Bismillahi al-Rahman,

This thread is devoted to those who can assemble as much as possible the quotes of scholars of Islam, be they Ahl al-Sunnah or others, in Refutation of the Ash'aris.

This will be beneficial for the Ahl al-Sunnah because:

* This will help Sunnis to defend themselves against the invitation of the Ash'ari

* This will support the Sunnis to debate the Ash'ari when exposed to their attacks

* This will help the Ash'ari to return to the Ahl al-Sunnah

As for the quotes mentioned, they are from all type of scholars and writers of the past, be they Ahl al-Sunnah or innovators or unknown people.

The justification for collecting them from Sunnis is apparent; as for the innovating people, such as from Ash'ari-colleagues or other Ahl al-Bid'ah and Mulhidah, it helps undermining the foundation of the Ash'ariyyah and exposes their ignorance according to other competent scholars in sciences other then those of the Ahl al-Sunnah.

For example,

The Shaykh Abu'l-Walid Ibn Rushd, the wellknown Muslim philosopher, as he has been called, was a bitter antagonist of Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, the wellknown scholar in Islam. Ibn Rushd was besides a philosopher also a Mufti, Faqih and Qadi in the Maliki Madhhab; rather, he was a great authority in the Maliki Madhhab, and his Bidayat al-Mujtahid wa-Nihayat al-Muqtasid is according to many Sunnis and non-Sunnis one of the greatest books of Furu' al-Fiqh in Islam. So his judgement on Ash'aris, although not always agreeable to us, is usefull, Insha'Allah - and we shall mention so if theirs need for the brothers/sisters.

Maybe Allah will strenghten our faith Insha'Allah when reading some of the words of the Mufti's of Islam, in their prosecution of the Ahl al-Bid'ah.

Wa-Billahi Tawfiq!

1 The First Saying is from Imam Abu'l-Abbas Ibn Surayj (d.306/908):


"We do not speak with Ta'wil (interpretation) of the Mu'tazilah, the Ash'ari's,
the Jahmiyyah, the apostates, the Mujassimah, the Mushabbihah, the
Karramiyyah and those who declare Allah to be like His creation
(Mukayyifah - those asking about the modality of His attributes).
Rather we accept them without Ta'wil and we believe in them without
declaring any likeness with the creation (tamthil)."

(Source: Ibn al-Qayyim, Ijtima' al-Juyush al-Islamiyyah 62)

Comment:

As we can see Imam Ibn Surayj said this about al-Ash'ari and his group around him before the man returned to the Ahl al-Sunnah, for al-Ash'ari was 40 years a Mu'tazili. When he left it, around 300, he was a Kullabi, for only in 320 did he became a Sunni according to the historians. So this statement of Imam Ibn Surayj, has been said between 300 and 306, the reported death of Ibn Surayj. This is important to be beware off.

For Imam Ibn Surayj's biography see my article about him in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radd_ashariyyah/message/8

2 The Second Saying is from Imam Abu'l-Wafa Ibn 'Aqil:


"The As'arites have opposed the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of the Messenger, and the Consensus of the Jurists and the Linguists; understand therefor and be aware, and take care of their beliefs; watch out for their innovation and their misleading; convert the one who takes from them, and report the Muslims their beliefs and corrupt tenets. With Allah, al-Wali lies help, and He's our Judge!"

(Source: Ibn 'Aqil, al-Radd 'ala'l-Asha'irah al-'Uzzal wa-Ithbat al-Harf wa'l-Sawt fi Kalam al-Kabir al-Muta'al p.86)


Comment:

This work of Ibn 'Aqil is downright condemnation of the Asha'irah, and their innovative stance in the issue of the Qur'an. It has been written by him and was wellknown to the Hanabilah, while Abd al-Wahhab al-Subki, unaware of this and many other basic issues, called Ibn 'Aqil an Ash'ari!? How far from the truth! In the work their are many sayings of him agains the Ash'aris, but this particular is sufficient and comprehensive enough, Insha'Allah.

3 The Third Saying is from Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (d.505/1111).

_______________________________________________________________

Before we mention what he had to say about the Asha'irah, let us mention some facts about his life, thought and the heritage he left us.

There's no doubt that Abu Hamid Muhammad b. Muhammad al-Ghazali al-Tusi was an accomplished scholar in Islam, im more then once science, such as Usul al-Fiqh, its Furu', Arabic Language and many sub-sciences.

Abu Hamid al-Ghazali was also a celebrated teacher and author, having lectured and written many famous books, among his best known is Ihya 'Ulum al-Din.

For this, and his role as Mufti, we may praise his strive in Islam. May Allah grant him Paradise!

But, Alas! He was also a man of many mistakes and faulty interpretations. The scholars from all parties have made this clear, for example Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Subki, Ibn Hajar and others.

Abu Hamid al-Ghazali was indulged in both praiseworthy sciences as blameworthy ones. As for the latter he indulged in the thoughts of the philosophers, and in some of the strange parts of Tasawwuf, such as those of some of the excessive ones who lived before him, for example al-Hakim al-Tirmidhi.

But, al-Hamdulillah, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali in the time approaching his death, he became more and more aware of what was right, correct and praiseworthy. Thus, he start to indulge in his later days in the learning of the Sunan, and he abandoned some of the teachings of the Ahl al-Kalam to whom he was ascribed to, in particular the Ash'ariyyah. Thus, he rejected 'Ilm al-Kalam for the Muslims in the latest work of his: al-Iljam al-'Awamm 'an Ilm al-Kalam. But before, he mentioned already his disapproval of the Asha'irah, and their extremism in Takfir in opposing him, in his important Faysal al-Tafriqah bayna al-Islam wa'l-Zandaqah.
In my opinion, and this is also the opinion of some of the Muhaqqiqin al-Din, Shaykh Abu Hamid al-Ghazali was never an Ash'ari at all, as many Asha'irah claim, rather he was an independant thinker, more then his teacher Abu'l-Ma'ali al-Juwayni, and in the end he stood aloof from their way and he never accepted them openly, saying "I'm an Ash'ari" or "I follow al-Ash'ari and the Asha'irah" or the like. Rather, we may say with confidence that he belongs to the Ahl al-Sunnah at the end of his life. And the following will support part of that, Insha'Allah.
__________________________________________________________________

