Dawahmen using Philosophy, Logic and Kalam ?! 

Is the use of rational proofs a part of the Salaf methodology? Ibn Taymiyyah says: ‏“فإنَّ أحمدَ لم ينهَ عن نظرٍ في دليلٍ عقليٍّ صحيح يُفضي إلى المطلوب، بل في كلامه في أصول الدين في الرد على الجهمية وغيرهم من الاحتجاج بالأدلة العقلية على فسادِ قولِ المخالفين للسنة ما هو معروف في كتبه وعند أصحابه .. ‏والمقصود أن أحمد يستدل بالأدلة العقلية على المطالب الإلهية إذا كانت صحيحة، إنما يذم ما يخالف الكتاب والسنة، أو الكلام بلا علم، والكلام المبتدع في الدين .. ‏وهو لا يكره - إذا عرف معاني الكتاب والسنة - أن يعبر عنها بعبارات أخرى إذا احتيج إلى ذلك، بل هو قد فعل ذلك، بل يكره المعاني المبتدعة في هذا، أي فيما خاض الناس فيه - من الكلام في القرآن والرؤية والقدر والصفات - لا بما يوافق الكتاب والسنة وآثار الصحابة والتابعين” ‏درء تعارض العقل والنقل، ١٥٣/٧ “Ahmad b. Hanbal didn’t forbid one from looking into sound rational evidences that fulfils [the goal] that is wanted. Rather in his words concerning the fundamentals of the religion in [the book] Al Radd ‘Ala Al Jahmiyyah and other works you will find his usage of sound rational proofs to expose the invalidity of the statements of the opposing side that which is well known in his books and from his companions. The intent here is that Ahmad uses rational proofs in those matters pertaining to the Divine on condition that these rational proofs are sound But Ahmad only disliked & criticised the [rational proofs] that go against the Qur’an and Sunnah or speaking without knowledge and the speech of the innovator regarding the religion. And he does not dislike, if one knows the meanings of the Quran and Sunnah, that he expresses [these meanings] using a different style if that is what’s required. Indeed, he (ie Ahmad) did this himself!! What he (ie Ahmad) disliked was the innovated meanings in this [the innovated rational “proofs”] i.e. that which the people [Ahlul Kalam] delved into with speech regarding the Qur’an, the seeing of Allah, the Divine Decree and Allah’s attributes that does not conform to the Qur’an, Sunnah and Aathaar of the Sahaba and the Tabi’een” I say: If you’ve read the book الرد على الجهمية you will appreciate what Ibn Taymiyyah is saying about Ahmad. This shows that this blanket prohibition of logic & use of rational proofs that some claimants to Ibn Taymiyyah & Ahmad today assert is not in line with what Ibn Taymiyyah & Ahmad did & thought.

I laughed and they said "can't you be modest" I cried and they said "why don't you smile?" I smiled and they said "he's a show off" I frowned and they said "i started showing my true colors" I was silent and they said i had a feeble tongue When i spoke they said i was too talkative When i was tolerant they called it cowardice And said, had I been brave, i would have taken a revenge When i showed up some courage they said it was rash & reckless And i wouldn't have behaved so if i were balanced. When I said NO they considered me odd, When i agreed with them, they called me a blind follower So it became certain, that no matter how hard i try, Pleasing People will bring nothing but criticism. From the poetry of Imam ash shafiee

This is why definitions are so important

How did Muslims regress to the point where some claim thinking, I.e. logic, is haram? Absolute madness.

It is true that philosophy is not completly haram, but one shut not go extreme with it. The quran and the sunnah provides the best arguments and refutations against every false belief and the quran itself contains logical arguments. What Abdulrahman Hassan said was true, some people who give dawah are ignorant about the quran and hardly quote from it anymore. In stead they quote these weird greek philosophers or scientists

for the last 2500 years, philosophers were only speculating and arguing on issues....they will never provide absolute answers to all metaphysical questions,.....but philosophy is a useful tool for thinking and analysis......so to attribute absoluteness to philosophy is wrong......and to reject philosophy absolutely is equally wrong......there must be nuances in engaging with philosophy by students of knowledge, Muslims or not

Assalamualaikum brother Hijab. In my country, Malaysia, two muslim bodyguards were beaten and had gun pointed on them by their Chinese boss because they were fasting in Ramadhan. Muslim in Malaysia are nice people that accept other races to live with us, but now we are oppressed by them in our own land. Please cover this issue. Thank you.

