Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Do some sunni scholars

Rate this topic


Lion33

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

What do you mean exactly and what proof do you have of this?

I dont really have any proofs its judge based on reading the body language and emotions of some sunni scholars. It sees almost as if some of them agree with shias and know that shiaism is correct but act like munafiqs. Basically I guess what I am saying is that they might be shia but like undercover or something. Maybe their scared of khawarij or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I don't think they are munafiqs to be honest. Sunni scholars just choose to follow their own teachers and seniors with little exposure to the ahlulbayt school of thought. 

I think they choose not to research much into Shiism as many of their past scholars have labelled us as kafirs.

Edited by ali_fatheroforphans
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
14 minutes ago, Yama Nemati said:

I dont really have any proofs its judge based on reading the body language and emotions of some sunni scholars. It sees almost as if some of them agree with shias and know that shiaism is correct but act like munafiqs. Basically I guess what I am saying is that they might be shia but like undercover or something. Maybe their scared of khawarij or something.

Well I've noticed Sunni Sufis tend to be more pro-ahlul bayt and generally speak positively about Shias or atleast avoid attacking shias verbally. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

I don't think they are munafiqs to be honest. Sunni scholars just choose to follow their own teachers and seniors with little exposure to the ahlulbayt school of thought. 

I think they choose not to research much into Shiism as many of their past scholars have labelled us as kafirs.

still a sunni scholar who is not ignorant of shiasim and knows its proofs but stays a sunni obviously has some problems in their intentions or something

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Well I've noticed Sunni Sufis tend to be more pro-ahlul bayt and generally speak positively about Shias or atleast avoid attacking shias verbally. 

stuff like that its weird sufis can be extremely annoying and either their weak intellectually or they act annoying on purpose, I am trying to figure that out lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
22 minutes ago, Yama Nemati said:

stuff like that its weird sufis can be extremely annoying and either their weak intellectually or they act annoying on purpose, I am trying to figure that out lol

With all due respect, I think you are wrong. I find the opposite, sufi scholars are actually very well educate and very sophiscated in their intellectual discourse.

^The Shiekh Abdul Hakim Murad is a Maliki Sufi I believe. 

 

^This Shiekh is a Bralevi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

With all due respect, I think you are wrong. I find the opposite, sufi scholars are actually very well educate and very sophiscated in their intellectual discourse.

^The Shiekh Abdul Hakim Murad is a Maliki Sufi I believe. 

 

^This Shiekh is a Bralevi.

This is true but than they praise munafiqs such as abu bakr, umar, aisha, uthman and all those shayateen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
8 hours ago, Yama Nemati said:

This is true but than they praise munafiqs such as abu bakr, umar, aisha, uthman and all those shayateen.

My mum was a Sufi Sunni before converting to Shia. Sufis are taught to love ahululbayt (as) just like us Shias. Like my mum's side didn't even mind attending majlis during muharram. I know some Sufis who mourn for Imam Hussein(as).  

If majority of Sunnis were Sufis, then there maybe less Shia Sunni conflict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

My mum was a Sufi Sunni before converting to Shia. Sufis are taught to love ahululbayt (as) just like us Shias. Like my mum's side didn't even mind attending majlis during muharram. I know some Sufis who mourn for Imam Hussein(as).  

If majority of Sunnis were Sufis, then there maybe less Shia Sunni conflict.

Majority of sunnis are sufi and the issue is that they are too selfish to care about anybody else but themselves and they are kind of cowards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

 

16 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

With all due respect, I think you are wrong. I find the opposite, sufi scholars are actually very well educate and very sophiscated in their intellectual discourse.

^The Shiekh Abdul Hakim Murad is a Maliki Sufi I believe. 

 

^This Shiekh is a Bralevi.

How are they sophisticated if they`re spreading wrong information ? 

The first speaker is got to be joking if he really directed his speech towards the Salafis because we do not ignore the Fiqh instead we consider all the Fiqhs that exists and that have historically existed. Unlike these staunch Muqallids who refuse to look past beyond the walls of their own Fiqh. 

