chain reaction with Al-Azhar- who I also carry their accademic chains via my Sheikh one of Ali Gommas top students- and hence old rifts were reignited and now today there is disunity!! I accept Ahlus Sunnah as these 3 schools and I pray in any Masjid whether Sufi or salafi or in between and I advise every Muslim to do the same! Is the Athariyya Aqeedah the most authentic? Yes! Is it the only viewpoint? No! But Islam is a vast tradition and mature enough to accept these differences and it's only the immature who contradict this. The salafis of wright street spubs write many books despite not being qualified to speak about religion at all and my own teachers in Saudi do not very much like these over the top people as they are Hanbali and identify with the 4 sunni schools of fiqh.
exactly akhi, the classical hanbali scholar imam assaffarini, qadi abu ya’la and many more were the true fuqaha of the hanabilah. May Allah bless you for spoking the truth.
Well that’s great. I agree 100 % with your description you just made about the “meaning” of Salafi. The only thing I disagree with you about is that I do not consider it a “movement” or a “group” but it’s an approach or a way of understanding to protect the earliest “pure” theology of islam from the impurities of later Greek philosophy and other deviations in creed.
Good video paul. The term "salafi" isn't as exclusive as many would like to hive off. The term "salafi" describes someone who is on the athari aqeedah (creed) as it is seen as the cred of the pious predecessors. The asharis or maturidis do not see themselves as not being "salafi" that is, not being upon the beliefs and actions of the 3 earliest generations. All Muslims do. What is now seen as salafi proper is one who is hanbali in fiqh (jurisprudence) and athari in aqeedah (creed) but anyone who is athari can be called salafi in the general sense. So I would technically he seen as salafi in that I follow the maliki school of though and the athari aqeedah. I do not claim the title because it seems rather presumptuous. I see following the salaf as a constant life goal. Not some title one slaps on themselves then starts declaring themselves righteous and on the right path and other deviants. People like abu khadijah is a well known ignoramus which many prominent scholars in Saudi arabia have warned against and stated he doesnt have the knowledge to teach Islam. The problem with modern day salafis is that the modern rendition of this group is more reactionary and exclusive. They are hyper focused on declaring everyone heretics and deviants even within their own ranks to the point they end up eating each other alive. This mindset is absolutely against the mindset and teachings of the salaf they are attempting to emulate. Also, there is politics involved. They are funded by gulf states and Saudi arabia and are influenced in teaching people to be bootlickers of the tyrants and claiming this is the consensus or at least unanimous agreement of the salaf which, is wrong. Everyone from as suyuti (ashari sufi giant in islamic schoalsticism) and other scholars who are of the other 2 creedal schools amd sufi chains all have it being their goals to follow and appeal to the salaf. The muslim world is much bigger then this hyper partisan group who does far more harm then benefit. So long as a muslim follows quran and the sunnah within the acceptable range of interpretation of mainstream orthodox sunni islam it in my humble opinion would be fitting to call them being upon the path of the salaf. Thats my two cents, have a nice day and looking forward to many more benefital videos from you Paul 😊😊😊
Salafiyyah isn't just being athari. Salafiyya is more than just following the true meaning of tawheed al asmaa was sifaat. Salafiyya is also to differentiate yourself from the khawaarij. It also means staying away from hizbiyyah. It also means that you obey the ruler and don't speak against the rulers by mentioning their names as per the commands of the prophet ﷺ. Follow the evidence and the texts ikhwa, not any personalities.
To my knowledge the Hanbali/athari creed is not the same as the modern salafi creed so saying the athari creed existed before Imam Ash’ari doesn’t help the salafis. The Ash’ari creed is basically some new developments which were used to debunk the mutazilites etc. That’s why Sunnis regards Ashari, Māturīdī and athari to be ahlus sunnah but the modern salafis would not be part of it as far as I’m aware.
Im not very sharp so forgive me for some stupid questions lol. Was Asari Creed a dominant creed before Ashari and Maturidi Creed? What was status of Asari Creed during the dominance of Mutazilla?
@@BloggingTheology Brother Paul, forgive me for any potential misunderstanding of what you’ve said, though just wished to clarify that you are aware that the Ashʿarīs themselves declare that ‘Atharism’ was the belief of the Salaf?
I used to watch you at speakers corner and you are a very nice man but I have heard on a Dawah channel that you have left Islam and are not a Muslim. I pray that this is not the case and if you have left; Why? You look very gaunt and look as if you've lost weight. I pray that you're in good health and I would plead with you to not leave Islam. Death is around the corner. Take care and my prayers are with you
@@zellak-pr7pu I just wanted to make sure that he's part of the family because of my love for him May Allah bless him and give him a long life ,I had heard that he left Islam and was really upset because he is a very knowledgeable brother and I liked the way he used to talk in Speakers Corner, I don't agree with Muslims who slander their brother and what happened to " making excuses for your brother "? I want to see him start debating with Christian speakers because Non Muslims will tend to look at Islam as an option to accept especially when it's coming from a White middle class Englishman and Allah knows best. My Salaams
I still remember whilst studying at Medina University Saudi Arabia in the 80s we met an Algerian Shaykh in the Haram of Medina (Sidi Alawi Bendi Murad from the city of Oran). One of the students asked him why did Shaykhul Islam Ibn Taymiyya reject Ibn Arabi (Shaykhul Akbar)? meaning, there had to be a reason, and the Shaykh gave the following reason saying; "Ibn Taymiyya was a great master of the exoteric sciences, whereas Ibn Arabi had not only knowledge of the exoteric sciences but also excelled in esoteric knowledge, even though they both took from the same ocean, with a difference that Ibn Ibn Taymiyya was like an angler standing outside the ocean and catching all different kinds of fish from the ocean. Ibn Arabi is like the diver with the oxygen-tank and mask and goes to the bottom of the ocean and brings back pearls and shows it to Ibn Taymiyya who says that it's not possible that these pearls could have come from this ocean because for all the years he's been at this ocean. And Ibn Arabi tells Ibn Taymiyya, "The only way that you can get to the pearls is when you dive to the bottom of the ocean. What a brilliant explanation indeed!
@@Faiz9163 Meanwhile Ibn Taymiyya’s influence is over the simpleton Wahhabis. You Wahhabis don’t realise that all Muslims bow before the Kaaba, yet that isn’t considered worship of the Kaaba. But somehow visiting graves is worshiping the graves. Oh you poor deluded simpletons.
@@786AbdulSalamKhan The prophet sallallahu alaihi wa sallam warned in authentic narrations to make graves place of worship. He said the Jews and Christians are cursed because they made their graves as places of worship. Now bark. Why did the prophet sallallahu alaihi wa sallam link graves to worship jahil? Your Ilm ul Kalam is refuted with one Hadith/statement of the prophet sallallahu alaihi wa sallam. Now cry 'Wahhabi' again.
@@786AbdulSalamKhan visiting graves for what exactly to remember death or to go there to some random guys peers grave and seek blessing from it. Because thats whats happening these days . Rampant
May Allah guide you to Islam. Thank you for making Muslims aware of this topic "Creed of the salafi" may Allah be pleased with them. First, I believe we need to know & understand the term "salaf", linguistically and technically. The term salaf was not invented by Imam Ahmad or Ibn Taimiyah, but it started at the time of the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him, when he used the term talking to his daughter on his sick bed saying to her "verily I'm your best predecessor" you can check the hadith in Bukhari & Muslim (وَإنِّي لا أُرَى الأجَلَ إلَّا قدِ اقْتَرَب، فاتَّقِي اللَّه واصْبِرِي، فَإنَّهُ نِعْم السَّلَف أَنَا لكِ). So, Muslims shouldn't be strangers to this term because term is also mentioned in the Qur'an and they need to have proper understanding & the correct knowledge because knowledge is based upon trust. (Knowledge is Trust). From Prophet Adam to Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon them, they are our pious predecessors. Their creed was the same, which was to Worship Allah alone & what is upon us is to affirm like how the Prophets & Messengers affirmed the existence of Allah etc, without addition or subtraction. From Abu Hanif, Malik, Shafi'i & Ahmad, all of them their creed was the creed of the salafi & they are our salaf. Whoever follows the Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him according to how his companions understood him then that person is amongst the followers of the methodology of the pious predecessors (salafi creed). The Qur'an & the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him were revealed in the time of the sahabas (companions) & the sahabas taught the ones who saw them, but never saw the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him, & the ones saw the sahabas taught the ones who never saw the sahabas. Those are the best three generations, like it comes in a hadith collected by Bukhari and Muslim, "The best people are my generation..." These generations where taught to affirm like how the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him affirmed & that the creed of Islam is not based on logic, but on evidence, which is the Qur'an & the teachings of the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him. Meaning Islamic takes the evidence first then logic follows. Why? so that we cannot change anything in the Islamic creed & Islam in general. Even if the evidence goes against our logic, it is a must to accept it because Allah is the All Wise. The saying of Ali may Allah be pleased with him that if the religion (Islam) was based upon logic we would've whipped under our leather sock. In conclusion, the salafi creed is the Islamic creed. The creed that teaches us to Worship Allah alone. The creed that teaches us to be dutiful to our parents. The creed that teaches us to be kind to our neighbors. The creed that teaches us to show mercy to the creation & spread peace & love. Hence, when we meet & depart we say: "Asalaam alaikum (Peace be upon, actual meaning is No harm will befall you from me) warahmatullahi (& the mercy of Allah be with you in this life & hereafter) wabarakatuh (and may He bless you).
very good job Paul ! i have some comments if salaf creed is the one unic authentic creed , is it not an oblifation to follow it and reject achaa'ria and suffism and all other groups? how and where can we found the salafi creed early books? did you read why yasser alkadhi was refuted by salafi students? are they right or wrong ? is it part of salafi creed to refute the errors in order to protect people? isnt logic? did you talk to shamsi in speakers corner?
This video is short and to the point. Yasir Qadi left Salafiyah but confirmed it to be the oldest manhaj or creed and that’s interesting. I’ve heard all kind of attacks on Salafis but never any real proof or evidence that salafiyah is not the correct path. There’s an interview on UA-cam with Yasir Qadi saying he left salafiyah because it’s not intellectually challenging enough for him. Wow! What a weak excuse. The only legitimate reason to leave the salafy path is, if it’s proven to not be the correct path.
I am of athhari creed as well. It's perfectly fine to call ourselves aspiring Salafis. We want to be like our role model the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him and the rightly guided companions. The terrorists whom call themselves salafi are not salafis. They are sinning and will be answerable to Allah. I adopted the athhari/salafi once I learned more about my religion via international open university. My family and most of our local community are still following ashari creed mainly due to not having the right knowledge of all these matters. The truth is not popular at the moment but it does not make it any less true. May Allah subhaana wa ta Ala bless and guide us all. Thank you for taking the time to research these matters. If only more of our Muslims would too. Ameen.
This stuff is all interesting and some people will really study this but it is simply academic. Or water under the bridge, when you hear the Azan and get up, face the Qibla, straighten the rows, and pray together before Allah swt.... Perhaps take a step back.... I'm a PhD, don't over-hype a PhD in-and-of-itself... 😄 ..still credit to Yasir Qadri for doing a PhD in religion in a materialistic world!
EXCELLENT post! Paul is in danger of losing/lost the forest for the trees. Nonetheless, he's brave for stepping in. Wish he'd expend his energy on his bookshelf :-))
isn't it the whole point of Islam ? Pure, unchanged theology. The second you open the room for "progression", you end up like Christians today, divided and lost in a sea of theological confusions
@@gamerdadzrepublic1548 I absolutely agree to the later part of your opinion. Although this is not what Islam is all about, this is what Islam was destined to become. The Quran endorses progressiveness even expects it from it's students. Quran praises and advocates the use of rational faculty. The scholars of Islam have failed Islam with their short sightedness. It's not fair to criticize Islam for the actions of Muslims. This is a divine plan, nothing happens which is not supposed to happen.
@@jawadmuhammad3158 the Quran endorses studying and using rational faculties, but never to question its content or the Prophet' teachings (pbuh) through his Sunnah. Also, remember there are 1400 years worth of scholarly work on the matter, it is always wiser to go back to that when in doubt. Our layman opinions really can't compare to scholars (modern scholars like sheikh al Albani, sheikh Ibn baz etc... rahimahumallah) who dedicated their whole life to the preservation of those teachings and we should be proud of that
@@gamerdadzrepublic1548 Where does this "questioning the content come from", did I say something like that? Kindly don't mix "questioning the scholars interpretations" with "questioning the content of Quran". With the utmost love and respect, I denounce this schoolboy methodology of mainstream Salafi protestant Islam. Please forgive me if I have offended you. This is an irony. This was meant to be. 🙏
@@gamerdadzrepublic1548 Frankly, I think another 1400 years are not enough to pick the pearls inside the Quran and we are saying people have already deciphered everything. This approach is against "IQRA". But the good news is, Eesa A.S will answer all questions and set everything right with divinely given wisdom.
Hey there, how are you doing? Really good topic. I just want to maybe clarify some stuff around As-Salafiyyah. Basically everything a muslim should is based on the Quran, Sunnah and with the comprehension of the salaf us salih(righteous predecessors). After the death of The Prophet, some people tried to bring innovation to Islam through fabricated hadith. So people started asking for chain of narration of hadiths to differentiate the truth from falsehood. Thus the appellation Ahlus Sunnah Wa Jama'ah to differentiate who were on the right path on those on falsehood. Also it is said the muslims will divide into 73 sects, 1 sect on the right path and the 72 will be in the hellfire. Those adhering to the Quran, Sunnah and with the comprehension of the salaf us salih(righteous predecessors) being the right one. Ahlus Sunnah Wa Jama'ah, Al-Athari and As-Salafiyyah(there were some other appellation as well but they all adhered to the same principle) is the 1 sect on the straight path. I will try to give a famous question: Where is Allah? Answer: Allah is above his throne and that is what the Quran and the sunnah says. However some muslims believe that Allah is everywhere and thus create their own sect out of the Quran and the sunnah thus becoming part of one of the 72 sect. As for Yasir Qadhi, may Allah guide him back to the straight path, was a salafi at a point after his passage through the University of Madinah. However now you will see he deviated from that( you can find it on UA-cam itself, Yasir Qadhi refutes Yasir Qadhi) A blatant example is belief in the unseen. Yajuj and Majuj. You will find that he says that google map has identified everywhere on earth so there cannot be a creature that is there waiting to come out. ( I am paraphrasing here, you will find it more easily in the video) Scholars that are known for following Ahlus Sunnah: Ibn Taymiyyah, Imam Al-Ajuri( There are a lot more like the four Imams). In our times, Shaykh Al-Albani, Shaykh Uthaymeen, Shaykh Bin Baz, Shaykh Fawzaan, Shaykh Rabee, Shaykh Ruhayli( Also a lot more) Conclusion: Adhere to the Quran, to the authentic hadith( as soon as you find an authentic hadith that goes against what you were doing in the past, stop doing it and follow the sunnah of the Prophet) and the with comprehension of the salaf us salih(righteous predecessors). Example, if you read of the Quran and you start interpreting by yourself, everyone is going to have their own conclusion however if we follow how the Prophet taught the Sahabas everyone will be on the same understanding. A famous example is the understanding of the verse Surah 2:187 where the sahaba thought he needed to use a thread to know the time for sehri but the Prophet explained it was about the darkness of the night and the whiteness of the dawn. Hope that helps
If u want the truth only follow quran and hadith . We dont follow people we have the greatest one is mohamad his teaching is clear and if u look more details you can look for scholars and one with evidence you can follow as i say in previous video comments there are people who say we are the truth and this is the interpretation. People like paul in Christianity and make people think that they are the truth in islam u will find sufi shei and salafi all the they clam thay have the truth and truth is clear in book . In the quran and hadith. I hope i shared with you ideas about this and thanks again .
Again, that doesn't clarify a very important thing, WHICH ONE IS FOLLOWING THE TRUTH ? You can't say "I only follow Quran and Sunnah" because then I'll ask "Well , which understanding do you base your Knowles on ?" And even for Argument's sake , let's say you follow scholars, then I'll ask "Which understanding did they take their info from ? What do they believe in ? How do they establish fatawa ?" This is literally the same Argument posed by Quranists. So, choose who you take your knowledge from, and we don't call ourselves "Salafis" for deviation and division, but only to differentiate ourselves from The Evil Sects . Afw ibn Malik reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said: افْتَرَقَتْ الْيَهُودُ عَلَى إِحْدَى وَسَبْعِينَ فِرْقَةً فَوَاحِدَةٌ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَسَبْعُونَ فِي النَّارِ وَافْتَرَقَتْ النَّصَارَى عَلَى ثِنْتَيْنِ وَسَبْعِينَ فِرْقَةً فَإِحْدَى وَسَبْعُونَ فِي النَّارِ وَوَاحِدَةٌ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَالَّذِي نَفْسُ مُحَمَّدٍ بِيَدِهِ لَتَفْتَرِقَنَّ أُمَّتِي عَلَى ثَلَاثٍ وَسَبْعِينَ فِرْقَةً وَاحِدَةٌ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَثِنْتَانِ وَسَبْعُونَ فِي النَّارِ The Jews were split into seventy one sects and one of them is in Paradise and seventy are in the Hellfire. The Christians were split into seventy two sects and seventy one are in the Hellfire and one of them is in Paradise. By the one in whose hand is the soul of Muhammad, my nation will split into seventy three sects and one of them is in Paradise and seventy two are in the Hellfire. It was said, “O Messenger of Allah, who are the ones in Paradise?” The Prophet said: الْجَمَاعَةُ They are the united community. Source: Sunan Ibn Mājah 3992, Grade: Sahih And in another narration, the Prophet said: مَا أَنَا عَلَيْهِ وَأَصْحَابِي They are those who follow my way and my companions. Source: Sunan al-Tirmidhī 2641, Grade: Hasan
@@theelahmed2682 Yes exactly ما انا عليه واصحابي Not what any shekh or sofi or any another name not released by allah or prophet or his companion. The real world now is called for everyone must stick to some mazhab and follow this is not islam read and obtain for truth and u will find every thing in creed is clear not shariah . Shariah need scholars like merath etc.. to obtain . Thanks
"Obey Allah and obey His messenger" and also "today I (Allah) have perfected your religion for you" ...are two verses of the Holy Quran as many know. So obeying the messenger in what he said and did while alive (including what he didn't say or do) naturally becomes the creed (and Rasulilah (saw)) practically lived it for the ummah to witness and follow. And if the deen ( way of life) was perfected and completed as a favour from God to His subjects then surely there can be no other creed that is right besides the one the messenger and his companions lived upon. If the creed they were upon is called salafism (in present day fitan) then surely that is the way. The emergence of all the other creeds has led to contamination of the pure creed. Diversity of views between the companions of the prophet existed but the creed remained pure. These days new creeds come up as views differ.
I went to a salafi school and my big family from both sides are mostly salafis. Let me tell you this: even within salafism, there are so many groups who hate each other. There are the ultraconservative ones, there are the more moderate ones, which are still considered as very conservative still, etc. But yes, the creed is pure, even though it is easy for new or more fanatic salafis to fall into takfiri behavior, which in and of itself is condemned within salafism
Every legitimate Muslim is to follow the way of the prophet and the three pious generations. Abu Hanfia is known for his maturidiyyah aqeedah (although not names that then) and he was from Tabi'un (the second generation). What salafis are calling to is what every Muslim is calling to.
