---Allah is One (Allah is the ONLY Creator and is not composed of parts, pieces, or dimensions) ---Allah existed before the creations and there was NOTHING ELSE in existence (no light, darkness, time, space, distance, or direction) ---Allah ABSOLUTELY does not need the creations (hence, Allah does not require space in order to exist) ---Allah ABSOLUTELY does not resemble the creations (hence, Allah is not attributed with bodily or spatial characteristics--like, size, shape, form, organs, limbs, motion, stillness, etc.) If a person does not understand these principles, then there can be no coherent discussion about what does and does not befit the Creator.

true

Well said

well said.

@@fifafreebies8941 Allah does not need nor resemble any creation, but when He described himself with something, we affirm it and accept it, without questioning its reality, or equating it with the attributes of creations.

Ameen

How to ask him a question

The problem is that he is not wahhabiyah najdiyah anymore

@@pocophone2010is that a problem? Rather he has left the fold of islam.. speaking kufr and having doubts in the preservation of quran.

​@@IsmetPeci1Please verify truth, before your speak. He has clarified numerous time please see his explanation after this there will be no excuse to spreading this lies.

​@@maryamshakeel4027flying to Texas

Have to ask ourselves are we ready to embrace all types of knowledge without affecting our aqeedah and eliminate doubts?

But see brother in Islam we have the Quran n the sunnah.... n for the most part they’re enough IAllah. also in Islam we don’t have strange foreign thoughts, thoughts like trinity So, for the most part Islam is straight forward.... For that reason muslims don’t investigate a lot We r really settled with our faith.

Taqleed in Fiqh is a controversial topic but in fact taqleed in kelam/in what you believe in is HARAM. One can't just be Muslim because his parents were. He must, this is an obligation, get knowledge and believe with full heart

@@ibrahimyilmaz4861 You do know we are all muslims from birth, but parents take us away if christian, athiest or other faiths. Children accept Islam from parents because they like the explanation, there is no nagging doubt etc that other children suffer with their parents explanations. Because islamic explanations is satisfying unlike other faiths or non faiths. Islam always made sense to me since I was a kid. Its not blind faith, I opened the Quran and loved it♥️

@@salampakistan3691 Bro in what you are saying you are a 100% right but you didnt understand what i was saying. There are two kinds of Taqleed (blind following). One of them is Taqleed in Fiqh (jurispudence, what and how to do for example where to place the hands in salah) and the second is Taqleed in Aqeeda (Aqeeda is what you believe). It is mandatory for all Muslims to follow blindly in Fiqh, so ie Hanafis put their hands below the belly naval without knowing a hadith or something for it. It is not need. But you cant just be Muslim because you were born that way. You need to understand what you are believing in. You cant just say yes im Muslim because my ancestors. You need to know that Islam is 100% and must be the only right religion as it says in the Quran. These are two different things

Jazakallah khair

Jazak Allah Khair. We should aim to unit ummah and forget about small differences. I found ibadhi school the oldest to be the most respected school on this regard. Very well balanced school and their arguments always have the strongest dalil. Their school never fostered extremists. Their scholars are not well known. But they are the most knowledgeable people of Islam

@@SamSam-mv6gf correct if im wrong but dont they say a person who commits a kabeerah is not muslim ?

@@halazeel776 thank you. Ibadhi get their fiqh and ahkam with evidence and dalil. Who committed kabirah is regarded Muslim and buried on Muslims grave. But they said he is Kafir kofr naimah. It means he is kafir of Allah blessing. Their evidence is from Quran 27:40 " So when Solomon saw it placed before him, he exclaimed, “This is by the grace of my Lord to test me whether I am grateful or ungrateful. And whoever is grateful, it is only for their own good. But whoever is ungrateful, surely my Lord is Self-Sufficient, Most Generous.” the opposite of Shokr or being grateful is Kofr or being ungrateful. Ibadhi fiqh is the most ultimate highest and of the most in depth when it comes to evidences

@@SamSam-mv6gf are they not also from the descendants of the khawarij. Those that killed Uthman ra. and basically started a whole fitnah.

We don't use emotion to know where Allah is, if Quran & Sunnah says He is above then He is. You have no evidence from Quran except general statements. Also our Fitrah agrees with Allah being above everything.