The second speaker said the grave of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) is one of the greatest favours of Allah but he forgot to mention the most important favour of Allah after the Holy Qu`ran, which is the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, Student_of_Deen said:

 

How are they sophisticated if they`re spreading wrong information ? 

The first speaker is got to be joking if he really directed his speech towards the Salafis because we do not ignore the Fiqh instead we consider all the Fiqhs that exists and that have historically existed. Unlike these staunch Muqallids who refuse to look past beyond the walls of their own Fiqh. 

The second speaker said the grave of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) is one of the greatest favours of Allah but he forgot to mention the most important favour of Allah after the Holy Qu`ran, which is the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him). 

Their issue isn't in regards to Madhab el-fiqh but madhab el-aqeeda. You Salafis are in stark contrast to the asharis and maturidis, who do not just do ijitihad without consulting the previous scholars. The sufi shiekh is right, it is a fallacy to suggest that you can simply employ your own manhaj in analyizng the ahadeeths and quranic ayahs, that being taking everything from them as apparent and literally. Infact that is what leads to numerous contradictions within the salafi schools, especially on contradictions that you find in the Quran; purely based on your flawed reasoning of literalism of the quran.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
13 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Their issue isn't in regards to Madhab el-fiqh but madhab el-aqeeda. You Salafis are in stark contrast to the asharis and maturidis, who do not just do ijitihad without consulting the previous scholars. The sufi shiekh is right, it is a fallacy to suggest that you can simply employ your own manhaj in analyizng the ahadeeths and quranic ayahs, that being taking everything from them as apparent and literally. Infact that is what leads to numerous contradictions within the salafi schools, especially on contradictions that you find in the Quran; purely based on your flawed reasoning of literalism of the quran.

I understand your defence of people of kalam because after all Shi`as are heavily influenced from them. But you are either ignorant of our methodology or you are biased and not being honest like this so called "Sufi Sheikh". 

We can prove our method of thinking, analysing and interpreting Islamic text from the earliest Muslims. 

The so called Asharis, Maturidis, Mutazilites, Jahmities etc came later and it is was them who were and are in stark contrast with the Muslims from the time of the Prophet (Peace be upon him).

 

Edited by Student_of_Deen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Student_of_Deen

Quote

I understand your defence of people of kalam because after all Shi`as are heavily influenced from them. But you are either ignorant of our methodology or you are biased and not being honest like this so called "Sufi Sheikh". 

We can prove our method of thinking, analysing and interpreting Islamic text from the earliest Muslims. 

Go ahead and provide your evidence with sources please. Where is your proof that the correct metholodogy is to interpret the quran and ahadeeth literally?

Quote

The so called Asharis, Maturidis, Mutazilites, Jahmities etc came later and it is was them who were and are in stark contrast with the Muslims from the time of the Prophet (Peace be upon him).

Yet the Salafi madhab is one of the most recent madhabs in Islam as a whole. Who is your earlier "salafist" scholar? For example the Ashari madhab founded in 300AH, Muta'zili founded some 200AH, the Maturidi also some 200AH. Salafist madhab of literalism in all departments came way way later. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

@Student_of_Deen

Go ahead and provide your evidence with sources please. Where is your proof that the correct metholodogy is to interpret the quran and ahadeeth literally?

Please look up our views and arguments for yourself. I challenged the op on one of your threads but instead of providing evidence & arguments to back his claims, he went on to make personal attacks against me and now i`m not in a mood to open for this nor I have time to open more lengthy discussions like this one. 

 

1 hour ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Yet the Salafi madhab is one of the most recent madhabs in Islam as a whole. Who is your earlier "salafist" scholar? For example the Ashari madhab founded in 300AH, Muta'zili founded some 200AH, the Maturidi also some 200AH. Salafist madhab of literalism in all departments came way way later. 

That just goes on to show your ignorance, nothing more. We Salafis are following the methodology of the Salaf then how can anyone pre-date us ?

 the Prophet -Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam -:

”For indeed, those who will still be alive after me will see many differences; so hold fast to my Sunnah, and to the sunnah of the rightly guided Khalifahs after me, Adhere to and cling tightly to it and beware of newly-invented matters, for every newly-invented matter is an innovation and every innovation is deviation.“ [Narrated by several scholars including At-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud in their Sunan. At-Tirmidhi said: Hadith hasan sahih.]