Abu Hanifa Radiyallahu A'nh Wasn't A Maturidi, This Is A Mistake ! Imam Abu Haneefah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Allah has a Hand, a Countenance and an Essence as He, may He be exalted, mentioned in the Qur’an. Whatever Allah, may He be exalted, has mentioned in the Qur’an of His having a Countenance, Hand and Essence, these are attributes of His which we affirm without discussing how. It cannot be said that His Hand is His power or blessings, because that is denying the attribute, and is the view of the Qadaris and Mu‘tazilah. Rather His hand is a divine attribute, and we do not discuss how it is; His wrath and His pleasure are divine attributes, and we do not discuss how they are. End quote from al-Fiqh al-Akbar, with commentary by Mullah ‘Ali al-Qaari, p. 85. And just to inform you akhi, any narration that you have heard or seen which claims that Imam Abu Hanifa Radiyallahu A'nh was a maturidi or Ash'ari or Mu'tazili, THOSE ARE FABRICATIONS. Don't believe me ? Check these : m.islamqa.info/ar/answers/158755q وتعتبر العقيدة الطحاوية التي ألفها أبو جعفر الطحاوي الحنفي رحمه الله ، على منهج أهل السنة والجماعة , سوى أحرف يسيرة منها ، ولذلك كان لها شيوع كبير بين علماء المسلمين وطلابهم ، حتى أصبحت تدرس في كثير من الجامعات والمساجد ودور العلم . قال الطحاوي في مقدمتها (ص 1) : " هذا ذكر بيان عقيدة أهل السنة والجماعة على مذهب فقهاء الملة : أبي حنيفة النعمان بن ثابت الكوفي وأبي يوسف يعقوب بن إبراهيم الأنصاري وأبي عبد الله محمد بن الحسن الشيباني رضوان الله عليهم أجمعين وما يعتقدون من أصول الدين ويدينون به رب العالمين " انتهى الكلام عن اعتقاد الإمام أبي حنيفة النعمان رحمه الله السؤال : 158755 03/01/2011 هل هناك كلام حول عقيدة الإمام أبي حنيفة؟ لأني سمعت بعض الناس يقدحون في عقيدته، فأرجو التوضيح. الجواب Ar ar الإمام أبو حنيفة النعمان بن ثابت الكوفي إمام من أئمة المسلمين بلا مدافعة ، اتفق أهل العلم على إمامته وجلالة قدره . قال علي بن عاصم : لو وزن علم أبي حنيفة بعلم أهل زمانه ، لرجح عليهم . وقال ابن المبارك : أبو حنيفة أفقه الناس . وقال الشافعي : الناس في الفقه عيال على أبي حنيفة . وقال الخريبي : ما يقع في أبي حنيفة إلا حاسد أو جاهل . قال الذهبي رحمه الله : " الإمامة في الفقه ودقائقه مسلمة إلى هذا الإمام ، وهذا أمر لا شك فيه. وليس يصح في الأذهان شيء إذا احتاج النهار إلى دليل وسيرته تحتمل أن تفرد في مجلدين ، رضي الله عنه ، ورحمه . توفي شهيدا مسقيا في سنة خمسين ومئة " انتهى . راجع : "سير أعلام النبلاء" (6 /390-403) واعتقاد الإمام أبي حنيفة رحمه الله في التوحيد وفي إثبات الصفات والرد على الجهمية وفي القدر واعتقاده في الصحابة رضي الله عنهم وسائر مسائل الإيمان الكبرى موافق لمنهج السلف ولمنهج إخوانه أئمة المذاهب ، سوى أحرف يسيرة مخالفة نقلت عنه ، كقوله في عدم زيادة الإيمان ونقصانه ، وقوله في مسمى الإيمان أنه تصديق بالجنان وإقرار باللسان ، وأن العمل خارج عن حقيقة الإيمان . وقد ذكر ابن عبد البر وابن أبي العز ما يشعر أن أبا حنيفة رجع عن ذلك . راجع : "التمهيد" (9/247) , "شرح العقيدة الطحاوية" (ص395) وراجع كتاب "اعتقاد الأئمة الأربعة" (ص3-8) للدكتور محمد بن عبد الرحمن الخميس قال شيخ الإسلام رحمه الله : " إن الأئمة المشهورين كلهم يثبتون الصفات لله تعالى ويقولون إن القرآن كلام الله ليس بمخلوق ويقولون إن الله يرى في الآخرة ، هذا مذهب الصحابة والتابعين لهم بإحسان من أهل البيت وغيرهم ، وهذا مذهب الأئمة المتبوعين مثل مالك بن أنس والثوري والليث بن سعد والأوزاعي وأبي حنيفة والشافعي وأحمد بن حنبل وإسحاق ... " انتهى من "منهاج السنة النبوية" (2 /54) وتعتبر العقيدة الطحاوية التي ألفها أبو جعفر الطحاوي الحنفي رحمه الله ، على منهج أهل السنة والجماعة , سوى أحرف يسيرة منها ، ولذلك كان لها شيوع كبير بين علماء المسلمين وطلابهم ، حتى أصبحت تدرس في كثير من الجامعات والمساجد ودور العلم . قال الطحاوي في مقدمتها (ص 1) : " هذا ذكر بيان عقيدة أهل السنة والجماعة على مذهب فقهاء الملة : أبي حنيفة النعمان بن ثابت الكوفي وأبي يوسف يعقوب بن إبراهيم الأنصاري وأبي عبد الله محمد بن الحسن الشيباني رضوان الله عليهم أجمعين وما يعتقدون من أصول الدين ويدينون به رب العالمين " انتهى . ولما كان كثير من أتباع أبي حنيفة على مذهب الأشاعرة والماتريدية دخل المذهب كثير مما يخالف اعتقاد السلف ، بل ويخالف اعتقاد الإمام نفسه ، ولذلك فإن كثيرا مما ينسب إلى أبي حنيفة من ذلك لا يثبت عنه ، وإنما هو من كلام بعض اتباعه ممن ينتسب إلى مذهبه . قال ابن أبي العز الحنفي رحمه الله : " وَالظَّاهِرُ أَنَّ هذه الْمُعَارَضَاتِ لَمْ تَثْبُتْ عَنْ أبي حنيفة رحمه الله ، وَإِنَّمَا هي مِنَ الْأَصْحَابِ ، فَإِنَّ غَالِبَهَا سَاقِطٌ لَا يَرْتَضِيه أَبُو حنيفة " انتهى من "شرح العقيدة الطحاوية" (ص 226) وقال الشيخ ابن جبرين رحمه الله : " الرسالة التي كتبت عن الإمام أبي حنيفة ، يمكن أنه أملى بعضها ، وأخذها بعض تلامذته وتسمى ( الفقه الأكبر ) ، نقل منها شيخ الإسلام بعض النقول في الحموية ، وكذلك ابن أبي العز في شرح الطحاوية . ولكن يظهر أنه قد دخلها التغيير من بعض المتأخرين الذين انحرفوا في بعض الاعتقاد ؛ فأدخلوا فيها كثيراً من التأويلات ، وشرحها كثير ممن هو على مذهب الأشاعرة أو مذهب منكري الصفات ، وأنكروا ما كان عليه السلف رحمهم الله ، ولا شك أن سبب ذلك كثرة ما تلقوه عن مشايخهم الذين كانوا على هذا المذهب الذي هو تأويل وتحريف الصفات وما أشبهها " انتهى . "فتاوى الشيخ ابن جبرين" (63 /14) وقال الشيخ الألباني رحمه الله : " أبو حنيفة ، والأئمة الأربعة ، هم على الخط السلفي ، إلا أنه لا بد كل واحد له زلة ، لكن الأتباع في واد ، والأئمة أنفسهم في واد " انتهى .
@@theelahmed2682يا فلان خف علينا من جهلك المركب شيئا يا أخ هو الإمام أبو حنيفة شو ما كان المهم هو أثبت الصفات والماتريدية والأشعرية الذين هم أهل السنة كذلك اثبتوا الصفات نحن وإياهم نثبتنها ولم نعطل أي شيء ورد في صفة الله تعالى على رغم افترائكم علينا والأدلة مشهودة عليكم ابحث وستجد لكن لا هو ولا هم ولا أحدنا لا نثبتها كما تثبتونها أنتم ، إذا وصفك أحد بأنك يد ما الذي يعنيه ويريده ؟؟؟ كيف يفهم العربي الصحيح وصفه أنك يد أو أنك عين ؟؟ هل تبادر إلى ذهنه أنه وصفك باليد الجارحة ؟ يا فلان لا تحشو كلاما في كلام السلف لم يقولوه حاشاهم أن يثبتوا صفات الباري مشبهينه بخلقه او بالإنسان ... أنتم سلفكم مقاتل بن سليمان بالغ في الإثبات ونحن لمعارضنا المعتزلة في الصفات اثبتناهن كما وصف الله تعالى نفسه بها لا معطلينها ولا مشبهينها، إما فوضنا المعاني كلها لقائلها وأخذنا ما يقبل في اللسان العربي معنى يليق بسياق الآية الكريمة وما التي لا تعارض آية مُحكمة ومحكمة الدلالة هن أم الكتاب والآخر متشابهات ما تبين كل المعاني الممكنة لتبلغ إلى من قرأها الحكمة أو الإرشاد أو التعليمة أو التفقيه لأمر أو الإشارة لتوجيههم إليها وبها ولتبلغهم بها ومقاصدهم إلى عليا المعارف والاكتشافات في حال من أحوالهم الجاري عليهم . الحمدلله الذي علم الإنسان ما لم يعلم ونزل على رسوله الكريم الدين الكامل ليبلغنا مقاصد حسنة في ديننا وفي دنيانا لمصالح ديننا ودنيانا ولآخرتنا حقا كاملة This is a deceptive way the corrupt like to use to inject their opinions to lead you into innovation thinking they're "followers of the Prophet and the first three generations" Brother are you alluding that the ummah for following ONE THOUSAND OR MORE BY ONE OR TWO HUNDRED YEARS has gone lost ??? And suddenly in the middle of najd a man by name of Mohammed bin AbdilWahhab brought a new religion contrary to the one followed by most if not all of the AhlusSunnah/Muslim people after the 3rd generation? They were corrupted not because of their religious norms but because of their worldly ambitious pursuits. And their disobedience to the Islamic Law and the Prophetically connected Guided Sheikhs teachings and guidance in their new era in accordance with the way of the pious predecessors. Are you saying that the likes of Imam AnNisaii, AlBeihaqi, AbuNeim AlEsfahani, Imam AlBazdawi, AbuMoein AlNasafi, AnNawawi, Imam AlHajar AlAsqalani, AlSanusi, AlSuyuti, Ibn3abideen, Ibn AlJawzi .... were all lost ??? May Allah cure your heart and mind wallah the one who has been corrupted in matters are those who searched for ways to get them to carry out their world-acquiring agendas and world-focused recognitions with little to no regard for The Way or The Custodians of The Way.
Dear sir. Please note that salafism is not a homogenous group and is a very wide spectrum. Abu khadeejah for example is in no way a spokesman for all salafism and is only representative of a particular strand of salafism which is criticised by other salafis. When it comes to athari and ashari creed, all argue that their position is closest to the truth and it’s development needs to be understood in its particular historical context. And one can be athari in belief but not Salafi as the two are not synonymous.
I am Athari in creed but I am not a salafi. 'Salafism' is not simply a matter of aqeedah, and it can be misleading to present it as such. Love your work though, and your balanced approach. Allah bless you.
Dear .. the Salafi is the Athari is the Hanbali they are the modern ahl they are the Wahhabi The names have changed and the goal and the project are one going back to the first three centuries
Hi Paul, would you make a video on the Maturidi school which is the main competition of Ashari. Comparison of Salafi, Ashari, and Maturidi is another good idea. Thanks,
I honestly don't get this beef between ashari and athari. As an ashari myself, I acknowledge that ashari are the later creed, but only officially. The methodology itself is not an innovation, Imam Ashari simply restructure it to make it its own creed, just like what Imam Shafii did to Fiqh with his book al-Umm. If we learn the history behind asharism, we'll understand there was a need to have its own creed at that time. And some may argue the need continue to exist till today, which is why I am ashari myself. I have no problem with athari at all.
@@13bm90 This so called “first creed” mentioned in the video had to be developed over time due to the many innovators & heretics that appeared, such as the khawarij, rafidis, murjias, jabaris, qadaris, jahmis, etc. Because of all these different fringe groups, two trends of scholars emerged. One known as Ahl al Kalam (people of discussion) & the other known as Ahl al Hadith (people of tradition). The Ahl al Kalam emerged around the time Greek philosophical works were translated into Arabic & circulated in the Muslim world, their aim was to prove Islamic orthodoxy by reason, but the first of them were Mu’tazilites who themselves had a few controversial beliefs. Then you had the Ahl al Hadith who were basically a knee jerk reaction to all the above, they stressed the importance to hadith as evidence above everything else. They espoused this so called “first creed” & the above was the reason why, it doesn’t necessarily make this creed the true orthodox creed. Imam Ashari basically resolved the above problems via a “middle way” between the Ahl al Kalam & Ahl al Hadith, based on many hadiths where the Prophet (S) said the middle way, or moderation is the best way. Historically, his followers, the Asharis were the first to call themselves Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama’at.
I always wondered, were the Ummah from Abu al-Hassan until ibn Taymiyah in Dalall? And after him until Abdulwahab again? That makes no sense to me... and calibers like Salah ad-Din, without him Egypt would be Shia, or an-Nawawi, al-Qurtubi, al-Asqalani have been on the wrong Creed? Subḥān Allāh.
The text of the Qur’an is that we follow the words of God and the words of the Prophet Muhammad and follow the companions of the Prophet Muhammad. is over . The six imams of hadith and the four imams of jurisprudence and the companions, and those who composed the books on the sciences of religion did not know Ash'ari. The Ash'aris found the books of Islamic scholars and made explanations and interpretations for them, but they did not establish the religion. We follow the three centuries because the Prophet Muhammad told us that they are the best of the centuries. Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi is a hero and undoubtedly contributed to the preservation of Muslims and he is an Ash'ari Likewise, the Sufi Ottoman Empire contributed to saving Muslims from the Shiites Do we say that Sufism is the truth? The Fatimid state contributed to banishing Crusader ambitions, so do we say that the Shiites are the truth and saved the Muslims? The discussion is not conducted like this, my brother, and your argument is very weak
Paul kind sir, in one of your videos after observing your wisdom, I said you're already a source of guidance to many people. As such, people might start rendering to your videos for reference. May I suggest that you simply make these presentations without such declarations as you made here, good sir? I'm not sure how to direct this message to only you and not display it publicly. My point is you confirmed the earliest creed, the way of the Companions, the purest Islaam against the radical advent of ilm kalaam and then said we don't have to follow it and rather use the same ilm kalaam? Isn't that incoherent and ironic? With kind request
@@BF109G4 not in matters of aqeedah he wasn’t...he made some SERIOUS mistakes. He excused the jahmiyyah, made mistakes in the siffat of Allaah and innovated into the religion what wasn’t from the way of the Salaf.
@@BF109G4 Abdullah Ibn Abdur-Rahmaan Abu Butayn najdi said : "He (Ibn Taymiah )mentioned earlier some actions and statements of kufr, regarding the sifat (atributes) and he made difference between ignorant and others. Even the opinion of sheikh, May Allah have mercy upon him (aba butayns words), in stopping in takfir of jahmiah and similar to them is in contradiction to the text's of imam ahmad and from others of him from the imams of Islam." [El-Intisar li Hizb Al-Muwahhidin, page 59]
I am sorry there is a debate on a athari Theologian named Muhammad ibn Karram from Sijistan whose creed is taken by Imam Darimi the Younger or the Second Imam Ad Darimi(he and Imam Ad Darimi senior actually has a name but i forgot both. The Imam Darimi i mean is the late Darimi) then Imam Ibn Taimiyyah took Imam Darimi creed, maybe you can look on Dr Arrazy disertation , Arrazy Hasyim is an Indonesian scholar who break away from Salafism and he wrote a desertation about the genealogy of creed of the salaf
It’s not controversial at all: Salafi creed has proof from Quran and Sunnah. Notice: everyone claims that he is following Salaf but we always ask for the proof. Salafyah is a creed, manners, methodology, ..etc. If someone does not have the manners of Salaf he is not a true salafi. Yaser Qadi is a student of Tony Blair. This guy is more politicized. He has an issue with the way of Salaf to deal with rulers which goes against the democratic approach that Yaser Qadi embraced after classes with Tony Blair .
In an authentic hadith, Khabbab bin Al-Aratt reported: I was sitting next to the door of the Prophet (peace be on him) and when he came out he said ‘Listen to me’ and we replied, ‘We are listening, ya Rasul Allah’ and he said ‘There will be, after me, leaders who will lie to you, and commit oppression among you. Whosoever believes their lies or helps them in their oppression he is none of me and I am not of him and he will not come near my Hawd (lake) on the Day of Judgement.’ (Musnad Ahmad, Tirmidhi and Nasa’i)
@@handler654 Riyad as-Salihin 51 Ibn Mas'ud (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, "You will see after me favouritism and things which you will disapprove of." They submitted: "What do you order us to do (under such circumstances)?" He replied, "Discharge your obligations and ask your rights from Allah". [Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
Alhamdulillah sir you have looked into the matter quite well mashallah but I wanted to say something for me how I see this matter as a "salafi" myself that Islam is vast in understanding but only in fiqhi (jurisprudential) matters not aqeeda (creedal) matter but we should not deny evidences from the Qur'an and the sunnah which is unambiguous or apparent if Allah Sub'hanauatala says something unambiguous then it is what it is we shouldn't interject our ideas in it but in matters which is broader which is not clear either from the Qur'an or the sunnah then it is about understanding and it is the "salafi" methodology that the rulling must be nearer to the understanding of the Qur'an the way the prophet pbuh and his companions understood it. And this is a humungous discussion cannot right in one comment. May Allah Sub'hanauatala bless you sir JazakumAllahu khairan
@@BloggingTheology you cross examine references and evidence keeping the context and the intentions behind scripture in mind. most people McQuote quickly and draw conclusions.
Athari creed was the earliest creed. But Athari creed is not the same as today's neo salafi atharism. Today's Athari creed is more like ibn taymiyyahan-atharism. I'm going to discuss this with Shaykh Yasir actually because I'm a bit surprised with his position, after doing my own research.
Well said brother. the early athari would take the attributes of the Almighty as they come and WOULDN'T comment on it. Today's psudo salafi manhaj take the ayats of Sifat and give them a real and literal meaning. This is a subtle but a huge difference! That's why ibn Qudamah stated that alla ayats that have any likeness to creation are mutashabih.
@@AbdullahodSandzak jazakAllah khair, brother. Exactly. Ibn Qudamah specifically identified as a muffawid. But yes, you're totally right - they took them as they came. Ibn taymiyyah codified today's version of atharism that includes "affirmation of the literal meaning".
@@hassanabdaladl Allah bless us both with good and enlighten us with more knowledge. Sadly, many of these people who study aqeeda have not come to understand the problem with this psudo athari creed of today. Alhumdulilahir Rabbil Ala meen
Complicated subject. Yasser Kadi is seen by salafis to be like a Catholic cardinal with a PhD from Alazhar. Having a Westernised understanding of Islam.
@@BloggingTheology The view of Tim Winter: An anti-intellectualist, anti-philosophical, ‘protestant’ form of interpretation of scripture and canon - sometimes with an overemphasis on literal meaning) with disastrous results on the intellectual health of the Islamic community. heightenedsenses.co.uk/2013/03/20/timothy-winter-on-salafism/
@@sherifel-hadi3439 not apparent why either of those are bad things. Especially looking at how astray christianity has gone with incoporating platonism & other Hellenistic schools of thought.
@@arthurmorgan4201 You have a point there. But the salafis carry it to an extreme. They leave no room for free thinking or any kind of interpretation. Is this what prophet Muhammed (PBUH) intended? I am not qualified to say.
@@sherifel-hadi3439 what they are saying that the early sahaba and tabeen are the 3rd source of understanding after the Quran and the prophet’s sayings peace be upon him - this actually makes a lot of sense and is mentioned clearly in one of the Hadiths
I’m a bit late to the party, but with the utmost respect to Ibn Taymia as a prominent Faqih, his creed is not fully in-line the Ahlul Sunna. Ibn Taymia clearly adopts the philosophers thinking of creation types with no beginning (I.e. some types of creations always existed). He’s also restored Al-Karamiya set of beliefs and falsely alleged that’s what the Salaf beloved. Unfortunately this is not known to most of Salafi’s who innocently follow Ibn Taymia blindly in everything he said. He’s certainly a great scholar but no one is perfect except the prophets. You can benefit a lot of him but you need to be careful and not take everything he says for granted.
