To find out more about Dr. El-Tobgui's research, visit his Academia page: brandeis.acade... You can download Dr. El-Tobgui's book, Ibn Taymiyya on Reason and Revelation, here: brill.com/view...
Absolutely brilliant discussion!! - Ibn Taymiyyah (rh) was truly an intellectual legend!! Presented in such a comprehensive manner, it can be so difficult to explain convoluting philosophical concepts succinctly!!
2:05 Qiyas (analogical inference). It is one of the four accepted sources in Sharee'ah along with Qur'an, Sunnah and Ijma' (Consensus). Qiyas has four Arkan (Pillars). 1. The Asl (old case). 2. The Far' (the new case). 3. The 'illah (common factor, or effective cause). 4. The Hukm (ruling). For example a new case emerges that is not mentioned in the Qur'an and Sunnah like marijuana. So the Mutjahid could use Qiyas to arrive at a ruling for this new case. He takes an old case (the asl) that is mentioned in the Qur'an or Sunnah like Khamr (alcohol). Then he uses the 'illah (effective cause) which is the intoxication that is the common factor between the asl (old case) and far' (new case). And then he arrives at the Hukm (ruling). Since intoxicants are Haram (Unlawful), then Qiyas (analogical inference) renders marijuana as Haram too as it shares the 'illah of intoxication with alcohol which is Haram. The Ta'leel that he mentions is the 'illah (effective cause). His masters thesis was on this Qiyas (analogical inference) and it's Ta'leel i.e. the 'illah (effective cause) that is one of the Arkan (Pillars) of Qiyas. Hope that helped you understand. And insha'Allah it made you interested in Usul Al-Fiqh.
Ibn Taymiyyah رحمه الله was a genius, he refuted the philosophers using their own principles: وقالوا: الوجود واحد، ولم يميزوا بين الواحد بالعين والواحد بالنوع "An they said: 'Existence is one and the same' - and hence failed to distinguish between _oneness in actuality and oneness in genus (naw')."_ [Al-Furqaan Beyna Auliya' Ar-Rahmaan wa Auliya' Ash-Shaytan p. 106 in the Arabic - and "The Criterion Between The Friends of Allah & The Friends of Shaytan" p. 224 in the english translation] In logic (mantiq) they delve into classifications called the alfaz al-khamsa (the five universals) taken from Porphory's book "Eisagoge". Taxonomy was developed from this. The pantheists would've failed in Taxonomy as they wouldn't be able to differentiate the universe from the particulars inside the universe. 1. The Jins (genus). 2. The Naw' (species). 3. Fasl (differentia). 4. Khaas (property). 5. A'raad (accident). The upper part are the kulliyat (universal) and as you go down defining the Hadd (definition), then you get to the particulars (juz'iyyat). Ibn Taymiyyah رحمه الله is using their classifications against the Ahlul Kalam and philosophers who ended up becoming pantheists. Because they were unable to differentiate between Allah ﷻ and the creation. But when it came to Hadd (defining words) and its Mahiya (quiddity - whatness, essence) then they were quick to make the Fasl (differentia) and argued for the brilliance of Mantiq (logic). But when it came to Allah ﷻ, then they could not differentiate Him from His creation. So they denied Al-Istawa and Allah's ﷻ 'Uluww (Highness) above His creation not mixing inside it. The philosophers use the universals like "one universe" and does not differentiate the particulars inside the universe from one another. So to them human beings are similar in oneness with the stars since we are all part of the same universe. Ibn Sina and Ibn 'Arabi were disbelievers.
mashāllah, a very clear, succinct explanation of Athari creed. Good to feel affirmed upon what I was raised on in the 1990's alhamdulillah, much appreciate the book link, and if a softcover does come out, i'll buy it inshāllah.
I would say that 1:40:00 is where the action begins wrt to application of ibn Taymiyyah’s ideas. Gotta write some notes from there moving fwd in shā Allah. Understanding 7aqīqa & majāz seems to key to ibn Taymiyyah’s thought on Divine Attributes.
Ibn Taymiyya on Reason and Revelation: A Study of Darʾ taʿārud al-ʿaql wa-l-naql ---by Carl Sharif El-Tobgui, PhD drive.google.com/file/d/1yKWHPyoJe5I2nE14v8FSNnXwe2MTtPFH/view
05 Qiyas (analogical inference). It is one of the four accepted sources in Sharee'ah along with Qur'an, Sunnah and Ijma' (Consensus). Qiyas has four Arkan (Pillars). 1. The Asl (old case). 2. The Far' (the new case). 3. The 'illah (common factor, or effective cause). 4. The Hukm (ruling). For example a new case emerges that is not mentioned in the Qur'an and Sunnah like marijuana. So the Mutjahid could use Qiyas to arrive at a ruling for this new case. He takes an old case (the asl) that is mentioned in the Qur'an or Sunnah like Khamr (alcohol). Then he uses the 'illah (effective cause) which is the intoxication that is the common factor between the asl (old case) and far' (new case). And then he arrives at the Hukm (ruling). Since intoxicants are Haram (Unlawful), then Qiyas (analogical inference) renders marijuana as Haram too as it shares the 'illah of intoxication with alcohol which is Haram. The Ta'leel that he mentions is the 'illah (effective cause). His masters thesis was on this Qiyas (analogical inference) and it's Ta'leel i.e. the 'illah (effective cause) that is one of the Arkan (Pillars) of Qiyas. Hope that helped you understand. And insha'Allah it made you interested in Usul Al-Fiqh.