Also, his saying: ”The Jews split up into seventy-one sects, the Christians split up into seventy-two sects, and this ummah (Muslims) will split up into seventy-three sects; all of them are in the Fire except one." Someone asked: "which is that one O Messenger of Allah?".
He replied:
"Whoever is upon that which I am upon and my companions.“ [Sunan Tirmidhi and others, and he declared it hasan. Al-Iraqi said in “Takhrij Al-Ihya”: Its chains are good.]

The Sahaba and their followers did not indulge in ilm ul kalam, Rather they opposed it and warned people against it. 

Imam Shaafie ÑÍãå Çááøå said that:

Imam al-Shafi'i's famous statement: “My judgment with respect to the partisans of Kalâm is that they be smitten with fresh leafless palm branches, that they be paraded among the communities and tribes, and that it be proclaimed: "This is the punishment of him who has deserted the Book and the Sunnah, and taken up Kalâm!"

(al-Bayhaqi, Manâqib al-Shafi'i 1:462 and many others)

And also from Imam Ahmed (RH):

Imam Ahmad said: "If you see a man loving Kalâm, then warn against him!"

(Ibn Battah, al-Ibanah 2:54 and others)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Student_of_Deen

Quote

That just goes on to show your ignorance, nothing more. We Salafis are following the methodology of the Salaf then how can anyone pre-date us ?

It's quite simple. I know you claim to follow the metholodogy of the Salaf, I'm not disputing you believe that; I simply dispute that being true to begin with. The Athari/Salafi madhab factually speaking is a recent one, unless you have contrary evidence to prove that. Who was the founder of your school? Ibn taymiyyah? That would still make it the most recent madhab of aqeedah in Sunni Islam.

Quote

 the Prophet -Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam -:

”For indeed, those who will still be alive after me will see many differences; so hold fast to my Sunnah, and to the sunnah of the rightly guided Khalifahs after me, Adhere to and cling tightly to it and beware of newly-invented matters, for every newly-invented matter is an innovation and every innovation is deviation.“ [Narrated by several scholars including At-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud in their Sunan. At-Tirmidhi said: Hadith hasan sahih.]

Also, his saying: ”The Jews split up into seventy-one sects, the Christians split up into seventy-two sects, and this ummah (Muslims) will split up into seventy-three sects; all of them are in the Fire except one." Someone asked: "which is that one O Messenger of Allah?".
He replied:
 "Whoever is upon that which I am upon and my companions.“ [Sunan Tirmidhi and others, and he declared it hasan. Al-Iraqi said in “Takhrij Al-Ihya”: Its chains are good.]

The Sahaba and their followers did not indulge in ilm ul kalam, Rather they opposed it and warned people against it. 

None of those narrations disprove any of the other madhabs of aqeedah in sunni islam, nor does it support the literalist approach to the quran and ahadeeth.

A simple refute to your point is that the Sahaba were not scholars and therefore that is the reason why they weren't involved in Ilm ul kalam.

Quote

Imam Shaafie ÑÍãå Çááøå said that:

Imam al-Shafi'i's famous statement: “My judgment with respect to the partisans of Kalâm is that they be smitten with fresh leafless palm branches, that they be paraded among the communities and tribes, and that it be proclaimed: "This is the punishment of him who has deserted the Book and the Sunnah, and taken up Kalâm!"

If you understand this narration in that light, then it is self-contradicting and ironic. Since Imam Shafi was a scholar himself and definately set out logically to understand his deen. 

Quote

'Ilm al-kalam is one of the Islamic sciences. It discusses the fundamental Islamic beliefs and doctrines which are necessary for a Muslim to believe in. It explains them, argues about them, and defends them. 

http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ip/kalam.htm

Athari/Salafi scholars do the exact same in order to justify their aqeedah in all aspects. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 11/05/2017 at 5:31 AM, Lion33 said:

Majority of sunnis are sufi and the issue is that they are too selfish to care about anybody else but themselves and they are kind of cowards. 