I have a HUGE essay due, but this is a must watch! Asalamu Aleikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh. May Allah accept our fasts, forgive our shortcomings, and answer the longings of our hearts. RAMADAN MUBARAK SAID ☪️

Omar Suleiman in One Path network? The guy who walked with LGBT supporters in a rally and in the same rally didn't say anything when a sister got baptized but silently watched ?

It’s really refreshing to see you guys together. May Allah keep you together forever

Asalamualaykum Brothers & Sisters. Read below, will take you a couple seconds. Inshallah we can reap the rewards of just spending a few seconds of our day doing some dhikr 1. SubhanAllah 2. Alhamdulilah 3. La ilaha illallah 4. Allah hu Akbar 5. Astaghfirullah wa atubu ilahi 6. SubhanAllahi wabi hamdihi

Love you guys from Ethiopia You have a lot of fans here in ethiopia

It's Finished It's Finished!!

Salam alykoum all from France 🤝

Ramadan Mubarak to everyone! Btw why can't I see Hijab?

Love you my brothers ❤ Mohammed Hijab & Ali ☝

I feel the audience won't get boredom if you're doing your da'awa without using scripts, quoting verses from the heart and that's why Dr zakir is able to deliver lectures to a live audience of about 1million. I like it!

Ramadan is a month of ibadah and not debating muslims. Abu Umamah reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “No people are led astray after being guided but that they indulged in arguments.” Then, the Prophet recited the verse, “They strike an example for you only to argue. Rather, they are a quarrelsome people.” (43:58) Source: Sunan al-Tirmidhī 3253 Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Al-Tirmidhi

The problem is using philosophy to determine the shape or form of god- that's problematic, because we'd be talking about something outside our rationale- while using it. You just have to know where to stop.

Some guy come to my house today and asked for a small donation for the local swimming pool so I gave him a glass of water he didn't even say thanks funny guy

All due respect my brothers.. dont you think Naseeha is more important because of issues that you have mentioned? Dawah to bring non muslims to deen is always important ofcourse but seems like us as muslims ourselves need guidance and teaching before we can go and think we can give dawah becoz we read one or two books. Many of us are misguided and the hour is very near.. may Allah almighty make it easy for us and protect us from the fitnah of the dajjal

Those brothers have misquoted ibn taymiyah and the salaf and have been doing it for so long with little knowledge.

[Quran 20:22] "Indeed, the worst of living creatures in the sight of Allah are the deaf and dumb who do not use reason."

You should constantly be scared that your not doing your dawah correctly thats a good thing ahlie

So Imam Shafii would have lashed Ibn Taymiyya with his shoes according to our Salafi brothers lol.

The fact that this is even a point of contention is a major reason why a lot of sincere young people with 'Muslim' cultural backgrounds feel very distant from the Salafi/Wahhabi lot. The fact that everything has to be substantiated with statements from Ibn Taymiyyah as well is also a clear indication of the power of the Petro dollar Dawah.

“The beginning of wisdom is the definition of terms.” ~ Socrates

That's very clear to me now. Keep up the great work inshallah 👍

Why do you guys look like twins with a bit of different shades?!! Masha Allah, you guys are growing and look barely 20 years old! Ramadan Kareem everyone!

Salaam brothers, Alhamdulilah you are making things clear for us muslims, may ALLAH reward you with fruits of this world and most importantly with fruits of Jannah for your struggle and hard work, ameen.

Man when these 2 together can't help myself,I have to do Dua for you both, MAY ALLAH SHOWER YOU AND YOUR FAMILIES WITH HIS BLESSINGS

Leave Wahhabism and follow the true Hanbali School I can see very good progress in ur believes Mister Hijab ;)

I really like your intellectual style and thoughtfulness just ordered one of your books bro

Manhaj Salaf ❤

When the prophet Muhammad (SAWS) debated with a Christian and the Christian tried to explain to the Nabi (SAWS) how Jesus (AS) is the Son of God becuase he was born without a father, the prophet (SAWS) replied to him by saying, "if jesus was born without any male intervention and this makes him the son of god then what about Aadam (AS) who didn't have a father or a mother is he the bigger son of god". How would you define this interaction between the Nabi (SAWS) and the Christian would it be logic or no?