The best scholars of uma and lot of them testified that sheikh al Islam bin tTaymia is what the salaf asalih believes Al imam Adahabi ,bin khatir, ibn qayem, ibn Rajab,Assoyuti, Al Mizzy, Ashukani, Ibn Hajjar Asqalani, and many many prominent scholars with different madhab like ibn Kathir was shafi almadhab But some Ashari were enemies of him like Zaheed Al kawthari and his disciple Anashar in his book referred the creed of ibn Taymia to Al karamia creed and from platonic philosophy of love
@@worldnewsfoodandbooks8218 Brother, Ibn Kather is Ashari, even though he's Ibn Taymmiya's student, the only students who kept his creed were Ibn al-Kayeem and ibn abd-elhady. Al-zahaby is Ibn Taymyyia's fan and his statements about Ibn Taymiya are very lenient and contradictory sometimes. Ibn Taymmiya was a scholar no doubt about that but he was Mubtade in Aqeedah, just read his books brother for your self. He clearly agrees with corporatists (Mujaseema) and falsely claimed that was Salaf and ibn-Hanbal creed, just like Abu Yaala. Ibn al-Jawzy and Ibn-Kudama both before Ibn Taymiiya denied that was Salaf and Ibn-Hanbal creed. As Ahlul-Sunna in fiqh are Hanafi, Maliky, Shafii and Hanbali, in Aqeedah, Ahul-Sunna are Ashaari, Matrudi and non-corporealist Hanbalis. Corpoleasit Hanablis took their creed from al-Karamya. and contray to hat you said, Ibn Hajar was critical of Ibn Taymiyya, and narrated his repentance from Tajseem, which Ibn al-Qayeem and others denied. Those who commended Ibn Taymiyya commended him after his repentance. Read al-Durrau Al-Kamena of Ibn Hajar, Bio no. 409 which is for Ibn Taymiyya. overwhilming amount of people are now leaving Wahabism (whcih you like to call Salafis) after they realized the truth about what Ibn Taymiyya's creed was.
@Path of Sahaba a drug called actually reading what the scholars say not what others spread lies about them. Try it sometime, it may help you from your ignorance. If you read his tafsir instead of watching wahabies UA-cam channels you will find out if yourself. But what can I say, you guys got used of being led by ignorance so have at it. Let alone his appointment in Dar Al-Hadeeth school in his time which was Waqf on Asharis, to break it down for you, it’s a condition to be ashari to get appointed. Read his bio in Ibn hajar al-askalsny book.
There are plenty of reasons why salafism is attractive specially to new converts in search of a new beginning. Yet the very idea that there was a detailed uniting aqueedah is ridiculous. Yes there were fundamental ideas all Muslims agreed and continue to agree on. But most issues that salafis obsess over today were never issues of debate in the salaf period
A lot of people don't recognize that the athri creed is split into two parties. Ibn taymiya represents a historically smaller section of the athri creed who were not accepted in the earlier hanabile and subsequent hanabile until today. For any details of what I say I can refer you to ibn rajabs fadl ilm Al salaf. You would need to read between the lines slightly if you do not have prior knowledge but it is detailed in a section about ibn muqatil.
Salafis, wahabis and other labelled groups really dividing the Muslim nations. We should stay under only one banner which is islam like early generations did, not to put a label on like ahle sunnah and others.
My brother, I think you do not understand the meaning of the Salafism (Hanbalis). They are asking the Islamic sects to return to the Qur’an and Sunnah. There is no Wahhabi ideology. This is a mystical and Shiite lie. Sheikh Wagdy Akkawi - The Horn of Satan (Wahhabism/Wahabi) | Abu Mussab Wajdi Akkari ua-cam.com/video/cxQZwbzXwxg/v-deo.html The Life of Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdil Wahhaab | Shaykh Saalih al Fawzan ua-cam.com/video/QVu9Winm7nw/v-deo.html The Term Wahhabi - Shaykh Albani ua-cam.com/video/QFJD3tyWxdQ/v-deo.html The most important thing in Islam is tawhid (monotheism), which is a direct worship of God without an intermediary, whether an idol, a shrine, or a cleric. Explanation of the Book of Tawheed - Imam Muhammad Abdul Wahab d1.islamhouse.com/data/en/ih_books/single2/en_50_questions_and_answers_in_faith.pdf
Even Al-Ghazāli admitted that the doctrine of Sahābah was not Kalām based doctrine in his famous book (Il'ihyā, P376) This issue reminds in a sense of Pauline christianity vs disciples' christianity.
That's not an admission meaning he is stating that it is wrong. He himself states that the first one using Calam was prophet Ibrahim peace be upon him. Even that, Allah Subhanahu wa Taala stated: و تلك حجتنا آتيناها ابراهيم. "And this is our proof that we gave to Ibrahim". This means that it is Allah himself that is apposing the seal of approval on Calam.
@@qursan67 I was very clear that he admitted that the *doctrine of Sahabah was not a Kalām based doctrine.* Whether Kalām is wrong or not is another subject. However, Salafis can be very proud for maintaining the way of Sahabah for that matter. And of course to say that Abraham was using a "kalāmi argument" is a far- fetched claim, and that's why some Ash'ris themselves didn't to interpret that verse that way.
Your last sentence is absolute nonsense... -The Prophet (S) was neither a theologian nor a philosopher, but a lawgiver. He called people to the worship of one God, preached against polytheism & injustice. He called people to be accountable for their actions & warned them of judgement. And he finally established laws for humanity to accrue benefits & avoid harm. -The priority of the sahaba after the Prophet (S), was the common good of the ummah, & the futuhat (entry) of Islam into other lands; they deemed it necessary to establish the caliphate in order to do this. In time things got more & more political & this lead to civil war. -The priority of the tabieen was fiqh, & even with the emergence of many innovators & heretics, besides Imam Abu Hanifa, many of the prominent fuqaha refused to get involved in discussions & debates about aqeedah, & even forbade it, as the harms far outweighed the benefits. -With the increase of innovators & heretics, & the circulation of Greek philosophical works in Arabic, scholars got more & more involved in discussions & debates about aqeedah, in order to set parameters. Some did this by reason, namely the Mu’tazilites, others by tradition, namely the Hanbalis, whereas Imam Ashari set the parameters for a balanced aqeedah. -In the East, Imam Maturidi sought to espouse the authentic aqeedah of Imam Abu Hanifa, & set the parameters of his aqeedah using reason. The Ashari school became widespread & considered orthodox by the 11th century, with further developments & parameters being set by the likes of Imam Ghazali. Whereas both the Asharis & Maturidis considered each other to be orthodox by the Ottoman period. -Later Asharis considered the actions of Imam Ashari & the earlier Asharis to be a necessary evil but no longer necessary. However, constant challenges by some of the Hanbalis kept these discussions & debates going. On the hand, other later Asharis considered taqleed (imitation) in matters of aqeedah, namely the blind faith of the masses, to be either sinful or disbelief, depending on their capacity to investigate. -This view on taqleed was challenged by the Sufis, who believed the faith of the masses to be superior to the faith of these Asharis, as the masses already possessed firm faith without investigation, whereas these Asharis needed rational investigation & this implied weak faith. Any deeper understanding of aqeedah could only be achieved by spiritual struggle, to the point one reaches a state in which he can gain knowledge through kashf (unveiling). -After European colonialism, the classical schools fell & this had severe consequences for the development of fiqh, & religious/intellectual academia in the Muslim world in general. Many reformers & puritans began to emerge to influence religious thought among the Muslims. -The reformers blamed widespread superstition among the masses of Muslims on the Sufis. As Sufis deemed taqleed in aqeedah acceptable, & asserted that no one is tasked with investigation. Moreover the Sufis were vastly popular among the masses, as people would much prefer to see saints perform miracles as opposed being told what to do, how to live, how to think, etc. by people simply because they know more/have learnt more. The reformers also blamed the theologians in general for having the wrong priorities. -And of course, finally the Wahhabis appeared & challenged the orthodoxy of the Asharis, Maturidis & Sufis, & espoused a puritanical Hanbali school of thought. Their thought entered into mainstream Islam in the mid 20th century due to Saudi backing. Overall, after the Prophet (S) & the sahaba, I believe the Sufis & the fuqaha (until the 17th century) were correct, although whether the Sufis are to blame for intellectual sterility among the masses is another question.
@@786AbdulSalamKhan How is it non sense when it is an aya in the Quran that describes what Sayyidina Ibrahim did as the proof of Allah that was given to him? I am fine with a founded rebuttal.
@@Khaledf I do not think that Al Ghazali is someone who claimed that he is following and all his scholars and followers a path against the path of Sahaba. The Sahaba did not need an explanation it was very clear for them.
I believe I can actually give some good insights on this topic since this is one of my main areas of interest. The "salafi" creed is traditionally actually known as the "Athari creed" they are basically synonomous. In recent times it has been called the Salafi creed due to rise in popularity of Salafism and the resurgance of Salafism. However, Salafism itself has actually many sub branches within it as well, and Abu Khadeeja is definitely not a good reference point to any matters of Salafism, because he belongs to an ultraconservative subsect known as the "Madkhalis" named like that because they are the followers of Sheikh Rabee Al Madkhali. Abu Khadeeja doesnt have any academic qualifications nor Islamic qualifications and is one of the most extreme figures. However, the Athari or Salafi creed is historically definitely orthodox with precedence in the Islamic tradition. Yasir Qadhi I have been following quite closely as well and I think he is a good scholar, he turned away from Salafism but not necesarily away from the creed of atharism or Salafism, however, he has become critical of many aspects of their literalism etc. In fact, within Sunni Islam, the two main creeds are the Athari ( Salafi) creed and the Ash'ari creed. Yasir Qadhi has in fact a great talk on UA-cam about the Athari vs Ashari divide and split. And the differences between them. I highly recommend this video to you since you seem to be interest. I can provide you with the link or you can search "Yasir Qadhi - difference between Salafi and Ash"ari. Greetings from the Netherlands
Assalamu Halaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu Brothers And Sisters, I really didn't wanna comment on this because I'll just probably get slandered and shunned, but I have some problems with this statement (but I do agree with others), so let's dissect this Insh'Allah : 1. Historically, the term "salafi" was previously used by scholars of the sunni school and is not a new mouvement (like what Brother Paul and Abu Khadija HA has mentioned), just to give an example : Muhammed Bin Khalaf, well known as Waki' (died in 306 A.H) , said in his biography of Isma'il bin Hammâd : "Isma'il Bin Hammâd Ibn Abi Hanifah Was A True And Correct SALAFI" (Source : Akhbar Al-Qudaat , 2/167) . So As We See, Salafiyya Isn't A New Mouvement And Dated From The Time Of The Early Generations . 2. Yasir Qadhi is not a scholar of Islam, whether you like it or not, he's an Ikhwani and literally is an obsessive lover of Westernism and denies Islamic Traditional Scholarship, plus he has majorly false claims (ex. The Hadith Of Ya'juj Wa Ma'juj And Its Inauthenticity) , and no actual salafi scholar praised him, but in fact, disagreed with his beliefs. 3. Abu Khadija, unlike what you think, is an amazing da'ee (A Person Who Does Da'wah) and really just much better than The Deviant Yasir Qadhi, just go and check his site if you want to look at it yourself. 4. The term "Madkhali" has no historical basis whatsoever, and it was fabricated by Anti-Salafis and Especially of those who baselessly criticize Shaykh Rabi' Al-Madkhali HA , he is a real salafi scholar and actually praised by mountais of knowledge (i.e Major Theologians Of The Athari Creed) [Unlike Yasir Qadhi]. But I need to say, everybody makes mistakes, even Scholars, so because Abu Khadija said a weird claim, it doesn't make him a deviant whatsoever. 5. Ash'aris are not from Ahlul Sunnah (People Of The Sunnah) whatsoever ! Their creed is baseless and fabricated, and if you do not believe me, check this : Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said: The term Ahl as-Sunnah includes the Mu‘tazilah, includes the Ash‘aris, and includes those followers of innovation whose innovation does not go as far as disbelief, if we use the term to mean as opposed to the Raafidis. But if we want to explain the meaning of the phrase Ahl as-Sunnah, we say that Ahl as-Sunnah in the true sense of the word are the righteous forebears (as-salaf as-saalih) who united in their adherence to the Sunnah and followed it. In this case, the Ash‘aris, Mu‘tazilah, Jahamis and so on are not among Ahl as-Sunnah according to this meaning. End quote from ash-Sharh al-Mumti‘ (11/306). Ibn Abdul-Barr Al-Māliki (rahimahullāh, d. 390H) quoted the saying of Imām Mālik: “It is not permitted to accept the witness of Ahlul-Bid’ah and Ahlul-Ahwā.” Then he explained: “The people of desires according to Mālik and all of our companions are Ahlul-Kalām (the people of theological rhetoric). So every mutakallim (one who resorts to theological rhetoric) is from the people of desires and Bid’ah whether he is an Ash’ari or other than an Ash’ari. His witness is never accepted in Islam. He is to be abandoned and disciplined for his innovation. And if he continues upon innovation, his repentance is sought [by those in authority].” (Jāmi’ Bayān Al-‘Ilm wa Fadlihi, 2/96) Al-Imām Al-Harawi stated in his book, Dhamm Al-Kalām (the Dispraise of Theological Rhetoric): I heard Ahmad Ibn Nasr Al-Mālīni (d. 412H) saying: “I entered the ‘Amr Ibn Al-‘Ās Congregational Mosque in Egypt with a group of my companions. Once we had sat down, a shaikh came along and said: ‘You are from the people of Khurasān and you are Ahlus-Sunnah and this is the place of the Ash’ariyyah so get up [and leave from here].'” Imām Ash-Shāfi’i (d. 204H) stated: “My judgment upon the people of rhetoric (Ahlul-Kalām) is that they should be beaten with palm branches, placed on the back of a camel and paraded among the people and it be announced: ‘This is the punishment for the one who abandons the Book and Sunnah and takes to Kalām (theological rhetoric).” (Al-Baghawi reported it in Sharhus-Sunnah, 1/218) Finally, just as an advice, do not listen to western so-called "Islamic Scholars" because they are not true students of Knowledge, let alone Theologians, You cannot even dare to compare any Traditional Scholar to these common people . And another piece of advice for Br.Paul, Please Brother, I already know that you love listening to western intellectuals, but You also need to learn from Traditional And Eastern Ones, like Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen, Shaykh Ibn Baaz, Shaykh Salih Al-Fawzaan {May Allah SWT Bless Them} , and I'm not trying to be biased, I am Athari and Salafi al Hamdullilah, but I'm an ex-Ash'ari, and By Whose Hand Is My Soul, Salafis are the best of People in academic refutations and knowledge. BarakaAllahu Fikom
@@theelahmed2682 Thank you brother, for your honesty of Athary(Salfi) defence. I might add, that if it were not for the Salafis, Islam would have been hijacked by Hellinistc thinkers just like Christianity was by Paul. Salafism reminds me of James, the brother of Jesus Br. Paul talked about, that represented early Jerouslim disciples of Jesus, who tried hard to uphold the LAW(Shariah). Thanks, Paul Williams for your subjects, integrity and professionalism.
@@qabbanms Allahuma Yudakhilokom Wa Yudakhilana Fi Al-Firdousil A'laa, and yeah man, Salafiyya is the truth and anybody who denies this is a very ignoramous person, just look at me man (not trying to say I'm the best salafi) but I've provided sources, unlike the Other Brother (May Allah SWT Guide Him) and Wallah, I do not want any bad for my Brothers And Sisters, Muslims And NON-MUSLIMS, but what I only want is the truth man, I will never call myself salafi if it did not get me closer to Allah SWT
Asalmaleykum Paul I found this topic interesting because as I see it now with the advent and easy access and f the internet we are seeing more and more muslims attacking one another and I have to say the Salafis are harsh in their treatment of non salafis. Please shed more light on this subject. JazakAllah
Exactly. It is an attempt of present-day salafis to ground themselves in the original salafi/athari/hanbali creed, but really, they are propagating the creed of Ibn Taymiyyah.
What is the difference between the salafi aqeeda and the majority of sunni's aqeedah? Maybe a video on various theological differences between the major Muslim creeds?
I am a revert and a Salafi. you are so selfless, reasonable and your analysis is always based on evidence. Thank you sir.
thank you!
don't you have a problem with the tawheed of the Salafis where they ascribe a body to God?
@@amarabidali5316 that is a lie.
@@amarabidali5316 oh, so when the pious early generations believe in literally taking the attributes and names in a way that befits Allah SWT only are ascribing a body to Allah SWT ? Are the early traditional Scholars who believed in the same thing also are mujassima ? If you call us anthropomorphists, you are not only insulting us but all of Orthodox Islamic Scholarship, Fear Allah SWT !
If you want proof, look at this :
islamqa.info/en/answers/301643/approach-of-the-four-imams-regarding-the-divine-attributes-and-some-books-to-refer-to-concerning-that
Imam Abu Haneefah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Allah has a Hand, a Countenance and an Essence as He, may He be exalted, mentioned in the Qur’an. Whatever Allah, may He be exalted, has mentioned in the Qur’an of His having a Countenance, Hand and Essence, these are attributes of His which we affirm without discussing how. It cannot be said that His Hand is His power or blessings, because that is denying the attribute, and is the view of the Qadaris and Mu‘tazilah. Rather His hand is a divine attribute, and we do not discuss how it is; His wrath and His pleasure are divine attributes, and we do not discuss how they are.
End quote from al-Fiqh al-Akbar, with commentary by Mullah ‘Ali al-Qaari, p. 85.
www.abukhadeejah.com/the-names-and-attributes-upon-their-apparent-meanings-fingers-descending-ascending-and-image-by-al-barbahaaree-explanation-of-al-fawzaan/
Imaam Abu Muhammad Al-Hasan b. `Alee b. Khalaf al-Barbahaaree (died 329H, rahimahullaah) stated in his Sharhus-Sunnah (point 42):
Everything that you hear from the Prophetic narrations which your intellect cannot comprehend, such as the saying of the Messenger (salallaahu `alaihi wassallam):
“The hearts of the servants are between the two Fingers from the Fingers of the Most Merciful, the Mighty and Majestic.”
And His saying:
“Indeed Allaah descends to the nearest Heaven.”
And He descends on the Day of `Arafah, and He will descend on the Day of Resurrection. Also people will not cease to be cast into the Hellfire until Allaah, may His praise be exalted, places His Foot over it. And the saying of Allaah, the Most High, to the servant:
“If you come to Me walking, I will come to you hurriedly.”
And the saying of the Messenger (salallaahu `alaihi wassallam):
“Allaah created Aadam upon His image.”
And the saying of Allaah’s Messenger (salallaahu `alaihi wassallam):
“Indeed I saw my Lord in the most excellent image.” And the likes of these narrations (ahaadeeth).
So upon you is to submit to these texts, believe in them, and to consign [how they are] to Allaah [without engaging in speculation], and to be pleased with these narrations. These narrations must not be explained by your desires, rather Imaan (belief) in them is an obligation. Anyone who comes and explains them according to his own desires, and thus rejects them is a Jahmee.”
www.abukhadeejah.com/ahlul-kalam-and-the-asharis-are-ahlul-bidah-philosophy-to-establish-his-religion/
Imam Adh-Dhahabi stated in his work, Siyar A’lām An-Nubalā, that Ibn Fawrak who was an imām of the Ash’ariyyah entered upon the ruler Mahmūd Ibn Sabkatkīn (d. 421H) and said to him: “It is not allowed to describe Allah as being above (fawqiyyah) because that would necessitate describing Him [also] with being below…” So the ruler said: “It is not me who described Allah [with being above] such that I am necessitated [by your assertion]. Rather, it is He (Allah) who has described Himself [with being above].” So, Ibn Fawrak was dumbfounded, unable to respond. And when he left the ruler, he died. It was said that his gall-bladder split apart. (17/487)
Ibn Abdul-Barr stated in At-Tamheed (7/129): “In this is a proof that Allah (the Mighty and Majestic) is above the sky, over the Throne, above the Seven Heavens as the Jamā’ah has stated. And this is their proof against the Mu’tazilah and the Jahmiyyah who say: ‘Indeed Allah is everywhere! And He is not over the Throne.’ The evidence for the correctness of what is stated by Ahlul-Haqq (the people of Truth) is the saying of Allah: ‘The Most Merciful ascended over the Throne.’ (Tāhā: 5) and His saying: ‘Then He ascended over the Throne. You have no protector besides Him nor any intercessor.’ (As-Sajdah: 4)“
Ibn Abī Zamanīn Muhammad Ibn Abdillāh Al-Māliki (d. 399H) stated in his book, Usūl As-Sunnah: “From the sayings of Ahlus-Sunnah is that Allāh (the Mighty and Majestic) created the Throne, and He distinguished it with highness, and elevation, above everything that He created. Then He ascended over it however He willed
@@theelahmed2682 yes exactly, the Salafi God is from sahih muslim and sahih bukhari from the hypocrites who introduced Israeli narrations to Islam. @Abu Humayd your bro just gave you evidence about your God having body parts.
