Monday, 19 July 2010

Imam an-Nawawi was an Asha’ri in Creed – Part2




A Refutation of the Claims of the
Pseduo-salafis

One of the claims of the pseudo-salafi movement is that

“ Imam An-Nawawi was not an Asha’ri in creed.”

Another example of their attempt to rewrite history to be in their favour

Ibn ‘Uthaymin


Ibn Uthaymeen and the Pseudo-Salafis:

Muqaatiliyyah

Fact: Ibn ‘Uthaymeen LITERALLY affirms “sitting” for Allah ta’alaa.

Simple question for the neo-muqaatiliyya

What is the meaning of

 “sit” ? 


They claim to know the literal meaning, so let them share with us what they truly believe of Allah?


That he sits on a throne, but that sitting is not like our sitting. 





Just as I sit upon a chair, but you do not sit as I sit! 
We also want to know how they have determined this meaning to be literally “sit”,


When as Ibn Qudaamah states, “The Messenger of Allah did not clarify the meaning!”
Then they claim they do not make tamtheel etc. Yet they have made tamtheel by affirming the literal meaning for Allah ta’alaa
As Ibn Al-Jawzi said, “If only they had reported the narrations and remained silent afterwards.”


Instead, they delve into the meanings, and wade in the pools of tajseem and tashbeeh.

Quote:
" That he sits on a throne,but that sitting is not like our sitting.
 Just as I sit upon a chair,but you do not sit as I sit! "


...read the full article here:
also don't forget:
Ibn Uthaymeen & the Neo-Muqatilliyyah
– Istiwaa 'Alal 'Arsh –
Negating the Anthropomorphism


---



The Pseudo-salafis want it both ways. They want to utilize this great Imam to their benefit, claim him for their cause, all the while ascribe to him kufr and heresy in the same breath.
What Sunnis are certain of is that Imam An-Nawawi, qaddasa Allahu Ruhuhu, well forever be remembered as Shaykh ul Islam, the Wali of Allah , one at whose hands the masses have been guided by, and whom the Muslims have trusted and loved for over 700 years.
The pseudo-salafis and their khariji da’wah laced with kufr and anthropomorphism was defeated in the past, and their brief bump to knowness at the expense of dirty oil money will all go up in flames soon enough. 


The masses have seen the treachery of their ways, and they are learning of their anthropomorphism, and that their slogans of “salaf” and “tawhid” really are just that – empty slogans, as shown by Imam An-Nawawi himself!


Ibn Uthaymin was an evil man who many times stepped outside of the ijma’, who promoted slaughtering women and children ‘because the kuffar do so to us’ – a premise unheard of in Islamic law. We have compiled a refutation of him utilizing the dafa’ of Ibn Al-Jawzi to refute his batil here:

---


Imam an-Nawawi was an Asha’ri in Creed

Part2


Wahhabi says:
Quote, al-boriqee:

"Abu Layth the article was a mass deception to say the least and more importantly, the material you present is a sidetrack of the actual argument state “pseudo salafi” stated (which was me)