Ramadan Kareem everyone ❤️

Suraij as-Shafi'ee (d. 306H) said, mentioned by Ibn Taymiyyah in "Bayaan Talbees al-Jahmiyyah": توحيد اهل العلم وجماعة المسلمين أشهد أن لا اله الا الله وان محمدا رسول الله وتوحيد اهل الباطل الخوض في الأعراض والأجسام وانما بعث النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم بانكار ذلك The Tawheed of the people of knowledge and the jamā'ah of the Muslims is "I testify none is worthy of worship except Allāh (alone) and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allāh". And the Tawheed of the people of falsehood is disputing about al-a'răd (incidental attributes) and al-ajsām (bodies) and the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) was sent with the rejection of that."

Honestly i agree with you Mohammed Hijab. But can you give examples of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) using philosophy to strengthen your case?

This is very counter-intuitive, considering the fact that Allah tells us to use our logic and intellect to recognize him.

I think it's unfair to label them as conservative scripturalist. Avoid using labels as much as you can. If they are culpable of it then don't be like them especially if you disagree with them and how they cause fitnah as a result of constantly attaching certain labels on others The problem with us is that we immediately start to label others the moment we disagree with them. I understand that their view may demotivate you guys from the great work you are doing. There's nothing necessarily wrong with the methodology you guys use But you have to understand their point too. I get that they shouldn't just label your methodology as invalid. There are pros and cons to their view just as there are to yours Even if ibn tamiyah (not undermining him in any shape or form) was of the view that there's a good and a bad kalam, the majority of the salaf never used philosophy or kalam to convert non muslims or specifically atheists. Philosophy was never used by the early generations. And there's a difference between logic and philosophy. Simply reasoning or using your reason doesn't mean that you are doing philosophy. In philosophy, there's no fine line with regards to how you can use logic. It's an independent source of knowledge particularly in philosophy. That's why our ULAMA warn us against philosophy and we can't deny that those who deviated were influenced by philosophy not by logic. They didn't reason rather they ended up overwhelming themselves with it. Allah tells us to reason but at the same time He also reminds us that we are limited in our knowledge. You can't reason limitlessly if you are limited in your knowledge Calling someone as a conservative scripturalist is not correct. The more you adhere to the methodology as laid by the Quran and sunnah, the better Prophet Muhammad SAW started off His journey of giving dawah by reminding the disbelievers of the hereafter and also calling them to worship Allah alone. His methodology was sound and clear. Even though it lead many people away from the religion but it also lead many to embrace the religion Again, there's nothing wrong with how you guys do dawah. If your arguments can give life to someone's intellect in a way which doesn't contradict the Quran and sunnah then that's alhamdulillah great. However, I just thought I should clear as to why scholars are critical of philosophy

Brother Hussain didn’t attack no one guys . He was asked question he answered it according to what الشافعي said . You guys need to slow down you put all pictures of the brothers from speakers corner as if he was directing his answer to you guys please slow down don’t amplify every thing and end up attacking the brother please it’s Ramadan guys seriously no good come out of this .

If I hear a sound in another room. I can conclude rationally that the sound was an effect and there must have been a cause. This is logic. What's the problem with this? People use this type of logic in every day life

My favorite duo, may Allah bless!

Are people actually questioning the use of logic?

Ibrahim a.s uses logic when giving Dawah. When he pretend to worship the star and the moon and sun then he said they can’t be a God and he gave good reasons . This is all logically arguments that’s Ibrahim a.s used

Hey everyone I hope you are doing well let’s try to finish the Quran this Ramadan and try to strive in the way of Allah and spread Islam and let’s get closer to Allah the gates of jahannam are closed and gates of paradise are open! Ramadan Mubarak!! 😁😁

Jazak Allah Khair for this video, i’ve noticed this is happening in dawah tables the brothers no longer want to use any basic rational arguments because they say this is biddah

Ramadan Mubarak everyone

Salam from indonesia,, assalamualaiykum brother,,,

Brother we need and I mean we need Arabic translation if it is at all possible. There are so many people I want to share these videos with that don’t speak English. Regardless, I appreciate everything you do!

Assalaamu Alaikum and Ramadan Kareem to all. Brother Hijab, please tell us what you think about Sheikh Imran Hosein's many in depth lectures on Islamic Eschatology? Jazak'Allah

14:13 There are many intellectual arguments in the Qur'an. Why can't Du'aat use that with atheists and not philosopher's arguments?