The Words from Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, rahimahullah

In Which He a ) Rejects the Ash'ari Thought that to Deviate from Them is Kufr and b ) His Despise of Them for their Envy and Speaking Ill about Others and c ) to Disregard them for their Ignorance

"Verily I see you, O bewildered brother and faithful friend, inflated with anger and divided in thoughts, on hearing a group of people blame me out of envy at what I wrote about the secrets of religious practices. They allege that there are in those writings some points which contradict the teachings of the early authorities and the master theologians; that it is Kufr to deviate even a little from the teaching of al-Ash'ari; and that it is error and perdition to differ even in a small matter from him. Relax, O faithful and bewildered brother! Do not press your bosom with it. Calm down. Forbear what they say and leave them alone smartly. Despise those who are envious and speak ill of others. Disregard those who know nothing about unbelief and heresy."

(Source: al-Ghazali, Faysal al-Tafriqah p. 127)

Let us also see what Abu Hamid al-Ghazali declared about the Ahl al-Sunnah, particularly the followers of Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal:

"The Ash'arites and the Mu'tazilites, because of too much investigation, went so far as to admit the Ta'wil of many literal senses. Those who are closest to the Hanbalites (i.e. to the Ahl al-Sunnah) in matters of the Hereafter are the Ash'arites, may Allah help them, for they affirm most of the literal senses except a few. The Mu'tazilites have gone much further in the Ta'wil than the Ash'arites."

(Source: Ibid., idem. p. 185)

4 The Fourth Saying is from Abu'l-Walid Ibn Rushd (d.595/1198), in the West known as Averroës the Philosopher.
_____________________________________________________________

As it is with Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, rahimahullah, it would be wise to start beforehand with an exposition of his stature as an scholar in Islam.

Born in 520/1126 in Cordoba, al-Andalus, he lived there and in al-Maghreb all his life. His father was an famous preacher and mufti, and his father, called Ibn Rushd al-Jadd, was even more known. Both he and his grandfather are great authorities in the Maliki Madhhab when it comes to Fiqh. Ibn Rushd died in 1198, in Marakech.
Ibn Rushd became even the chief Qadi of Cordoba for a time, while before he was also active as a Qadi in Seville. He also acted as doctor at the royal court of the Amir, where his opinion on Fiqh-matters counted too heavy.
All in all, you would say nothing is wrong with him if you read this. But, Ibn Rushd indulged in the so-called 'Ulum al-Awa'il (lit. Early Sciences), or the "Greek sciences". They where called in ancient time by the comprehensive name 'philosophy', which included pharmacy, medicin but also politicology, history ánd theology. And specifically in these, so-called 'foreign sciences' ('Ulum al-'Ajami) by the Sunnis, such as theology, logic and all that is related to it, he became proficient in it, to such an extreme way, that he violated many beliefs in Islam. It is not the time and place to expose his mistakes, deviancy in certain matters or even unbelief, as some may accuse him; rather, he was not only wrong in some way, but also right, as all scholars are. And this did not go unnoticed to the Sunnis, rather they appreciated what's good of him and rejected was bad of him. And as for al-Ghazali, Ibn Rushd can be excused for many wrong Ijtihad he did, such as in his legitimacy of philosophy, and his permissibility for Ta'wil for some people, and other issues. But they are, though innovative in more then one sense, not always Kufr. And even if they were, for the Mujtahid, who sincerily opposes something by faulty reasoning or interpretation, there's no blame, as indicated by the Ahl al-Sunnah, who understand well the famous Hadith al-Sharif. This enables the reader also to realize that it is the Ahl al-Bid'ah who rush first in Takfir of Muslims, rather then the Ahl al-Sunnah, and this will be mentioned too, by this scholar in Islam, the most knowledgeable of those who has been called 'Muslim philosophers' Ibn Rushd, a man who studied the Qur'an, the Sunnah, the Fiqh of Imam Malik and his followers, the Language etc. and who prayed, fasted, payed his zakat etc. while those Zanadiqa by consensus, such as Ibn Sina and his followers, who inclined to the Isma'iliyyah sect, and professed either Jahmi or Rafidi/Ghulat views, and abstained from formal 'ibadah such as salat, then they are Kuffar, Enemies of Allah, whose opinion is waste and foolishness in any issue covering Islam and the Muslims; rather, they are worser then the Kafirun as Ibn Taymiyyah said, for they attack Islam from inside and spread their cancer to both the elite as common people. May Allah forbid them Paradise!

[For references to Ibn Rushd, I would direct people first and firmost to Ibn Taymiyyah and his Radd 'ala Ibn Rushd, and to the Siyar of al-Dhahabi, Ibn Farhun's Dibaj and the subsequent views on him and others by the A'immah of the Malikiyyah such as al-Shatibi and al-Wansharishi]
______________________________________________________________

Today, many Muslims, both scholars as students speak great about Ibn Rushd. The author of Bidayat al-Mujtahid, The Commentator of Aristoteles, the Physican who authored al-Kulliyyat, one of the best medical textbooks..
..You'll see also the Ahl al-Bid'ah praise him, both those who claim to be Malikis as others..
..Even Ash'aris praise him, speak highly of him, and mention his greatness as they wish, though they and many others are unaware of his opinions, meaning what he really believed in.

Thus you'll see them never mention his attacks against al-Ghazali, without adding that they differed only in opinion on small matters, nor will they regognize that what Ibn Rushd mentioned against al-Ghazali was more then once truthful, and that what he refuted was correct in some of his writings. Neither will they mention his attack against the Ash'ariyyah in particular and the Ahl al-Kalam in general, for either their blind to it, or they stuffle it away.

But when Abu Muhammas Ibn Hazm mention the disgraces and vices of the Ash'arites they reject him, claiming he was ignorant of al-Ash'ari and his followers. They reject him as a reliable reporter, dubbing him as a 'literalist' or Zahiri, while he wasn't that at all in this issue we mention. It suit them well to reject this Faqih and Mufti, for they abhor him and his teachings, while when we report what Ibn Rushd said about them, they neither deny nor respond at all!

How unjust are many innovators! When the Hafidh Ibn Hazm reports on the authority of their Ash'ari follower Abu'l-Walid al-Baji what the beliefs of the Ash'arites are they deny and reject; but if Ibn Rushd is mentioned, you hear...

The Mufti Ibn Rushd knew very well what he was saying, and his saying against the Ash'ariyyah are almost always supported by firm proofs and evidence. For what he rejected from the was their opposition to the Qur'an and Sunnah.
For example, he opposed al-Ghazali, declaring:

"He (i.e. Abu Hamid) is an unbeliever on account of his summoning people to unbelief"

And he makes also Takfir of the Ash'aris, responding:

"It is they (i.e. the Ash'arites) who are the Unbelievers and in error!"

(Source: Ibn Rushd, Fasl al-Maqal p.34 and 37, see tr. by Hourani)

Comment:

Then tell me O Ash'arites! Why are you angered by the Takfir of Ibn Hazm, as reported by Ibn al-Subki, but not by the same Takfir of the Maliki Qadi Ibn Rushd? Then they have nothing to say, for as far as I'm aware none as embarked on refuting Ibn Rushd in his Takfir of the Ash'aris. Why? Was he right? I don't think you can call them all Kuffar, far from that!, but certainly those who oppose the manifest Qur'an as some extremist of them did, they are close to Kufr, as many A'immah said, and as Zahiris, Malikis, Hanafis and other said.

The Maliki Ibn Rushd said also:

"As for the Ash'arites' claim that it is permissible for Allah to do that of which He does not approve, or enjoin that which He does not want, we take refuge with Allah the Almighty from this sort of belief, because it is tantamount to Kufr!"

(Source: Ibn Rushd, Kashf 'an Manahij al-Adillah p. 235)

And he also said about the Ash'arites and other Mutakallimun in general:

"The worst that has befallen religion from this group of people is that they have interpreted many of [those passages] which they thought should not be understood literally, and maintained that such interpretation was not its intent; Allah made it look ambiguous in order to try and test His servants. We take refuge in Allah from entertaining this suspicion concerning Him! We rather hold that the precious Book is miraculous in its clarity and eloquence. Hence how far from the intent of Scripture are those who claim that what is not ambiguous is really ambiguous!"

(Source: Idem., ibid. p. 180)

And in his Kashf there's a long section of Ibn Rushd, rahimahullah and may Allah reward and forgive him for his mistakes by upholding and defending part of Islam, in which he cuts down the Ash'arite Denial of 'Uluww and Fawqiyyah from p. 176 and further.

He mentions for example some Ayat al-Qur'an on Allah's Highness and Aboveness, and says,

"There are many other verses of this type, which, were one to interpret them, the whole of Religion would become interpreted; whereas if one were to declare them ambiguous, the whole of Religion would become ambiguous. For all the religious laws are based on [the belief] that Allah is above heaven, wherefrom the Angels bring down revelation to the Prophets, that from heaven the holy Books were sent down; and that to heaven the Prophet [Muhammad], saw, was carried up during the midnight journey until he became close to Sidrat al-Muntaha. Furthermore, all the philosophers are in agreement that Allah and His Angels are above heaven, and all religions agree with them in this!"

(Source: Ibn Rushd, Kashf p. 176)

So what about the Ash'arites who deny this?! See how Ibn Rushd refute them, and says that,

"it has been customary for people of [our] Religion (i.e. Islam as above) to affirm it of Allah the Almighty since the beginning, until the Mu'tazilites denied it. Later on they were followed in this denial by the later Ash'arites, like Abu'l-Ma'ali and his followers"

And this is true, for the early Ash'arites, even al-Ash'ari himself, never denied Allah's Istiwa, and His being 'above the heaven'; rather, the first major 'mujaddid' of the Madhhab al-Ash'ariyyah was Abu'l-Ma'ali Abd al-Malik al-Juwayni, who begun continue denying the Sifat Allah by way of Ta'wil which he borrowed from the Mu'tazilah. Both his Irshad and Luma' testify to his unjust Ta'wil.
And al-Ghazali followed his master, i.e. al-Juwayni, in this in part as Ibn Rushd indicates.

But Know, O dear brothers/sisters!

Be Aware, that many of the Ahl al-Kalam, especially the Asha'irah have repented from many mistakes, and they should be therefor be recognized as Sunnis in the end, even if their innovative opinions have not vanished, and people still rely on them such as many nowadays Jahmis.

Thus said Abu'l-Faraj Ibn al-Jawziy, the Hanbali whom we have mentioned before and about whom we shall mention more Insha'Allah, that Abu'l-Ma'ali al-Juwayni repented!
And this report, which the Ash'ari-Jahmi can't digest, is a slap in their face, for they are fond at taking rejoice in mentioning Ibn al-Jawziy and his attack against the Ahl al-Sunnah in his Daf' Shubah al-Tashbih. So what will they do with their favourite, why by the way rejected al-As'ari himself in Sayd al-Khatir!, who said:

"Abu'l-Ma'ali al-Juwayni used to say: I have traversed the world of Islam and its sciences, sailing the ocean and diving into all that has been forbidden them, all in search for truth and fleeing from imitation; now I have come back from all to the word of truth. Follow the religion of the licit. If Allah does not cause His Loving Kindness to overtake me, so that I shall die in the religion of old wives, and my terminate on the day of my departure with the word of Ikhlas (lit. sincerity, bu maybe Tawhid), then Woe to Ibn al-Juwayni! (i.e. himself)!"

Ma'a Salam!