No one is using emotion. It's simple rationality, we can't place any type of limits (location, distance, time, space etc) on our divine creator. Allah SWT is nothing like it's creation as it says in the Surah Ikhlaas, verse 4: "And there is none comparable to Him." Allah جل جلاله reveals again in the Qur’an Al Kareem, in the Surah Ash-Shura (Chapter 42, Verse 11): “There is absolutely nothing like him" (Allah جل جلاله )

ASSALAMUALAIKUM but AllahSubhanahuwa Ta'Ala is above Arsh right?@@zakali92

Also at 19.01 Dr YQ says that the Asharis say "There is no actual Throne". This is incorrect. There IS DEFINITELY a Throne but Allaah does not sit on it, nor is He just 'above' it. The Throne is the largest creation of Allaah and it was created to signify His Majesty & Dominion over everything, since it is bigger and 'above' all of His other creation. However, it is still a creation of Allaah and finite and therefore occupies a certain amount of place. Allaah SWT, on the other hand, is BEYOND BEING BOUND BY SPACE OR PLACE.

@@bittertruth6575 The Qur'an: الرحمن على العرش ٱستوى The Narrations: "أين الله؟ في السماء" Explained in Bukhari: ٱستوى أي: علا و ٱرتفع kalamis: we don't believe in any of that. Ofcourse the kalamis think that the Allah Azzawajal and the Prophet Sallahu Alaihi wa Sallam did not explain the Deen to us in clear terms and thus they have to come up with their far-fetched Taweelat NaoudhubIllah min Dhalik.

​@@ahmads5889 And the literalists became anthropomorphists because they assigned a body and place to Allaah. La hawla wa la quwata illah billah! i won't bother going any further since this is a very very delicate topic with complex ideas and I feel it is safer for both of us to stop here. However I will leave you with this ayah: "There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing." Surah 42 verse 11: and this video (please turn on subtitles if you don't understand arabic): kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eaecZcWS1r6WcWw.html

@@bittertruth6575 OudhubIllah, look at the shamelessness, I literally quoted texts and didn't even give an interpretation, yet you start crying anthrophromism. Subhan Allah.

​@@ahmads5889I make it a point not to argue about these points. Salaam.

Al Aqeedatul Wasatiyyah by Ibne Tayyimiah

sunnahmuakada.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/al-ghazali-theninety-ninebeautifulnamesofgod.pdf

www.farhathashmi.com/english-section/aqeedah/?giml-id=766 Names of Allah by Sister Taymiyyah Zubair (daughter of Dr. Farhat Hashmi) - these are audio lessons though, not written

The scholars of Asha’rayn also give preference to take ta’weel which does not contradict the ayah ليس كمثله شيء. So they do not enforce those ta’weelaat. Rather they say instead of thinking of a hand or eye or foot like ours it is better to leave the matter to Allah. Ta’weelat is not permissible by anyone who does not have ijazah in Ilm ul Kalam.

askyq@epic.org

---Allah is One (Allah is the ONLY Creator and is not composed of parts, pieces, or dimensions) ---Allah existed before the creations and there was NOTHING ELSE in existence (no light, darkness, time, space, distance, or direction) ---Allah ABSOLUTELY does not need the creations (hence, Allah does not require space in order to exist) ---Allah ABSOLUTELY does not resemble the creations (hence, Allah is not attributed with bodily or spatial characteristics--like, size, shape, form, organs, limbs, motion, stillness, etc.) If a person does not understand these principles, then there can be no coherent discussion about what does and does not befit the Creator.

Exactly. Salafism takes the attributes literally as in affirming anthrophormism.

@Ibraishah Abdullah lol najdi doctrine yeah yeah. I am not scholar but shaism and sufism i consider them out of islam . Allah knows best

@@omerabbadi9389 bro id be offended but this is actually hilarious 💀💀

@@alkane2561 supported by no proof?????

@@HeyIntegrity stop lying

How can we have peaceful and healthy discussions when we have ibn baz saying that asharis are not from ahlussunnah and that they are ahl bidah and deviants?

@@soldierofal-rahman7836 he's not going to lie and he'll still educate the people. Of course the laymen aren't deviants

@@DrJames_YT so Imam Nawawi was deviant? Imam Suyuti?

@@soldierofal-rahman7836 yes? What's wrong with that, if they literally believed anything which comes from the jahmiyyah then they are definitely wrong in that matter, and it still comes to the conclusion to how they came about to having that belief. Many can and have used a wrong approach to things which results in them believing something incorrect. May Allah forgive them.

On the other hand you have Sufis who believe that the Prophet is Nur Ilahi, and the Ashari creed which is heavily influenced by Greek Philosophy. The Athari creed is the earliest creed. Salafis say Allah has face because Allah says so in the Quran. But not face like human. I dont think you watched the video, you just came to comment some nonsense.

@JB Priestley you dont have a brain. So you're saying Allah is lying when He says that He has a face?