How many people have reverted to Islam based on your philosophical style of argumentation?

This vid was much needed!!! Especially as this is one of the main reasons MH is targeted all the time! May Allah grant him protection and success in all that he does, Ameen

What if ibn Teymiyyah didn't speak about this? - We would have a hard time.

Just memorising the and quoting the salaf without context is ridiculous and unacedemic your right hijab unfortunately alot of brothers and even scholars sometimes talk about fiqh issues and fall into the fallacy of equivication not studying what it meant at the time of the salaf and prophets pbuhs time and how today it doesn't mean the same thing, i Heard an e.g of the word سياره in surah yusuf knowadays it means a car but obviously that's not what is meant, jazak allah khayr

We see many people bringing quotes from the Salaf condemning the usage of Kalam. However, this is a flawed method from many angles. Firstly, Kalam during the time of the Salaf is significantly different than what later scholars defined it as. The Ash’ari polymath Al-Adud al-Iiji (r) defines it as: علم يقتدر معه على إثبات العقائد الدينية بإيراد الحجج ودفع الشبه. “A sciences through which the ability to affirm religious beliefs is gained by bring forth arguments and defending against doubts.” Secondly, the science of Kalam during the earlier generations was associated with heretics and misguided sects. The condemnation of Kalam by many early authorities was possibly not about the science itself as much as it was about the people associated with it. Thirdly, many of the Athari scholars studied and used Kalam, and even heavily depended on it to prove their arguments against their opponents. An example of these scholars includes, but is not limited to: Abu Ya’la, Taqi al-Din Ibn Taymiyyah, Najm al-Din al-Tufi, among others. Lastly, I will end off with the following quotes from our Hanbali scholars, explaining the ruling of Kalam, when it is permissible, and when it is not. Imam Ahmad said in one narration (paraphrased): “We were quiet, until the innovators called us to discourse (kalam), so we broke our silence.” The Hanbalis took from this that it is permissible to debate innovators with rational arguments, coupled with textual evidences - the essence of Kalam. Ibn Muflih quotes from grandson of Abu Ya’la that he said: “The correct opinion in the Madhhab is that learning Kalam is legislated and prescribed.” Sheikh Mansur al-Buhuti says in Kashaf al-Qina’: “[Kalam is impermissible] only if purely rational arguments are used. As for using textual evidences, or rational evidences along with textual evidences, then this is Usūl al-Dīn, and the way of the people of Sunnah. This is the meaning of Sheikh Taqī al-Dīn [Ibn Taymiyyah]’s words.” And Allah knows best.

Shamshi has lots of videos discussing with nonmuslims what arguments does he use?

What I dont get is .. everyone admits and knows based on the historical evidences that taymiyyah was a very controversial figure whose writings often times were not only against the established ijma and consensus but often times contradicted himself and flip flopped between certain topics and has had several scholars who spoke against him. So why rely on his books when there are other more notable scholars.. mainly the salaf scholars like the 4 madhabs? Im started to see that alot of these issues involve taymiyyah.. and if he were removed these issues would be easily resolved and be a non issue.

Love all the new vids coming out keep it. Coming

Beautiful SubhanAllah, absolutely loved it

By saying philosophy/logic is haram you have to negate human communication itself since it is predicated on logic. Philosophy as defined today is inescapable, everyone does it. Hijabs response when he said making philosophy haram means you have to now make computer science haram, science, law haram etc, is a good point, however it doesn't establish how severe the problem of saying philosophy is haram (as is defined today) actually is. If you make philosophy haram you make much of your day to day statements and conversations haram. The funny thing is the Quran and the sunnah are full of philosophical arguments (again philosophical as defined today). What the scholars in the past said was haram when referring to philosophy, was something very different, philosophy didn't have the same meaning as it does today. If you called yourself a philosopher back then, you were essentially a Neo Platonist. This is why Al-Ghazali's book was titled the incoherence of the philosophers, even though under today's definitions he himself would be classified a philosopher. In fact even Ibn Taymiyyah would be classified as a philosopher today. That's because back then being a philosopher meant something very very different to what that would mean by today's definitions. To put it simply philosophy today means to think about reality. 'The philosophers' or Al - Falaasifa, that the scholars in the past condemned and warned against were a specific group mostly made up of neo platonists and had pagan derived beliefs, and if anyone claimed to be a philosopher or falsafa in Arabic it meant you belonged to that specific group of people and their beliefs. Being a philosopher today has a completely different meaning, as Ibn Taymiyyah stated there is no one set of beliefs that makes someone a philosopher. This is why you have philosophers that are Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Athiest, Agnostic, Muslim, pantheist, dualist, theist etc all with completely different beliefs and ideas, even within their own subsets. These super salafi fools don't want to look at the actual definition of philosophy (because if you look at the actual definition of philosophy you cannot make it haram) so they force their own made up definition (even though they can't seem to agree on one) so they can claim its haram (and unwittingly make their own statements and conversations haram, because philosophy as defined today is inescapable), and make everyone brain-dead sheep like them, that blindly obey and regurgitate the garbage that comes from the putrid mouths of their ignorant cowardly overlords.