Allah created everything, His spirit is a creation of His the same way His house the Ka'ba is a creation of His. He created "where" and created "when", He created every physical thing and everything we perceive. The Salafis like the first "Sunni" scholars took metaphors to be literal and therefore committed shirk as saying God has different body parts is removing Him from Oneness as one day you can worship His foot which apparently He will put in Hellfire and the other His face which we will apparently be able to see like we see the moon in the Hereafter.
Paul I am salafi and so impressed with your research and hard work. Infact going to make dua for you.
Alhamdulilah for salafiyyah. It’s a simple concept that any religious person should strive for. If you are a follower of Moses, then you should only wish to understand the teachings that Moses taught the same way that those around him did. If you follow Jesus, then you should only want to know exactly how those who heard jesus speak, understood things. Similarly, if you follow Muhammad peace be upon him, then you need to understand how the companions understood Islam and follow that way. Not to mention the numerous Hadith that directly tell us to follow the way of the companions. It cannot be the case that a person who came along hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years later, somehow understands the religion better than those who walked and talked with the Prophet peace be upon him.
That's shirk, let him make his own dua.
@@amarabidali5316 shirk is associating partners in whorship to Allah. You idiot troll should try harder
@@amarabidali5316 u don't even know what shirk is😂😂. What a noob
@@عصامإسلام-ل8ض shirk is when Allah says Aisha is kafir but you say "No Allah! you are wrong"
You are like a machine! Your posting rate is incredible!! wow
Masha Allah
My sentiments exactly just different words 👍
Masha Allah
I stopped labelling people the moment I learned more about my own deen. We always have a yardstick; The Quran and the Sunnah. So I learned to listen to the evidence first. I'm well aware of the huge sin of takfir and dividing the ummah. May Allah guide us all the haqq.
@@MH-ys4io your words are Quran and sunnah tell us to be salafi! What a claim. What imaginary world did you find this in? If said imams were the greatest as you claim and were salaf you modern day salaf resemble anything BUT great. I associate more respect to Zionist then you. Why your type breathes today is beyond me.
@@MH-ys4io it tells us to be salafi ? stop spreading non sense...
@@ocerco93 it tells us to FOLLOW THE SALAF. Salafis follow ibn taymiyyah
@@pecknarmpekky1871
Salafi's invalidates anyone's interpretation of the mutassyabih verses of the Quran outside of the Prophet's and Aslaf's interpretations.
So, no. That's why I don't like labels, because there are certain rules/traditions attached to it. I am a Muslim, and that's it. Do not divide Allah's deen.
The only people who divides Allah's Deen are the ones who aren't upon what the Companions were upon. Our understanding and methodology should be their understanding and methodology. They learned directly from the Prophet, and the first 3 generations of Believers are the model for Islam. Allah preserved the religion through them.
What I love about your bloggings, vloggings & podcasts is they are all on academic evidence-based understanding of the topics presented.
Hmm, thank you. Keep blogging. Love to hear from u.
We as Muslims do not view Yale University as the criteria to decide which Islamic school of Aqeeda is correct and which is new.
True
@@BloggingTheology True, and Islamic universities, especially Salafis, graduate students are keen to invite scholars to discuss their thesis.
Unlike Western universities, which do not know who the debaters of the message are, nor the extent of their knowledge, nor his understanding of religion and his love for following the approach of the Prophet Muhammad.
what is the right criteria to decide which creed is correct ????
@@MejriThameurSimple: Quran & Sunnah.
@@Hbibif3 agreed, but based on which explanation ?
Asharism is salifism. Asharism is another way of looking the early creed or looking salafism from another angle.
Asharism has more interpretation of the sifat than the early salafism and the need for that was avoiding misconception of the sifat, not rejecting the sifat.
That is all.
The interpretation has also base in the early salaf.
My brother . If the interpretations of the attributes of God are not from God or the Prophet Muhammad .. its place is the trash.
Because religion is taken from the words of God and the words of His Prophet only.
Theories and explanations do not need them.
Companions of the Prophet Muhammad died and did not know Al-Ash’ari or Al-Rumi, and they are the best of people and the highest ranks in Paradise
@@عبدالله-ن6ه2ص here we go again, you keep saying trash if it is werent interpreted by the salaf, I advise you go study kitab out there, You’re truly speaking out of your ignorant about the aqaid. okay stop your bigotry akhi learn from Islamic university.
How many Sifat do Ash'arites affirm??
Only 7.
Even those 7 they corrupted it.
I just defended you because Muslims shouldn't say things without evidence, anyway I would love to see you have a podcast where Christians can phone in and debate or ask questions, we need as many Dawah channels as possible. May Allah bless you and reward you for the work you are doing. My Salaams
You never fail to amaze me. You are the proof that Allah guides anyone He wills.
We have to distinguish between the (salaf) and (salafis)
(Salaf) means the early generations of muslims while the modern term (salafi) means those who follow Ibn Taymiyyah. the modern salafis who follow Ibn Taymiyyah have different creed from the earliest creed of salaf. The earliest creed was to believe in the text without explaining it (تفويض) while Ibn Taymiyyah believe in it literally giving it anthropomorphic (تجسيم) meanings.
So you’re one of those people who thinks of Allah as having body like humans with your sick mind and you’re blaming your sickness on ibn taymiyah who never did such thing and you’re accusing salafis of not following salaf you liar
@Path of Sahaba Yes
facts
May Allah forgive you for slandering Ibn Taymiyyah.
Very nice indeed! I appreciate how your focus is not stained.
Thank you!
Brother Paul, I am a Salafi, and I love you in the sake of Allah for your fairness and objectivity.
May Allah show us the truth as it is, and help us to pursue it.
Amen!
Allah the most High is showing you the truth right here in this video!!!
Mr Paul, you are indeed one of those who contemplate...a truly smart and intelligent man! Mashallah!
If the Salfi creed is the origional creed why we should not follow it?
There is a difference between CREED and the “ salafi movement” - the movement includes the creed but other stuff too. This video is JUST TALKING about the creed which is actually called “athari creed” but just so everyone knows what he is talking about he named the video “ salafi creed “
@@thaghrahmedia4468 whats the difference between salafi creed and the movement ?
@@osmanjibril8940 today salafi movement are infighting with tabdee' tahdher hajr
@@bosbanon3452 so are you saying that they dont have the salafi aqeeda or methodologybut they are a salafi movement ?
that doesnt make sense
I am a salafi but i think it got a bad name due to a small fraction of its followers are known to be harsh and blindly following their teachers. Be a balanced Salafi
Interesting work, and the channel has very high quality content.
I would like to point out however that Yale should not really be taken as a reference when it comes to validating Islamic Theology :-)
Fair point
Dr. Yasir Qadhi only did doctorate from Yale i think.
But he graduated from Madina Islamic University.
This is his field hence knows better than most of the Ummah currently.
Brilliant episode. I love it. Jazakallah khairan.
nice upload Paul. Looking forward to your next ones.
Thanks 👍
I think the main problem with the Islam today is the over-analysis and the over-indulgence of the Islamic scholars of the main tenants of Islam which are in reality very simple and should not be made complicated by opinions of different scholars. This results in the formation of different sects despite their basic beliefs being same. Islam is not that complicated. You just have to believe in the absolute authority of Allah, all the prophets, their scriptures and the judgement day. Thats it. This much is enough. No need of different sects in Islam. Sorry for my bad English.
Very well said 👍
@Glorious Quran you want to follow the messenger? How so ? According to YOUR opinion? According to whose authority, Your own??? Then you enter disputed matters to "tip your toe in" and acclaim your self to following the Prophet what do you think Hanafis or Shafiees or Maliki or Hanbali have been practicing all these years !? What do you think the Muslim Sunni has been doing up until the new-aged Muqatili Khaariji decided to come up with their own religion as attributed to Muhammed bn AbdulWahhab by group of scholar , verified by AbdurRahman bn Mohammad bn Qasim AlAasimi AlNajdi ?
But when you dip your toe in speculative theology or you harbor unorthodox doctrinal misconceptions and misperception then it becomes incumbent upon the patient to visit a circle of AhleThikr and examine yourself and your thoughts and treat them with the textual proofs in line with the traditional predecessors and rational proofs and sound reasoning that ONLY the Arabic language allows or follows or what supports the Arabic rhethoric.
@@TheMercifulAndJust
Few words about the term "Authority". As long as Messenger (SAW) was among us, he was 'The Authority'. Through him Allah gave us Deen. He taught us how to perform essential practices (Salah, Saom, Hajj, Jakat) which the entire Ummah is performing as living tradition without any basic difference. And he left us the ' Ultimate Divine Guidance' & 'The Supreme Authority' the Holy Qur'an.
What else a common Muslim needs?
@Glorious Quran We are what Qur'an says we are: Muslims. Not a thing more, not a thing less. Alhumdulillah.
Thank you for the video, what is interesting is that a period of popular Salafism also emerged in 16th century Ottoman Istanbul as well. they were popularized by Qadizade Mehmet and his followers were known as Kadizades. So the sudden emergence of 'salafism' isn't a new thing.
May Allah guide you to Islam.
Thank you for making Muslims aware of this topic "Creed of the salafi" may Allah be pleased with them.
First, I believe we need to know & understand the term "salaf", linguistically and technically.
The term salaf was not invented by Imam Ahmad or Ibn Taimiyah, but it started at the time of the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him, when he used the term talking to his daughter on his sick bed saying to her "verily I'm your best predecessor" you can check the hadith in Bukhari & Muslim
(وَإنِّي لا أُرَى الأجَلَ إلَّا قدِ اقْتَرَب، فاتَّقِي اللَّه واصْبِرِي، فَإنَّهُ نِعْم السَّلَف أَنَا لكِ).
So, Muslims shouldn't be strangers to this term because term is also mentioned in the Qur'an and they need to have proper understanding & the correct knowledge because knowledge is based upon trust. (Knowledge is Trust).
From Prophet Adam to Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon them, they are our pious predecessors. Their creed was the same, which was to Worship Allah alone & what is upon us is to affirm like how the Prophets & Messengers affirmed the existence of Allah etc, without addition or subtraction.
From Abu Hanif, Malik, Shafi'i & Ahmad, all of them their creed was the creed of the salafi & they are our salaf.
Whoever follows the Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him according to how his companions understood him then that person is amongst the followers of the methodology of the pious predecessors (salafi creed).
The Qur'an & the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him were revealed in the time of the sahabas (companions) & the sahabas taught the ones who saw them, but never saw the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him, & the ones saw the sahabas taught the ones who never saw the sahabas. Those are the best three generations, like it comes in a hadith collected by Bukhari and Muslim, "The best people are my generation..."
These generations where taught to affirm like how the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him affirmed & that the creed of Islam is not based on logic, but on evidence, which is the Qur'an & the teachings of the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him. Meaning Islamic takes the evidence first then logic follows.
Why? so that we cannot change anything in the Islamic creed & Islam in general. Even if the evidence goes against our logic, it is a must to accept it because Allah is the All Wise. The saying of Ali may Allah be pleased with him that if the religion (Islam) was based upon logic we would've whipped under our leather sock.
In conclusion, the salafi creed is the Islamic creed. The creed that teaches us to Worship Allah alone. The creed that teaches us to be dutiful to our parents. The creed that teaches us to be kind to our neighbors. The creed that teaches us to show mercy to the creation & spread peace & love. Hence, when we meet & depart we say: "Asalaam alaikum (Peace be upon, actual meaning is No harm will befall you from me) warahmatullahi (& the mercy of Allah be with you in this life & hereafter) wabarakatuh (and may He bless you).
@Salafiyyaaa Amin
Can I get a reference for that? That is a really interesting find.
@@MusaMills1 I found this information in Samer Akkach's book: Islam and the enlightenment. It is also easily found on the internet, search Qadizade Mehmet efendi.
@@omarn7650 Thank you very much. Reading on it now and I am blown away.
Ended up liking before watching 😅 but am gonna hear completely
~After hearing completely~
Somehow your British accent felt more nuanced this time 😅
I had originally felt that Salafism is the right thing, because of their premise that following the religion of the first three generations is following Islam.
As of last or last to last year, I have just washed my hands off anything that ends in an -ism or is anything like that, because by their very nature they are limited.
I have also listened to Dr Yasir Qadhi a lot, and in one of these sessions where he was forced to discuss creed, he said in the end something similar to that this discussion is not too fruitful because whether athari or ashari, people still do not show any major differences in righteousness, closeness to religion etc. i.e. the outcome is not very different for being ashari or athari 😅
😂
What about ghamidi or farahi understanding of Islam
@@mohammadtahir3140 I am sorry dear brother, I do not know about these understandings.
What I can tell only from your comment is that these understandings trace back their origins to the people they are named after. Since I see all humans to be limited by their intellectual capacities, I find it a red flag that these understandings are named after their people.
If you would like, you may inform your understanding of these understandings, but please please please keep in mind that trolls, haters, and those who love disputing can disrupt our conversation and we will need to generally avoid them for they keep on asserting their points at the expense of love and mercy and forgiveness. I'll in shaa Allah discuss your understanding of these understandings in a manner that is discussion and not debating.
@@shahfaisalislam8719 brother I am not very good at English speaking that's why it is very difficult to me to make you understand what is my my beliefs and understanding. But I strongly recommend you to listen to javed Ahmed ghamdi and I hope if you not biased about sectorism or any other. Ism you won't be disappointed
Great comment. Though I would still encourage learning about these theologies as it is to do with the history of Islam and enables to understand where we come from. I would like to follow the way of the salaf as much as possible but wouldn't put myself in a group. That's just humans being tribalistic (what a surprise 😄)
Paul,
You really impress me on how your critical mind finds its way through very complex, controversial and delicate issues. Many Muslims who read Quran and study religion identify themselves as following the original faith when they are actually following a version that came later in history and does not capture the pure Aqieda and the way of the prophet. I guess Allah knew that, if he leaves religion preservation to man, the man will eventually alter it. Preservation of pure religion requires divine intervention, IMHO.
Your angle is correct taken as well possible in this forum
It's important to note that the mantle of being 'salafi' is claimed by multiple groups that have their differences and by people who don't follow any particular group. I feel being 'salafi' has been hijacked by groups like SPUBs and the followers of Rabee' Almadkhali who claim it for themselves while spending almost all their time criticizing people sometimes justly and a lot of the time unjustly. A lot of people who call themselves salafi and adopt the salafi creed don't like SPUBs at all. What is common between those who call themselves salafis is their creed and I think it's inaccurate to criticize salafis in general for something only a small part of salafis do. At the end of the day, what matters is not the label but the belief and actions. We are called Muslims in the Quran and that's sufficient as a label as long as we have the correct creed and follow Allah's law to the best of our ability and knowledge.
Who have they criticised unjustly?
Look at the channel sp files you have examples
My brother . The criterion for truth is to return to the texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah and to follow the companions of the Prophet Muhammad and those who understood Islam from it.
Many of those who criticize Salafism are Sufis, Ash'aris, Shiites, or parties that have political ambitions in Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries and do not accept Salafism because they defend these governments.
So when you watch someone criticizing Salafism, you have to know what his sect, ideas and party he belongs to.. Then analyze what he says on the ground.. and what is the alternative offered by those who criticize Salafism.. Then you will improve to choose what is correct.
good luck brother
@@عبدالله-ن6ه2ص An-Nawawi was an Ashari and Ibn Taymiyyah excused the Asharis and Jahmiyyah.
Indeed.
I am a salafi Alhamdulillahi and it's well clear
I am from Sierra Leone 🇸🇱
It’s interesting you mentioned Ibn Taymiyah never came up with anything new. While not everything he said was wrong, he did believe in things which none of the authorities of the Salaf ever said. The belief of Ibn Taymiyah does not absolutely equal the belief of the Salaf.
@Path of Sahaba even if you are correct, that doesn’t take away from the number of times Ibn Taymiyyah violated the consensus.
@Path of Sahaba message me on Ig
YOU ARE SMART MY BROTHER ...I AM SOOOO PROUD ABOUT YOU ....
thx u brother paul I learned a lot from you💚✅🤲
You are very welcome
The Athari creed definitely predates Asharism/Maturudism. Also Asharism has changed a lot. The early Asharis have beliefs that would be unpalatable by modern Asharis. To be fair the Athari creed also developed over time. But it is more or less the same. The statements of some of the early Asharis would scare most Asharis today - maybe they might even consider some of it blatant disbelief. I don't know alot about the Maturidi school - if it went through changes like the Ashari school or not?? What i do know is that they consider each other sister schools now; whereas historically they used to refute each other. They kind of ganged up on the Atharis now. Great video by the way.
-The Prophet (S) was neither a theologian nor a philosopher, but a lawgiver. He called people to the worship of one God, preached against polytheism & injustice. He called people to be accountable for their actions & warned them of judgement. And he finally established laws for humanity to accrue benefits & avoid harm.
-The priority of the sahaba after the Prophet (S), was the common good of the ummah, & the futuhat (entry) of Islam into other lands; they deemed it necessary to establish the caliphate in order to do this. In time things got more & more political & this lead to civil war.
-The priority of the tabieen was fiqh, & even with the emergence of many innovators & heretics, besides Imam Abu Hanifa, many of the prominent fuqaha refused to get involved in discussions & debates about aqeedah, & even forbade it, as the harms far outweighed the benefits.
-With the increase of innovators & heretics, & the circulation of Greek philosophical works in Arabic, scholars got more & more involved in discussions & debates about aqeedah, in order to set parameters. Some did this by reason, namely the Mu’tazilites, others by tradition, namely the Hanbalis, whereas Imam Ashari set the parameters for a balanced aqeedah.
-In the East, Imam Maturidi sought to espouse the authentic aqeedah of Imam Abu Hanifa, & set the parameters of his aqeedah using reason. The Ashari school became widespread & considered orthodox by the 11th century, with further developments & parameters being set by the likes of Imam Ghazali. Whereas both the Asharis & Maturidis considered each other to be orthodox by the Ottoman period.
-Later Asharis considered the actions of Imam Ashari & the earlier Asharis to be a necessary evil but no longer necessary. However, constant challenges by some of the Hanbalis kept these discussions & debates going. On the hand, other later Asharis considered taqleed (imitation) in matters of aqeedah, namely the blind faith of the masses, to be either sinful or disbelief, depending on their capacity to investigate.
-This view on taqleed was challenged by the Sufis, who believed the faith of the masses to be superior to the faith of these Asharis, as the masses already possessed firm faith without investigation, whereas these Asharis needed rational investigation & this implied weak faith. Any deeper understanding of aqeedah could only be achieved by spiritual struggle, to the point one reaches a state in which he can gain knowledge through kashf (unveiling).
-After European colonialism, the classical schools fell & this had severe consequences for the development of fiqh, & religious/intellectual academia in the Muslim world in general. Many reformers & puritans began to emerge to influence religious thought among the Muslims.
-The reformers blamed widespread superstition among the masses of Muslims on the Sufis. As Sufis deemed taqleed in aqeedah acceptable, & asserted that no one is tasked with investigation. Moreover the Sufis were vastly popular among the masses, as people would much prefer to see saints perform miracles as opposed being told what to do, how to live, how to think, etc. by other people simply because they know more/have learnt more. The reformers also blamed the theologians in general for having the wrong priorities.
-And of course, finally the Wahhabis appeared & challenged the orthodoxy of the Asharis, Maturidis & Sufis, & espoused a puritanical Hanbali school of thought. Their thought entered into mainstream Islam in the mid 20th century due to Saudi backing.
Overall, after the Prophet (S) & the sahaba, I believe the Sufis & the fuqaha (until the 17th century) were correct, although whether the Sufis are to blame for intellectual sterility among the masses is another question.
Also I wanted to add that every Salafi is an athari - but not every athari is a Salafi. I think that is an important point.
Alot of what you said here was wrong. No modern day ashari scholar would consider any view (generally) of the early Ash’aira to be deviant, or even kufr.
Regarding the maturidi and ashari schools, both schools durings its beginning refuted each other, but during these refutations realized the majority of their differences are semantical in nature, and nothing which entails kufr or innocation.
The real problem is that most muslims don't differentiate between the Athery creed , also known as Hanbaly creed ,and Ibn Taimeia opinions. Yes, Ibn Taimeia creed is build upon the Hanbaly one , but he has certain main differences which most people don't know. We must distinguish between the Hanbaly creed ,Ibn Taymia opinion and Salafi (Wahhabi) creed.