The Sheikh differentiates between wahhabism and atharism in other videos but mixes stuff here . I know many wahhabis struggling to avoid imagining anthropomorphism and if they go back to atharism they would clear away of the modern salafis wicked ideology

@@kinetickame1203 there is no difference between Atharism and Salafism..exact same creed

@@sheriefelsayad5578 True unless you mean by Salafism pseudo Taimism or Wahhabism. Most of Hanbali imam use Tafweed which is completely different from anthropomorphism

Some of the later hanbalis went to extremes. Affirming and discussing things that the earlier scholars did not. They said ahad reports amounted to certainty and must be affirmed as certainty. So they said things like Allah has will sit next to the Prophet on judgement day, maqam al mahmud. Similar to Jesus sitting with the Father in their beliefs. You had some hanbalis discussing Allah having two eyes. You had some affirming ears, or saying you can't say Allah doesn't have ears. You had others discussing whether Allah leaves the throne when he descends. All of these examples show the hanbalis were not one type either. Neither were asharis were one type. What can be said, was in the begining the distinction between them wasn't that great. Even ibn taymiyuahs time, he refuted them but he also worked with them. The hanbalis of old were much harsher, for small differences. Lile Imam bukhari and his issues. Or sharif abu jafar and ibn aqil.

@@islamicmoldtivation8143 The methodology of Ahlus‐Sunnah wal‐Jamaaʹah is that Allah has Two Hands, both wide‐spreading in giving blessings. They are from His Personal Attributes and are haqiqi that befits Him. [Allah] said, "O Iblees, what prevented you from prostrating to that which I created with both My hands? Were you arrogant [then], or were you [already] among the haughty?" [Quran 38:75] Hence all Divine Attributes including Yadain (two hands) are Haqq (Existent Real): Haqiqi : real, occurring in fact not illusory nor symbols. Atharis believe in all divine attributes including Yadain without tashbih, tahrif or takyeef. Atharis agreed upon the belief that the Yadain are Two Hands, which in no way, resemble the hands of created beings. It is not correct to distort and misinterpret them to mean ʺstrengthʺ or ʺblessingsʺ for many reasons. Some of them are as follows: Firstly: It would mean that the apparent meaning of the wording is changed to mean a metaphorical one with no supporting proof. In fact there are hadith that proves the Hands (Yadayn) of Allah are real; Hadeeth: al-Bukhaaree (Eng.) Vol. 9, H 604; Muslim (Eng.) Vol. 4, H 6699: "Allah will grasp the heavens with His Hand and the earth with the other, then He will shake them ..." Secondly: the Arabic language mentions the attribute in dual form. Thus the verse affirms the Two Hands. “Rather, both His Hands are extended.” [Sooratul‐Maaʹidah, 5:64] The Power or blessings of Allah has never been mentioned in dual form in the Quran. As in Arabic, it's impossible to say that "Two Hands" means "Two Powers" or "Two Blessings". Thirdly: the Arabic word Yad means hand which is used in the verse been discussed. But the Arabic word for power is Quwwa which is not used in the verse 38:75. Ibn Khuzayma said; "Some of the Jahmites claimed the meaning of the saying: ‘Allah Created Adam with His Two Hands’, i.e. with His power. Hence, they claimed that al-Yad (hand) refers to al-Quwwah (power), and this is also from changing (the wording/meanings). This is also ignorance of the Arabic language. [Source: Kitaabu-Tawheed page 87] Yadain cannot mean two powers or two blessings because Abdullah ibn Umar said: Allah created four things with His Hand: The Throne, The Pen, Jannat Adn (or Garden of Eden), Adam, then He said to the rest of His creation “Be” and it was. [Muktasar al Uluww page 105] So Yad is a specific attribute distinct from power or blessings. Abdullah Ibn Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) reported: I heard Allah’s Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) saying while on the pulpit, “The Almighty will take hold of His heavens and earth with His Hand; and he (the Messenger of Allah) grasped his hand, and began to grasp it and outspread it, (then said): Then He (Allah) will say: ‘I am the Almighty! Where are the haughty? Where are the arrogant ones?” He (Ibn Umar, the narrator of the hadith) said: “Allah’s Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) moved to his right and left so much, until I saw the pulpit shaking from below until I said, ‘Will it cause Allah’s Messenger to fall?' [Saheeh Muslim, Sunan An-Nasa’i, and the wording is that of Ibn Majah - Hadith 198]. [Imam Ibn Majah (d. 273 H.) in his "Sunan as-Sughra" (Sunan Ibn Majah)", in "Kitab as-Sunnah", in the chapter: "Concerning Denial by The Jahmiyyah"] The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) grasped his hand in order to clarify that Allah’s grasping of the earth and the heavens with His Hand on the day of judgment is to be taken literally and not metaphorically. He did not intend by it to liken the reality (kayfiyyah) of Allah’s grasping with his own grasping, innocent is He -peace be upon him- from that. It was narrated that ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say on the pulpit: ‘The Compeller (Al-Jabbar) will seize His heavens and His earths in His Hand’ - and he clenched his hand and started to open and close it - ‘Then He will say: “I am the Compeller, I am the King. Where are the tyrants? Where are the arrogant?” And the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) was leaning to his right and his left, until I could see the pulpit shaking at the bottom, and I thought that it would fall along with the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ).” [Sunan Ibn Majah - Kitab Zuhd] The above hadith is one of the strongest proofs for the Ahlul Athar since the Prophet (SAW) himself believed in the apparent meaning of Allah's YAD. The Prophet (SAW) did NOT change the meaning to power. Rather he affirmed the divine attribute of Hand in a haqiqi manner without tashbih or tahreef. Imam Tabari in his commentary on Surah 39, Ayah 67 and Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal in his Kitab Al Sunnah Volume 2, page 476, narration no. 1090 narrate: Ibn Abbass said: “The seven heavens and seven earths in Allah's hand is similar to a mustard seed in one of your hands.” It is very clear that Ibn Abbass affirmed the hand of Allah in a haqiqi manner (real Hand) without distorting the meaning to power or blessing.