No need to go to Ibn Taymiyyah.In the Quran Ibrahim AS used rational arguments in all his dawah: He didn't break all the idols but left the axe on the biggest idol. "they cannot speak...." " the moon set... " "You bring the sun from the west..." Rational arguments is an accepted means of dawah.

You and Brother Ali Dawah deserve king Faisal international award for da'wah!

I absolutely love the title

To those criticizing br Hijab I say this verse of Arabic poetry: أقلوا عليهم لا أبا لأبيكم.. من اللوم أو سدوا المكان الذي سدوا Stop criticising them or otherwise do the job they are doing and let us see how perfect your work is. Nevertheless, I just want to point out that saying we cannot use the Quran to prove its authenticity is kind of problematic because there's many rational argument that the Quran itself made. Br Hijab you actually used one of them أم خلقوا من غير شيء أم هم الخالقون As well as the miracles in it such as the historical accuracy of the Quran regarding ancient Egypt, the video is on your channel brother and it is amazing.

Thankyou for clarifying I had alot of doubts about this

Well said. Alhamdulillah. May Allah Swt bless you all. Keep up the good work.

Abdullāh Ibn ‘Amr Ibn Al-‘Ās said: I heard Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) saying: إِنَّ اللَّهَ لاَ يَقْبِضُ الْعِلْمَ انْتِزَاعًا، يَنْتَزِعُهُ مِنَ الْعِبَادِ، وَلَكِنْ يَقْبِضُ الْعِلْمَ بِقَبْضِ الْعُلَمَاءِ، حَتَّى إِذَا لَمْ يُبْقِ عَالِمًا، اتَّخَذَ النَّاسُ رُءُوسًا جُهَّالاً فَسُئِلُوا، فَأَفْتَوْا بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ، فَضَلُّوا وَأَضَلُّوا “Allah does not take away the knowledge by taking it away from the hearts of the people, but He takes it away by the death of the Scholars till no Scholar remains. Then people will take as their leaders the ignoramuses who when asked will give their verdict (fatwa) without knowledge. So they will go astray themselves and will lead the people astray.” (Reported by Al-Bukhārī, no. 100) In a wording, he said, “There will remain the ignoramuses from whom verdicts (fatwas) will be sought. They will give verdicts based upon their own opinions, so they will go astray and will lead the people astray.” (Al-Bukhāri no. 7307) This idiot Hijab is leading all muslims astray and speaking ill about scholars. Please avoid taking knowledge from him and his gang.

You need to look into Naser Mohammad AlYamani. He will be your perfect match hijab, if your up for it. I know scholors just dont want to give him "clout". I am confused to why no one has tried to refute his claims. He challenges any person any scholor and im still waiting for someone to speak out. ✌🇾🇪

Thanks for clarifying this for me , JazakAllah

Brother what you guys failed to realise that philosophy’s core teaching or base is to be a free thinker and use logic, “your own logic “ there’s no wrong or right in free thinking. This could lead to shirk. We have not come across and scholars who are philosophical

We have a revelation no need for philosophy .

the Prophet sallalahu aleyi wasallam's da'wah was about the QUR'AN and sunnah. the Prophet sallallahu aleyhi wasallam NEVER used other stuff to deliver the message of Islam. I will stick to that, the way of the Salaf.

I see the argument from both sides, playing with philosophy can be dangerous for someone's deen and such however this is why only those learned and trained should give dawah, those who have understood the religion. I mean just imagine if everyone thought like them?