Bro you don't even know where you talking about read the books from imam ahmed and his students they say the same things as ibn taymiyyah
Thanks for this and your other posts... Now I have much better knowledge about other faiths..
There are details that Yasir Qadhi brushes over in his paper. What some have already mentioned in the comments is that the original athari creed accepted the attributes of Allah as is, leaving the meaning to Allah as He Himself knew best what He meant by them. One of them being ibn taymiyyah being representative of the athari creed "in general". but either one is or isn't the same as the other.
The issue with the salafi approach is the literalist approach of the siffaat (attributive names). And you clearly see in the earlier works of the Atharis that no meaning was ascribed what so ever and even Imam Ahmad who the athari methodology of deriving theology comes from stated negation of meanings or negations of possible logical conclusions i.e. "He is not a body".
Where as the taymiyyan/salafi creed does have the issue of anthropomorphism or at least that their statements logically follow to that extent, and no negation is made, and if one is made or superimposed on to their creed, they say that it is a negation of the attribute.
Where as the original athari creed specifically did have negations of such.
More over ibn taymiyyah delved even deeper philosophically (even though he was opposed to Kalam as a method) and had greater creedal issues.
I do agree with the athari creed being the earliest however in meaning none of the 3 schools differ on the meaning in key creedal issues, they only differ on the method.
You can check out Shaykh Yusuf bin Sadiq al-Hanbali al-Athari who holds to the athari creed and has an ijazah (permission to teach) from the Islamic University of al-Azhar. And he affirms this as well that the ash'arites preserved the meaning of beliefs of the atharis even though as an athari he disagrees with the methods. I think that would be a more assessement to measure academic honesty, since islamically we would go by chains of transmission and the chains of transmission of al-Azhar go back to the original scholars.
mashaa Allah, akhi, the salafussaliheen were athari mufaweeda, not one of them go and say the dzahir ul ma’na of the sifat. yet the salafist nowadays almost dwelving into anthromorphic.
surprised you would comment on internal matters within the islamic diaspora :)
i've been catching up with your videos on youtube. very nice content.
Each time I watch a video on this channel I feel more appreciation and love for Paul.
I have been following Dr. Yasir Qadhi for a few years now and I watched hundreds of hours of content, including methodical lectures, interviews, and series like the excellent ~150 hours Seerah series in English.
I come from a traditional training in Asha’ri creed and I find him to be fair in a lot of how he addresses controversial topics, but I’m not academically trained rigorously enough for my view to have much weight. Just wanted to share.
Also, it would be great if we can get an interview with Dr. Yasir and Paul and I believe it can be very beneficial to learn more and see the two amazingly genuine brothers together.
Thank you, Paul. You work is amazing, your energy is inspiring, and this channel is such a gem. ❤
Great video sir as usual. May I suggest you read a book called 'Najhul Balagha'which means Peak of Eloquence.
I'm very sure you will find it a very interesting read.
It's a compilation of lectures and sermons one of the prophet Mohammed's( peace be upon him) close companions . Right at the beginning of Islam.
Are you mo from sc?
Mr MO you mean Najhul Balagha which is a book claimed by "" SHIAS "" that It contains lectures and sermons of hazrat ali peace be upon him yes or no ???
Oh shia look what ali has to say
Verily, the people who payed allegience to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, have payed allegience to me based on the same principles as the allegience to them. So anyone who was present has no right to go against his pledge of allegience, and anyone who was absent has no right to oppose it. And verily shura (consultation) is only the right of the Muhajirs and the Ansar. So if they decide upon a man and declare him their imam, then it is with the pleasure of Allah. If anyone goes against this decision, then he must be persuaded to follow the rest of the people. If he persists, then fight with him for leaving that which has been accepted by the believers. And Allah shall let him wander misguided and not guide him. (Nahjul-Balaghah, Letter #6)
thanks brother for sharing your academic research into these topics.
I am Muslim. I am Salafi because I follow Al *Salaf* Al Saleh (The Pious Predecessors)
Very easy to say than done😂😂
@@saidhashi2856You can say that about everyone today. Everyone tries their best to follow the Salaf. Of course if you are talking about some people like SPUBS or TROID that hijacked this name then yeah but don’t generalize.
I love you for the sake of Allah (swt) , brother Paul , keep up the good work 👍
Mr. Williams I would very much appreciate, as I believe many others would, a list of books that you endorse or recommend reading. If this exists already, my apologies.
It doesn't exist at the moment, but thanks for asking. I'll give it some thought.
On theology, Moderation in belief by Al ghazali is good text focused on god attributes. Mind you this is heavyweight philosophical reading. There are a couple other books they may pop up on amazon if you search for this book
@@Yameen200 What kind of books are you looking for?
@@عبدالله-ن6ه2ص where does it say im looking for books buddy ?
Abu Khadeeja from Birmingham.
Brother Paul your weigh above this.
True Salafis and the Athari, Asharis and Maaturidis.
They have semantical differences but in reality are the same.
no
Paul! I feel there is a very subtle nuance that is lacking and that you might appreciate. We have to differentiate salafism from atharism. For traditionnal scholars, Salafism began in the 18th century and wrongly interpreted athari creeds by introducing anthropomorphist understanding to it. Asharis don't have any problems with the Athari creed. On the contrary, they all agree on the creed of Imam At-Tahawi for example. They only say that the Asharis expanded the Athari creed to make the Sunni creed a relevant response against there contemporary anthropomorphists and Mu'tazili rationalists of their time. The same with sufism. The majority of sufi masters are Asharis-maturidis. Yet they all recognized Sh.Abd el Qadir Al Jilani as one of the greatest Imam ever even though he was a hanbali-athari scholar.
The critic of the traditional sunnis today against salafism (and you find the same critic in the past centuries against some extreme-deviant Athari who were accused of anthropomorphism) is that
1-Some salafis deformed the original Athari creed. They took it as a way of justifying an anthropomorphic vision of God saying the like of "God have a hand which is a body but different than the kind of hand we know".
2- Salafis rejected the madhabs methodology which impose the following of one of the four school of law as long as someone is not a complete Mujtahid (Independent legal Scholar of the divine law who reached the highest level). Because of that, they claimed that almost anyone could interpret the law as long as he have evidence from the Qu'ran or the Sunnah. For traditional scholars, this is the greatest way of destroying the religion. Why? Because I can't use the Qu'ran as an evidence for legal rulings since I didn't master the highest the level of it's arabic language like did Imam Shafii who traveled 15 years to acquire it and I didn't master all the tools of legal methodology that Imam Malik inherited from the salaf who took them from the Sahabas. The same way I can't use an authentic Hadith as I didn't master the whole corpus so that there might be another one that say the exact contrary which might be explained by a specific context, etc. The results of their legal methodology was a complete disaster as it justified any ignorant one (who taught he wasn't ignorant because he had memorize texts) to make his own legal understanding which resulted in the propagation of takfir (accusing muslim of rejecting islam) and accusations of shirk (accusing muslim of associating other to God). All of this caused huge disasters since the very beginning of there movement until our very days, the greatest of which was the emergence of islamic terrorism justifying the killing of innocents, muslim and non-muslims alike, on that basis. Even if we agree that salafis in general don't preach terrorism, we have to acknowledge that all contemporary islamic terrorist movements emerged from the Salafi methodology. From Boko Haram, to Daesh, to Al Qaeda, you can't find one single terrorist movements who emerged from the traditional sunni understanding: "Research has shown how apolitical Saudi-backed schools in Somalia in the early 1990s, known as Ittihad schools, mutated very suddenly into nurseries for the movement that became known as Shabab. Similarly, Boko Haram founder Muhammad Yusuf began his preaching at the Ibn Taymiyya mosque in Maiduguri having been instructed in Madkhalism by graduates of Madina University, but converted to a Nawaqidi interpretation. Abd el Rahman Abd el Khaliq, one of the most newsworthy Egyptian radicals, also studied in Saudi universities; as did Turki Bin' Ali, the "senior scholar" of Daesh" (Travelling Home, Abdel Hakim Murad, p230). And we can continue applying this to all the other movements...
How weird would it be than that the revivers of the true creed brought the greatest calamity to the muslim world which is division, violence, intolerance and the shedding of blood in the name of the message of our beloved Prophet (peace and blessings upon him)
For us, when you associate the Athari creed (which all Asharis respect) with salafism, you are confounding the noble athari creed with the critics of anthropomorphism made by the Asharites against some extreme-deviant hanbalis who misinterpreted atharism. As well, you are associating the noble Athari creed with the dangerous legal mind set built by the Salafis school that open the doors for takfir and accusations of shirk which then open the doors for violence and the spread the shedding blood.
With all love and respect Paul, the reason why we love your channel is because you are mastering the christian theology and you're able to make us reflet on great islamic response to it in the contemporary time. This bring us all together.
But if you start to deal into the most dividing subject that divides muslims nowadays before having really master the islamic tradition, it will brake this great harmony that we feel on your channel.
I would recommend you (applying this to myself first as I'm in Egypt stydying): try to really study seriously the sunni tradition for the next years and than see after a while what kind of subject like that you feel to share as your opinion. You will be doing it with a far deeper consciousnees of the issues you're dealing which will avoid any possible confusion like the one I felt on this video.
Please forgive me if I did say anything wrong. We love you!
Ma Salam from Cairo!
nice post. İ am from Turkey and what you say is fact. Mr. Paul has a very complete understanding of christian theology and who jesus really was and we greatly respect that. On the other hand he compared the salafis to protestant christians( who have a massive population....) Wahhabi-salafis are less than 1 percent of the total muslim population of close to 2 billion people. This ideology came into existence in the 17th century when mr wahhab and MBS(the g8 grandfather) of todays saudi king decided to start an uprising against the ummah at the time. They pretty much overnight declared 99.9 percent of the muslims as heretics... This was a blessing to the pope and western countries. You are from Egypt so you must know the history of The Egyptians putting down this rebellion. The british crown kept supporting this movement monetarily in order to destroy islam from within. And after WW1 they were partially succesful in doing this. They kept saudi as a satellite state and used them to keep spreading this false concept after the 50-60s.... Ofcourse when people went to pilgrimage they would force these books on people from all over the ummah... But thankfully people arent gullible nowadays. İt is much harder to trick people with the advent of the internet.
assalamo alaikum paul . thanks for including Brother Abu Khadeejah and SPUBS. i believe their POV needs to heard as well.
Knowing that al-Ashʿarī died in 936 which is 324 H, and he is the founder of the Ashʿarism, and Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal died 855 which is 241 H the one known as Imam Ahel Assunnah and as the "Defender of Orthodoxy", you will know for sure that the Asha'ri creed is not the first creed for Sunni Islam, nor was it the way of Imam Ahmad and every Imam before him since the Sahabah of the Prophet PBUH.
Good video Paul! 👍🏻
This so called “first creed” had to be developed over time due to the many innovators & heretics that appeared, such as the khawarij, rafidis, murjias, jabaris, qadaris, jahmis, etc.
Because of all these different fringe groups, two trends of scholars emerged. One known as Ahl al Kalam (people of discussion) & the other known as Ahl al Hadith (people of tradition). The Ahl al Kalam emerged around the time Greek philosophical works were translated into Arabic & circulated in the Muslim world, their aim was to prove Islamic orthodoxy by reason, but the first of them were Mu’tazilites who themselves had a few controversial beliefs. Then you had the Ahl al Hadith who were basically a knee jerk reaction to all the above, they stressed the importance to hadith as evidence above everything else. They espoused this so called “first creed” & the above was the reason why, it doesn’t necessarily make this creed the true orthodox creed.
Imam Ashari basically resolved the above problems via a “middle way” between the Ahl al Kalam & Ahl al Hadith, based on many hadiths where the Prophet (S) said the middle way, or moderation is the best way. Historically, his followers, the Asharis were the first to call themselves Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama’at.
@@786AbdulSalamKhan I agree with most of what you said, until you wrote the last thing "Historically, his followers, the Asharis were the first to call themselves Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama’at.
" This is ABSOLUTELY NONSENSE!!!
1- Sufyan al-Thawri
died 778 AD - 161H said : How few are the people of Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama'at" And Sufyan is from the 2nd H. century
and using the full name as Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama'at!!
2- Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari
died 923 AD - 310 H wrote in his book "Sareeh Al-Sunnah- صريح السنة : As for what is correct in saying that the believers see their Lord, the Almighty, on the Day of Resurrection, which is our religion to which we owe God, and that we have come to realize by the people of -in Arabic: Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama'at- the Sunnah and the community..."
3- Abu Ja'far Ahmad al-Tahawi died 933 AD - 321 H wrote in his famous book "Statement of the belief of Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama'at" بيان عقيدة أهل السنة والجماعة: This stated the belief of Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama'at"
And more and more. I've only given you the full name "Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama'at" from a few people before Alashari himself; but the word "Ahl al Sunna" alone, is actually everywhere among those Imams before Alashari!
Also, being in the middle where the first generation was not, is not a good thing to do. You can not understand the creed better than the Sahaba who were taught is by the Prophet PBUH himself! Being the "first creed" means being on the same creed of the Sahaba, it's absolutely makes it the true one as the Prophet PBUH said " the path which I and my companions follow" Tirmidhi (2641)
@@yosefofarabia508 The phrase existed, but wasn’t widespread. People referred to themselves as “Ahl al Hadith” for example much more so, prior to to referring to themselves as “Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama’at”. Also...you should provide a source for those quotes, are they from early sources, later sources, what?
The sahaba didn’t concern themselves with creed, neither did many of the early scholars besides Imam Abu Hanifa. The early scholars avoided & even forbade people to get involved with discussion & especially debates about creed (kalam), as the harms far outweighed the benefits. However, as the innovators & heretics became widespread, some scholars needed to set parameters.
That’s what creed is, setting the parameters/limits for beliefs so people could not assert whatever they desired to be the teachings of Islam. The Mu’tazilites set the parameters using reason, as this also happened to coincide with the circulation of Greek philosophical works in Arabic. The Hanbalis set the parameters using tradition, a combination of hadiths from the Prophet (S) & what was passed down to the Muslims from generation to generation, however they set these parameters as a reaction, not for its own sake, in other words just like the Mu’tazilites they had external influence.
Imam Ashari set the parameters using both reason & tradition, in order to set forth a balanced creed. This was seen as a necessary evil by many later Asharis, however some of the Hanbalis, especially the likes of Ibn Taymiyya, & now modern Salafis, won’t stop the obsession with creed; so this evil of discussing & debating creed (kalam) won’t go away anytime soon.
@@786AbdulSalamKhan Brother, you said "Historically, his followers, the Asharis were the first to call themselves Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama’at.
" and that was not true at all as a I showed you; now you're saying no "The phrase existed, but wasn’t widespread" what does that even mean!? If Sufyan (2nd century
Imam) used the phrase to refer to people who aren't people of bidaa, meaning, the phrase was known to people and widespreaded.
The phrase you are mentioned "Ahl al Hadith" were also used but not as a phrase against the kalam groups, it was used against "Ahul al Raii" like Imam Abu Hanifa and his school of thought of Iraq. Ahl al Hadith like Imam Malik and the school of Ahl Al Madian and Ahl Makka, the school of Al Hijas. They were the 2 main school of thoughts at the time: Ahl al Raii أهل الرأي and Ahl al Hadith أهل الحديث both were fiqhi schools of thoughts.
" they set these parameters as a reaction" I agree! Muslims knew the "creed" as a part of the believe in Allah swt by how they were taught generations to generations since the sahaba until the kalam appears and the "how" questions about the sifat of Allah swt, then came the need to form into books and called "the creed of the salaf" by which they mean: You can't ask "how" about Allah's sifat because Allah said about himself "there is nothing like Him".
@@yosefofarabia508 I will ask again, please provide the source for the quote by Sufyan al Thawri, is it an early source or a later source? Secondly, the quote you cited by Sufyan al Thawri states the Ahl al Sunna were very few, please explain how very few means widespread.
I am already aware of who the phrase “Ahl al Hadith” was used against. Thanks.
There is a difference between simply listing the beliefs of the Muslims, & setting parameters against others who did. The Hanbalis did the latter, so no it does not truly reflect what the sahaba believed.
The Prophet (S) was neither a theologian nor a philosopher, he was a lawgiver. You will find in the Qur’an, that the “creed” taught by the Prophet (S) was simple, and the priority of the sahaba after the Prophet (S) was not creed.
Atharism is not the problem, it is as legit as Asharism and Maturidism. Those three are the Sunni way. Also the Sunni way are the 4 Mazhabs.
So take your pick. We follow the salaf and we are salafis by following the four Imams.
Now you will ask why mixing aqeeda with mazhab ? I am but observing the rejection of the mazhabs by the group that calls them selves " salafis". This is the litmus test for a very serious deviation. Which alim ( scholar ) in the past centuries rejecting the mazhab ? Shaykh ibn Teymia and his true followers belonged to a mazhab. So these aqeeda wars are not that naive when viewed from a wider perspective.
Paul can you please do an informative video about the Kharijites and their descendants the Ibadis ?
You are very brave for objectively seeking out truth as it is.
Salam brother Paul. I just want to comment on the very last sentence in which you state that "Yale wouldn't have given him[Yassir Qadi] a PhD if he was wrong". In fact, Yale and any other respected institution assists a PhD thesis based on whether it follows the scientific method of research and therefore meets their academic stander. In other words, you as a PhD candidate has the opportunity to claim whatever as long as you represent your case in a scientific method and language. So, the same institution, let us say Yale, might approve a PhD that reputes Yassir Qadi's thesis. thanks
It's Yasir Qadhi actually. However the so called salafism today is flawed. They exposed themselves yet again with their fatwahs about covid lockdown and denial of end time signs.
Great work! Always an interesting listen
Aaaaaahh.. I just discovered your channel today (thanks YT recommendation) and after watching a couple of videos, this is THE ONE I was waiting for !!!
I'm not sure I caught all the words and names you used (English is not my 1st foreign language).. but I'd love to say that I (as average person) believe that neither Allah swt nor His Messenger have called us sunni, or salafi or ashaari or whatever.. they just called us Muslims. As simple as it is.
If one goes through complications such as philosophy, sufism, kalam, weird ideologies, etc. then they're deviating from the simplicity of the message of Islam which must be accessible to the kid as to the adult, to the illiterate as to the educated, etc.
*The message is cristal clear. Allah swt is our Creator, we are in this life with a purpose to worship Him and only Him and He sent prophets and messengers to show us the way to worship Him.*
So, as long as one sticks to Quran and Sunnah according to the way it was related and interpreted by Muhammad pbuh and his Companions.. we are on the Right Path.
*Muhammad (pbuh) said, "The best people are those of my generation (Companions), and then those who will come after them (the next generation : Tabiin : followers), and then those who will come after them (the next generation : tabii attabiin : following the followers), and then after them, there will come people whose witness will precede their oaths, and whose oaths will precede their witness."*
So the _Aqida_ Creed is related in Quran and authentic Ahadiths. As simple as it is and as it must be. When Allah swt (or His Messenger) says something about Himself, His Names and His Attributes, we just take it the way it is without complications. He states Nothing compares to Him so why try to understand what goes beyond their limited brain ?!
The early trustful scholars (such as Ibn Taymiya) who were following Kitab and Sunnah have written volumes to quench one's thirst (for advanced learners).
And they never claim being a part of a group or naming a group by their name.
Though, as they are human beings, and they might be mistaken, we took what goes with *evidences* and we leave which doesn't.
I (as average person) believe any "new" name or designation of a parti or group or sect or ideology or or.. created after the Messenger is nothing but deviation from Truth (with levels).
PS : If my beliefs and thoughts go in line with a name or designation.. Alhamdulillah I still call myself *Muslim* .
And Allah knows best,
The term Calam was referring to greek philosophy influence during the early days of the mu3tazila. However, after it has been purged from the ideas that lead to contradictions and inconsistencies, it started referring to the science that defends the creed of Islam using reasoning proofs. The salaf in their negative comments about Calam were not talking about the work of Al Ashari or Al Baqillani or Al Juwayni or Al Ghazali. They were talking about the mu3tazila.