@@Adrian-yf1zg Most atharis and Hanbalis dont believe in the claim that Allah will sit next to the Prophet on judgement day. There were weak reports stating that Mujahid had such opinion, but weak reports are not used in qaidah. Atharis believe maqam mahmud refers to the intercession granted to the Prophet ﷺ. Some ahad reports can amount to certainty since there are different suggestions as to what is the minimum requirement for a report to be mutawwatir. So even if there are 4 - 9 narrators in each level of chain; then that reaches certainty even if its not reaching mutawwatir status on each level. some hanbalis discussing Allah having two eyes. Yes because there are hadith explcitly saying that Allah has ayn. Even ashari scholars like baqilaani believed Allah has two eyes. Al-Baqillaani is the author of the book: "At-Tamheed al-Awaa'il wa Talkhees ud-Dalaa'il" - a book which focuses on the issues of creed. He states in Chapter: Concerning Allaah Having a Face and Two Hands: "The Attributes of His Essence are those that He has never ceased to be described with, and they are Life, Knowledge, Power, Hearing, Seeing, Speech, Wish (Iraadah), Permanence (al-Baqaa), Face, Two Eyes, Two Hands, and Will." Baqilaani does not make ta'weel of Face, Two Hands and Two Eyes. So it is clear from this that he affirms these attributes without ta'weel. He rejected the metaphorical interpretations given by the mu'tazila. Baqillaani says "And if someone said: What has led you to deny that His Face and Hand is a limb when you do not understand hand as an attribute, and face as an attribute except as limb? It is said to him: That is not necessitated, just like it is not necessitated when we do not understand a living, knowing, able (being) except to be a body (jism) that we, us and you, should judge Allah with the same." End quote. Where is your proof for your claim that "You had some affirming ears" You are certainly right in saying "Neither were asharis were one type." Early asharis affirmed Yadain, Ayn, Uluw and rejected the metaphorical interpretation of the mu'tazila with regards to Hands, Eyes, Above the throne and other creedal matters.

@@ParvezKhan-py5ys ahad reports don't always amount to certainty. Even if a million scholars say it does. Even if baqallani says this, it doesn't make it true. Also many of tue early asharis accepted uluw or highness but not neccessarily in the sense of direction. Dhahabi also had issues with the term "bi dhatihi".... All these statements like bi dhatihi or speech uncreated and lafdh issue were all newly invented questions the later scholars started speaking about.... Beyond the pure literal text

@@Adrian-yf1zg sahih Ahad hadith have been used in aqeedah and fiqh by many of the pious salaf and early scholars. It is more certain than speculative theology of ilm ul kalam. Many of the mutakalimun cosmological arguments were invented later. Its premise was taken from the works of aristotle. Many ulama of the salaf spoke against such hellinistic philosophy. Ashari's innovated belief of kalam nafsi was also newly invented which went against ijma and arabic language

We dont use logic over revelation. The Quran says Allah is eternal.

@@fountainofspeech1379 So do you believe Allah is physical?

@@fountainofspeech1379 the question was not logic but revealation itself against revealation

@@mohamadkhateeb402 I say what the Quran says and what the Prophet stated in numerous hadith. I don't subtract or add anything to it like you do. Allah says something in the Quran and that's more than enough for me to take it as fact without understanding because we humans can't perceive anything on the level of Allah.