Cowards? It's good to insult sat behind a screen isn't it, it makes you a brave mighty Shiite by INSULTING doesn't it?

all hot air, that's what you are, a true shian e ali sat cowered behind a screen insulting anyone that you don't like......more like the word COWARD relates to you

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
28 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

@Student_of_Deen

It's quite simple. I know you claim to follow the metholodogy of the Salaf, I'm not disputing you believe that; I simply dispute that being true to begin with. The Athari/Salafi madhab factually speaking is a recent one, unless you have contrary evidence to prove that. Who was the founder of your school? Ibn taymiyyah? That would still make it the most recent madhab of aqeedah in Sunni Islam.

The Athari creed is the creed of the Salaf. Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (rahimahullah) is credited as it`s founder but that`s not the case. He was simply struggling for what he learned from the Muslims before him (i.e. Sahaba and Tabaeen). 

 

29 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

None of those narrations disprove any of the other madhabs of aqeedah in sunni islam, nor does it support the literalist approach to the quran and ahadeeth.

Actually they do, That is no can show one instance where the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions got involved in ilm ul Kalam. 

 

31 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

A simple refute to your point is that the Sahaba were not scholars and therefore that is the reason why they weren't involved in Ilm ul kalam.

What ? Do even realize what you`re saying ?

Syedna Ali, Hassan, Hussain, Abbas, Hamza etc (May Allah be welll pleased with them) were all Sahaba. If they were not scholars then who was/is ? 

 

33 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

If you understand this narration in that light, then it is self-contradicting and ironic. Since Imam Shafi was a scholar himself and definately set out logically to understand his deen. 

Ilm- al Kalām is not logic & reasoning skills which Allah and messenger (Peace be upon him) have taught us and stressed it to use our God given faculties of reasoning & understanding to learn and Understand the Deen of Allah.

ilm al Kalam is the philosophy of seeking Islamic theological principles through Aristotelian or Greek rhetoric. That is the reason why the people of Kalam showed so late because their ideas only became widespread when the Abbasids started translating works of Ancient Greece` philosophers. That`s the reason why Imam Shafi (Rahimahullah) and others opposed it and the people who preached it. 

41 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

'Ilm al-kalam is one of the Islamic sciences. It discusses the fundamental Islamic beliefs and doctrines which are necessary for a Muslim to believe in. It explains them, argues about them, and defends them. 

http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ip/kalam.htm

Athari/Salafi scholars do the exact same in order to justify their aqeedah in all aspects. 

No they don`t. Nobody who truly belongs to Ahle Sunnah wal jamaah will indulge in Kalam. You need to understand the difference between logical reasoning and ilm ul kalam. 

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (rahimahullah):

“There is no analogical reasoning in the Sunnah and examples or likenesses are not to be made for it. Nor is it grasped and comprehended by the intellects or the desires. Rather it [consists of] following [and depending upon] it and abandoning the hawaa [desire].” (Foundations of the Sunnah)“The person of theological rhetoric (kalam) will never prosper. And never do you see anyone looking into theological rhetoric except that in his heart is a desire for creating mischief.’ (Reported by Ibn Qudaamah in his Burhaan fee Bayaanil-Qur’an)

“ For indeed, (indulging in) theological rhetoric (kalaam) in the matter of Qadar, the Ru’yah (seeing Allaah in the Hereafter), the Qur’aan and other such issues are among the ways that are detested and which are forbidden. The one Who does so, even if he reaches the truth with his words, is not from Ahlus-Sunnah, until he abandons (using) this mode of argumentation, [and until he] submits and believes in the Aathaar (the Prophetic Narrations & those of the Companions).” (Foundations of the Sunnah)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Student_of_Deen

Quote

The Athari creed is the creed of the Salaf. Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (rahimahullah) is credited as it`s founder but that`s not the case. He was simply struggling for what he learned from the Muslims before him (i.e. Sahaba and Tabaeen).

Sure he was but his madhab for initially a fiqh one only. None the less this point doesn't make much sense. He was an Athari, however the majority of people at the time were either, muta'zila, maturidi or ashari. Asharism just found the middle ground bewteen the two. Simply because you are a hanbali/salafi, that doesn't mean your founding fathers' ideas were correct. You need to actually provide evidence of that. 