5 The Fifth Saying is from Abd al-Malik b. 'Isa b. Darbas (d.659).

This one, Sadr al-Din Abu'l-Qasim b. 'Isa b. Darbas al-Shafi'i, is none other than the Ash'ari-Sunni Preacher of Damascus, in the time of Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi, rahimahumullah, and Ibn Darbas was the first Qadi in the rule of the banu Ayyub.

It is he, who has been claimed to be an Ash'ari, and who has uphold the I'tiqad al-Ash'ari, as Abu'l-Hasan al-Ash'ari believed in in the later part of his life, and defended this belief, and refuted the 'pseudo-Ash'arites' or Kullabites, who claim to follow al-Ash'ari, but who departed from his way.

There's an article on Abu'l-Hasan al-Ash'ari, his Ibanah 'an Usul al-Diyanah, and its defense of it by Abd al-Malik Ibn Darbas, in http://www.allaahuakbar.net/ashariyyah/final_book.htm .

I've a translation of Ibn Darbas' work in front of me, namely of:
al-Risalah fi Dabb 'an al-Ash'ari - The Book in Defense of al-Ash'ari

I've promised before to transcribe the whole translation on the web, and Insha'Allah I shall do so on the forum of www.ahya.org, as a brother is waiting there for it.

But before so, let me quote some passages of Ibn Darbas in his defense of al-Ibanah and his rejection of the Jahmis and others who deny its ascription to al-Ash'ari, as some try to do so today, neglecting all the work together out of pride and stubborness.

It has been already posted on the net that, that the author declared,

"Know, O community of brethren, may Allah grant us and you succes to the right Religion and guide us all to the straight path, That the book, al-Ibanah 'an Usul al-Diyanah, which the Imam Abu'l-Hasan 'Ali b. Isma'il al-Ash'ari authored, is the one on which his affair established with respect to what he professed and took as Religion in worshipping Allah, subhanahu-wa ta'ala, after his return from Mu'tazilism, by the grace of Allah and his benevolence.
And every saying (lit. maqalatin, which can indicate also treatise or tract on creed) which is ascribed to him now, and which opposes what's in al-Ibanah, then he turned back from it, and declared himself to be innocent of it in front of Allah the Sublime!"

(Source: Abd al-Malik Ibn Darbas, Risalah fi Dabb 'an al-Ash'ari p.1)

Comment:

It's clear what has been said here, i.e. {fa'malu ma'shara'l-ikhwan waffaqana'l-Allah wa-iyyakum li-dini'l-qawim wa-hadhana ajma'ina li-sirati'l-mustaqim bi-anna al-kitab al-ibanah 'an usul al-diyana alladhi allafa hu al-imamu abu'l-hasan 'ali bnu isma'il al-ash'ari huwa alladhi istaqarra 'alayhi amruhu fi ma kana ya'taqiduhu wa bi ma kana yadinu 'lLahu subhanahu wa-ta'ala ba'd ruju'ihi 'an al-i'tizal bi-manni Allah wa-lutfi..} and then he denies any ascription which comes after al-Ibanah to al-Ash'ari, which is a rejection of what Ash'arism stands for today!
Thus, Abu'l-Hasan al-Ash'ari opposed Ta'wil/Ta'til, and he rejects thus any interpretation which contradicts what's in his latest book, namely al-Ibanah! This is the opinion od Ibn Darbas himself, and he supports this whit the sayings of the scholars before and contemporair with him.

Abd al-Malik Ibn Darbas says also,

That Abu'l-Hasan al-Ash'ari stated in al-Ibanah, "That it is the Religion with what he worship Allah, the sublime, and [which] he reports and confirms [as] beliefs from the Companions, the Followers and the Imams of Hadith, who have passed before, and the saying of Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Allah's pleasure upon them all!"

Comment:

Its clear, as Imam al-Ash'ari (d.324) said in al-Ibanah (ca. 320), and Ibn 'Asakir (d.571) confirmed in al-Tabyin al-Kadhib al-Muftari fi-ma Nusiba 'an al-Shaykh Abu'l-Hasan al-Ash'ari, that Imam al-Ash'ari is a follower of Imam Ahmad - i.e. in the latest time of his life, and upon which he died. See for yourself al-Ash'ari's quote,

"If anybody say to us,'You have denied the beliefs of the Mu'tazilah, the Qadariyyah, the Jahmiyyah, the Haruriyyah, the Rafidah, and the Murji'ah; now let us know the beliefs you hold and the religion you follow', the anwser is: The belief we hold and the religion we follow are holding fast to the Book of our Lord, to the Sunnah of our Prophet, and to the traditions related on the authority of the Companions and the Successors and the Imams of the Hadith; to that we hold firmly, professing what Abu 'Abdallah Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Hanbal professed, and avoiding him who dissents from his belief, because he is the excellent Imam and the perfect leader through whom Allah declared the truth, removed error, manifested the modes of action, and overcame the innovations of the innovators, the deviations of the deviators, and the skepticism of the skeptics. The mercy of Allah be upon him, for he is an eminet Imam and an exalted, honored friend, and upon all the other Imams of Islam!"

This is authentic, as is the whole book ascribed to al-Ash'ari; in every century of Islam this book has been ascribed to him, and from all the fuqaha of the four madhahib have quoted it or mentioned it. Such is his fame, that Ibn Darbas rejected any Takdhib of the ascription, to such an extent that he called them Jahmis! see below..

Abd al-Malik Ibn Darbas again confirms its ascription, and more importantly its reliance, saying:

"And the book has been mentioned, relied upon, and confirmed [as coming] from the Imam Abi'l-Hasan, Allah's mercy upon him. And he has been praised for what he has written in it, and they have declared him free (thereafter) from every innovation that has been ascribed to him. And they have quoted from him from his work (al-Ibanah), [like] a community from the Imams from the Fuqaha of Islam, and Imams of the Cities, and the Hadith-masters, and others then them"

So he has been praised for what's in it, while Kullabi-Ash'arites of today reject it and call what's in it Tajsim and Tashbih and whatever they like to say, following their desires; but al-Hamdulillah, many of the scholars of Islam have not, such as Ibn Darbas mentioned. This indicates that not all people who ascribe themselves to al-Ash'ari are the same: rather, some are Kullabites, others Jahmis, some both etc.
And this can be confirmed by the mentioning of Ibn Darbas of the scholars who relied on it (see the link above).

