" O Salafis! You will hardly find a scholar throughout the history of Islam who did not err in certain matters, including aqeedah, usool, and manhaj. Are you going to denounce them? "

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

A short Response to the Facebook post of Ebn Hussain 

الحمد لله والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله وعلى آله وصحبه ومن اتبع هداه، أما  بعد فإن خير الهدي هدي محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم، وشر الأمور محدثاتها، وكل محدثة بدعة، وكل بدعة ضلالة 

This is a brief response to the post of a brother called Ebn Hussain, he argues that we should not refute the scholars / sects for as long as they fall under the general meaning of Ahlul Sunnah, by this he means Ahlul kalam including Asharis / Maturidis and other deviant sects, he thinks that these sects are generally regarded as Ahlul Sunnah and thus we should focus on refuting only Qubooris / Rafidah and other similar sects

To support his claim he brought some doubts and highlighted some of the mistakes and odd views of the scholars, In Sha Allah i will respond to these doubts in a separate blog but first we need to point out the errors he made while misquoting scholars like Ibn Taymiyyah and Al-Albani to support his false views. Without any further delay let's just get straight to the point. 

The brother begins: 

" What many modern-day Salafis don't understand: 

A huge bulk of scholars of Islam held odd views and arguably wrong beliefs. From the justice of Inn Taymiyyah and scholars like Ibn Baz and al-Albani and other than them is that they always gave credit where credit is due, even to those who held beliefs that were outright deviation according to them, as long as they could be generally ascribed to Ahlul-Sunnah and not to brazen heretics like the Mutazilah, Rafidah, etc.  ". 

I say:  it is difficult to find a scholar that had no mistakes and these mistakes vary in there degree and graveness, however it is equally rare to find a scholar who erred in his Aqeedah and was excused, the Salafis of the past were stern against those who denied Qadar, attributes of Allah, ullow, Qur'an being speech of Allah(swt) and similar issues that have to do with the fundamental beliefs of ASWJ, and even if someone was excused then it was only in a sense that they refrained from making Tabdi, it did not prevent them from refuting the mistakes of those scholars, pointing them out and warning against them, it is well known that Ibn Hajar and Nawawi were Athari in their usool but with regards to some of the names and attributes they made ta'weel and agreed with the Asharis, nonetheless other than this their usool and Aqeedah is that of Atharis /Salafis and they did not affirm the position of Asharis in other issues, but still to this day scholars warn against the mistakes they made. 

Secondly, the issue of giving credit to someone from Ahlul Bid'ah then it is not restricted to the group the brother thinks are "generally included in Ahlul Sunnah ", prophet (saw) praised even the kuffar for some of their good qualities, you'll find scholars giving credit to jahmiyyah in the books if Rijal, for Example in Mizan Al Ai'tadal Al Dhahabi mentions under the biography of the grandson of Abu Hanifa, Isma'il bin Hammad that he was one of the greatest Faqih. Isma'il was a staunch jahmi in Aqeedah, does the brother believe that Jahmiyyah are also generally Ahlul Sunnah? 

The brother continues : 

" Ibn Taymiyyah and al-Albani famously stated that the Asha'irah are from Ahlul-Sunnah *except* in the matters where they have deviated from Ahlul-Sunnah. This is significant, considering the stance of many Athari scholars on Ash'aris who argue that modern-day Ash'aris are worse in deviancy as the early ones, closer to the Jahmiyyah really. "

I say : the brother is unaware that the term Ahlul Sunnah has multiple usages, some times it is used for those who Oppose Rafidah and other times it refers only to the saved sect, those who truly follow the pure Sunnah of the Messenger, Salafiyyon.

let us hear from ibn Taymiyyah himself 

قال ابن تيمية : " فلفظ أهل السنة يراد به من أثبت خلافة الخلفاء الثلاثة ، فيدخل في ذلك جميع الطوائف إلا الرافضة .
وقد يراد به : أهل الحديث والسنة المحضة ، فلا يدخل فيه إلا من يثبت الصفات لله تعالى " انتهى من " منهاج السنة " (2/221) .

Similarly ibn uthaymeen says : 

وقال الشيخ ابن عثيمين : " أهل السنة يدخل فيهم المعتزلة ، يدخل فيهم الأشعرية ، يدخل فيهم كل من لم يكفر من أهل البدع ، إذا قلنا هذا في مقابلة الرافضة .
لكن إذا أردنا أن نبين أهل السنة ، قلنا : إن أهل السنة حقيقة هم السلف الصالح الذين اجتمعوا على السنة وأخذوا بها ، وحينئذ يكون الأشاعرة والمعتزلة والجهمية ونحوهم : ليسوا من أهل السنة بهذا المعنى " انتهى من " الشرح الممتع " (11/306)

So yes, Asharis are from the people of Sunnah in whatever they agree with the people of Sunnah , however in no way the word here is intended to unite truth with falsehood, it is only appropriate that i should share the video of Al-Albani on the topic of unity with Asharis so that there is no doubt left

https://youtu.be/4k-DRCDVZrw

The brother continues :

" No, not every zandaqah can be excused as a mistake or as a difference of opinion, nobody argues for that, except a zindeeq. Modern-day zanadiqah try to disguise their zandaqah as difference of opinion and ijtihad. However, a number of scholars in the past held some views that would make many Muslims - including the average Salafi 'talib al-Ilm' - doubt everything they've learnt about these great men, simply for the fact that their odd views are often not mentioned in books about them. "

I say : the brother perhaps is unaware that the dispute between Salafiyyon and Asharis /Maturidis is much deeper than it looks, some of their baatil ai'tiqad include 

Giving precedence to Aql over Naql :

https://www.dorar.net/firq/419/المطلب-الخامس:-موقف-الأشاعرة-من-النقل-عموما-والسنة-خصوصا

Restricting Eman to simply belief in the heart ( many of them use this to claim Abu Talib was a Muslim) :

https://dorar.net/firq/637/المطلب-الرابع:-مسمى-الإيمان-عند-الأشاعرة

Belief in creation of Qur'an :

http://www.saaid.net/Doat/almuwahid/5.htm

Is this not enough of heresy?? Is it not worth refuting ?? Do you wish to unite the followers of Ahmed (who was beaten and lashed every day to say that Qur'an is created) with the Asharis? 

Great scholars of Islam including Dhahabi, Lalakai, Muzani and Ibn Taymiyyah are famous for their refutations of Asharis, specially ibn Taymiyyah as he spent much of his life refuting the heresy of Asharis, was he just wasting his time? Did he go to the jail for nothing? After all Asharis are from Ahlul Sunnah according to the brother, why would ibn Taymiyyah do this? When he wrote 

العقيدة الحموية 

درء تعارض العقل والنقل

الرسالة التدمرية

Was he contradicting his own principle and statement that they are from Ahlul Sunnah (as the brother believes)? 

How can then the brother claim that we should not refute the batil Aqa'id of this group? And how on earth can he use the speech of Shaykh Al-Islam as his evidence?? 

The truth is Ibn Taymiyyah considers it obligatory to refute the sects of the people of Innovation and warn against them, he (rh) says :  

ومثل أئمة البدع من أهل المقالات المخالفة للكتاب والسنة أو العبادات المخالفة للكتاب والسنة ، فإن بيان حالهم وتحذير الأمة منهم واجب باتفاق المسلمين

. اهـ . مجموع الفتاوى ج 28 ص 231 

To be Contnd.