Excellent talk! I recently came across a person say he didn’t like the Islamic religion because of use acceptance to be called AbulAllah, somehow that meant to him “a religion that loves slaves”. As ibnu Taymiya would say, this person shababa Allah to a human understanding of what being a slave means. It is amazing how our human mind and language can deceive us.
This is not only the longest video on the channel, but imo, the best one so far. One thing I would disagree with though is the point that in order for the theologian/philosopher to show how Ibn Taymiyyah's conception of the divine attributes results in tashbih, they must get into discussions on nominalism vs. realism and get into the metaphysics of essentialism etc. One question I have is if Ibn Taymiyyah would consider verses which mention for example Allah's yad, wajh, istiwa etc. Qat'i in terms of their signification? Would Ibn Taymiyyah say that these verses are not open to interpretation and the only possible meaning is the apparent one?
As the other brother said, the kayfiyyah is known. But also as dr Tobgui said, his position is more consistent when it comes to the other attributes and his fear of this being a slippery slope that leads to negation, ta’wil or meaninglessness of the other attributes like Love, Rahma etc
It is not due to disrespect that some take the metaphorical meaning, (especially Ashariyah) Its due to two possibilities, actual meaning and metaphorical meaning and the context of the ayahs where these divine attributes are mentioned leaves the possibility for both. Allah knows best
I think the main point here is that the epistemic jump towards a metaphorical meaning is unneeded, therefore it would be unwise to make it. The entire paradigm of affirmationism rests on the fact that there is actually nothing problematic with literal meanings, and that the art of language and a bit of thinking shows that the claim of tashbih that people like the Asha'ira use, is false. Notable scholars were affirmationists, rightly, but I think Ibn Taymiyyah was quite unprecedented in his approach to explain it. Of course, bringing controversy with him. The logistics of said controversy is what I think is succinctly investigated by Dr.El-Tobgui here. الله أعلم
@@naijiri I also believe that taking the literal meaning is the safest option. However, one has to appreciate, that not everyone has the art of language or for that matter, little bit of thinking. In the end, when you boil it down and all things considered, there is little difference in the actual beliefs. Allahu Alam.
I don't know about that, so الله أعلم is truly the right answer. We would then have to get into defining orthodoxy, which I already had troubles doing. We can't forget that scholars would takfir each other over these issues. The two approaches to theology are vastly different in some ways, but we seemingly all agree on the six pillars of faith. How do we reconcile? Not sure, but I think it's best to avoid hostility regardless of what position we take. And part of IT's paradigm was reinstating our theology as something easily palatable to the layman, and something that truly represented the relationship between man and God and opposed to the "cold" and apophatic interpretation that he said the Asha'ira held. So in his view, everyone would indeed have the capability to follow this, and this would be the way the Salaf interpreted our religion, of course without all of the technicalities. It's safe to say that the two views are fairly opposite, and adherents of both would agree, as they did historically, but I can't say how this plays out when defining Ahlus Sunnah. We laymen should just try to worship Allah as best as possible without meddling in this conundrum, I guess. (Which I am ironically not doing by consuming content like this haha)
Dream Dawah Conference 🚀 Theme - Islam: The Solution in Times of Confusion -- Sept 26-27, 2020 commentaryforhealing.blogspot.com/2020/09/dream-dawah-conference-theme-islam.html
Shoaib don't embrace ibn taymiyyah nominalism cuz if u do ! Then universals like genetics , anotomical homology are out of the window cuz my hand has 5 fingers while ape has 5 fingers but at the same time no similarity cuz finger-ness is Only in mind then it's tantamount for saying evolution is mental conception since since it talks about universality of species 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
losts of claims no evidence. Ibn Taymiyyah defended from Tatars. Ibn Abdul Wahab did hijra & defended per sunnah, taught ppl to call upon Allah alone & proper tawasul like how Umar told Abbas lets pray to Allah together & not graves which is shirk.
Ibn Abdul Wahab's in laws are Saudis who host Hajj educating & welcome Muslims, Saudis booted al queda who was taken in by cia 79 iran who has face of S. Qutub who said Islam should be like marxism & have global revolts, shi'as like chalabi lied on iraq wmds isil formed & follow it, not Saudis who reject this!