You can see who's sincere and not. These two alhamdullillah mashallah truly sincere and doing amazing work jazakallahkhairan

Allah hu Akbar ☝

Just Accept that Ashairas were so much beyond these so called Asaris Alot of the times while debating with Non Muslims They would bring up logic

Brother It is sufficient to avoid ilmul kalam that Rasul (s:) and his sahaba (r:) and there follower tabiye don't use it. Are they not fully follow islam properly?? The ilmul kalam came from greek psychology. It is not from allah and his rasul(s:). People who use it is far from islam day by day.

Thank you for making this video , i recently came across a video of Sheikh Yasir Qadhi refuting the way of using rational arguments (namely by Sheikh Ahmad Deedat and Dr. Zakir Naik ) , it turns people away from Dawah according to him , which i didnt resonate with ... feel he has kind of lost it ... His concept of Shirk is all over the place , it would be great if you could make a video on Shirk as well .

No one's saying all of philosophy is harām.

بارك الله فيكم

It's all most a year since they dropped the app

I feel like people fail to realise that for the most part Philosophy is FROM ISLAM. It’s not some post-Islam separate Alien notion 🤣🤣 Philosophy, Science, mathematics etc are form the Quran and was applied successfully in societies across an empire spanning North Africa and west Asia Im the GOLDEN AGE OF ISLAM! Islam is unlike other religions, they may use supernatural mythological stories while Islam is Objectively True with Historical facts and logic and reason. May Allah grant us all wisdom and knowledge and peace Insha Allah’ ameen ♥️

أول الدين معرفته قال أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب ( عليه السَّلام ) : " الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ الَّذِي لَا يَبْلُغُ مِدْحَتَهُ الْقَائِلُونَ ، وَ لَا يُحْصِي نَعْمَاءَهُ الْعَادُّونَ ، وَ لَا يُؤَدِّي حَقَّهُ الْمُجْتَهِدُونَ ، الَّذِي لَا يُدْرِكُهُ بُعْدُ الْهِمَمِ ، وَ لَا يَنَالُهُ غَوْصُ الْفِطَنِ . الَّذِي لَيْسَ لِصِفَتِهِ حَدٌّ مَحْدُودٌ ، وَ لَا نَعْتٌ مَوْجُودٌ ، وَ لَا وَقْتٌ مَعْدُودٌ ، وَ لَا أَجَلٌ مَمْدُودٌ . فَطَرَ الْخَلَائِقَ بِقُدْرَتِهِ ، وَ نَشَرَ الرِّيَاحَ بِرَحْمَتِهِ ، وَ وَتَّدَ بِالصُّخُورِ مَيَدَانَ أَرْضِهِ . أَوَّلُ الدِّينِ مَعْرِفَتُهُ ، وَ كَمَالُ مَعْرِفَتِهِ التَّصْدِيقُ بِهِ ، وَ كَمَالُ التَّصْدِيقِ بِهِ تَوْحِيدُهُ ، وَ كَمَالُ تَوْحِيدِهِ الْإِخْلَاصُ لَهُ ، وَ كَمَالُ الْإِخْلَاصِ لَهُ نَفْيُ الصِّفَاتِ عَنْهُ ، لِشَهَادَةِ كُلِّ صِفَةٍ أَنَّهَا غَيْرُ الْمَوْصُوفِ ، وَ شَهَادَةِ كُلِّ مَوْصُوفٍ أَنَّهُ غَيْرُ الصِّفَةِ ، فَمَنْ وَصَفَ اللَّهَ سُبْحَانَهُ فَقَدْ قَرَنَهُ ، وَ مَنْ قَرَنَهُ فَقَدْ ثَنَّاهُ ، وَ مَنْ ثَنَّاهُ فَقَدْ جَزَّأَهُ ، وَ مَنْ جَزَّأَهُ فَقَدْ جَهِلَهُ ، وَ مَنْ جَهِلَهُ فَقَدْ أَشَارَ إِلَيْهِ ، وَ مَنْ أَشَارَ إِلَيْهِ فَقَدْ حَدَّهُ ، وَ مَنْ حَدَّهُ فَقَدْ عَدَّهُ ، وَ مَنْ قَالَ فِيمَ فَقَدْ ضَمَّنَهُ ، وَ مَنْ قَالَ عَلَا مَ فَقَدْ أَخْلَى مِنْهُ . كَائِنٌ لَا عَنْ حَدَثٍ ، مَوْجُودٌ لَا عَنْ عَدَمٍ ، مَعَ كُلِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ لَا بِمُقَارَنَةٍ ، وَ غَيْرُ كُلِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ لَا بِمُزَايَلَةٍ ، فَاعِلٌ لَا بِمَعْنَى الْحَرَكَاتِ وَ الْآلَةِ ، بَصِيرٌ إِذْ لَا مَنْظُورَ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ خَلْقِهِ ، مُتَوَحِّدٌ إِذْ لَا سَكَنَ يَسْتَأْنِسُ بِهِ ، وَ لَا يَسْتَوْحِشُ لِفَقْدِهِ " ، 1 1. نهج البلاغة : 39 ، طبعة صبحي الصالح . Sermon 1 “All praise belongs to Allāh whose worth cannot be described by speakers, whose bounties cannot be computed by those who compute and whose claim (to obedience) cannot be met by those who attempt to do so, the One whom the height of intellectual courage cannot sufficiently appreciate and the depths of understanding cannot possibly reach; He is the One for describing whom no limit is laid down, no ample praise exists, no time is ordained and no duration is fixed. He brought forth creation through His Omnipotence, dispersed winds through His Compassion and firmed the shaking earth with rocks. “The foremost in religion is to acknowledge Him. The perfection of acknowledging Him is to testify to Him. The perfection of testifying to Him is to believe in His Oneness. The perfection of believing in His Oneness is to regard Him as the Absolutely Pure One. The perfection of His purity is to deny Him attributes because every attribute is a proof that it is different from that to which it is attributed, and everything to which something is attributed is different from the attribute itself. Thus, whoever attaches attributes to Allāh recognizes His similitude. Whoever recognizes a similitude for Him regards Him as being two. Whoever regards Him as being two recognizes the existence of parts for Him; whoever recognizes parts for Him mistakes Him; whoever mistakes Him points at Him; whoever points at Him attributes limitations to Him, and whoever attributes limitations to Him numbers Him. “Whoever asks, ‘In what is He?’ holds that He is contained, and whoever asks, ‘On what is He?’ holds that He is not on something else. He is a Being but not through the phenomenon of coming into being. He exists but not out of non-existence. He is with everything but not in physical nearness. He is different from everything but not in physical separation. He acts but without connotation of movements and parts. He sees even when there is none to be looked at from among His creation. He is the One and only, such that there is none with whom He may keep company or whom He may miss in absence.”

