|Sunday, 22 October 2017|
Never see Ash'ariyyah in the same light, ever again! Aristotle of Stageira, Philo of Alexandria, Augustine of Hippo, the Sabeans of Harraan, the Mu'tazilites of Basrah and Baghdad and the Jahmite Ash'ari Heretics of Today Claiming Orthodoxy. Read the first article, the second article, the third article, the fourth article, the fifth article.
You are here:
We ought to disclose our tools first of all, and here they are, they are made of rubberwood, our preference. It gets the job done and maintains its shiny surface even with the most stubborn cases. Cleaning is a breeze.
As you can see, each piece in the collection has a specific purpose and is used for a specific task. In a field of neo-Jahmites charged up with centuries of calculated deception, you need to be well-equipped. Rehabilitation won't take place just yet. We are done with the first tool (building the framework, finished here in Part 1), and we are currently using the second and third (establishing fact and gradually building context, we already did some in Part 2), and will remain doing so for a few articles more. When you start hearing effeminate screams and shouts [from the makhaaneeth of the Jahmiyyah], you'll know the fourth has swung into action in smashing their doubts for which they (the makhaaneeth) will be wailing and screaming. Please note: This is all majaaz, don't take it upon its haqeeqah, it is purely a figure of speech and is for education purposes only.
The Sources of Information
We are going to rely upon these books:
They are two books of Abu Mansur al-Baghdadi (d. 429H) an Ash'ari scholar, Usul al-Din and al-Farq bayn al-Firaq, and Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari's (d. 324H) Maqaalaat al-Islaamiyyeen. You can refer to the relevant entries in all these books under the Raafidah, and under the section on the Mushabbihah. Rather than provide full translations of entire passages, we are going to provide summary statements which will be exact translations of sentences in any case.
Understanding the Paths of the Mu'attilah and Mujassimah Have the Same Base and Origin
This is something the leaders of the pseudo-Ash'ari neo-Jahmites want to keep from you [their follower, who aspires to follow what he thinks is the way of al-Ash'ari]. It's easy for them, because people like you don't go and read the books for yourself and nor do you study history objectively. The swindle therefore is made easier, its a doddle, and your Kellers, GF Haddads, Abul Hasans and their likes couldn't have it easier. So lets reveal this little secret and blow the lid off it.
Now that you have grasped that, then you should know for sure that the Ahl al-Kalaam are divided into two. The Mu'attilah (the deniers of Allaah being a jism and having attributes and actions, or something from them) and the Mujassimah (those claiming Allaah is a jism). The first to say Allaah is not a jism is al-Jahm bin Safwan, the Imam of ta'teel. And the first to say Allaah is a jism are the Rafidi Ahl al-Kalam Mujassimah, in particular Hisham bin al-Hakam al-Kufi, the Rafidi Mutakallim, the Imam of tajsim. And both of these views are founded upon the same underlying foundations. Yes, it is none other than the proof of huduth al-ajsaam. As we shall see with the Hanafi Mujassimah, the Karraamiyyah, they were also led to tajsim upon this same proof.
As for the Mu'attilah amongst them:
The Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Kullaabiyyah, Ash'ariyyah, Maturidiyyah. They used this proof to prove the universe is originated and to prove Allaah's existence, and then in order to remain consistent with it, they denied Allaah's attributes and actions, in order to not liken Him to created bodies, as they claimed. Otherwise the proof would be invalidated. Hence, you will understand their theological language, "Allaah is not a jism, not a jawhar, not an 'arad, has no spatial dimension, is not above, not below, is not in place, is not in direction, is not in spatial occupation, is not within the universe, or outside the universe, is not in contact with things, or separate from things, is not distant from [anything] or near to [anything]..." and so on. These people considered a jism (body) to mean whatever accepts a'raad (incidental attributes) and hawaadith (events) and whatever is composed. Hence, these particular negations of theirs and why they denied the attributes and actions (to varying degrees).
As for the Mujassimah amongst them:
The Rafidi Mujassimah, Hanafi Karraamiyyah. They also used this proof to prove the universe is originated and to prove Allaah's existence, and they said that since only bodies and their incidental attributes exist and since it is impossible for Allaah to be from the incidental attributes [which can never exist on their own] then He must be a body. To remain consistent with the revealed texts in affirmation of attributes and actions, they said Allaah must be a jism in order to possess attributes. These Mujassimah said that jism (body) means "that which exists (mawjud)" and "that which is self-established (qaa'imun bi nafsihi)" as al-Ash'ari documents about them in his al-Maqaalaat. Then they said (the Raafidees) "Allaah is a jism, he has length, breadth, width ...." and the rest of it you will see in what follows when we document their views in detail. You will see their language more or less opposite to that of the Mu'attilah. One thing to note about these Mujassimah is that some of them inherited something of the gross tashbih of their ancestors who had deified Ali (radiallaahu anhu) and others, and thus that gross language of tashbih was mixed into their tajsim resulting from their ilm al-Kalaam, and you will see this manifest when you read their beliefs in the next article inshaa'Allaah.
