What exactly did I say that wasn’t said by the elites among the scholars before me?

Were any of you able to attend the RIS Conference? If so do you happen to know the name of Habib Ali Al Jifri’s translator, and where he is from?

What Khalil Harras stated is the official position of the wahhabi ideology. What he said is not isolated. In the city I live in, one of the “salafis” said “Allah will put his foot in Hellfire” then he lifted up his own leg to emphasis that he meant literally. Their basis for saying such things are hadith which they misinterpret. You can refer to al-Asma’ wa-s-Sifaat by al-Hafiz al-Bayhaqi for proper explanations.

If you truly believe that Allah is not a physical/temporal object with limbs and organs then why use the english word hand? If you say that it is because what is mentioned in al-Qur’an is the word yad and yad means hand. It is not 100% accurate. Why? Because yad has different meanings and the literal and apparent meaning it a limb. If you don’t mean that meaning, then why translate it at all? Why not just use the word yad in arabic? The must ignorant ghetto muslim says “I’m gonna make Salah…” – he doesn’t translate it to “prayer”. It is somewhat disingenuous to say the least, to use a word that you know gives the impression of something which you yourself don’t accept. Simply say “Allah informed us in al-Qur’an that He has an Attributed called Yad (يد) which is an Eternal and Everlasting Attribute that does not resemble any created thing.” <—- This is what a TRUE SALAFI would say.

Don’t you see the contradiction in this? A literal hand is a physical hand. Not just that, the heads of the “Salafis” do say that “Allah has two real eyes” and that “his hand has a palm and fingers and it opens and closes”. When they say “we don’t know how”, they only mean they don’t know the exact size and color, etc. This is the statement of Khalil Harras in his Sharh Al-Aqeedah Al-Waasitiyyah “How can ‘hand’ be interpreted to mean power when the text proves mentioning of palm, fingers, right and left, closing, opening, etc. Which can happen only in the case of a real hand.”

They also say that “since Ad-Dajjaal has only one eye, he is not God because God has two eyes.”

What they believe in and describe is something straight out of Greek Methology.

Just the other day I was sitting at a talk with a Salafi scholar, and He said that Allah is al-Baseer meaning that He sees and we affirm this, but this doesn’t mean we go beyond that to say, “He has a pupil, iris, cornea, etc.”.

So if someone says He has a physical hand this is resembling creation, but make sure that when someone says “physical” they don’t just mean literal, but didn’t use the best word.

you also question the judgement of ^Aliyy who said “Baniyy Umayyah are fighting me, they claim that I have killed ^Uthmân, they are liars what they want is kingship”,

you reject the fourteen century old tradition of reporting the truth, however embarrassing it can be, you blame extends to people like Al-Bazaar,
and At-Tabaraniyy,
Imam Al-Bayhaqiyy,
Imam ash-Shâfî^iyy,
al-Bukhâriyy who reported the hadîth of ^Ammâr,
Muslim,
Ahmad,
at-Tirmidhiyy,
Ibn Hibbân,
alHâfiz asSayûtiyy,
alMânawiyy,
Ibn ‘Abî Shaybah,
al-Qurtubiyy,
Ibn Fûrak,
‘Abu l-Hasan al’Ash^ariyy,
Musaddad ibn Musarhad,
alHâfiz ibn Hajar al^Asqalâniyy,
^Abdul-Hayy Ibn al^Imâd Al-Hanbaliyy,

Abû Dâwûd who narrated in his sunan from Safeenah, he said, Allâh’s Messenger salla-llâhu ^alayhi wa sallam said: [khilâfatu nnubuwwah thalâthûna sanah, thumma yu`tî-llâhu lmulka ('aw) malakahû man yashâ`]. Which means: the caliphate which agrees with the sunnah with the sharee^ah is for 30 years after that Allâh will grant kingship or the Prophet salla-llâhu ^alayhi wa sallam said, Allâh will grant kingship to whomever He wills.

You blame also Safeenah who reported this,
And alHâkim,
Ibn Khallikân,
Muhammad ibn Ishâq Asbahâniy,
An-Nasâ`iyy,
Al-Laqqâniyy,
al Khatîb Al-Baghdâdiyy
and Al-Hâfiz Ahmad Al-Ghummâriy
May Allâh reward them all greatly for their integrity and service.