^Wahabi-al-boriqee:
Quote:
"no one disputes his Imaamship or even his shaykhul-IslamNESS if you will, but that has nothing to do with the fact that he blind followed (meaning he followed the mutaklimoon and not that he was actually a mutakalim, thus he was not an ash’ari, but merely followed their opinions on some matters).
this is like Shaykhul-Islam ibnul-Jawzi, no one disputes his repute, Imaamship, Ilm, or his shaykhul-Islamness, but none of this deals with the fact that ahlu-sunnah Imaams considered Ibnul-Jawzi matrook in matters of sifaat, everyone deposed his views on sifaat as a heterodox tangent of the actual sunni creed. Likewise, Imaam an-Nawawee’s fame and repute is due to that which he specializes like his shurooh mainly of hadeeth, his expertise in fiqh and usoolul-fiqh and as well as qawaa’id al-fiqhiyyah, and as well as raqaa’iq, but he was NOT an expert in matters of sifaat which would explain WHY he resorted to jot down the opinion of his teachers on aqeedah rather than offering it himself, most of whom were unfortunately ash’ari at the time.
however, what I really want to know is how on the planet did you manage to compare al-Mazari, an ash’ari, with THE Ibn Qutaybah, who does not even reach the dust in the nostrils of Ibn Qutaybah.
I also find it strange how you would use Mukhtasir an-Nawawee (Ibn Attar), whom you failed to relay to your audience that he came across the sunni scholars and learned aqeedah only to have contradicted his shaykh and here is what he has to say about your madhaab in his tract on creed
“It is obligatory to believe that what Allaah has affirmed in His Book and upon the tongue of His Messenger (SAW) is the truth….” (pg.22)
“And when it is affirmed in the Great Book and the Prophetic Sunnah that He, Free form Imperfection and Exalted, created Adam with His Hand, and that He said to Iblees,’what prevented you from prostrating to one who I created with My Two Hands?’ And it is established in the Saheeh regarding the dispute between Moses and Adam, that Moses said to him,’Allaah created you with His Hand’. And he, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said relating from his Lord, ‘ I do not make from the progeny of one who I created with my Two Hands like one to whom I said Be and it was.’
[Reported by ad-Dailamee and it is da'eef as stated by Shaykh Mashur Salmaan in 'Rudood wat-Ta'qubaat' (pg.15 fn.1)]
And he, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said, ‘Allaah created Firdaus with His Hand, and the Gardens of Paradise with His Hand, and wrote the Taurah with His Hand,’ and narrations other than these. It is obligatory upon us to believe that this is the truth, and forbidden upon us that we say: that Allaah has spoken to us with what we understand, and we do not understand hand except something possessing a palm and fingers and therefore liken it to the creation and arrive at tajseem.
Allaah is Exalted above what the unjust say. Likewise it is forbidden that we say: the meaning is favour and power, because it s unfeasible to take it to mean the hand we understand, so it necessitates taking it to mean that fearing tashbeeh!
Such a stance is tahreef (distortion) containing ta’teel (negation), how is this possible when the consensus is that the Attributes are to be believed in exactly as revealed by the Sharee’ah (tawqeefiyyah). Furthermore the meaning of what they make ta’weel of is not established, and ta’weel is the way of the Mu’tazila and the Jahmiyyah, we seek refuge with Allaah from that. And it is necessary to absolve the Creator from tashbeeh and ta’teel by staying away from tahreef and takyeef and tamtheel, and by taking to His saying, ‘there is nothing like Him, and He is the Hearing and Seeing’ May Allaah grant us understanding and cognisance upon the road of tawheed and eliminating anthropomorphism. And this is the saying on all that is affirmed from the Attributes. And Allaah knows that corrupt from those that purify.” (pp.’s 24-26)
“So when the Book and authentic narrations affirm the Attributes of Hearing, Seeing, Eye, Face, Knowledge, Power, Strength, Greatness, Will, Desire, Words, Speech, Pleasure, Displeasure, Love, Hatred, Delight, Laughing – it is obligatory to believe in them literally without likening to the creation, and to stop at what Allaah said (about Himself), without adding, increasing, takyeef, tahreef, tabdeel and tagyeer (changing)…” (pp.’s 26-27)
“And some of them negated Nuzool (the descent of Allaah to the lowest heaven at the last third of the night), and weakened the ahaadeeth or made ta’weel fearing confinement of Allaah (tahayyuz), movement or transmission that would necessitate a body. But the researching scholars affirmed them and obligated faith in them as Allaah wills.” (pg. 19)
“And all of the verses and ahaadeeth affirming the Attributes of Coming, Nuzool, Face and other than these, the scholars obligated faith in them, and leaving contemplation of them and depicting a form for them.” (pg. 19)
[Extracts from 'I'tiqaad al-Khaalis' of ibn al-Attaar published with notes by Shaykh Alee Hasan]
Last, but not least, your rampage on bringing forth “ashaabunaa” stated by an-Nawawee for the mutakalimoon is in my belief, fueled with some compounded ignorance. I don;t think you are fully aware of how or the manner in which our shaykh an-Nawawee speaks, his style so to speak. an example of this is found here
Imaam an-Nawawee’s Refutation of the Asha’rite Theologians on This Issue
(I can’t post the arabic because its in a picture)
Commenting on the hadeeth, “I have been ordered to fight the people until they testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah (alone) and until they believe in me and what I have brought…” (Saheeh Muslim), an-Nawawee says in his Sharh of Saheeh Muslim (1/210-211):
In (the hadeeth) is a clear evidence for the madhhab of the muhaqqiqeen (those verifying what is correct) and the majority amongst the Salaf and the Khalaf that when a person believes in the religion of Islaam with a firm and resolute belief devoid of any doubt, that this is sufficient for him, and he is a believer amongst the Muhawahhideen. [And that] it is not obligatory upon him to learn the evidences of the Theologians and knowing Allaah, the Exalted, through them. [This being] in opposition to the one who made it obligatory and made it a condition of a person being from the the people of the qiblah [and who] claimed that he does not have the ruling [applicable to] the Muslims except through this. And this madhhab is the saying of many of the Mu’tazilah and some of our associates, the Mutakallimoon, and it is a manifest error…”
END QUOTE.