The Athary school is the most authentic and it is the established methodology of the companions and early Imams, however when the Mu'tazilites appeared the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah felt duty bound to respond in the language of the Mu'tazilites which is logic and ilmul Kalam! These schools developed and became part of Ahlus Sunnah! The Athary Aqeedah is the Aqeedah of the Hanbali school I know this because it's my school and in all the accademic catalogues of lineagesأثبات for the Fiqh and Aqeedah and the classical works and their various unbroken chains I find that these 2 other schools were eventually accepted as part of Ahlus Sunnah! One Imam who I have a quite short chain to him and his works is Imam Assafaareeni and in his own explanation of his poem of Aqeedah he clearly states that Ahlus Sunnah is three: The Athariyya, and the asharis and matureedis. However with the advent of modern salafis they went against the Hanabila and started to attack these other 2 schools! This is why I do not subscribe to the salafis though I love Naasir Uddin Al-Albaani and Ibn Uthaymeen who is Hanbali but still very critical of the 2 other schools. Abu khadeeja is not a scholar or an accademic infact he left Madinah half way through because he couldn't keep up. I lived in Birmingham and know the disunity these lot cause they are very extreme indeed in terms of shunning other Muslims. And so the scholars and Imams had matured in their understanding and had accepted each other and then ibn Abdul Wahaab came- who is in many of my chains- and from him the modern salafi movement and regressed which in turn caused a chain reaction with Al-Azhar- who I also carry their accademic chains via my Sheikh one of Ali Gommas top students- and hence old rifts were reignited and now today there is disunity!! I accept Ahlus Sunnah as these 3 schools and I pray in any Masjid whether Sufi or salafi or in between and I advise every Muslim to do the same! Is the Athariyya Aqeedah the most authentic? Yes! Is it the only viewpoint? No! But Islam is a vast tradition and mature enough to accept these differences and it's only the immature who contradict this. The salafis of wright street spubs write many books despite not being qualified to speak about religion at all and my own teachers in Saudi do not very much like these over the top people as they are Hanbali and identify with the 4 sunni schools of fiqh.
exactly akhi, the classical hanbali scholar imam assaffarini, qadi abu ya’la and many more were the true fuqaha of the hanabilah. May Allah bless you for spoking the truth.
Well that’s great. I agree 100 % with your description you just made about the “meaning” of Salafi. The only thing I disagree with you about is that I do not consider it a “movement” or a “group” but it’s an approach or a way of understanding to protect the earliest “pure” theology of islam from the impurities of later Greek philosophy and other deviations in creed.
Good video paul. The term "salafi" isn't as exclusive as many would like to hive off. The term "salafi" describes someone who is on the athari aqeedah (creed) as it is seen as the cred of the pious predecessors. The asharis or maturidis do not see themselves as not being "salafi" that is, not being upon the beliefs and actions of the 3 earliest generations. All Muslims do. What is now seen as salafi proper is one who is hanbali in fiqh (jurisprudence) and athari in aqeedah (creed) but anyone who is athari can be called salafi in the general sense. So I would technically he seen as salafi in that I follow the maliki school of though and the athari aqeedah.
I do not claim the title because it seems rather presumptuous. I see following the salaf as a constant life goal. Not some title one slaps on themselves then starts declaring themselves righteous and on the right path and other deviants. People like abu khadijah is a well known ignoramus which many prominent scholars in Saudi arabia have warned against and stated he doesnt have the knowledge to teach Islam.
The problem with modern day salafis is that the modern rendition of this group is more reactionary and exclusive. They are hyper focused on declaring everyone heretics and deviants even within their own ranks to the point they end up eating each other alive. This mindset is absolutely against the mindset and teachings of the salaf they are attempting to emulate. Also, there is politics involved. They are funded by gulf states and Saudi arabia and are influenced in teaching people to be bootlickers of the tyrants and claiming this is the consensus or at least unanimous agreement of the salaf which, is wrong.
Everyone from as suyuti (ashari sufi giant in islamic schoalsticism) and other scholars who are of the other 2 creedal schools amd sufi chains all have it being their goals to follow and appeal to the salaf. The muslim world is much bigger then this hyper partisan group who does far more harm then benefit. So long as a muslim follows quran and the sunnah within the acceptable range of interpretation of mainstream orthodox sunni islam it in my humble opinion would be fitting to call them being upon the path of the salaf. Thats my two cents, have a nice day and looking forward to many more benefital videos from you Paul 😊😊😊
You are right. Cent percent
Salafiyyah isn't just being athari. Salafiyya is more than just following the true meaning of tawheed al asmaa was sifaat. Salafiyya is also to differentiate yourself from the khawaarij. It also means staying away from hizbiyyah. It also means that you obey the ruler and don't speak against the rulers by mentioning their names as per the commands of the prophet ﷺ. Follow the evidence and the texts ikhwa, not any personalities.
To my knowledge the Hanbali/athari creed is not the same as the modern salafi creed so saying the athari creed existed before Imam Ash’ari doesn’t help the salafis.
The Ash’ari creed is basically some new developments which were used to debunk the mutazilites etc.
That’s why Sunnis regards Ashari, Māturīdī and athari to be ahlus sunnah but the modern salafis would not be part of it as far as I’m aware.
I have always found that history always sides with the truth.
Im not very sharp so forgive me for some stupid questions lol. Was Asari Creed a dominant creed before Ashari and Maturidi Creed? What was status of Asari Creed during the dominance of Mutazilla?
the Athari creed was the creed of the Companions
@@BloggingTheology Brother Paul, forgive me for any potential misunderstanding of what you’ve said, though just wished to clarify that you are aware that the Ashʿarīs themselves declare that ‘Atharism’ was the belief of the Salaf?
I used to watch you at speakers corner and you are a very nice man but I have heard on a Dawah channel that you have left Islam and are not a Muslim. I pray that this is not the case and if you have left; Why? You look very gaunt and look as if you've lost weight. I pray that you're in good health and I would plead with you to not leave Islam. Death is around the corner. Take care and my prayers are with you
i agree Paul does look a bit thin, hearing "Death is around the corner" will cheer him up no end i'm sure.
@@zellak-pr7pu I just wanted to make sure that he's part of the family because of my love for him May Allah bless him and give him a long life ,I had heard that he left Islam and was really upset because he is a very knowledgeable brother and I liked the way he used to talk in Speakers Corner, I don't agree with Muslims who slander their brother and what happened to " making excuses for your brother "? I want to see him start debating with Christian speakers because Non Muslims will tend to look at Islam as an option to accept especially when it's coming from a White middle class Englishman and Allah knows best. My Salaams
Thank you br. Paul for being objective and not biased.
I still remember whilst studying at Medina University Saudi Arabia in the 80s we met an Algerian Shaykh in the Haram of Medina (Sidi Alawi Bendi Murad from the city of Oran). One of the students asked him why did Shaykhul Islam Ibn Taymiyya reject Ibn Arabi (Shaykhul Akbar)? meaning, there had to be a reason, and the Shaykh gave the following reason saying; "Ibn Taymiyya was a great master of the exoteric sciences, whereas Ibn Arabi had not only knowledge of the exoteric sciences but also excelled in esoteric knowledge, even though they both took from the same ocean, with a difference that Ibn Ibn Taymiyya was like an angler standing outside the ocean and catching all different kinds of fish from the ocean. Ibn Arabi is like the diver with the oxygen-tank and mask and goes to the bottom of the ocean and brings back pearls and shows it to Ibn Taymiyya who says that it's not possible that these pearls could have come from this ocean because for all the years he's been at this ocean. And Ibn Arabi tells Ibn Taymiyya, "The only way that you can get to the pearls is when you dive to the bottom of the ocean. What a brilliant explanation indeed!
Hahahahaha where is ibn arabi's influence now? Among the grave worshipping sufis?
@@Faiz9163 Meanwhile Ibn Taymiyya’s influence is over the simpleton Wahhabis. You Wahhabis don’t realise that all Muslims bow before the Kaaba, yet that isn’t considered worship of the Kaaba. But somehow visiting graves is worshiping the graves. Oh you poor deluded simpletons.
@@786AbdulSalamKhan hahahaha grave worshippers. Is that your only daleel? "Wahhabi".
@@786AbdulSalamKhan The prophet sallallahu alaihi wa sallam warned in authentic narrations to make graves place of worship. He said the Jews and Christians are cursed because they made their graves as places of worship.
Now bark. Why did the prophet sallallahu alaihi wa sallam link graves to worship jahil?
Your Ilm ul Kalam is refuted with one Hadith/statement of the prophet sallallahu alaihi wa sallam. Now cry 'Wahhabi' again.
@@786AbdulSalamKhan visiting graves for what exactly to remember death or to go there to some random guys peers grave and seek blessing from it. Because thats whats happening these days . Rampant
Give the man a break, he emphasised that he’s not a scholar, and he could be wrong about salafism and that’s right.
May Allah guide you to Islam.
Thank you for making Muslims aware of this topic "Creed of the salafi" may Allah be pleased with them.
First, I believe we need to know & understand the term "salaf", linguistically and technically.
The term salaf was not invented by Imam Ahmad or Ibn Taimiyah, but it started at the time of the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him, when he used the term talking to his daughter on his sick bed saying to her "verily I'm your best predecessor" you can check the hadith in Bukhari & Muslim
(وَإنِّي لا أُرَى الأجَلَ إلَّا قدِ اقْتَرَب، فاتَّقِي اللَّه واصْبِرِي، فَإنَّهُ نِعْم السَّلَف أَنَا لكِ).
So, Muslims shouldn't be strangers to this term because term is also mentioned in the Qur'an and they need to have proper understanding & the correct knowledge because knowledge is based upon trust. (Knowledge is Trust).
From Prophet Adam to Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon them, they are our pious predecessors. Their creed was the same, which was to Worship Allah alone & what is upon us is to affirm like how the Prophets & Messengers affirmed the existence of Allah etc, without addition or subtraction.
From Abu Hanif, Malik, Shafi'i & Ahmad, all of them their creed was the creed of the salafi & they are our salaf.
Whoever follows the Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him according to how his companions understood him then that person is amongst the followers of the methodology of the pious predecessors (salafi creed).
The Qur'an & the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him were revealed in the time of the sahabas (companions) & the sahabas taught the ones who saw them, but never saw the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him, & the ones saw the sahabas taught the ones who never saw the sahabas. Those are the best three generations, like it comes in a hadith collected by Bukhari and Muslim, "The best people are my generation..."
These generations where taught to affirm like how the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him affirmed & that the creed of Islam is not based on logic, but on evidence, which is the Qur'an & the teachings of the Prophet peace and blessings be upon him. Meaning Islamic takes the evidence first then logic follows.
Why? so that we cannot change anything in the Islamic creed & Islam in general. Even if the evidence goes against our logic, it is a must to accept it because Allah is the All Wise. The saying of Ali may Allah be pleased with him that if the religion (Islam) was based upon logic we would've whipped under our leather sock.
In conclusion, the salafi creed is the Islamic creed. The creed that teaches us to Worship Allah alone. The creed that teaches us to be dutiful to our parents. The creed that teaches us to be kind to our neighbors. The creed that teaches us to show mercy to the creation & spread peace & love. Hence, when we meet & depart we say: "Asalaam alaikum (Peace be upon, actual meaning is No harm will befall you from me) warahmatullahi (& the mercy of Allah be with you in this life & hereafter) wabarakatuh (and may He bless you).
Thanks!
You're welcome!
MashaAllah well said
very good job Paul !
i have some comments
if salaf creed is the one unic authentic creed , is it not an oblifation to follow it and reject achaa'ria and suffism and all other groups?
how and where can we found the salafi creed early books?
did you read why yasser alkadhi was refuted by salafi students? are they right or wrong ?
is it part of salafi creed to refute the errors in order to protect people? isnt logic?
did you talk to shamsi in speakers corner?
Thanks for sharing it Sir but most importantly The book ( Quran) is still the same and one only ..
And also nobody from sunni islam doubt in sahah sitta( authentic ahadith)
@@HHasan-of2vi they all hadeeth differ considerably
@@soheil527 what I mean that they all agree on sahah sitta.
Paul what's it exactly in you that you always manage to get interesting topics up for discussions??
This video is short and to the point. Yasir Qadi left Salafiyah but confirmed it to be the oldest manhaj or creed and that’s interesting. I’ve heard all kind of attacks on Salafis but never any real proof or evidence that salafiyah is not the correct path. There’s an interview on UA-cam with Yasir Qadi saying he left salafiyah because it’s not intellectually challenging enough for him. Wow! What a weak excuse. The only legitimate reason to leave the salafy path is, if it’s proven to not be the correct path.
I am of athhari creed as well. It's perfectly fine to call ourselves aspiring Salafis. We want to be like our role model the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him and the rightly guided companions. The terrorists whom call themselves salafi are not salafis. They are sinning and will be answerable to Allah. I adopted the athhari/salafi once I learned more about my religion via international open university. My family and most of our local community are still following ashari creed mainly due to not having the right knowledge of all these matters. The truth is not popular at the moment but it does not make it any less true. May Allah subhaana wa ta Ala bless and guide us all. Thank you for taking the time to research these matters. If only more of our Muslims would too. Ameen.
👍
This stuff is all interesting and some people will really study this but it is simply academic. Or water under the bridge, when you hear the Azan and get up, face the Qibla, straighten the rows, and pray together before Allah swt....
Perhaps take a step back....
I'm a PhD, don't over-hype a PhD in-and-of-itself... 😄
..still credit to Yasir Qadri for doing a PhD in religion in a materialistic world!
fair enough!
EXCELLENT post!
Paul is in danger of losing/lost the forest for the trees.
Nonetheless, he's brave for stepping in. Wish he'd expend his energy on his bookshelf :-))
With respect to all my lovely Salafi brothers, Salafi Islam is "protestant Islam" no room for progression.
isn't it the whole point of Islam ? Pure, unchanged theology. The second you open the room for "progression", you end up like Christians today, divided and lost in a sea of theological confusions
@@gamerdadzrepublic1548 I absolutely agree to the later part of your opinion.
Although this is not what Islam is all about, this is what Islam was destined to become.
The Quran endorses progressiveness even expects it from it's students.
Quran praises and advocates the use of rational faculty.
The scholars of Islam have failed Islam with their short sightedness.
It's not fair to criticize Islam for the actions of Muslims.
This is a divine plan, nothing happens which is not supposed to happen.
@@jawadmuhammad3158 the Quran endorses studying and using rational faculties, but never to question its content or the Prophet' teachings (pbuh) through his Sunnah.
Also, remember there are 1400 years worth of scholarly work on the matter, it is always wiser to go back to that when in doubt. Our layman opinions really can't compare to scholars (modern scholars like sheikh al Albani, sheikh Ibn baz etc... rahimahumallah) who dedicated their whole life to the preservation of those teachings and we should be proud of that
@@gamerdadzrepublic1548 Where does this "questioning the content come from", did I say something like that?
Kindly don't mix "questioning the scholars interpretations" with "questioning the content of Quran".
With the utmost love and respect, I denounce this schoolboy methodology of mainstream Salafi protestant Islam.
Please forgive me if I have offended you.
This is an irony.
This was meant to be.
🙏
@@gamerdadzrepublic1548 Frankly, I think another 1400 years are not enough to pick the pearls inside the Quran and we are saying people have already deciphered everything.
This approach is against "IQRA".
But the good news is, Eesa A.S will answer all questions and set everything right with divinely given wisdom.
Hey there, how are you doing?
Really good topic.
I just want to maybe clarify some stuff around As-Salafiyyah.
Basically everything a muslim should is based on the Quran, Sunnah and with the comprehension of the salaf us salih(righteous predecessors).
After the death of The Prophet, some people tried to bring innovation to Islam through fabricated hadith. So people started asking for chain of narration of hadiths to differentiate the truth from falsehood. Thus the appellation Ahlus Sunnah Wa Jama'ah to differentiate who were on the right path on those on falsehood.
Also it is said the muslims will divide into 73 sects, 1 sect on the right path and the 72 will be in the hellfire. Those adhering to the Quran, Sunnah and with the comprehension of the salaf us salih(righteous predecessors) being the right one.
Ahlus Sunnah Wa Jama'ah, Al-Athari and As-Salafiyyah(there were some other appellation as well but they all adhered to the same principle) is the 1 sect on the straight path.
I will try to give a famous question: Where is Allah? Answer: Allah is above his throne and that is what the Quran and the sunnah says. However some muslims believe that Allah is everywhere and thus create their own sect out of the Quran and the sunnah thus becoming part of one of the 72 sect.
As for Yasir Qadhi, may Allah guide him back to the straight path, was a salafi at a point after his passage through the University of Madinah. However now you will see he deviated from that( you can find it on UA-cam itself, Yasir Qadhi refutes Yasir Qadhi)
A blatant example is belief in the unseen. Yajuj and Majuj. You will find that he says that google map has identified everywhere on earth so there cannot be a creature that is there waiting to come out. ( I am paraphrasing here, you will find it more easily in the video)
Scholars that are known for following Ahlus Sunnah: Ibn Taymiyyah, Imam Al-Ajuri( There are a lot more like the four Imams). In our times, Shaykh Al-Albani, Shaykh Uthaymeen, Shaykh Bin Baz, Shaykh Fawzaan, Shaykh Rabee, Shaykh Ruhayli( Also a lot more)
Conclusion: Adhere to the Quran, to the authentic hadith( as soon as you find an authentic hadith that goes against what you were doing in the past, stop doing it and follow the sunnah of the Prophet) and the with comprehension of the salaf us salih(righteous predecessors). Example, if you read of the Quran and you start interpreting by yourself, everyone is going to have their own conclusion however if we follow how the Prophet taught the Sahabas everyone will be on the same understanding. A famous example is the understanding of the verse Surah 2:187 where the sahaba thought he needed to use a thread to know the time for sehri but the Prophet explained it was about the darkness of the night and the whiteness of the dawn.
Hope that helps
you are absolutely right. الله يفتح عليك.
If u want the truth only follow quran and hadith . We dont follow people we have the greatest one is mohamad his teaching is clear and if u look more details you can look for scholars and one with evidence you can follow as i say in previous video comments there are people who say we are the truth and this is the interpretation. People like paul in Christianity and make people think that they are the truth in islam u will find sufi shei and salafi all the they clam thay have the truth and truth is clear in book . In the quran and hadith.
I hope i shared with you ideas about this and thanks again .
Again, that doesn't clarify a very important thing, WHICH ONE IS FOLLOWING THE TRUTH ? You can't say "I only follow Quran and Sunnah" because then I'll ask "Well , which understanding do you base your Knowles on ?" And even for Argument's sake , let's say you follow scholars, then I'll ask "Which understanding did they take their info from ? What do they believe in ? How do they establish fatawa ?" This is literally the same Argument posed by Quranists. So, choose who you take your knowledge from, and we don't call ourselves "Salafis" for deviation and division, but only to differentiate ourselves from The Evil Sects .
Afw ibn Malik reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:
افْتَرَقَتْ الْيَهُودُ عَلَى إِحْدَى وَسَبْعِينَ فِرْقَةً فَوَاحِدَةٌ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَسَبْعُونَ فِي النَّارِ وَافْتَرَقَتْ النَّصَارَى عَلَى ثِنْتَيْنِ وَسَبْعِينَ فِرْقَةً فَإِحْدَى وَسَبْعُونَ فِي النَّارِ وَوَاحِدَةٌ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَالَّذِي نَفْسُ مُحَمَّدٍ بِيَدِهِ لَتَفْتَرِقَنَّ أُمَّتِي عَلَى ثَلَاثٍ وَسَبْعِينَ فِرْقَةً وَاحِدَةٌ فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَثِنْتَانِ وَسَبْعُونَ فِي النَّارِ
The Jews were split into seventy one sects and one of them is in Paradise and seventy are in the Hellfire. The Christians were split into seventy two sects and seventy one are in the Hellfire and one of them is in Paradise. By the one in whose hand is the soul of Muhammad, my nation will split into seventy three sects and one of them is in Paradise and seventy two are in the Hellfire.
It was said, “O Messenger of Allah, who are the ones in Paradise?” The Prophet said:
الْجَمَاعَةُ
They are the united community.
Source: Sunan Ibn Mājah 3992, Grade: Sahih
And in another narration, the Prophet said:
مَا أَنَا عَلَيْهِ وَأَصْحَابِي
They are those who follow my way and my companions.
