Here is an example of one attempting to sound relevant and aware of the intricacies of Islamic creeds and groups while they are ignorant of basic fundamentals and completely enveloped in preconceived notions that barely scratch the surface of research and understanding.
1/23🧵 x.com
1/23🧵 x.com
Perhaps the most glaring error, among the many nonsensical statements in this person's thread, is what causes second-hand embarrassment: the claim that Ash‘aris are the rationalists, while Ahl al-Hadith are positioned on the other end of the spectrum,
which one may infer implies that they are not rationalists. I have written extensively on this topic, demonstrating that Ahl al-Hadith are exclusively the people of reason, and that anyone who deviates from revelation or believes that revelation contradicts reason
is not only opposing Islamic doctrine but also defying reason itself. For who, in their right mind, would claim that the Lord of the worlds revealed a scripture that contradicts the very reason He instilled in humanity?
This individual ignorantly conflates reason with what these people assume to be reason, which is better described as the product of reason. In classical definitions, reason is understood as a tool of investigation and a faculty that enables one to build rational conclusions.
Thus, what these people refer to as reason is, at best, a product of reason—something that is itself critiqued and evaluated by the mechanism of reason. This concept of reason is not exclusive to these heretics, who falsely claim a monopoly over it
while, in reality, they are the furthest removed from its proper application.
Those who have studied kalam and are familiar with the intricacies of Ash‘ari theology know that what they consider to be reason is, in nearly all cases, rooted in Peripatetic (Aristotelian) philosophy
Those who have studied kalam and are familiar with the intricacies of Ash‘ari theology know that what they consider to be reason is, in nearly all cases, rooted in Peripatetic (Aristotelian) philosophy
and its epistemology. They have borrowed this framework and attempted to impose it as a criterion over divine revelation, declaring that anything which opposes these unproven—and even impossible-to-prove—presumptions must be reinterpreted.
This "reinterpretation" is nothing more than a euphemism for rejection, as the beliefs affirmed and argued for in revelation are ultimately dismissed as false and contradictory to their restricted scope of reason—a reason to which they have enslaved themselves.
This individual continued their misconceptions by explicitly claiming that those who adhere to the Athar or Hadith are anti-rationalists, and then equating kalam with reason, as if humanity for thousands of years knew nothing about reason until the invention of
such heretical premises as kalam. What is this, within the realm of reason, but circular reasoning? They attempt to promote their beliefs by making them both the premise and the conclusion. This audacity not only betrays Islamic history but also portrays divine revelation—
the scripture sent to the Messenger of God, peace be upon him—as devoid of reason. Yet there is not a single page of the Qur'an or Hadith that lacks rational coherence. Reason, understood as the intrinsic, intuitive rationale with which mankind’s innate disposition is endowed,
is implemented throughout revelation.
Anyone who disagrees is left with only two options: either they claim that revelation lacks rational coherence, which is an attack on God, or they acknowledge that it contains reason,
Anyone who disagrees is left with only two options: either they claim that revelation lacks rational coherence, which is an attack on God, or they acknowledge that it contains reason,
in which case they must admit that they have chosen a pagan Greek epistemology over this divine guidance. How, then, can those who adhere to revelation and uphold it be labeled anti-rationalists?
An objective examination of this issue reveals that Ahl al-Hadith maintain the most consistent position, standing in opposition to all these heretical groups. They recognize the existence of reason as well as its limits and deficiencies,
understanding that God communicated with humanity while addressing their rational faculties so that they might comprehend and act upon His commands. However, these heretical groups, suffering from an existential crisis and an inferiority complex with pagan Greeks and other
civilizations, abandoned the epistemology chosen for them by God. Instead of working with the guidance provided by revelation, they deemed it irrational and inconsistent with their inherited beliefs, so they discarded it entirely,
ironically labeling those who did not go their irrational route, chose to hold firmly to what their Lord stated, and what is consistent with reason and innate disposition—as anti-rationalists.
This is what we see echoed in the writings of these unqualified individuals, who either harbor deep resentment toward revelation and refuse to accept it as their standard of reasoning, resorting instead to alternative frameworks,
or are so deeply ignorant that they are unaware of their own ignorance. This battle is not new. Muslim scholars from Ahl al-Hadith have consistently called out and exposed such heresies, writing extensively to establish the authority of revelation.
They have demonstrated that revelation cannot possibly contradict reason. But revelation is similar to the light of the sun in relation to the light of vision: just as one needs light to see the path, reason requires the illumination of revelation to remain on the straight path.
This is the recognition of the Salaf, and it is why they held firmly to revelation—not because they opposed reason, but because they rejected pseudo-reason, which is nothing more than the excrement of human thought.
Such ideas are not worth wasting paper on, let alone dedicating one’s life to, and certainly not worth abandoning the divine light of God’s guidance for the intellectual refuse of humankind.
جاري تحميل الاقتراحات...