He sure does put his “associates” on blast in the manner he impugns them with repugnant errors such as your kalaami based premise for the issue of tawheed to Allah .
Actually Im not finished, as I continue reading, the greater the befuddlement of truth has been practiced in your research that originally has nothing to do with his being matrook in sifaat.
You tried to end your inapplicable research to my argument by utilizing Haafidh adh-Dhahabee and Haafidh as-Sakhaawee (two ardent atharis i.e. salafis). I find this laughable to say the least because these quotes very well PROVE my case in point of what I originally claimed (which in reality was not a claim but a view that was expressed by ahlu-sunnah Imaams) which was that an-Nawawee was unreliable regarding giving exegesis to the doctrine of Asmaa’i was-Sifaat.
lets look again at both of their statements
adh-Dhahabee says
إن مذهبه في الصفات السمعية السكوت ، وإمرارها كما جاءت ،وربما تأول قليلاً في شرح مسلم.
‘Verily his madhdhab regarding the attributes as-sam’iyyah was as-sukūt (to remain silent regarding them). And he narrated them as they came, and maybe he interpreted them a small number of times in his Shar of Saī Muslim!”
adh-Dhahabee is an atharee, and when he says “he interpreted them” this is a statement that denotes a depraiseable action. It also seems like adh-Dhahabee was holding back, which is understandable considering the immense fadhl that an-Nawawee had and brought to the fore. However, as-Sakhaawee was more vehement in his language.
Imam As-Sakhawi quoted these words and said after them in his bio of Imam An-Nawawi,كذا قال، و التأويل كثير في كلامه
“This is what he says! And there is a lot of ta’wīl (interpretations) in what he said!”
again, coming from an athari, when we say “he does t’awil” or “does a lot of t’awil” all of it is pointing towards a despised position or path to tread upon.
Thus these statements are jarh against an-Nawawee and the only jarh that sunnis ever imposed on Nawawee rahimahullah.
Thus their statement indicates, as I initially regurgitated the view of ahlu-sunnah, that with regard to his speech concerning the Names and Attributes, then his words are not to be relied upon.
thank you for proving my point, jazakallahu khairan"
[End of Quote]
---
^Answer/response to ^Wahhabi


Quote: said,
"Abu Layth the article was a mass deception to say the least and more importantly, the material you present is a sidetrack of the actual argument state “pseudo salafi” stated (which was me)
no one disputes his Imaamship or even his shaykhul-IslamNESS if you will, but that has nothing to do with the fact that he blind followed (meaning he followed the mutaklimoon and not that he was actually a mutakalim, thus he was not an ash’ari, but merely followed their opinions on some matters)."

^Response: The only mass deception is your sad and ignorant response which shows you are grasping at thin air in hopes to respond to the arguments presented.

