7 Comments
User's avatar
Bro Saeed's avatar

My main comment concerns the use of the term Salafi to describe these scholars. Unless they themselves referred to themselves as Salafi it would be inappropriate to label them as such. Allaah knows best.

It's a minor point. Overall, your critique is very good. I especially liked how you called out the use of emotional appeals to garner support - this is a growing problem in the Ummah.

Expand full comment
Islamic Discourse's avatar

I agree with you, but I couldn’t tamper with the original article since this is a translation and not my piece (as highlighted in the beginning).

Expand full comment
Bro Saeed's avatar

I completely understand, and applaud your rigor in presenting the facts truthfully. Baarak Allaahu Feekum 🤲🏻

Expand full comment
Ali 🏝's avatar

He forgot to point out that most of the earlier ahlul hadith/hanbalis were muffawid and closely aligned with the Asha'irah, only major differences they had with the Ash'aris were their rejection of Ta'weel Sifat, 'ilmul Kalam, Kalamullah and a few others.

Expand full comment
Ali 🏝's avatar

If you look at Ibn Qudama’s Lum’at or Rawdat Nazir, it’s pretty clear he was upon Tafweedh al ma’na.

‘Tafweed al kayf’ came a long during Ibn Taymiyyah’s time, he basically revived the Karrami creed.

Expand full comment
Islamic Discourse's avatar

Happy to engage with exhaustive points you may raise if you decide to read the article fully. Baarak Allahu feekum akhi Ali.

Expand full comment