Abd al-Malik Ibn Darbas confirms the Ibanah of al-Ash'ari also on the authority of the Imam Abu Ali al-Hasan b. Ali b. Ibrahim al-Muqri, i.e. the Reciter, who said:

"and he has a Book on the Sunnah (i.e. creed) which he called Kitab al-Ibanah which he authored in Baghdad on entering it"

And this is reported also by Ibn 'Asakir, Ibn Abi Ya'la and others.

Comment:

I say: the quote just mentioned, from Abu Ali al-Hasan b. Ali al-Muqri, is suprising to me when I first read it. For Abd al-Malik Ibn Darbas knew very well who this scholar was, i.e. Abu Ali al-Ahwazi, the famous Recitator who travelled to Damascus and elsewhere. He died in 446/1055. He's also the person whom Ibn 'Asakir fiercely attacked in al-Tabyin al-Kadhib al-Muftari, the 'kadhib al-muftari' is none other then Abu Ali al-Ahwazi in Ibn 'Asakir's eyes. For al-Ahwazi authored a tract against Abu'l-Hasan al-Ash'ari, entitled Mathalib Ibn Abi Bishr, which has been recovered some while ago in the Maktaba al-Zahiriyyah and published, whom few modern scholars utilized. I have a copy of it, and in it he reject al-Ash'ari and his teachings, calling him a innovator, Zindiq etc. He does this on the basis of reports, reports used and relied on by more then one Ash'ari, incl. Ibn 'Asakir! I have not been convinced of al-Ahwazi reliability or unreliability, for particular reasons; though we get the impression that Ibn 'Asakir reject him totally, he relies on him partly, and in his Tarikh Dimashq he reports both praise and condemnation. Even Ibn Darbas who must have knew for certain that he was the 'alleged lying calumniator' called him Imam al-Qurra; Ibn 'Asakir himself even acknowledged his competence in the Qira'at al-Qur'an, in which he was an Imam according to the scholars. There comes also the fact that this tract, The Vices of Ibn Abi Bishr, has been transmitted and listened to by famous and great Imams, such as Ibn Abi Ya'la, Abu Tahir al-Silafi, the Banu Qudama (Hanabilah) and, one of the Banu Taymiyyah (the fact is that Ibn Taymiyyah knew of it, but curiously he never propagated with it against the Asha'irah, though he praised the Tabyin!). It is in 11 folio's dated 620 AH Insha'Allah, I'm planning sometime to post it on the internet on a future website, together with the Tabyin.

Ma'a Salam!

assalaamu 'alaikom,

excellent thread brother sharif. keep them coming!

6 The Sixth Saying if from Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani

And it can be found in his famous Ghunya li-Talib al-Tariq al-Haqq,

"It is essential to carry the Attribute of al-Istiwa' (Allaah’s Ascending) by His Essence over the Throne. Istiwa' does not mean sitting (qu'ud) and touching (mumassa), as the Mujassimah and Karramiyyah say, nor does it mean highness ('uluww) and elevation (rifa') as the Ash'ariyyah say; nor does it mean conquering (istila') or domination (ghalaba), as the Mu'' tazilah say. Nothing of this has been reported in the Law (shari'ah). Nor has this been related from any of the Salaf al-Salih, from the Companions and the Followers, or from the Ashab al-Hadith. Rather it is reported from them that they carried al-Istiwa' with its apparent meaning"

(Source: Abd al-Qadir al-Jili, Ghunya p. 50)

See a full translation in: http://www.islam.co.za/abdalqadirjilani/ghunya1.htm

A Concise Refutation of the Allegation that al-Ghunya had been tampered with.

Imam Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani is definitely the author of al-Ghunya li-Talibi Tariq al-Haqq, as any biographer of him has stated. In fact, together with the Futuh al-Ghayb and Fath al-Rabbani, it is his most famous work.

The different editions nowadays all concurr on the text, and none of them deleted the above passage, nor replaced it or changed it in any way; it is her passage, as all the book belongs to Abd al-Qadir! (See first Cairo edition of 1288/1871 by Dar al-Tiba'a al-Amirah or the Cairo edition of 1322/1904, or the Cairo 1375/1956 edition in two volumes)

Thus, any false allegation is Munkar; may Allah give the falsifier what he deserves!

Then besides the proof from al-Naql (Text), we have the evidence of al-'Aql, the faculty of proofs they prefer above the texts, the one they misuse and abuse, and in which they get totally confused, though they are mostly unaware of!

Tell me, O wiseguys! If there is a tradition, or even a trace, from the Imam of his Madhhab, i.e. Ahmad, that indicates that he opposed the Ta'wil and Tajsim of the Ahl al-Kalam, then is it not reasonable that his follower, i.e. al-Jilani, would articulate this?

Would not his teachers, the Hanabilah, such as Ibn Nasir, al-Jawaliqi or the great rawi Ibn Abd al-Baqi report this to him? What about his teachers from the descendants of Ibn al-Banna who opposed the Asha'irah? What to think about Ibn Abi Ya'la, the son of the Qadi who authored pamphlets agains them and others?
If he opposes the Hanbali Tradition of Defense of the Sunnah and its People against Bid'ah and its People, such as the Asha'irah, would he fell outside of this 'tradition'?

See further below:

The Literature written in Refutation of Ash'aris Specifically:

Qadi Abu Ya'la b. al-Farra' (d.458), author of al-Radd 'ala'l-Ash'ariyyah

Abu Isma'il Abdallah al-Ansari (d.481), author of Damm al-Kalam wa-Ahli

Abd al-Wahhab b. Abi'l-Faraj al-Shirazi (d.536), author of al-Radd 'ala'l-Ash'ariyyah

Abu'l-Wafa Ibn 'Aqil (d.526), author of al-Radd 'ala'l-Asha'irah al-'Uzzal

Muwaffaq al-Din al-Maqdisi (d.620), author of al-Burhan fi Mas'alat al-Qur'an wa-Radd 'ala'l-Ash'ariyyah fi-Qawlihim fi'l-Qur'an and of the Munazarah ma'a ba'd al-Ash'ariy fi'l-Qur'an wa-Radd 'alayhi bi'l-Manqul wa'l-Ma'qul.