You have been squelched and now you must bark at the caravan as much as you can, so as to attempt to cast aspersion upon the claim of this article, That Nawawi was an Asha’ri!
al-Boriqee, either you did not read the article, or you are truly, and without a doubt, stupid. In the article I refuted your assertion that Imam An-Nawawi is not taken from in ‘aqidah – an aspersion you cast in your comment. Hence, I utilized the very fact that there is agreement upon his title of “Shaykh Ul-Islam” to refute you, which we did only by Allah ’s grace. If you look at what shaykh ul Islam denotes, you will see that your claim of his abandonment in ‘aqidah is squelched, and your argument is debunked – as all Sunnis knew anyway!

Quote:
"this is like Shaykhul-Islam ibnul-Jawzi, no one disputes his repute, Imaamship, Ilm, or his shaykhul-Islamness, but none of this deals with the fact that ahlu-sunnah Imaams considered Ibnul-Jawzi matrook in matters of sifaat, everyone deposed his views on sifaat as a heterodox tangent of the actual sunni creed. Likewise, Imaam an-Nawawee’s fame and repute is due to that which he specializes like his shurooh mainly of hadeeth, his expertise in fiqh and usoolul-fiqh and as well as qawaa’id al-fiqhiyyah, and as well as raqaa’iq, but he was NOT an expert in matters of sifaat which would explain WHY he resorted to jot down the opinion of his teachers on aqeedah rather than offering it himself, most of whom were unfortunately ash’ari at the time."

Reply:^This also shows your lack of knowledge of History. Ibn al-Jawzi was not rejected by “everyone”, and in fact he was praised in matters of ‘aqidah by many. Needless to say, your scope of knowledge is lacking, so I am not shocked that you would not know such! You are trying to rewrite history here, just as you have tried to rewrite the history of Imam an-Nawawi!
This article though, is not about Imam Ibn al-Jawzi, and making an analogy between Ibn al-Jawzi and Imam An-Nawawi is preposterous for many reasons, among them being:
1) Nawawi attributed himself to the people of Kalam, whereas Ibn al-Jawzi did not, as we proved in this article.
2) Nawawi taught the works of kalaam, such as the Irshad, propogated them, where Ibn Al-Jawzi did not.
3) Nawawi quoted the scholars of Kalam, the Asha’ris, such as Mazari and others, to squelch the deviances of Hanbali anthropomorphism. Ibn al-Jawzi did not!
4) Ibn al-Jawzi castigated the Asha’ris in his Sayd al-Khatir, even though much of what he held regarding the Sifaat were the same views. Imam an-Nawawi always respected the forefathers of the asha’ris, quoted their scholars, and only quoted their opinions in issues of creed – never quoting the anthropomorphic creed of the Hanbalis of old such as Zaghuni or Abu Ya’ala.
Thus your analogy between the two are night and day.

Ibn al-Jawzi was not a man of kalaam and never claimed to be, whereas Imam An-Nawawi did ascribe himself to the Mutakallimin as we showed in the article. He was, though, one well acquainted with Ibn ‘Aqil’s creed, who turned against Mu’tazilism and refuted them using their same principles, just as Abul Hasan Al-Asha’ri had.
So you are refuted once again oh pseudo-salafi! Let us continue to show your deceit and lies…


Quote:

"however, what I really want to know is how on the planet did you manage to compare al-Mazari, an ash’ari, with THE Ibn Qutaybah, who does not even reach the dust in the nostrils of Ibn Qutaybah."


Reply: ^Has nothing to do with the topic, and this is an attempt to distract the audience from what really matters in the quote I presented. What I presented was Imam an-Nawawi using the arguments of the asha’ri scholars to refute, YES REFUTE, the statement of Ibn Qutaybah.


I know that it squelched your anthropomorphic argument, and it hurts you, but this fact refutes your pseudo-salafi lies on Imam an-Nawawi! Imam an-Nawawi was an asha’ri, quoted their Imams and their arguments in refutation of the anthropomorphic creed.
Yes, it upsets you, but it is truth and the truth always hurts the arrogant Hashawi!


