On my flight to New York there must have been a Zionist in the bathroom the entire time. There was a sign on the door that said "occupied."
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The Ash'aris believe that Allah's Speech subsists in His Essence and is without sound or letters, and therefore, Allah could not have said 'Alif-Laam-Meem'.The Mu'tazilas believed that the Quran is Allah's Speech; and Allah's Speech is created.The Ash'aris believed that the Quran is not Allah's Speech, so while Allah's Speech is uncreated, the Quran remains created.al-Juwayni the Ash'ari, in his al-Irshad, admits that the Ash'aris and the Mu'tazila agree that the Quran is created:"Our difference with the Mu'tazila is only semantical (ikhtilaf fil-'ibara wal-tasmiya), whereas they are in agreement with the Ash'aris in meaning and essence. For the meaning of what the Mu'tazilas say is: These expressions (in the Quran) are Allah's creation, and we do not deny that they are Allah's creation. We do, however, refuse to refer to the creator of this Kalaam (i.e. the Quran), as the one to speak it. So we have agreed in essence, while disagreed, after our agreement, on naming Him (as mutakallim with this Quran)"al-Taftazani says in his Sharh of al-Nasafi's creed:"He said: 'al-Quran is Allah's Speech and not created'. Note that he followed the word 'Quran' with 'Kalam Allah', due to what the scholars say: The Quran is Kalam Allah, and not created. It is not said: 'al-Quran is not created', lest it comes to mind that that which is composed of sounds and letters is eternal, as the Hanbalis believe out of ignorance and obstinacy!"He further says in refutation of the Mu'tazila:"As for their argument that the Quran is described with the qualities of the creation and the characteristics of Huduth (contingent) from composition, arrangement, descent, and that fact that it is in Arabic, audible, eloquent and a miracle, until the end of their argument. This is only an argument against the Hanbalis, and not against us. Because we believe that the arrangement (in the Quran) is emergent/created. The discussion is restricted to the eternal meaning"al-Bayjuri the Ash'ari theologian says in his Sharh Jawharat al-Tawheed:"it is still only permitted to say “The Qur’an is emergent (or created)� in a classroom setting"Ibn al-Jawzi says in al-Muntadham of al-Ash'ari:"The people never differed that this audible Qur’an is Allah’s Speech, and that Gabriel descended with it upon the Prophet – Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him. The reliable imams declared that the Quran is eternal, while the Mu’tazila claimed that it is created. Al-Ash’ari then agreed with the Mu’tazila that the Quran is created and said: �This is not Allah’s Speech. Rather, Allah’s Speech is an Attribute subsisting in Allah’s Essence. It did not descend on the Prophet, nor is it audible.’ "Ibn al-Jawzi would often say on the pulpit:"The heretics (the Ash'aris) claim; i) there is none in the Heavens, ii) neither is there Qur’an in the Mushaf, and iii) nor is there a Prophet in the grave; �your three shameful facets’" (al-Dhayl)Ibn al-Jawzi writes, while complaining about certain Ash’arites indoctrinating the masses with the Ash’arite dogma: “A group of Persian (a’ajim) heretics arrived in Baghdad and mounted the pulpits to sermon the masses. They would claim, in most of their gatherings: There is no �Speech of Allah’ on this earth, and is the mushaf anything but paper, galls and vitriol? Allah is not in the Heavens, and the slave-girl to whom the Prophet said: �Where is Allah?’ was dumb and therefore pointed towards the sky, meaning: He is not from the idols worshipped on this earth. They then said: �Where are the �letterists’, who claim that the Quran is composed of letters and sound? Rather, the Quran is only an expression of Jibril!’ They continued in this vein, until the sacredness of the Quran diminished from the hearts of many.� He then mentions at length, the arguments for the orthodox approach towards the Quran, and commends Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal for his rigid stance on the issue, which united the Muslims on one belief: the Quran, which is contained in the Mushaf, is the uncreated Speech of Allah. He then denigrates al-Ash’ari, saying: “Then, people did not differ in this issue, until there appeared �Ali b. Isma’il al-Ash’ari, who at first, held the beliefs of the Mu’tazilites. It then occurred to him, as he claimed, that Allah’s Speech subsists in the Divine Essence (sifah qa’imah bil-that). His claim, therefore, necessitated that the Quran we have is created.� Ibn Qudama says in his refutation of the Ash'aris on the topic of Quran:* "There is no dispute amongst all the Muslims that anyone who rejects a verse from the Quran, or a word, which is agreed upon, or even a letter which is agreed upon, is a Kafir... Whereas al-Ash'ari rejects the entire Quran and says: none of that is the Quran, rather it is the speech of Jibril"* He says: "What is amazing is that they are not bold enough to manifest their belief in public, nor do they explicitly state it except when they are alone. Even if they were the rulers, or governors of countries, and you were to attribute this belief to them, they would detest it and condemn it, and become obstinate. They would only pretend to honour the Quran respect the Mushaf, and stand up upon seeing it, whereas when they are alone they say: There is nothing in it but paper and ink, what else is there in it? And this is from the actions of Zanadiqah�* One of them said to Ibn Qudamah: I affirm that this Mushaf is actually the Quran, but it is not the eternal Quran, to which Ibn Qudamah replied: �So, do we have two Qurans?! … Some of our [Hanbali] companions said: �You (the Ash’aris) are the rulers and the governors over Islamic countries, so what prevents you from making your belief manifest to the common folk?* He said: �We do not know of a sect from the heretics who hide their beliefs, and who are not bold enough to manifest them, except the Zanadiqah and the Ash’aris.’* He said: �His belief (i.e. al-Ash’ari’s) is similar to that of the Mu’tazilah without doubt, except that al-Ash’ari wants to deceive. So he states his belief which appears to be agreeing with the beliefs of the people of truth. He then gives an explanation to his belief with a Mu’tazili twist.* He says: �The reality of the Ash’ari doctrine is that there is no God in the heavens, nor is there a Quran on this earth, and nor is Muhammad a messenger of God’.* He says: �What is amazing is that their leader (i.e. Abul-Hasan al-Ash’ari) who established their beliefs was a man not known for his religion or piety, nor was he known for any of the Sacred sciences. In fact, he belongs to no science except the science of blameworthy Kalam. All the while they acknowledge that he spent 40 years adhering to Mu’tazili doctrine, and then pretended to have retracted from it, however, nothing could be seen from him after his repentance except this Bid’ah.’al-Saffarini al-Hanbali says in his Sharh of his own Athari creed:"In conclusion, the Mu’tazilites are in agreement with the Ash’arites, while the Ash’arites are in agreement with the Mu’tazilites, that this Quran contained within the two covers of the Mushaf is created and anew. The only difference between the two factions is that the Mu’tazila did not affirm any other Speech for Allah except this (the Quran, which they thought was created), whereas the Ash’arites affirmed al-Kalam al-Nafsi (self-speech/talking to oneself/inner-speech) subsisting in Allah’s essence. Whereas the Mu’tazilites say, the Speech of Allah is created (and not subsisting in Allah). The Ash’aris do not consider it (the Quran) the Speech of Allah. Yes, they call it �the Speech of Allah’, but only metaphorically, and that is the belief of the majority of their predecessors."How to silence an Ash'ariJust ask him: Who said: Alif-Laam-Meem
How to silence an Ash'ariJust ask him: Who said: Alif-Laam-Meem