@@sadofaraji5999 so what's your point

All Ash'ari affirm all the attributes of Allah. All Muslims InshaAllah affirm all attributes of Allah. Whether they affirm them literally(physically) or metephorically is the question.

Lol 😆

The answer is that it's up to you... If you like a topi then why not... If you don't, then don't wear it

@@abuhanifah2079 I didn’t ask you and before giving answer first know about it thanks

😆😆 😂😂

@MH Codes yeah

Aqeedah Al waasitiyah by ibn taymiyyah rahimahullah

Ustadh abdurahman hassan has a very comprehensive and brief explanation on this book

AhlAsSunnah walJama'ah have concensus on the aqidah book by Imam Tahawi - aqida tahawiyyah. Do not trust what ibn Taimiyya says.

@@mikhan5191 can you quote any contemporary scholars? Btw dr. Yasir considers himself a student of ibn taymiyyah. People who don't understand the religion say these stuff.

@@Asad-gv9in - YQ used to be part of the Salafi sect & considered himself a student of ibn abdulWahhab but then disowned him after he discovered the facts. When YQ finds out the facts about ibnTaimiyyah, he will stop following his teachings as well, inshaAllah.

He's speaking in a neutral way. He's not even salafi himself

@@supercookiecookie8092 He leans more towards the Salafi side.

@@n.a3642 he openly said I left the branch of salaf due to them being very harsh when spoken against and a bit narrow minded.

@@supercookiecookie8092 Yes, but that's different from Theory. In theory, he still holds much of the Salafi aqeedah. Litterally his favorute scholar is ibn taymiyyah who is the "father" of today's salafis. When he said he left "Salafis" he is talking about the movement and people involved, not the ideology. However, that is not to say he is completely in line with "Salafism", that's why I just said he leans more towards it. Recently he's made comments about how there is a development in aqeeda (explaining what this means will take forever, but watch the videos if you care), and has said certain things that most Salafis extremely disagree with (the infamous video on what is and isn't shirk.) So he's not completely in line and drifting to something else, but if you were to ask him what he honestly prefers between Ashari vs Salafi(I know, not a realistic question, but if you were to theoretically ask him) he most likely would say Salafi.

Salahudin ayoubi rh was ashari. Where as abdul wahab (founder of wahabist salafist movement) was very cruel killed more Muslims. Also isiss follow his teachings. So think for yourself with which party do you want to raise up on the day of qiyamah

No Brother, what he is saying is that Atharis do not see the need for philosophical debates about the existence of Allah, rather they say its something self-evident so put your efforts in Ibadah and not in philosophical matters. For example do you need to philosophically debate whether you have two hands with 10 fingers in total, or do you need to ponder on whether water is actually wet? No, these are obvious. Now if a need arises to prove Allah's existence such as an atheist coming for a debate then yes put on your debate hat and prove Allah's existence but if there is no need then why bother?

@@mrghazni411 well, this is the problem when people doesnt read books. Imam Ahmed fought intellectually against the Mutazilates of his time, imam Abu Hanifah fought intellectually against the atheist. We are in a cultural warfare, do you think this is some office-philosophy going on? When ibn Taymiyya wrotr against the christians, was it not ibadah? Does it only become philosophy when Asharis does it? By the way, we couldnt make ibadah if it wasnt for them, protecting the deen, bi idni illah.

@@mohamedberrhili794 brother yes those where needed for their time and place but it’s the fact that the ashari would continue these philosophical debates even at times they are not needed. It’s like trying to develop a new vaccine for smallpox which doesn’t exist anymore. Instead of trying to make a vaccine for something that is no longer relevant it would be better to put those time and resources into making vaccines for problems we have today such as new variants of COVID-19. The same way since these philosophical debates are not as prominent it’s not necessary to keep going.

Everything is creation except Allah himself. And Allah is the one and only creator. Defining attributes for the creation is fine, but defining attributes of Almighty Creator Allah is foolish. Only Allah himself defines his attributes. It's not our job or wise, and in our ability, also is very arrogant of us to try, as creations to define our creator. 😊 👍

@MH Codes Hanafi Fiqh following comprise of both 'Asharis and Maturidi in Aqeedah

Why people just mentioned "ashari"? I think its just about popularity. ashari and maturidhi are the same sometime People said "Ashari" to adress them both in one word or call "Ashari wa almaturidi" but its never been adressed as "maturidi wal ashari. i m an ash'ari btw i m sorry, you re just our little brother 🤣🤣🤣