Quote:

"I also find it strange how you would use Mukhtasir an-Nawawee (Ibn Attar), whom you failed to relay to your audience that he came across the sunni scholars and learned aqeedah only to have contradicted his shaykh and here is what he has to say about your madhaab in his tract on creed" “It is obligatory to believe that what Allaah has affirmed in His Book and upon the tongue of His Messenger (SAW) is the truth….” (pg.22)

Reply: It is too bad that you Hashawis do not believe as Ibn Attar believed. For you believe that Allah is above his throne in PERSON – whereas “bi dhatihi” was never said by The Nabi ‘alayhis salam.
You pseudo-salafis delve into the meanings of these narratives, whereas the Nabi ‘alayhis salam or His companions did not either. All this goes to show you are really dodging the bullet.
I did not quote Ibn Attar, as in reality his only worth is that he studied beneath Imam An-Nawawi, and no more. Quoting Ibn Attar was to show WHO Imam An-Nawawi was, not who YOU want HIM to be!

Yes it refutes you, squelches your bida’ah, and destroys your claims about Imam An-Nawawi, nevertheless it is true, and the truth always upsets the Hashawi mujassim!

Quote:
"Last, but not least, your rampage on bringing forth “ashaabunaa” stated by an-Nawawee for the mutakalimoon is in my belief, fueled with some compounded ignorance. I don;t think you are fully aware of how or the manner in which our shaykh an-Nawawee speaks, his style so to speak. an example of this is found here"

Imaam an-Nawawee’s Refutation of the Asha’rite Theologians on This Issue
(I can’t post the arabic because its in a picture)

Commenting on the hadeeth, “I have been ordered to fight the people until they testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah (alone) and until they believe in me and what I have brought…” (Saheeh Muslim), an-Nawawee says in his Sharh of Saheeh Muslim (1/210-211):

In (the hadeeth) is a clear evidence for the madhhab of the muhaqqiqeen (those verifying what is correct) and the majority amongst the Salaf and the Khalaf that when a person believes in the religion of Islaam with a firm and resolute belief devoid of any doubt, that this is sufficient for him, and he is a believer amongst the Muhawahhideen. [And that] it is not obligatory upon him to learn the evidences of the Theologians and knowing Allaah, the Exalted, through them. [This being] in opposition to the one who made it obligatory and made it a condition of a person being from the the people of the qiblah [and who] claimed that he does not have the ruling [applicable to] the Muslims except through this. And this madhhab is the saying of many of the Mu’tazilah and some of our associates, the Mutakallimoon, and it is a manifest error…” END QUOTE.

He sure does put his “associates” on blast in the manner he impugns them with repugnant errors such as your kalaami based premise for the issue of tawheed to Allah ."

Reply: ^Absolutely laughable! This proves to me that you are either absolutely lacking in intelligence, insane, or just did not read the article.

Look Here:
1) We quoted this quote in arabic above, and I even used the quote from your pathetic website full of lies and manipulations!
2) He said “some of the Mutakallimin”, not All! So his refutation is not against ALL of the Mutakallimin, it against some of them, and yet he still called them “our companions” and ascribed himself to their school by doing so!Apparently, and it does not shock me as your lack of intelligence shows throughout this response, you do not understand that a man can disagree with SOME people in his school without abandoning the SCHOOL itself! One can disagree with SOME of your companions of your school, and still be part of the school!
You and your comrades of evil have tried to Hijack Imam an-Nawawi, yet he refutes your arguments and he shows your kufr in Allah ta’ala’s transcendence repeatedly!
3) Nothing of what you have said refutes the fact that Imam an-Nawawi is calling them his “companions, associates in religion“, and in fact continues to follow their way throughout his works. This quote is refutation of your lies and distortions, not in your favor, as any rational person can see.
---------------
Quote:
"You tried to end your inapplicable research to my argument by utilizing Haafidh adh-Dhahabee and Haafidh as-Sakhaawee (two ardent atharis i.e. salafis). I find this laughable to say the least because these quotes very well PROVE my case in point of what I originally claimed (which in reality was not a claim but a view that was expressed by ahlu-sunnah Imaams) which was that an-Nawawee was unreliable regarding giving exegesis to the doctrine of Asmaa’i was-Sifaat.