"Set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world" Jordan B Peterson

Everyone uses logic. Shaykh Mawlud AsSariri has a video where he laughs at people saying we warn against him cause he uses logic cause it's so ridiculous. Philosophy is a part of logic. It only becomes a problem when quran and hadith are being rejected. Usul alFiqh and Fiqh is also logic.

Ma sha Allah tabaraka Allah brothers Ali/hijab. On it keep it on learnd lots . Jaazakah Allah ghair

Ahl as-Sunnah are three groups: Hanafi, Ash'ari and Hanbali. None of these three groups compromise on the transcendence of Allah, which is established first and foremost according to the Qur'an and Sunnah. E.g. Imam al-Babarti is a Hanafi, Imam al-Ghazali an Ash'ari, Imam Ibn Qudamah a Hanbali. Imam Ibn al-Jawzi is not a Hanbali but Imam Ibn al-Zaghuni, Imam Qadi Abu Ya'a etc. who he criticised are. The followers of Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah - who is certainly not a mainstream Hanbali/Athari in creed - are three: Those of Ahl as-Sunnah, those of Ahl al-Biddah who are Muslims and those who are disbelievers. The Taymiyyun of Ahl as-Sunnah believe Allah is not in a place - they affirm his transcendence properly. This is established by clear evidences that are textual, not just rational. The Taymiyyun of Ahl al-Bid'ah imitate the Waqifiyyah of the past and state, "We neither state He is in a place nor not in a place," Then as Imam Ahl as-Sunnah made Tabdi of the ones who believed that neither they state the Qur'an is uncreated (Sunni doctrine) nor created (Kufr doctrine), we make Tabdi' of them. The Taymiyyun of Ahl al-Kufr say that Allah is in a place. They are Mujassimah, they follow the heretics of the past, the Karramiyyah and Muqatiliyyah. Those Taymiyyun of Ahl al-Bid'ah who wish for the Asha'irah and Ahnaf to accept them, by cosying up to them and agreeing with them on certain issues (which by the way we tolerate disagreement on), will insha'Allah never be accepted by them. I say to them, "teach tolerance of Kalam, tolerance of the groups of Ahl as-Sunnah, all you want - you are not fooling anyone," I tolerate and accept the Hanabilah who hated Kalam like Imam Ibn Qudamah and view him as a Sunni, but I will not do the same for you. They the innovators wish for us to tolerate Bid'ah just because they state what many of our scholars state. It will not happen. Speak with soft words as much as you like, these sheep will never leave their shepherd. Their shepherd is the Qur'an, Sunnah and as-Sawad al Adham. Sunni Orthodox Unity is without compromise. As for Hijab, Allahu Alam what he believes. I am not saying he is a Taymiyyan of Ahl al-Bid'ah, I am merely pointing these things our for those Taymiyyans like Hatem al-Haj and his followers who wish their beliefs to be counted amongst the beliefs of Ahl as-Sunnah. They are better than the Mujassimah and, especially if they recognise the heresy of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, they are closer to us, especially if they work towards acceptance of Tasawwuf, but just because they are closer to us does not make us accept them. We do not say of that Zaydi Ash'ari that Hijab debated that he is a Sunni - no - he is an innovator, even if he is closer to us than the common Rawafid. There are two extremes when it comes to these matters, "Let's make Tabdi of everyone" (does not tolerate legitimate differences of opinion) and "Let's accept everyone," (waters down fundamental Muslim beliefs and creed). Follow neither. Follow what was recited in Taraweeh, that He made us a middle nation. Neither is every single innovator hated without recognising them as your brother, nor are all their grievious errors tolerated. That is the path of moderation, between the two lines either side. The Taymiyyun of Ahl al-Bid'ah are our Muslim brothers and sisters who have rights over us. And in the way we treat them we leave the path of the people of Yemen who were softer. Then treat them better but do not tolerate the innovation. This is all I have wanted to say. If you've taken the time to read this, do not write some ignorant sectarian comment below. First wait until Iftar. Then go to the Masjid and pray Taraweeh. Then get some rest. Then eat Suhoor. Then do not write your comment the next day. Then after Ramadan, if you still wish to comment something, then after Eid, perform Wudhu, perform two Rakat and then write your comment. Insha'Allah in that time the anger or frustration you have will be gone. Ramadan Mubarak to all brothers and sisters.

Yesss yess I’m so so happppy That is the truth That is the Truth alhamduallah بَلْ نَقْذِفُ بِالْحَقِّ عَلَى الْبَاطِلِ فَيَدْمَغُهُ فَإِذَا هُوَ زَاهِقٌ

Why is Ibn Taymiyyah always quoted to make a salafi think that he is maby wrong? 🤔

Mashalah nice talk show.I have greatly benefited.

بارك الله فيكم ونفع بكم وجزاكم خير الجزاء.

Salaam, may ALLAH reward you brothers and keep you safe, ameen.

While your talking the truth there is benefit to bring from the criticism. While it is necessary to reply to logic with logic It is wise to believe there is a reason why Allah swt made different weights of importance to his message. I hope you keep using what brings us here to learn But I also hope you have more complete dawa were the Quran verses are the highlight of it which talks to the heart, mind and the soul ﴿فَلا تُطِعِ الكافِرينَ وَجاهِدهُم بِهِ جِهادًا كَبيرًا﴾ [Al-Furqān: 52] (52) So do not obey the disbelievers, and strive against them with it [i.e., the Qur’ān] a great striving. - English Meanings

Brother Hijab and Ali Dawah, you guys are amazing. 👍

Don't you think we're sometimes selective about who we take as salaf salif and who we ignore? Don't forget that Wasil ibn 'Ata was a member of salaf. Don't also forget that another Individual had similar views to Wasil: Zayd ibn 'Ali ibn al-Husayn ibn Abi Talib. Not just member of salaf, but member of Ahl al-Bayt and praised by Abu Hanifa.

MashaALLAH very good topic needed to be addressed with precautions

“Scripturalists”, that’s a very concerning thing to hear. As if scripture is insufficient. May Allah protect us from saying such things.

Jzk for the message brother.