All these were known people to Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani, the last one his student. Do you, O people of who oppose the Sunnah, think that he opposes his fellow-colleagues in their defense of the Sunnah, for following the like of you as you suggest..?

There's therefor conclusive evidence from both the Naql as 'Aql, to believe that he opposed them, besides their non-evidence or 'proofs' that constitute nothing against what we've said, for any 'evidence' against this is insufficient now, unless they come up with an early manuscript or something.. but they never can!

Imam Abd al-Qadir said, and it can not be over repeated: (though the enemis hate it)

It was asked to him: 'Can there be a Wali of Allah on a creed different from Ahmad Ibn Hanbal?' (See Majmu al-Fatawa of Ibn Taymiyyah)

To which he responded:


"Ma kana wa-la yakun!"


Ma'a Salam!

7 The Seventh Saying is from Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d.606/1210).


The Repenting of Kalam by Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d.606/1210)

‘Nihayat al-Iqdam al-‘Uqul ‘Iqal / wa akthar Sa’a al-‘Alamin Dalal’
al-Razi's Poetry

Introductionary remarks

One of the manifest proofs against the futility of Kalam and it’s people is their admitting their mistakes and wrong interpretations they made since they became involved in this Bid’ah. One of the chapters of Ibn Taymiyyah’s famous ‘Aqidah al-Hamawiyyah is about the confusing the leaders of the Ahl al-Kalam admitted about issues as Ta’wil etc. he referred particularly to Ibn al-Khatib, known as Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d.606/1210). This famous scholar in Usul al-Fiqh and other sciences was known as an Ash’ari Mutakallim. This man has deviated much from the principles of Fiqh, correct Tafsir en especially ‘Aqidah.

Ibn Sayyid al-Nas reported from Ibn Jubayr:

“I entered Ray and found that Ibn al-Khatib (Fakhr al-Din al-Razi) had turned away from the Sunnah, and was occupying the attention of the people with the books of Ibn Sina and Aristotle”

[Wafi, vol.4, p.251]

According to Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, al-Razi had the most shocking doubts on fundamental issues of faith. [Lisan, vol.4, p.426]
Not strange that Ibn Taymiyyah called him because of that ‘Imam al-Mushakkikin’!, i.e. Leader of the Doubters.

There is a report which illustrate this: it is related that one of his friends came to see him one day and found him weeping. He asked the reason, al-Razi replied:

“For some time I have held certain beliefs concerning certain questions, asserting them to be correct and all others to be errors, but I have come upon certain texts which show my beliefs to have been false during all this period. What is there to prove that all my beliefs are not of this nature?”

Abu Shama said, “He used to state the views of heretics fully, but when he came to refute them he would content himself with hints”. [Tarajim, p.68]

Ibn al-Khatib wasn’t unintelligent, even when he professed those innovative beliefs for so long. The Sufi Ibn al-‘Arabi having read his books in his lifetime attested to Ibn al-Khatib’s intelligence.

In al-Nuzhat al-Sharazuri said, “Know that although he did not attain true knowledge, he had great ability, and was very gifted in deriving subtle arguments from the words of the wise”.

Indeed, Ibn Taymiyyah was right when he made allusion to the state of the leaders of the Ahl al-Kalam such as Ibn al-Khatib; the Shaykh al-Islam said that only those who delved too far into Kalam realised the danger of it too repent from it.

And Ibn al-Khatib, i.e. Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, may Allah have mercy on him, came out of it. Thank Allah that He had willed for him a good outcome!

The Evidence

The proof of Fakhr al-Din al-Razi’s repentance of Kalam is given by Ibn al-Salah al-Sharazuri, the great Muhaddith and Shafi’i scholar of Sham who said:

“al-Qutb al-Tughani told me twice that he had heard al-Razi say, ‘Would that I had not occupied my time with ‘Ilm al-Kalam’, and weep” [see Shadharat, vol.5, p.21]

May Allah forgive him, Amin.

The Wasiyyah (testament) of Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, may Allah forgive his mistakes and ours, when he was dying on the 21st of Muharram in the year 606/1209..

“Thus says the slave Muhammad b. Umar al-Razi, who turns to Allah’s mercy, trusting in the benevolence of his Lord, and is about to end this life and to enter on the next, in the moment when the hard heart is softened and every sinner turns to his Lord.. know that I was a lover of knowledge, and I wrote about every question that I might know its quantity and quality, irrespective of whether it was true or false.. I have examined the methods of Kalam and Falsafah, and did not find in them the pofit I found in the Qur’an, for the Qur’an ascribes glory and maesty to Allah, and forbids preoccupations with obscurities and contradictions. These serve only to teach us that the human intellect disintegrates in these deep narrows and hidden ways..”, continueing his dictation to his pupil Abu Bakr Ibrahim b. Abi Bakr b. Ali al-Isfahani. [‘Uyun, vol.2, p.27-28; Sadharat, vol.5, p.22; Tabaqat al-Shafi’iyyah, vol.5, p.36-37]


The Poetry on top of the post means: In the end the progress of the intellect is halled, and the strivings of men are mostly error. [‘Uyun, vol.2, p.23; see also Hamawiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah] This is al-Razi testifying about his own mistakes, when he realised that. He also said the following lines of poetry:

“Wa-lam nastafi_du min bahtina tula ‘umrina / siwa an jama’na fih qil wa-qalu”