lets look again at both of their statements

adh-Dhahabee says
إن مذهبه في الصفات السمعية السكوت ، وإمرارها كما جاءت ،وربما تأول قليلاً في شرح مسلم.
Verily his madhdhab regarding the attributes as-sam’iyyah was as-sukūt (to remain silent regarding them). And he narrated them as they came, and maybe he interpreted them a small number of times in his Sharḥ of Saḥīḥ Muslim!”

adh-Dhahabee is an atharee, and when he says “he interpreted them” this is a statement that denotes a depraiseable action. It also seems like adh-Dhahabee was holding back, which is understandable considering the immense fadhl that an-Nawawee had and brought to the fore. However, as-Sakhaawee was more vehement in his language.
Imam As-Sakhawi quoted these words and said after them in his bio of Imam An-Nawawi, كذا قال، و التأويل كثير في كلامه

“This is what he says! And there is a lot of ta’wīl (interpretations) in what he said!”
again, coming from an athari, when we say “he does t’awil” or “does a lot of t’awil” all of it is pointing towards a despised position or path to tread upon. Thus these statements are jarh against an-Nawawee and the only jarh that sunnis ever imposed on Nawawee rahimahullah."
----------------------
Reply: Yes, this quote does squelch you indeed!
And again you can’t handle the truth, as most Mujassim Hashawis in their ignorance and arrogance can not. We quoted this quote within our article itself!
1) ta’wil is established in the law and as Imam an-Nawawi shows is the way of many of the salaf, including Imam Malik ibn Anas and Awza’i, as we quoted him saying in his Sharh of Sahih Muslim! Notice, and I know you can’t because you lack reason, that Imam An-Nawawi in nearly all of the quotes we have presented above says that “Ta’wil” is one of the ways of the early Muslims! I know, it refutes you, and it hurts, but its the truth and you are squelched by Imam An-Nawawi, an Imam who is free of you and your likes!
2) Sakhawi is refuting Dhahabi’s words of a “little”, because Nawawi does do ta’wil just as many of the salaf did! A fact that shows Shaykh ul Islam, Imam Nawawi took the way of the Asha’ris, the way of the salaf! So we hope you hold as Imam as-Sakhawi did, that Imam An-Nawawi was an Asha’ri, as he quotes Imam al-Yafi’i and Taj As-Subki as saying (as we clarified in the article which you did not read or are just to stupid to understand)! Also if you think Imam As-Sakhawi was on your side, then take note of his warning against Al-Harawi Al-Ansari’s works! But of course you wouldn’t share such with anyone as it would debunk your madhdhab of deviance!
If you disagree with Imam An-Nawawi’s approach, we don’t care. But do not lie upon Imam an-Nawawi by expelling him from a madhdhab he himself attributed himself to!
3) Where is the explicit blame for such from Sakhawi? Proof demanded! Unless of course it exists only in your sick imagination – the same imagination who believes in a pagan god of limbs, parts, and place, with literal hands, feet, shins, waist, eyes, etc etc etc…who you call “Allah” but who you really mean to be:

Quote al Boriqee:
"Thus their statement indicates, as I initially regurgitated the view of ahlu-sunnah, that with regard to his speech concerning the Names and Attributes, then his words are not to be relied upon."

Reply: Rather, Sakhawi’s statement is that Nawawi was an Asha’ri, as we quoted. He endorsed this view, and it only shows that you are trying to deceive the world over by rewriting History to your own sad and deviant cultist school.
But since you think Sakhawi is on your creed, oh Hashawi, please check out this youtube video in which Imam as-Sakhawi’s work “al-Maqasid” is being read from. Come back insha’Allah and tell me if he is still upon your creed oh pseudo-salafi!
والله سبحانه وتعالى منزه عن الحلول في الأماكن فإنه سبحانه وتعالى كان قبل أن تحدث الأماكن
“And Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala is free from Hulul (indwelling) in places, for verily He (swt) was before the very invention of “places”.”
Creed of pseudo-salafis:
“That Allah is in a place, above His throne (some say in, on, sitting on -istiqrr as ibn uthaymin did), and thus in the direction of ‘up’.”
You are squelched, and your attempt to demean Imam an-Nawawi is thrown into the wind. He refutes your creed, and he follows the salaf, just as the Asha’ris did!
May Allah grant us all tawfiq amin!
was-salam
---