And these are just some of the name of our most august ^ulamâ’ all along our history

http://www.masabih.org/showthread.php?t=3203&page=3&highlight=ahbash

Just to be clear, the one so says “Allah has an attribute called Yad (يد) which is an eternal and everlasting attribute that does not resemble any anything among the creations” is following the path of the Prophet. If he however, says that the meaning “Yad” is the literal and apparent meaning then this person is misguided. The literal meaning of “Yad” is the physical hand which is composed of smaller limbs such as fingers, a thumb, etc. This is what muslims reject because Allah is not an alien nor anything other type of physical object.

@Nurudeen Al-Husseini

Where did you get that from? Can you provide a reference to a classical Shafi’i scholar who says such a thing? Also what is “non explicit mujassim”? Can you define it? I have an idea about what you are referring to but I can assure you what some scholars like Abul-Muthna Al-Maghanisawi al-Hanafi said is different from what some people have been implying.

@Shaykh Gibril…

Gibril Haddad doesn’t like the Ahbash because he is in cahoots with Nazim Al-Qubrusi. Look at what Nazim’s shaykh Ad-Daghistani said in his book “al-Wasiyyah”: “Allah does not differentiate between kâfir, great sinner (fasiq), believer (mu’min) or Muslim. Actually they are all equal”. Shaykh Muhammad Al-Hamid al-Hanafi in his book “Rudud ’Abaateel” said in refutation to this heresy: “Will our master Muhammad (sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam) be like Abu Jahl (may he be cursed by Allah ta’ala)? Allahumma no!”

I used to follow along that group, so I have collected a ton of information directly out of thier books exposing their deviance. This is what G.F. Haddad defends, he doesn’t defend the truth!

@Abd al-Habib al-Nurani

As I stated I did not hear this directly from Ali al-Jifri, rather it was conveyed to me by several people, including students of Darul-Mustafa. But as I stated previously, if that is not his position and if was misinformed, I will retract my statements concerning him. The the truth as the truth and I need to adhere to it.

As for what you stated about the Ahbash, while I am sure someone will read this and accuse me of being one of them, I’ll say this anyway. About 3 years ago, I met one of their shaykhs who used to teach in Bangladesh. I set with him for a some time and I asked him some questions concerning al-Fiqh Al-Akbar. During this session, I asked him about Mu’awiyah Bin Safwan (who I believe completely that he will be in Paradise). I asked him do they say that Mu’awiyah was a fasiq (an enormous sinner)? He answer was no, it is not acceptable to say this about any companion. So I followed up by asking, well what about what Abu Mansur in his book Usulud-Din and Abdul-Qahir Al-Jarjani said when they used the terms “fasaquu wa dhalamuu”? He said “fasaquu” meant that they committed an act of fisq but we do not say they were enormous sinners because they are also narrators of hadith and we do not curse or cuss them. Imam Mulla Ali Al-Qari explained this entire issue the fighting between Ali and Mu’awiyah in his book Sharh Al-Mishkaah, anyone who wants, they can go through that book.

Now if what this person told me is not really the position of the Ahbash then can someone please provide me with a book of theirs in which they curse the companions? And please I don’t want anything copied from the wahhabi sites!

As for the Ghumari brothers: I have great respect for Al-Hafidh Ahmad al-Ghumari who was said to have reached the level of ijtihad as well as his younger brother Muhaddith Abdullah (a student of Muhammad al-Kawthari al-Hanafi [my hero] and a shaykh of Ali Jumu’ah [may Allah protect him]). I have seen the accusations on the internet that they were shi’ah but I really haven’t paid it much attention. However, I was told once by a person who is actually a habashi that they (al-ghumariyyun) used to curse Mu’awiyah and this was not acceptable. He said that they exceeded the proper boundaries in that issue. May Allah forgive them for that.

“Whoever believes Allah is a body [even if] unlike other bodies blasphemes.”

(And, of course, he is a kaafir if he says: “Allah is a body LIKE other bodies.”)

Furthermore, Ash-Shafi`iyy himself said:

“Al-mujassimu kaafir.”

(The corporealist [body worshipper] is a blasphemer.)

I saw this statement before on the web (about the explicit/non-explicit mujassim). It doesn’t make any sense, for it implies that there are two acceptable beliefs about Allah (which is obviously kufr).

On another note, i am glad to see that folks are waking up to this character Zaid Shakir. Please put the word out on these people. They have an agenda to distort the religion and eliminate the entire notion of kufr/riddah. May Allah guide us and strengthen us to expose those who mislead the Muslims.

With Allah is the success.