[Tabaqat al-Shafi’iyyah, vol.5, p.40] (‘The only profit we have derived from our lifelong labours is the accumulation of ‘it is said’ and they said’; the meaning of it is the same what Imam al-Shafi’I meant with a similar line of poetry, namely that only the ‘Ulum al-Qur’an wal-Sunnah are worthy of study and benefit, for both are ‘reported’ such as the Ayat & Ahadith: this refutes Ilm al-Kalam-studies, for they are not ‘reported’-type of studies)

Taken from: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radd_ashariyyah/files/

Comments:

There's no doubt that Fakhr al-Din Muhammad b. 'Umar al-Khatib al-Razi, author of a famous Tafsir and many others works, incl. Asas al-Taqdis, was a Mutakallim, an Ash'ari or independant one, who spoke and discussed speculative theology, in the trend of the philosophers, speculative theologians and thinkers.
It was Ibn Taymiyyah, among others, who refuted many of his thoughts and sayings, for example in his Naqd Asas al-Taqdis, and uphold the Sunnah.
But Ibn Taymiyyah, nor other Ahl al-Sunnah, did not do unjustice to the Ahl al-Kalam such as him; rather, they as Sunnis uphold justice, and defend the real Tawhid, even in the face of their antagonists and enemies.
Therefore, its right to defend the man as the sincere Tauba of a Muslim who died is accepted by Allah, Insha'Allah. And since al-Razi repented, may Allah accept his repentance and wash away his sins, as A'immah of the Ahl al-Sunnah testified, we should make that clear.
In the light of these Refutations of Ash'aris, this is the best proof of their faulty way, since many of them are blind for authentic Texts. So know, al-Razi repented from Kalam, speculative theology, and he accepted in the end the Texts, such as the Qur'an and the Sunan. This is therefore a rejection of any type of Kalam, incl. Ash'arism, and upholding the Qur'an wa'l-Sunnah, and the Ayat's in it which speak about Allah's Attributes as it was in the time of the Salaf.

May Allah let us die in the state of affirming the Qur'an wa'l-Sunan, free from Kalam!

Ma'a Salam!

The Eight Saying if taken from the book Damm al-Kalam wa-Ahlih,

Recorded by the Imam of the Sunnah, Shaykh al-Islam Abdallah al-Ansari (d.481):

[Who said] I heard Ahmad b. Abi Nasr al-Malini saying:

'I entered, in Egypt, together with some of my companions the Mosque of 'Amr b. al-'As, may Allah be pleased with him. When we made ourself sit down, a Shaykh came to us and said:

Thou are people from Khorasan and you are Ahl al-Sunnah. But this is a place of the Ash'ariyyah, so stand up [and leave]!'

(Source: Abu Isma'il Abdallah al-Ansari, Damm al-Kalam wa-Ahlih - ms - folio 117a; see also 1994 Beirut edition)

And the Shaykh al-Islam, Abdallah al-Ansari said:

'I heard Ahmad b. al-Hasan al-Khamushi, the jurist from Rayy, in his house in Rayy in a company, cursing the Ash'arites and praising the Hanbalites. That whas in the year when we went out for the pilgrimage.'

(Source: Idem., ibid., folio 117b)

And the Shaykh al-Islam, Abdallah al-Ansari, said also:

'I heard Ahmad b. Hamza and Abu Ali al-Haddad saying: "We found with Abu'l-'Abbas Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Nihawandi a strong rejection of the Ahl al-Kalam and he considered the Ash'ariyyah to be unbelievers."'

(Source; Idem., ibid., folio 116a)

Shaykh al-Islam Abdallah al-Ansari is Abu Isma'il Abdallah b. Muhammad al-Harawi, rahimahullah. He's the author of excellent works, such as Manazil al-Sa'irin, al-Maqamat, al-Faruq and the precious Damm al-Kalam wa-Ahlih.

The Damm al-Kalam is a most beneficial book in which al-Ansari collects from his teachers and the generations before, all the way to the Salaf, the reports on the blameworthiness of speculative theology, Kalam, and the praiseworthiness of the Sunnah and its people.

The rejection of this book is done only by the Jahmis or Kullabis, such as nowadays Muharrifin and Mu'awwilin. There's nothing blameworthy in this book, for the author recorder mostly what he heard and saw from other people, as the Ahl al-Hadith always do. He reported much blame and rejection against al-Ash'ari, and in this speaker, and not the collector alone, may be wrong or right. As for his blame of the Ash'ariyyah, i.e. those who ascribe themselves, right or wrong, to al-Ash'ari, then they were more knowledgable about them then we are.
This book has been relied upon by many scholars, incl. Muwaffaq al-Din Ibn Qudama, Ibn al-Qayyim and al-Suyuti.

And the Imam of the Ahl al-Hadith, the Hafidh al-Dhahabi said:

"al-Imam al-Kabir Abu Isma'il.. sahib al-Kitab Damm al-Kalam wa-Ahlih.. Abu Ism'ail was a sign in Tafsir, leader in Tadhkir, a scholar in Hadith.." see al-'Uluww lil-'Ali al-Ghaffar p. 333.

Ma'a Salam!

The Nineth Saying is from Abu'l-Layth al-Samarqandi:

[taken from http://siratemustaqeem.com/phpBB/viewtopic...580825abb#10537 ]

Bismillahi al-Rahmani al-Rahim,

Its no secret for the reader of Islamic History, in particular the history of the Seldjuks, that the A'immah of the Four Madhahib, especially the Hanafiyyah, have opposed the Ash'ariyyah in both principal matters as small issues..

All the early Hanafis who wrote on 'Aqidah have never made a secret of their opposition against Ash'aris in particular, and not a few Shafi'is in general, be they right or wrong; for example, read Sawad al-A'zam of Hakim al-Samarqandi or the passages on the nature of the Qur'an in al-Maturidi's Kitab al-Tawhid.

The Hanafi follower of Abu Mansur al-Maturidi, the well-known Faqih Abu'l-Layth al-Samarqandi (d.373/983), who's followers, many Maturidis/Hanafis, name: Imam al-Huda.