Both these groups are operating upon the same platform and from the same starting point, but moving to different conclusions. When this becomes clear to you, and you start on your journey of investigation, and choose to no longer remain an ignoramus whose mind is a plaything for academic fraudsters and shysters from the makhaaneeth of the Jahmiyyah, the pseudo-Ash'ari neo-Jahmi swindle should start to unravel somewhat.
A Crucial Point: All Of These People are Mushabbihah in the Theoretical Foundations Of Their Theology
Before we move on to the next article, it is crucial to understand that the Mu'attilah, like the Mujassimah both fall into tashbih (resemblance) in their theoretical foundations, and this is explained as follows.
They made Allaah subject to the same lawaazim (binding necessities) as those applicable to His creation after having made three types of false analogy for Allaah (these are similar, overlap and are different ways of saying what essentially amounts to the same thing). These are qiyas al-shumul (analogy by inclusion), qiyas al-ghaa'ib alaa al-shaahid (analogy for the unseen with the seen), qiyas al-tamthil (analogy of likeness). The conclusions of the Ahl al-Kalam from the proof of huduth al-ajsaam are founded upon these analogies. To illustrate, anything in the creation about which we say is "above" then that would necessitate it is in a direction, occupying a created space [as it is within the universe] and hence a composite body. They then extended this necessity and included Allaah within the genus of created things for whom such necessities are binding. Hence, if it is said about Allaah "above", it necessitates he must be a body (jism) too. However, Allaah's essence is unknowable and is unlike all other essences. Yet, in order to build the language of their theology (a series of negations), they have to include Allaah within the genus of created bodies so that they can apply the lawaazim that pertain to them (the created bodies) to Allaah Himself. It is from this starting point that the very language of their theism [how they describe Allaah] is conceived. So they are operating upon false analogies in the very theological foundations of their theology and hence, they are the Mushabbihah in truth. They do not really fathom the saying of Allaah, "There is nothing like unto Him" (42:11), and this falsifies all of these analogies. Since Allaah is unlike the created bodies, then the necessities applying to them cannot apply to Him, such that your whole theology should be founded upon such theoretical considerations.
Hence, after falling into this theoretical foundational tashbih these two factions (Mu'attilah, Mujassimah) took two different routes. The Mu'attilah saw the conclusions arising from these theoretical foundations to be repugnant in their souls. So they denied names, attributes and actions from Allaah (upon the differences between them) and claimed they were making tanzih and that this is Tawhid. The Mushabbihah followed through with the conclusions required by these theoretical foundations and simply made tashbih in describing their Lord, and they believed they were wholly consistent and that this is what the truth requires of them, otherwise they will not have affirmed a Lord.
As for Ahl al-Sunnah, followers of revealed Books and sent Messengers, those who restrict themselves to the speech of Allaah, His Messenger and the Righteous Salaf, then they know that there is nothing like Allaah, and as a result such type of theological speech about Allaah is false. They affirm what Allaah and His Messenger affirmed for Him whilst negating tamthil and takyif and know for sure that none of the lawaazim that related to created beings apply to Allaah, the Exalted, in His names, attributes and actions. Hence, they are the soundest in creed, firmest in faith, and of sound mind and constitution. Unlike the Ahl al-Kalaam for they are a confused, unsure, unstable, insecure people, and you will understand:
The saying of Abu Yusuf, the companion of Abu Hanifah, "Whoever sought his religion through kalām will fall into heresy", and the saying of al-Shaafi'ee, "Whoever entered into kalām never prospered," and likewise the saying of Imaam Ahmad, "Whoever takes to kalām will never prosper and whoever takes to kalām will not escape from tajahhum (adopting the ūsūl of the Jahmiyyah)."
For this reason, when you speak to these Ash'aris, Maturidis and their likes, they are the most intellectualy insecure people, prone to doubts, fickle, struggling to find psychological comfort for the spider's web they have built (the weakest of structures), and thus, reject plain truth and plain reason when it stares them in the face.
Link to this article: Show: HTML Link Full Link Short Link
You must be registered and logged in to comment.