al-boriqee says:
Quote:
Abu Layth says
Firstly, this is not true and if you want to go by experience, i never experienced what you experienced.
Secondly, because experiences do not own that much value on this kind of topic, the overriding factor here has to be based on what is established.
With that being said, The position that the ahlul-ilm among those ascribed to the millah of the salaf (who are deemed the wahhabi mujassims) is that an-Nawawee was definitely not salafi in his understanding of the Attributes of Allah (SWT), and anyone who knows his manhaj knows this. Thus you hearing or seeing posts of some idiots saying otherwise is basically that, nothing but a bunch of juhaal.
At any rate, based on your analysis, I can concur to the arguments you presented. Based on this, would it be correct for me to assume that an-Nawawee stood at odds with some of the mutakalimeen for their stances.
The reason why I says this is because it seems as if an-Nawawee was the last standing original ash’ari, upon the madhaab of al-Ash’ari himself and Baqilaani, all of whom agreed with what you guys label as the “wahhabi mujassimi creed” while going into t’awil on some of the sifaat.asalamu alaikum
-----------
al-boriqee says:
"may bad I don;t know how to use the html tags. 
the reply above is MY words, not Abu Layth’s. 
---------
That reply by me was in response to this quote from Abu Layth which is
“This claim regarding the salafis not claiming such is not true. I have heard with my own ears pseudo-salafis claim it, especially in the late 90s and early 2000s when their claims were left mostly unchallenged in English by the Sunnis. And if one simply does a simple search on Shaykh Google, they will find plenty of pseudo-salafis arguing that he held the view of the pseudo-salafis. ” asalamu alaikum"
[End of Quote]

Reply: 
We commend you Al-Boriqee for admitting that Imam An-Nawawi was an Asha’ri, as attested to by the Imams of Islam.

You should repent to Allah (SWT) – beg His forgiveness for demeaning and lying upon a Wali of Allah (SWT).

Your claim though that somehow the Asha’ris – as well as An-Nawawi agree with the wahhabi/pseudo-salafi doctrine is again laughable, just as your above claims regarding An Nawawi were too. 

Your claim begs many questions, and I do not feel like responding to such batil in detail – as this article refutes you well enough. Simply read the article and see for yourself how Imam An-Nawawi disagrees with the deviant creed of the wahhabi/pseudo-salafis on several points:
a) He practices tafweed – deemed deviance by Ibn Uthaymin and co.
b)
 He rejects the literal meaning – affirmed by Ibn Uthaymin and co.
c)
 He promotes tafweed when needed versus the wahhabi baatil of rejecting it completely.
d)
 He quotes the Mutakallimin and supports them, even calls them “Our companions”, hardly in line with the wahhabi pseudo-salafi puke.
e)
 He learned and taught works of kalaam – a certain no no in wahhabi doctrine.
f) He does not believe that Allah has place, and is ‘sitting’ upon the throne as stated by Ibn Uthaymin.

and the list continues…

---
Brother Faqir:
Some scans from Muhammad b. Salih al-Uthaimin relating to Imam al-Nawawi:
---
al-Albani says:
"“Shaykh al-Albanian says, is an oppression to say they (ie an-Nawawi and Ibn Hajar al 'Asqalani) and those like them, including to the ranks of heresy. According to Shaykh al Albanian, although both beraqidah Asy'ariyyah, but they do not accidentally menyelisihi Holy Scripture and as Sunnah. Their assumptions, beliefs they inherited Asy'ariyyah is two things: First, that Imam al Ash'ari said that, though he did not say, except at the previous time, (then he left and headed for the faith Salaf, Red). Second, they think the truth which they do not .”"
[Cassette Man Man wa Huwa Huwa Al Kafir al Mubtadi '? Quoted from catatam feet Ajwibah al al al manahij Mufidah min As'ilah al Jadidah, case 221; Decrees Shaykh Salih al fauzan collected by Jamal bin Furaihan al Haritsi.]
Source: 
Magazine Edition Sunnah 11/X/1428 H/2007 M with a few changes
---


...continue to: Part3