Abu'l-Layth al-Samarqandi is the author of the so-called Sarh Fiqh al-Akbar, 'Commentary of the Greatest Insight', Fiqh al-Akbar being a work ascribed to the Imam Abu Hanifah or to his student Abu Muti' al-Balkhi.
The correct title is actually Fiqh al-Absat, 'The Most Extensive Insight', as the manuscripts state so, instead of Fiqh al-Akbar.

This work, Sarh Fiqh al-Akbar (i.e. al-Absat), was first (?) published in 1307/1890, then in 1324/1906, and later in1368/1949 (by al-Kawthari). All these are Cairo editions. The 1367/1948 edition (Hayderabad), in al-Rasa'il al-Sab'a fi'l-'Aqa'id in pp.2-28, is a reprint of the 1324/1906 edition, and like the earlier its has been ascribed to al-Maturidi.
In reality, as we said in the beginning, it is a work from Abu'l-Layth al-Samarqandi, in which he offers a (!) commentary on the book al-Fiqh al-Absat, a text of questiosn/anwsers between Abu Muti' al-Balkhi and his teacher Abu Hanifah - and this ascription to Imam Abu Hanifah, though Abu Muti' al-Balkhi has been declared weak as an hadith-transmitter, is most right - Insha'Allah, wa-Allahu A'lam.

Known by some as Imam al-Huda, the Maturidite Abu'l-Layth al-Samarqandi, rahimahullah, refuted the Ash'arites in many places in his Sarh of Imam Abu Hanifa's opinions.

The passages in which he opposes and refutes them are, for instance: p.86-88, p.91-92, p.138ff (on Sifat Allah), p.151ff (on Kalam Allah) etc. (see the excellent Daiber edition); for another edition see p.286ff, 537ff, 603ff and other passages.

Let us take one for example, one of the fundamental issues in which the Maturidis rejected Ash'arism - as many other groups, incl. the Ahl al-Sunnah, oppose and reject them.

Said Abu'l-Layth al-Samarqandi:


"Belief by way of Taqlid is correct (al-iman bi't-taqlid sahih).. as opposed to the Mu'tazilah and the Ash'ariyyah; they do not approve belief by way of Taqlid and they speak of Unbelief of the common people (Kufr al-'Ammah), and this is uqly, nothing is more ugly than this (wa hadha qabih la aqbah min hada; other ms version says 'la aqbah min al-qaba'ih')"

(Source: Abu'l-Layth al-Samarqandi, Sarh Fiqh al-Akbar, p.68-69 of Daiber ed.; see also p.203-204; p.8 in the 1948 edition (reprint) and see also the commentary of the Hanafi al-Maghnishawi)

And Abu'Layth al-Samarqandi says also,

"the Ash'ariyyah says: Whats in the Masahif is not Allah's Words, rather it is a 'Ibarah ('expression' - not his actual Words) and a Hikayah from him.. beacuse al-Kalam is a Attribute of Him, and His Attribute can not exist in eternity on what it is attributed", and then he refutes this in p.155-157 (see p.20 of 1948 edition/reprint).

See also the interesting article in: http://www.cafearabica.com/wwwboard/social...sages/1093.html

And which of the two is more uqly/qabih.. I let the reader decide.
But know, that they are both uqly thoughts and statements, for they oppose the Sunnah.
_________________________________________________________________

May Allah ta'ala grant Abu'l-Layth and all other Muslims forgiveness for their mistakes, Amin!

Ma'a Salam!

10 The Tenth Saying is from Qadi Abu Ya'la b. al-Farra' (d.458):

The Qadi Abu Ya'la, rahimahullah, was the Imam of the Hanabilah in his time, and he was Qadi of Baghdad and the surrounding areas, as far as Harran in Syria, where he designated for instance the Imam Abu'l-Faraj al-Shirazi as substitute-qadi.

He's the author of many beneficial books, especially on Usul al-Din. Insha'Allah many saying of his will be brought in the future, incl. translations of substantial parts of his Mu'tamad fi Usul al-Din and other works.

Only now, let me mention a particular quote of the Imam, who refuted the Ash'aris and others, in which I substantiate part of Shaykh Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani's saying - and the affirmation and confirmation of his excelent book al-Ghunya.

I came across this saying of Qadi Abu Ya'la, and I found it very identical with the passage I quoted from al-Jilani. Let us remember first what Abd al-Qadir said:

Now then, see what the Qadi says in his Mu'tamad fi Usul al-Din:

"Allah has described Himself as 'established over the Throne' (20:5). It is essential to carry this Attribute without metaphorical interpretation.. not in the sense of sitting and touching, nor in the sense of height and elevation, nor in the sense of conquest and victory, contrary to what the Mu'tazilah have said, and contrary to the Asha'irah who say that it means highness by way of rank, position, majesty, and power; and contrary to the Karramiyyah and Mushabbihah that it means contact with the Throne by sitting on it. It is unlawful to understand it as sitting and touching, because no law has been revealed to that effect.. It only remains that this Attribute be understood in the absolute, free of qualification, as we did in the case of the Attributes of Hand, Face and Eye"

See: p. 44 of al-Mu'tamad, and other passages - his Mu'tamad is an summarized work originally called al-Mukhtasar al-Mu'tamad fi Usul al-Din, and it has been published since a few decades.

Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani was not ignorant of Qadi Abu Ya'la, nor any Hanbali after him. It is not overruled to say that al-Jilani made particular use of this text, i.e. al-Mukhtasar, or of its original, al-Mu'tamad, to write down the chapter on creed in his Ghunya. He may have taken this from Qadi Abu Ya'la al-Saghir, the grandson of Qadi Abu Ya'la - wa-Allahu A'lam.

What matters is:

Imam Abu Ya'la opposed the Ta'wil of the Ahl al-Bid'ah, and he opposes the Ta'wil of the Ash'ariyyah.

al-Jilani opposes them too, and in this he concur with the Hanbali grandmaster the Qadi, as they both concur with the Ahl al-Sunnah in general.

Would anyone still allege that al-Ghunya has been tampered with?

Wa-Billahi Tawfiq!

Ma'a Salam!