Source: Sunan al-Tirmidhī 2641, Grade: Hasan
@@theelahmed2682
Yes exactly
ما انا عليه واصحابي
Not what any shekh or sofi or any another name not released by allah or prophet or his companion. The real world now is called for everyone must stick to some mazhab and follow this is not islam read and obtain for truth and u will find every thing in creed is clear not shariah . Shariah need scholars like merath etc.. to obtain .
Thanks
@@fadykurdiah from where do we get the sunnah of RasoulAllah?
@@amarabidali5316
hadith
Or u get from shekh ?
@@fadykurdiah yh but we take the hadith from whom?
"Obey Allah and obey His messenger" and also "today I (Allah) have perfected your religion for you" ...are two verses of the Holy Quran as many know. So obeying the messenger in what he said and did while alive (including what he didn't say or do) naturally becomes the creed (and Rasulilah (saw)) practically lived it for the ummah to witness and follow. And if the deen ( way of life) was perfected and completed as a favour from God to His subjects then surely there can be no other creed that is right besides the one the messenger and his companions lived upon. If the creed they were upon is called salafism (in present day fitan) then surely that is the way. The emergence of all the other creeds has led to contamination of the pure creed. Diversity of views between the companions of the prophet existed but the creed remained pure. These days new creeds come up as views differ.
I went to a salafi school and my big family from both sides are mostly salafis. Let me tell you this: even within salafism, there are so many groups who hate each other. There are the ultraconservative ones, there are the more moderate ones, which are still considered as very conservative still, etc. But yes, the creed is pure, even though it is easy for new or more fanatic salafis to fall into takfiri behavior, which in and of itself is condemned within salafism
Alhamdulillah,Im salafi and happy you do your research,Quran and authentic hadiths.
Every legitimate Muslim is to follow the way of the prophet and the three pious generations. Abu Hanfia is known for his maturidiyyah aqeedah (although not names that then) and he was from Tabi'un (the second generation). What salafis are calling to is what every Muslim is calling to.
Abu Hanifa Radiyallahu A'nh Wasn't A Maturidi, This Is A Mistake !
Imam Abu Haneefah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Allah has a Hand, a Countenance and an Essence as He, may He be exalted, mentioned in the Qur’an. Whatever Allah, may He be exalted, has mentioned in the Qur’an of His having a Countenance, Hand and Essence, these are attributes of His which we affirm without discussing how. It cannot be said that His Hand is His power or blessings, because that is denying the attribute, and is the view of the Qadaris and Mu‘tazilah. Rather His hand is a divine attribute, and we do not discuss how it is; His wrath and His pleasure are divine attributes, and we do not discuss how they are.
End quote from al-Fiqh al-Akbar, with commentary by Mullah ‘Ali al-Qaari, p. 85.
And just to inform you akhi, any narration that you have heard or seen which claims that Imam Abu Hanifa Radiyallahu A'nh was a maturidi or Ash'ari or Mu'tazili, THOSE ARE FABRICATIONS.
Don't believe me ? Check these : m.islamqa.info/ar/answers/158755q
وتعتبر العقيدة الطحاوية التي ألفها أبو جعفر الطحاوي الحنفي رحمه الله ، على منهج أهل السنة والجماعة , سوى أحرف يسيرة منها ، ولذلك كان لها شيوع كبير بين علماء المسلمين وطلابهم ، حتى أصبحت تدرس في كثير من الجامعات والمساجد ودور العلم .
قال الطحاوي في مقدمتها (ص 1) :
" هذا ذكر بيان عقيدة أهل السنة والجماعة على مذهب فقهاء الملة : أبي حنيفة النعمان بن ثابت الكوفي وأبي يوسف يعقوب بن إبراهيم الأنصاري وأبي عبد الله محمد بن الحسن الشيباني رضوان الله عليهم أجمعين وما يعتقدون من أصول الدين ويدينون به رب العالمين " انتهى
الكلام عن اعتقاد الإمام أبي حنيفة النعمان رحمه الله
السؤال : 158755
03/01/2011
هل هناك كلام حول عقيدة الإمام أبي حنيفة؟ لأني سمعت بعض الناس يقدحون في عقيدته، فأرجو التوضيح.
الجواب
Ar
ar
الإمام أبو حنيفة النعمان بن ثابت الكوفي إمام من أئمة المسلمين بلا مدافعة ، اتفق أهل العلم على إمامته وجلالة قدره .
قال علي بن عاصم : لو وزن علم أبي حنيفة بعلم أهل زمانه ، لرجح عليهم .
وقال ابن المبارك : أبو حنيفة أفقه الناس .
وقال الشافعي : الناس في الفقه عيال على أبي حنيفة .
وقال الخريبي : ما يقع في أبي حنيفة إلا حاسد أو جاهل .
قال الذهبي رحمه الله : " الإمامة في الفقه ودقائقه مسلمة إلى هذا الإمام ، وهذا أمر لا شك فيه.
وليس يصح في الأذهان شيء إذا احتاج النهار إلى دليل
وسيرته تحتمل أن تفرد في مجلدين ، رضي الله عنه ، ورحمه . توفي شهيدا مسقيا في سنة خمسين ومئة " انتهى .
راجع : "سير أعلام النبلاء" (6 /390-403)
واعتقاد الإمام أبي حنيفة رحمه الله في التوحيد وفي إثبات الصفات والرد على الجهمية وفي القدر واعتقاده في الصحابة رضي الله عنهم وسائر مسائل الإيمان الكبرى موافق لمنهج السلف ولمنهج إخوانه أئمة المذاهب ، سوى أحرف يسيرة مخالفة نقلت عنه ، كقوله في عدم زيادة الإيمان ونقصانه ، وقوله في مسمى الإيمان أنه تصديق بالجنان وإقرار باللسان ، وأن العمل خارج عن حقيقة الإيمان .
وقد ذكر ابن عبد البر وابن أبي العز ما يشعر أن أبا حنيفة رجع عن ذلك .
راجع : "التمهيد" (9/247) , "شرح العقيدة الطحاوية" (ص395)
وراجع كتاب "اعتقاد الأئمة الأربعة" (ص3-8) للدكتور محمد بن عبد الرحمن الخميس
قال شيخ الإسلام رحمه الله :
" إن الأئمة المشهورين كلهم يثبتون الصفات لله تعالى ويقولون إن القرآن كلام الله ليس بمخلوق ويقولون إن الله يرى في الآخرة ، هذا مذهب الصحابة والتابعين لهم بإحسان من أهل البيت وغيرهم ، وهذا مذهب الأئمة المتبوعين مثل مالك بن أنس والثوري والليث بن سعد والأوزاعي وأبي حنيفة والشافعي وأحمد بن حنبل وإسحاق ... " انتهى من "منهاج السنة النبوية" (2 /54)
وتعتبر العقيدة الطحاوية التي ألفها أبو جعفر الطحاوي الحنفي رحمه الله ، على منهج أهل السنة والجماعة , سوى أحرف يسيرة منها ، ولذلك كان لها شيوع كبير بين علماء المسلمين وطلابهم ، حتى أصبحت تدرس في كثير من الجامعات والمساجد ودور العلم .
قال الطحاوي في مقدمتها (ص 1) :
" هذا ذكر بيان عقيدة أهل السنة والجماعة على مذهب فقهاء الملة : أبي حنيفة النعمان بن ثابت الكوفي وأبي يوسف يعقوب بن إبراهيم الأنصاري وأبي عبد الله محمد بن الحسن الشيباني رضوان الله عليهم أجمعين وما يعتقدون من أصول الدين ويدينون به رب العالمين " انتهى .
ولما كان كثير من أتباع أبي حنيفة على مذهب الأشاعرة والماتريدية دخل المذهب كثير مما يخالف اعتقاد السلف ، بل ويخالف اعتقاد الإمام نفسه ، ولذلك فإن كثيرا مما ينسب إلى أبي حنيفة من ذلك لا يثبت عنه ، وإنما هو من كلام بعض اتباعه ممن ينتسب إلى مذهبه .
قال ابن أبي العز الحنفي رحمه الله :
" وَالظَّاهِرُ أَنَّ هذه الْمُعَارَضَاتِ لَمْ تَثْبُتْ عَنْ أبي حنيفة رحمه الله ، وَإِنَّمَا هي مِنَ الْأَصْحَابِ ، فَإِنَّ غَالِبَهَا سَاقِطٌ لَا يَرْتَضِيه أَبُو حنيفة " انتهى من "شرح العقيدة الطحاوية" (ص 226)
وقال الشيخ ابن جبرين رحمه الله :
" الرسالة التي كتبت عن الإمام أبي حنيفة ، يمكن أنه أملى بعضها ، وأخذها بعض تلامذته وتسمى ( الفقه الأكبر ) ، نقل منها شيخ الإسلام بعض النقول في الحموية ، وكذلك ابن أبي العز في شرح الطحاوية .
ولكن يظهر أنه قد دخلها التغيير من بعض المتأخرين الذين انحرفوا في بعض الاعتقاد ؛ فأدخلوا فيها كثيراً من التأويلات ، وشرحها كثير ممن هو على مذهب الأشاعرة أو مذهب منكري الصفات ، وأنكروا ما كان عليه السلف رحمهم الله ، ولا شك أن سبب ذلك كثرة ما تلقوه عن مشايخهم الذين كانوا على هذا المذهب الذي هو تأويل وتحريف الصفات وما أشبهها " انتهى .
"فتاوى الشيخ ابن جبرين" (63 /14)
وقال الشيخ الألباني رحمه الله :
" أبو حنيفة ، والأئمة الأربعة ، هم على الخط السلفي ، إلا أنه لا بد كل واحد له زلة ، لكن الأتباع في واد ، والأئمة أنفسهم في واد " انتهى .
@@theelahmed2682يا فلان خف علينا من جهلك المركب شيئا يا أخ
هو الإمام أبو حنيفة شو ما كان المهم هو أثبت الصفات والماتريدية والأشعرية الذين هم أهل السنة كذلك اثبتوا الصفات نحن وإياهم نثبتنها ولم نعطل أي شيء ورد في صفة الله تعالى على رغم افترائكم علينا والأدلة مشهودة عليكم ابحث وستجد لكن لا هو ولا هم ولا أحدنا لا نثبتها كما تثبتونها أنتم ، إذا وصفك أحد بأنك يد ما الذي يعنيه ويريده ؟؟؟ كيف يفهم العربي الصحيح وصفه أنك يد أو أنك عين ؟؟ هل تبادر إلى ذهنه أنه وصفك باليد الجارحة ؟ يا فلان لا تحشو كلاما في كلام السلف لم يقولوه حاشاهم أن يثبتوا صفات الباري مشبهينه بخلقه او بالإنسان ... أنتم سلفكم مقاتل بن سليمان بالغ في الإثبات ونحن لمعارضنا المعتزلة في الصفات اثبتناهن كما وصف الله تعالى نفسه بها لا معطلينها ولا مشبهينها، إما فوضنا المعاني كلها لقائلها وأخذنا ما يقبل في اللسان العربي معنى يليق بسياق الآية الكريمة وما التي لا تعارض آية مُحكمة ومحكمة الدلالة هن أم الكتاب والآخر متشابهات ما تبين كل المعاني الممكنة لتبلغ إلى من قرأها الحكمة أو الإرشاد أو التعليمة أو التفقيه لأمر أو الإشارة لتوجيههم إليها وبها ولتبلغهم بها ومقاصدهم إلى عليا المعارف والاكتشافات في حال من أحوالهم الجاري عليهم . الحمدلله الذي علم الإنسان ما لم يعلم ونزل على رسوله الكريم الدين الكامل ليبلغنا مقاصد حسنة في ديننا وفي دنيانا لمصالح ديننا ودنيانا ولآخرتنا حقا كاملة
This is a deceptive way the corrupt like to use to inject their opinions to lead you into innovation thinking they're "followers of the Prophet and the first three generations"
Brother are you alluding that the ummah for following ONE THOUSAND OR MORE BY ONE OR TWO HUNDRED YEARS has gone lost ??? And suddenly in the middle of najd a man by name of Mohammed bin AbdilWahhab brought a new religion contrary to the one followed by most if not all of the AhlusSunnah/Muslim people after the 3rd generation? They were corrupted not because of their religious norms but because of their worldly ambitious pursuits. And their disobedience to the Islamic Law and the Prophetically connected Guided Sheikhs teachings and guidance in their new era in accordance with the way of the pious predecessors.
Are you saying that the likes of Imam AnNisaii, AlBeihaqi, AbuNeim AlEsfahani, Imam AlBazdawi, AbuMoein AlNasafi, AnNawawi, Imam AlHajar AlAsqalani, AlSanusi, AlSuyuti, Ibn3abideen, Ibn AlJawzi .... were all lost ???
May Allah cure your heart and mind wallah the one who has been corrupted in matters are those who searched for ways to get them to carry out their world-acquiring agendas and world-focused recognitions with little to no regard for The Way or The Custodians of The Way.
Dear sir. Please note that salafism is not a homogenous group and is a very wide spectrum. Abu khadeejah for example is in no way a spokesman for all salafism and is only representative of a particular strand of salafism which is criticised by other salafis. When it comes to athari and ashari creed, all argue that their position is closest to the truth and it’s development needs to be understood in its particular historical context. And one can be athari in belief but not Salafi as the two are not synonymous.
I am Athari in creed but I am not a salafi. 'Salafism' is not simply a matter of aqeedah, and it can be misleading to present it as such. Love your work though, and your balanced approach. Allah bless you.
Salafi is Athari. Stop speaking without knowledge.
Dear .. the Salafi is the Athari is the Hanbali they are the modern ahl they are the Wahhabi The names have changed and the goal and the project are one going back to the first three centuries
Elaborate
Hi Paul, would you make a video on the Maturidi school which is the main competition of Ashari. Comparison of Salafi, Ashari, and Maturidi is another good idea.
Thanks,
I honestly don't get this beef between ashari and athari. As an ashari myself, I acknowledge that ashari are the later creed, but only officially. The methodology itself is not an innovation, Imam Ashari simply restructure it to make it its own creed, just like what Imam Shafii did to Fiqh with his book al-Umm. If we learn the history behind asharism, we'll understand there was a need to have its own creed at that time. And some may argue the need continue to exist till today, which is why I am ashari myself. I have no problem with athari at all.
“Ashari is the later creed, but only officially. -Yet it’s- not an innovation”.
Can’t you see the clear conflict in your statement?!
@@13bm90 is shafii school an innovation?
@@13bm90 This so called “first creed” mentioned in the video had to be developed over time due to the many innovators & heretics that appeared, such as the khawarij, rafidis, murjias, jabaris, qadaris, jahmis, etc.
Because of all these different fringe groups, two trends of scholars emerged. One known as Ahl al Kalam (people of discussion) & the other known as Ahl al Hadith (people of tradition). The Ahl al Kalam emerged around the time Greek philosophical works were translated into Arabic & circulated in the Muslim world, their aim was to prove Islamic orthodoxy by reason, but the first of them were Mu’tazilites who themselves had a few controversial beliefs. Then you had the Ahl al Hadith who were basically a knee jerk reaction to all the above, they stressed the importance to hadith as evidence above everything else. They espoused this so called “first creed” & the above was the reason why, it doesn’t necessarily make this creed the true orthodox creed.
Imam Ashari basically resolved the above problems via a “middle way” between the Ahl al Kalam & Ahl al Hadith, based on many hadiths where the Prophet (S) said the middle way, or moderation is the best way. Historically, his followers, the Asharis were the first to call themselves Ahl al Sunna wa al Jama’at.
Great video!
I always wondered, were the Ummah from Abu al-Hassan until ibn Taymiyah in Dalall? And after him until Abdulwahab again? That makes no sense to me...
and calibers like Salah ad-Din, without him Egypt would be Shia, or an-Nawawi, al-Qurtubi, al-Asqalani have been on the wrong Creed?
Subḥān Allāh.
If you said otherwise, so a lot of salafus sholeh in the wrong creed?
Imam Ahmad, imam Malik, etc.
There is more doesn't make sense
The text of the Qur’an is that we follow the words of God and the words of the Prophet Muhammad and follow the companions of the Prophet Muhammad.
is over .
The six imams of hadith and the four imams of jurisprudence and the companions, and those who composed the books on the sciences of religion did not know Ash'ari.
The Ash'aris found the books of Islamic scholars and made explanations and interpretations for them, but they did not establish the religion.
We follow the three centuries because the Prophet Muhammad told us that they are the best of the centuries.
Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi is a hero and undoubtedly contributed to the preservation of Muslims and he is an Ash'ari
Likewise, the Sufi Ottoman Empire contributed to saving Muslims from the Shiites
Do we say that Sufism is the truth?
The Fatimid state contributed to banishing Crusader ambitions, so do we say that the Shiites are the truth and saved the Muslims?
The discussion is not conducted like this, my brother, and your argument is very weak
Paul kind sir, in one of your videos after observing your wisdom, I said you're already a source of guidance to many people. As such, people might start rendering to your videos for reference.
May I suggest that you simply make these presentations without such declarations as you made here, good sir?
I'm not sure how to direct this message to only you and not display it publicly.
My point is you confirmed the earliest creed, the way of the Companions, the purest Islaam against the radical advent of ilm kalaam and then said we don't have to follow it and rather use the same ilm kalaam? Isn't that incoherent and ironic?
With kind request
Salafi means: Following Quran and Sunnah according to the understanding of Salaf (the prophet and the companions).
* according to Ibn Taymiyyah
@@pecknarmpekky1871
Ibn Taiymiyah was following Ibn Hanbal and Ibn Hanbal was following Sahaba.
@@BF109G4 not in matters of aqeedah he wasn’t...he made some SERIOUS mistakes. He excused the jahmiyyah, made mistakes in the siffat of Allaah and innovated into the religion what wasn’t from the way of the Salaf.
@@pecknarmpekky1871
You are wrong my friend.
Provide sources or shut up. Don’t preach because preaching never refutes.
@@BF109G4 Abdullah Ibn Abdur-Rahmaan Abu Butayn najdi said :
"He (Ibn Taymiah )mentioned earlier some actions and statements of kufr, regarding the sifat (atributes) and he made difference between ignorant and others. Even the opinion of sheikh, May Allah have mercy upon him (aba butayns words), in stopping in takfir of jahmiah and similar to them is in contradiction to the text's of imam ahmad and from others of him from the imams of Islam."
[El-Intisar li Hizb Al-Muwahhidin, page 59]
I am sorry there is a debate on a athari Theologian named Muhammad ibn Karram from Sijistan whose creed is taken by Imam Darimi the Younger or the Second Imam Ad Darimi(he and Imam Ad Darimi senior actually has a name but i forgot both. The Imam Darimi i mean is the late Darimi) then Imam Ibn Taimiyyah took Imam Darimi creed, maybe you can look on Dr Arrazy disertation , Arrazy Hasyim is an Indonesian scholar who break away from Salafism and he wrote a desertation about the genealogy of creed of the salaf
It’s not controversial at all: Salafi creed has proof from Quran and Sunnah. Notice: everyone claims that he is following Salaf but we always ask for the proof. Salafyah is a creed, manners, methodology, ..etc. If someone does not have the manners of Salaf he is not a true salafi. Yaser Qadi is a student of Tony Blair. This guy is more politicized. He has an issue with the way of Salaf to deal with rulers which goes against the democratic approach that Yaser Qadi embraced after classes with Tony Blair .
Jazak Allahu Khayr!
@king like what the prophets did
Brother very true may Allah reward you and brother Paul may increase him in goodness
In an authentic hadith, Khabbab bin Al-Aratt reported:
I was sitting next to the door of the Prophet (peace be on him) and when he came out he said ‘Listen to me’ and we replied, ‘We are listening, ya Rasul Allah’ and he said ‘There will be, after me, leaders who will lie to you, and commit oppression among you. Whosoever believes their lies or helps them in their oppression he is none of me and I am not of him and he will not come near my Hawd (lake) on the Day of Judgement.’ (Musnad Ahmad, Tirmidhi and Nasa’i)
@@handler654
Riyad as-Salihin 51
Ibn Mas'ud (May Allah be pleased with him) reported:
Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, "You will see after me favouritism and things which you will disapprove of." They submitted: "What do you order us to do (under such circumstances)?" He replied, "Discharge your obligations and ask your rights from Allah".
