Lubnanix

Tafwid al Ma’na from the Salaf… 🧵 PART 1

@AbuZurah10 @paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 Wa alaykum alsalam, sure brother

@Lubnanix @paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 Assalamu alykum i have a question Can I give it to you privately? I wanted to write to you but unfortunately it doesn't work

How Imam al-Bukhari Rejected the Idea of Allah Being in a Place (makan) “al-Bukhari clarified that both what is called ‘heaven’ and what is called ‘Throne’ are created, governed, originated. Allah existed before all of that and other than it. Those places came into being after non-existence, and His pre-eternity rules out describing Him with spatial confinement within them.”

@farwan21599 @HarounKanj Can I see brother?

@HarounKanj Bassam "the Gay" Zawadi got refuted by me about the Taymiyyan Infinite, poor boy deleted everything. Threw the playboard from table and ran home. Conversation is stored in my mail, can be send to those who want see. Just ask.

Latest update: Imam Plato was a Muwahhid. We have taken his Ma'rifa from our 'Ārifīn with an unbroken chain. Saed Fouda is an engineer who faked it till he made it in 'Ilm Kalām. He was such an expert fraudster that even the expert Mutakallimun on our time fell for it.

عندما تتعارض الفطرة مع العقيدة الخاطئة

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 Al-Bukhari negated the term jism. You said that negating this term is bid‘ah, yet you refuse to say that al-Bukhari fell into bid‘ah. Be consistent!

@Lubnanix @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 nope, as i told you that negating the lafdh by itself in all terms is a bid’ah, as for negating a specific concept of jism (such as where jism = meat and flesh) then yes this is wajib and one must negate this understanding of jism. 5th time now. RESPOND TO QATADAH BOYn

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 So you want me to respond to something Salafis don’t even agree on? The verse you brought and Qatadah’s statement make no mention of hawadith la awala laha, so what exactly is there to respond to? If it were so obvious, why didn’t al-Albani affirm it?

@Lubnanix @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 bro do you think im supposed to care what al albani says in a matter of kalam 😭😭😭 i don’t take from albani رضي الله عنه is anything, let alone asma wal-sifaat. respond to what I quoted from qatadah

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 So al-Bukhari fell into a bid’ah?

@Lubnanix @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 you’re not tracking… i believe negating the lafdh jism is a bidd’ah, but negating the meanings that are batil are wajib. we’re not going to go in circles with this cause this is the 4th time im mentioning this q’idah to you

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 Also, the discussion is about makan, and its mere usage is not evidence that they accepted the meaning you’re attributing to it. 2/

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 I can easily show you how your own scholars prohibit the outright negation of jism, yet you still negate the term. You clearly have no idea what you’re talking about. 1/

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 Even al-Albani said Ibn Taymiyyah was wrong on this. I lost? Lol. youtu.be/lvr7nlaC5aQ?is…

@Lubnanix @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 surat al-rahman, where Allāh ta’la says 'كل يوم هو في شأن’ qatadah says this means Allāh is creating everyday, destroying everyday, and ‘يحدث امرا' every day 😂😂😂😂. You lost.

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 No, he explicitly negates jism in the same book. Re-read the discussion. And for the tenth time, makan can have a correct meaning, so relying on a report that mentions makan is not necessarily problematic.

@Lubnanix @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 did bukhari rely upon a narration that promoted tajsim…?

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 Hawadith la awal laha. Good luck finding the wording or the meaning in the Quran and Sunnah.

@Lubnanix @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 you will find all of these in the quran and sunnah. Pick one and we can go through it lol 😂😂

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 But that’s beside the discussion. The point is that makan has a correct meaning according to how some scholars defined it. Therefore, al-Bukhari transmitting a report that mentions makan is not proof that he affirmed an actual place. 3/

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 If you object, I challenge you to produce a proof. 2/

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 It’s hard to tell if you’re trolling or not, but I’ll assume good faith. What part of ‘it’s not my definition, but the definition of a group of scholars’ is difficult to understand? Also, are you aware that Ibn Taymiyyah used terms that are not found in the Qur’an or Sunnah?

@Lubnanix @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 you’re not responding to the argument mentioned. what i stated here shows that what is mentioned has to fall in line with the kitab and sunnah, every word must stem from an example within Allāh’s book or the sunnah of the Rasul of its used istilahan. now respond to other tweet

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 Are you trolling? It’s not my definition, again and again. It’s how some scholars defined it, as reported by al-Tabari. Therefore, affirming makan is not necessarily wrong if the correct meaning is intended.

@Lubnanix @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 mate, when i say something is illogical that means it’s objective. is it possible for something that doesn’t exist to contain attributes that are solely for existed things? if not, then makan cannot contain, ergo your defintion is invalid. You lost.

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 What’s so hard to understand?

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 What does this have to do with the discussion? You’re all over the place. I’m simply showing that there is a correct meaning of makan based on what al-Tabari reported from some scholars. So affirming it isn’t automatically wrong if it’s understood in that correct sense.

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 Who cares what you think is logical or illogical? I’m referring to the definition given by scholars who affirmed makan, before and during the time of al-Tabari. This isn’t about you or me.

@Lubnanix @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 scholars can have their own terminologies if it’s justified, but it cannot be forced onto others to accept. that’s why as we mentioned, we reject the meaning of jism and makan your scholars give as they’re illogical and defintions cannot be illogical

@paleohanafi @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 You’re missing the point again. It’s not about how we define makan, but how the scholars who affirmed it defined it. It’s not my view, I don’t affirm makan. I’m just mentioning what al-Tabari reported from those scholars.

@Lubnanix @ashariukht @QassamiQadiri12 and no, i told you to justify a creedal defintion from the salaf. I can justify makan being a relation of two things from the sunnah easily lol, and even in the Arabic ‘urf