Quote

Actually they do, That is no can show one instance where the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions got involved in ilm ul Kalam. 

You are just re-stating what you said before, none of those narrations are mukham in regards to using logic/reasoning/metaphors in regards to the quran. 

Quote

What ? Do even realize what you`re saying ?

Syedna Ali, Hassan, Hussain, Abbas, Hamza etc (May Allah be welll pleased with them) were all Sahaba. If they were not scholars then who was/is ? 

 

 

I'm talking about being taught on an academic level. They weren't factually speaking scholars in those regards. 

 

Quote

Ilm- al Kalām is not logic & reasoning skills which Allah and messenger (Peace be upon him) have taught us and stressed it to use our God given faculties of reasoning & understanding to learn and Understand the Deen of Allah.

ilm al Kalam is the philosophy of seeking Islamic theological principles through Aristotelian or Greek rhetoric. That is the reason why the people of Kalam showed so late because their ideas only became widespread when the Abbasids started translating works of Ancient Greece` philosophers. That`s the reason why Imam Shafi (Rahimahullah) and others opposed it and the people who preached it. 

You seem to be conflating rhetoric and logic/reasoning here. Rhetoric is "the art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, especially the exploitation of figures of speech and other compositional techniques."  Logic is "reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity." When the prophet Muhammed(saw) was doing dawah and spreading the word, did he not use logic and reason to do so? 

Infact you ignored the website I used, which is an islamic website. Here it is again:

Quote

'Ilm al-kalam is one of the Islamic sciences. It discusses the fundamental Islamic beliefs and doctrines which are necessary for a Muslim to believe in. It explains them, argues about them, and defends them. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
11 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

@Student_of_Deen

Sure he was but his madhab for initially a fiqh one only. None the less this point doesn't make much sense. He was an Athari, however the majority of people at the time were either, muta'zila, maturidi or ashari. Asharism just found the middle ground bewteen the two. 

WRONG

Majority of people were not Asharis or Maturidis at that time. As far as the scholars are concerned then the Mutazilites had found favour with the Abbasid ruler Al Ma`mun and that is why they were the dominant force at that time. 

Abū l-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī 260–324 AH (874–936 CE) the alleged founder of Asha`ri creed was born 2 decades after the dead of Imam Ahmad. Imam Ashari wrote a book in which he clarified he has completely left & repented from the use of Kalam in Deen and have accept the Athari madhhab but the Asharis rejected his book calling it unauthnetic. 

While Muhammad Abu Mansur al-Māturīdī (853–944 AD), the founder of Maturidi creed was born a year and so before Imam Ahmad died so obviously there was no Maturidi school either at that time. 

 

31 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

You are just re-stating what you said before, none of those narrations are mukham in regards to using logic/reasoning/metaphors in regards to the quran. 

How am I repeating the same thing ? I said those narrations prove ahlul kalam wrong because the Prophet (Peace be upon him) and his companions never used it. 

32 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

I'm talking about being taught on an academic level. They weren't factually speaking scholars in those regards. 

They were taught in Masjid e Nabawi where they learned for years from the greatest teacher Allah ever sent. Nobody can rival that regardless of on which level they were taught. 

They were not only scholars but they were Fuqaha and Authorities in their own right and their successors always looked up to them. 

34 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

 

You seem to be conflating rhetoric and logic/reasoning here. Rhetoric is "the art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, especially the exploitation of figures of speech and other compositional techniques."  Logic is "reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity." When the prophet Muhammed(saw) was doing dawah and spreading the word, did he not use logic and reason to do so? 

I did not say just "rhetoric", I said Aristotelian/Greek rhetoric applied on the Deen of Allah in order understand it on the model built by the ancient philosophers. You`re again confusing it with logic and reason.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) obviously used logic and reason as he was the most logical & reasonable person who ever lived and Islam is the most logical & reasonable faith ever. But he never used Aristotelian rhetoric and tried to interpret the Deen of Allah in accordance with it Naudhubillah.

 

39 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Infact you ignored the website I used, which is an islamic website. Here it is again:

I gave it a quick read. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...