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
Alhamdulillah sir you have looked into the matter quite well mashallah but I wanted to say something for me how I see this matter as a "salafi" myself that Islam is vast in understanding but only in fiqhi (jurisprudential) matters not aqeeda (creedal) matter but we should not deny evidences from the Qur'an and the sunnah which is unambiguous or apparent if Allah Sub'hanauatala says something unambiguous then it is what it is we shouldn't interject our ideas in it but in matters which is broader which is not clear either from the Qur'an or the sunnah then it is about understanding and it is the "salafi" methodology that the rulling must be nearer to the understanding of the Qur'an the way the prophet pbuh and his companions understood it. And this is a humungous discussion cannot right in one comment. May Allah Sub'hanauatala bless you sir JazakumAllahu khairan
the way you study religion is not like anyone i've seen before in the west
not sure that's a good thing!
@@BloggingTheology you cross examine references and evidence keeping the context and the intentions behind scripture in mind. most people McQuote quickly and draw conclusions.
Athari creed was the earliest creed. But Athari creed is not the same as today's neo salafi atharism. Today's Athari creed is more like ibn taymiyyahan-atharism. I'm going to discuss this with Shaykh Yasir actually because I'm a bit surprised with his position, after doing my own research.
Well said brother. the early athari would take the attributes of the Almighty as they come and WOULDN'T comment on it.
Today's psudo salafi manhaj take the ayats of Sifat and give them a real and literal meaning.
This is a subtle but a huge difference! That's why ibn Qudamah stated that alla ayats that have any likeness to creation are mutashabih.
@@AbdullahodSandzak jazakAllah khair, brother. Exactly. Ibn Qudamah specifically identified as a muffawid. But yes, you're totally right - they took them as they came. Ibn taymiyyah codified today's version of atharism that includes "affirmation of the literal meaning".
@@hassanabdaladl
Allah bless us both with good and enlighten us with more knowledge. Sadly, many of these people who study aqeeda have not come to understand the problem with this psudo athari creed of today.
Alhumdulilahir Rabbil Ala meen
Complicated subject.
Yasser Kadi is seen by salafis to be like a Catholic cardinal with a PhD from Alazhar. Having a Westernised understanding of Islam.
lol nice!
@@BloggingTheology
The view of Tim Winter:
An anti-intellectualist, anti-philosophical, ‘protestant’ form of interpretation of scripture and canon - sometimes with an overemphasis on literal meaning) with disastrous results on the intellectual health of the Islamic community.
heightenedsenses.co.uk/2013/03/20/timothy-winter-on-salafism/
@@sherifel-hadi3439 not apparent why either of those are bad things. Especially looking at how astray christianity has gone with incoporating platonism & other Hellenistic schools of thought.
@@arthurmorgan4201
You have a point there. But the salafis carry it to an extreme. They leave no room for free thinking or any kind of interpretation. Is this what prophet Muhammed (PBUH) intended? I am not qualified to say.
@@sherifel-hadi3439 what they are saying that the early sahaba and tabeen are the 3rd source of understanding after the Quran and the prophet’s sayings peace be upon him - this actually makes a lot of sense and is mentioned clearly in one of the Hadiths
I’m a bit late to the party, but with the utmost respect to Ibn Taymia as a prominent Faqih, his creed is not fully in-line the Ahlul Sunna. Ibn Taymia clearly adopts the philosophers thinking of creation types with no beginning (I.e. some types of creations always existed). He’s also restored Al-Karamiya set of beliefs and falsely alleged that’s what the Salaf beloved. Unfortunately this is not known to most of Salafi’s who innocently follow Ibn Taymia blindly in everything he said. He’s certainly a great scholar but no one is perfect except the prophets. You can benefit a lot of him but you need to be careful and not take everything he says for granted.
The best scholars of uma and lot of them testified that sheikh al Islam bin tTaymia is what the salaf asalih believes
Al imam Adahabi ,bin khatir, ibn qayem, ibn Rajab,Assoyuti, Al Mizzy, Ashukani, Ibn Hajjar Asqalani, and many many prominent scholars with different madhab like ibn Kathir was shafi almadhab
But some Ashari were enemies of him like Zaheed Al kawthari and his disciple Anashar in his book referred the creed of ibn Taymia to Al karamia creed and from platonic philosophy of love
@@worldnewsfoodandbooks8218 Brother, Ibn Kather is Ashari, even though he's Ibn Taymmiya's student, the only students who kept his creed were Ibn al-Kayeem and ibn abd-elhady. Al-zahaby is Ibn Taymyyia's fan and his statements about Ibn Taymiya are very lenient and contradictory sometimes. Ibn Taymmiya was a scholar no doubt about that but he was Mubtade in Aqeedah, just read his books brother for your self. He clearly agrees with corporatists (Mujaseema) and falsely claimed that was Salaf and ibn-Hanbal creed, just like Abu Yaala. Ibn al-Jawzy and Ibn-Kudama both before Ibn Taymiiya denied that was Salaf and Ibn-Hanbal creed. As Ahlul-Sunna in fiqh are Hanafi, Maliky, Shafii and Hanbali, in Aqeedah, Ahul-Sunna are Ashaari, Matrudi and non-corporealist Hanbalis. Corpoleasit Hanablis took their creed from al-Karamya. and contray to hat you said, Ibn Hajar was critical of Ibn Taymiyya, and narrated his repentance from Tajseem, which Ibn al-Qayeem and others denied. Those who commended Ibn Taymiyya commended him after his repentance. Read al-Durrau Al-Kamena of Ibn Hajar, Bio no. 409 which is for Ibn Taymiyya. overwhilming amount of people are now leaving Wahabism (whcih you like to call Salafis) after they realized the truth about what Ibn Taymiyya's creed was.
@Path of Sahaba a drug called actually reading what the scholars say not what others spread lies about them. Try it sometime, it may help you from your ignorance. If you read his tafsir instead of watching wahabies UA-cam channels you will find out if yourself. But what can I say, you guys got used of being led by ignorance so have at it. Let alone his appointment in Dar Al-Hadeeth school in his time which was Waqf on Asharis, to break it down for you, it’s a condition to be ashari to get appointed. Read his bio in Ibn hajar al-askalsny book.
There are plenty of reasons why salafism is attractive specially to new converts in search of a new beginning. Yet the very idea that there was a detailed uniting aqueedah is ridiculous. Yes there were fundamental ideas all Muslims agreed and continue to agree on. But most issues that salafis obsess over today were never issues of debate in the salaf period
Bcoz there were no deviation in aqeedah in the salaf time ...ashari aqeedah was not invented so obvioulsy there was no discussion on creed.
@@Dani-lk3ed then you don’t know history or basics of Islamic thought.
A lot of people don't recognize that the athri creed is split into two parties. Ibn taymiya represents a historically smaller section of the athri creed who were not accepted in the earlier hanabile and subsequent hanabile until today. For any details of what I say I can refer you to ibn rajabs fadl ilm Al salaf. You would need to read between the lines slightly if you do not have prior knowledge but it is detailed in a section about ibn muqatil.
Salafis, wahabis and other labelled groups really dividing the Muslim nations. We should stay under only one banner which is islam like early generations did, not to put a label on like ahle sunnah and others.
A Muslim is, as per the Prophet's definition, anyone who says there is no God except Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger.
My brother, I think you do not understand the meaning of the Salafism (Hanbalis). They are asking the Islamic sects to return to the Qur’an and Sunnah.
There is no Wahhabi ideology. This is a mystical and Shiite lie.
Sheikh Wagdy Akkawi - The Horn of Satan (Wahhabism/Wahabi) | Abu Mussab Wajdi Akkari
ua-cam.com/video/cxQZwbzXwxg/v-deo.html
The Life of Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdil Wahhaab | Shaykh Saalih al Fawzan
ua-cam.com/video/QVu9Winm7nw/v-deo.html
The Term Wahhabi - Shaykh Albani
ua-cam.com/video/QFJD3tyWxdQ/v-deo.html
The most important thing in Islam is tawhid (monotheism), which is a direct worship of God without an intermediary, whether an idol, a shrine, or a cleric.
Explanation of the Book of Tawheed - Imam Muhammad Abdul Wahab
d1.islamhouse.com/data/en/ih_books/single2/en_50_questions_and_answers_in_faith.pdf
pls do a series on this. i am tired of namecalling between Hijb and SPUBS
Even Al-Ghazāli admitted that the doctrine of Sahābah was not Kalām based doctrine in his famous book (Il'ihyā, P376)
This issue reminds in a sense of Pauline christianity vs disciples' christianity.
That's not an admission meaning he is stating that it is wrong. He himself states that the first one using Calam was prophet Ibrahim peace be upon him. Even that, Allah Subhanahu wa Taala stated: و تلك حجتنا آتيناها ابراهيم. "And this is our proof that we gave to Ibrahim". This means that it is Allah himself that is apposing the seal of approval on Calam.
@@qursan67 I was very clear that he admitted that the *doctrine of Sahabah was not a Kalām based doctrine.*
Whether Kalām is wrong or not is another subject. However, Salafis can be very proud for maintaining the way of Sahabah for that matter.
And of course to say that Abraham was using a "kalāmi argument" is a far- fetched claim, and that's why some Ash'ris themselves didn't to interpret that verse that way.
Your last sentence is absolute nonsense...
-The Prophet (S) was neither a theologian nor a philosopher, but a lawgiver. He called people to the worship of one God, preached against polytheism & injustice. He called people to be accountable for their actions & warned them of judgement. And he finally established laws for humanity to accrue benefits & avoid harm.
-The priority of the sahaba after the Prophet (S), was the common good of the ummah, & the futuhat (entry) of Islam into other lands; they deemed it necessary to establish the caliphate in order to do this. In time things got more & more political & this lead to civil war.
-The priority of the tabieen was fiqh, & even with the emergence of many innovators & heretics, besides Imam Abu Hanifa, many of the prominent fuqaha refused to get involved in discussions & debates about aqeedah, & even forbade it, as the harms far outweighed the benefits.
-With the increase of innovators & heretics, & the circulation of Greek philosophical works in Arabic, scholars got more & more involved in discussions & debates about aqeedah, in order to set parameters. Some did this by reason, namely the Mu’tazilites, others by tradition, namely the Hanbalis, whereas Imam Ashari set the parameters for a balanced aqeedah.
-In the East, Imam Maturidi sought to espouse the authentic aqeedah of Imam Abu Hanifa, & set the parameters of his aqeedah using reason. The Ashari school became widespread & considered orthodox by the 11th century, with further developments & parameters being set by the likes of Imam Ghazali. Whereas both the Asharis & Maturidis considered each other to be orthodox by the Ottoman period.
-Later Asharis considered the actions of Imam Ashari & the earlier Asharis to be a necessary evil but no longer necessary. However, constant challenges by some of the Hanbalis kept these discussions & debates going. On the hand, other later Asharis considered taqleed (imitation) in matters of aqeedah, namely the blind faith of the masses, to be either sinful or disbelief, depending on their capacity to investigate.
-This view on taqleed was challenged by the Sufis, who believed the faith of the masses to be superior to the faith of these Asharis, as the masses already possessed firm faith without investigation, whereas these Asharis needed rational investigation & this implied weak faith. Any deeper understanding of aqeedah could only be achieved by spiritual struggle, to the point one reaches a state in which he can gain knowledge through kashf (unveiling).
-After European colonialism, the classical schools fell & this had severe consequences for the development of fiqh, & religious/intellectual academia in the Muslim world in general. Many reformers & puritans began to emerge to influence religious thought among the Muslims.
-The reformers blamed widespread superstition among the masses of Muslims on the Sufis. As Sufis deemed taqleed in aqeedah acceptable, & asserted that no one is tasked with investigation. Moreover the Sufis were vastly popular among the masses, as people would much prefer to see saints perform miracles as opposed being told what to do, how to live, how to think, etc. by people simply because they know more/have learnt more. The reformers also blamed the theologians in general for having the wrong priorities.
-And of course, finally the Wahhabis appeared & challenged the orthodoxy of the Asharis, Maturidis & Sufis, & espoused a puritanical Hanbali school of thought. Their thought entered into mainstream Islam in the mid 20th century due to Saudi backing.
Overall, after the Prophet (S) & the sahaba, I believe the Sufis & the fuqaha (until the 17th century) were correct, although whether the Sufis are to blame for intellectual sterility among the masses is another question.
@@786AbdulSalamKhan How is it non sense when it is an aya in the Quran that describes what Sayyidina Ibrahim did as the proof of Allah that was given to him? I am fine with a founded rebuttal.
@@Khaledf I do not think that Al Ghazali is someone who claimed that he is following and all his scholars and followers a path against the path of Sahaba. The Sahaba did not need an explanation it was very clear for them.
I adhere to the Salafi Creed. But Yasir Qadhi denounced salafiya openly.
and its one of the things hes right.
I believe I can actually give some good insights on this topic since this is one of my main areas of interest. The "salafi" creed is traditionally actually known as the "Athari creed" they are basically synonomous. In recent times it has been called the Salafi creed due to rise in popularity of Salafism and the resurgance of Salafism. However, Salafism itself has actually many sub branches within it as well, and Abu Khadeeja is definitely not a good reference point to any matters of Salafism, because he belongs to an ultraconservative subsect known as the "Madkhalis" named like that because they are the followers of Sheikh Rabee Al Madkhali. Abu Khadeeja doesnt have any academic qualifications nor Islamic qualifications and is one of the most extreme figures. However, the Athari or Salafi creed is historically definitely orthodox with precedence in the Islamic tradition. Yasir Qadhi I have been following quite closely as well and I think he is a good scholar, he turned away from Salafism but not necesarily away from the creed of atharism or Salafism, however, he has become critical of many aspects of their literalism etc. In fact, within Sunni Islam, the two main creeds are the Athari ( Salafi) creed and the Ash'ari creed. Yasir Qadhi has in fact a great talk on UA-cam about the Athari vs Ashari divide and split. And the differences between them. I highly recommend this video to you since you seem to be interest. I can provide you with the link or you can search "Yasir Qadhi - difference between Salafi and Ash"ari. Greetings from the Netherlands
Very interesting! Thanks.
Assalamu Halaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu Brothers And Sisters, I really didn't wanna comment on this because I'll just probably get slandered and shunned, but I have some problems with this statement (but I do agree with others), so let's dissect this Insh'Allah :
1. Historically, the term "salafi" was previously used by scholars of the sunni school and is not a new mouvement (like what Brother Paul and Abu Khadija HA has mentioned), just to give an example : Muhammed Bin Khalaf, well known as Waki' (died in 306 A.H) , said in his biography of Isma'il bin Hammâd : "Isma'il Bin Hammâd Ibn Abi Hanifah Was A True And Correct SALAFI" (Source : Akhbar Al-Qudaat , 2/167) . So As We See, Salafiyya Isn't A New Mouvement And Dated From The Time Of The Early Generations .
2. Yasir Qadhi is not a scholar of Islam, whether you like it or not, he's an Ikhwani and literally is an obsessive lover of Westernism and denies Islamic Traditional Scholarship, plus he has majorly false claims (ex. The Hadith Of Ya'juj Wa Ma'juj And Its Inauthenticity) , and no actual salafi scholar praised him, but in fact, disagreed with his beliefs.
3. Abu Khadija, unlike what you think, is an amazing da'ee (A Person Who Does Da'wah) and really just much better than The Deviant Yasir Qadhi, just go and check his site if you want to look at it yourself.
4. The term "Madkhali" has no historical basis whatsoever, and it was fabricated by Anti-Salafis and Especially of those who baselessly criticize Shaykh Rabi' Al-Madkhali HA , he is a real salafi scholar and actually praised by mountais of knowledge (i.e Major Theologians Of The Athari Creed) [Unlike Yasir Qadhi]. But I need to say, everybody makes mistakes, even Scholars, so because Abu Khadija said a weird claim, it doesn't make him a deviant whatsoever.
5. Ash'aris are not from Ahlul Sunnah (People Of The Sunnah) whatsoever ! Their creed is baseless and fabricated, and if you do not believe me, check this :
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said: The term Ahl as-Sunnah includes the Mu‘tazilah, includes the Ash‘aris, and includes those followers of innovation whose innovation does not go as far as disbelief, if we use the term to mean as opposed to the Raafidis.
But if we want to explain the meaning of the phrase Ahl as-Sunnah, we say that Ahl as-Sunnah in the true sense of the word are the righteous forebears (as-salaf as-saalih) who united in their adherence to the Sunnah and followed it. In this case, the Ash‘aris, Mu‘tazilah, Jahamis and so on are not among Ahl as-Sunnah according to this meaning.
End quote from ash-Sharh al-Mumti‘ (11/306).
Ibn Abdul-Barr Al-Māliki (rahimahullāh, d. 390H) quoted the saying of Imām Mālik: “It is not permitted to accept the witness of Ahlul-Bid’ah and Ahlul-Ahwā.” Then he explained:
“The people of desires according to Mālik and all of our companions are Ahlul-Kalām (the people of theological rhetoric). So every mutakallim (one who resorts to theological rhetoric) is from the people of desires and Bid’ah whether he is an Ash’ari or other than an Ash’ari. His witness is never accepted in Islam. He is to be abandoned and disciplined for his innovation. And if he continues upon innovation, his repentance is sought [by those in authority].” (Jāmi’ Bayān Al-‘Ilm wa Fadlihi, 2/96)
Al-Imām Al-Harawi stated in his book, Dhamm Al-Kalām (the Dispraise of Theological Rhetoric): I heard Ahmad Ibn Nasr Al-Mālīni (d. 412H) saying: “I entered the ‘Amr Ibn Al-‘Ās Congregational Mosque in Egypt with a group of my companions. Once we had sat down, a shaikh came along and said: ‘You are from the people of Khurasān and you are Ahlus-Sunnah and this is the place of the Ash’ariyyah so get up [and leave from here].'”
Imām Ash-Shāfi’i (d. 204H) stated: “My judgment upon the people of rhetoric (Ahlul-Kalām) is that they should be beaten with palm branches, placed on the back of a camel and paraded among the people and it be announced: ‘This is the punishment for the one who abandons the Book and Sunnah and takes to Kalām (theological rhetoric).” (Al-Baghawi reported it in Sharhus-Sunnah, 1/218)
Finally, just as an advice, do not listen to western so-called "Islamic Scholars" because they are not true students of Knowledge, let alone Theologians, You cannot even dare to compare any Traditional Scholar to these common people .
And another piece of advice for Br.Paul, Please Brother, I already know that you love listening to western intellectuals, but You also need to learn from Traditional And Eastern Ones, like Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen, Shaykh Ibn Baaz, Shaykh Salih Al-Fawzaan {May Allah SWT Bless Them} , and I'm not trying to be biased, I am Athari and Salafi al Hamdullilah, but I'm an ex-Ash'ari, and By Whose Hand Is My Soul, Salafis are the best of People in academic refutations and knowledge.
BarakaAllahu Fikom
@@theelahmed2682 Thanks!
@@theelahmed2682 Thank you brother, for your honesty of Athary(Salfi) defence.
I might add, that if it were not for the Salafis, Islam would have been hijacked by Hellinistc thinkers just like Christianity was by Paul. Salafism reminds me of James, the brother of Jesus Br. Paul talked about, that represented early Jerouslim disciples of Jesus, who tried hard to uphold the LAW(Shariah). Thanks, Paul Williams for your subjects, integrity and professionalism.
@@qabbanms Allahuma Yudakhilokom Wa Yudakhilana Fi Al-Firdousil A'laa, and yeah man, Salafiyya is the truth and anybody who denies this is a very ignoramous person, just look at me man (not trying to say I'm the best salafi) but I've provided sources, unlike the Other Brother (May Allah SWT Guide Him) and Wallah, I do not want any bad for my Brothers And Sisters, Muslims And NON-MUSLIMS, but what I only want is the truth man, I will never call myself salafi if it did not get me closer to Allah SWT
Asalmaleykum Paul I found this topic interesting because as I see it now with the advent and easy access and f the internet we are seeing more and more muslims attacking one another and I have to say the Salafis are harsh in their treatment of non salafis. Please shed more light on this subject. JazakAllah
Not all Salafis are like that.
No of course not. I didn’t mean to paint them all with the same brush.
U have to know that athari method is far from salafi method, salafi creed is actually Ibn Taymiyyah creed, who had his own philosophical views
Exactly. It is an attempt of present-day salafis to ground themselves in the original salafi/athari/hanbali creed, but really, they are propagating the creed of Ibn Taymiyyah.
What is the difference between the salafi aqeeda and the majority of sunni's aqeedah?
Maybe a video on various theological differences between the major Muslim creeds?