• Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʾarī said: *❝His speech is one, comprising commands, prohibitions, news, inquiries, promises, and warnings. These aspects relate to expressions within his speech, not to a numerical count within the speech itself. The expressions and words revealed on the tongues of angels to the prophets, peace be upon them, are indications of eternal speech. The indication is created and originated, while what is indicated is eternal.❞* وكلامه واحد هو أمر ونهي وخبر واستخبار، ووعد ووعيد وهذه الوجوه ترجع إلى اعتبارات في كلامه لا إلى عدد في نفس الكلام. والعبارات والألفاظ المنزلة على لسان الملائكة إلى الأنبياء عليهم السلام دلالات على الكلام الأزلي، والدلالة مخلوقة محدثة، والمدلول قديم أزلي 📚 (Al-Milal wal-Niḥal p. 108) • Abū Bakr al-Bāqillānī said: *❝That which is descended, and that which is transmitted from region to region [the Qurʾān], is in reality the statement of Jibrīl, and the evidence for this statement is the saying of Allāh: {Indeed it is the statement of a Noble Messenger (Jibrīl)} … And this is Allāh informing us that the Arabic text we have which is an expression of the speech of Allāh is in reality the statement of Jibrīl and not the statement of a poet or a sorcerer.❞* والنازل على الحقيقة المنتقل من قطر إلى قطر قول جبريل عليه السلام هذا إخبار من الله تعالى بأن النظم العربي الذي هو قراءة كلام الله تعالى قول جبريل لا قول شاعر ولا قول كاهن 📚 (Al-Inṣāf p. 92) • Abū al-Maʾālī al-Juwaynī said: *❝Know after it [the preceding discussion regarding what is “kalām” and “mutakallim”] that [our] speech with the Muʾtazilah and all the opposers in this issue is connected to negation and affirmation. For what they have affirmed and determined to be “kalām” (speech), then in and of itself, it is established, affirmed. And [then] their saying [thereafter], “It is the speech of Allāh, the Most High,” when it is subjected to a scientific study, the speech (kalām) [simply] returns back to [one of] languages and appellations. For the meaning of their saying: “These are the expressions of the speech of Allāh” is that they are His creation, and we do not reject that they are the creation of Allāh, but we prohibit from calling the Creator of [this] speech as “mutakallim” on account of them. So we have come to an agreement [with the Muʾtazilah] upon the meaning but we have disputed, after this agreement, about its appellation (i.e. what to call this meaning).❞* واعلموا بعدها أن الكلام مع المعتزلة وسائر المخالفين في هذه المسألة يتعلق بالنفي والإثبات، فإن ما أثبتوه وقدّروه كلامًا فهو في نفسه ثابت، إنه كلام الله تعالى إذ [لعل صوابها إذا] رد إلى التحصيل آل الكلام إلى اللغات والتسميات فإن معنى قولهم: هذه العبارات كلام الله، أنها خلقه، ونحن لا ننكر أنها خلق الله، ولكن نمتنع من تسمية خالق الكلام متكلمًا به فقد أطبقنا على المعنى، وتنازعنا بعد الاتفاق في تسميته 📚 (Al-Irshād p. 116-117) • Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī said: *❝The cover has been lifted, revealing the existence of a meaning that is implied by the word, in addition to other meanings. We call this speech, which is a kind contrary to sciences, intentions, and beliefs. Its existence is not impossible; rather, it must exist, as it is a type of speech. Thus, it is what is meant by eternal speech. As for the letters, they are created and are indications of speech and the indicator is different to the indicated, nor are they described with the attribute of the indicated. Even if their indication is self-referential, like knowledge, they are still created and indicate an eternal creator. So, how could it be far-fetched for created letters to indicate an eternal attribute?❞* فقد انكشف الغطاء ولاح وجود معنى هو مدلول اللفظ زائداً على ما عداه من المعاني، ونحن نسمي ذلك كلاماً وهو جنس مخالف للعلوم والإرادات والاعتقادات، وذلك لا يستحيل ثبوته الله تعالى، بل يجب ثبوته؛ فإنه نوع كلام، فإذا هو المعني بالكلام القديم. وأما الحروف فهي حادثة وهي دلالات على الكلام والدليل غير المدلول، ولا يتصف بصفة المدلول، وإن كانت دلالته ذاتية كالعالم فإنه حادث ويدل على صانع قديم، فمن أين يبعد أن تدل حروف حادثة على صفة قديمة. 📚 (Al-Iqtiṣād Fī al-Iʾtiqād p. 187) • Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī said: *❝One of them is through sound and letter, and the other is through the inner speech that is not expressed in sound and letter. This is a perfection, and it is with respect to Allāh, the Exalted, neither impossible nor indicative of temporality.❞* أحدهما: بالصوت والحرف: - والآخر بكلام النفس الذي ليس بصوت وحرف؛ وذلك كمال، وهو في حق الله - تعالى - غير محال ولا هو دال على الحدوث. 📚 (Al-Iqtiṣād Fī al-Iʾtiqād p. 183) • Al-Shahrastānī said: *❝So al-Ashʾarī innovated a third saying and judged with the emergence of the letters, and this is the destruction of the ijmāʾ and he judged that what we read is Allāh’s speech only metaphorically not in reality - and this is pure innovation.❞* فأبدع الأشعري قولاً ثالثاً وقضى بحدوث الحروف وهو خرق الإجماع وحكم بأن ما نقرأه كلام الله مجازاً لا حقيقة وهو عين الابتداع 📚 (Nihāyat al-Aqdām p. 313) • Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī said: *❝We dispute the application of the terms “the Qurʾān” and “the speech of Allāh” to these letters and sounds. What they (the Muʾtazilah) have mentioned as evidence only implies the Qurʾān’s createdness with this interpretation, which is unanimously agreed upon. However, thereafter, we claim a quality inherent to the essence of Allah and assert its primordial nature. We have explained that this attribute cannot be described as Arabic, non-Arabic, clear, or ambiguous because all of these are attributes of speech, which consists of letters and sounds. Consequently, as for the speech they attempted to prove is created, we do not dispute its created. However, the speech for which we claim primordiality does not align with the evidence they presented.❞* ننازع في إطلاق لفظ "القرآن" و "كلام الله تعالى" على هذه الحروف والأصوات. وما ذكروه [أي: المعتزلة] من الأدلة فهو إنما يفيد حدوث القرآن بهذا التفسير، وذلك متفق عليه، وإنما نحن بعد ذلك ندعي صفة قائمة بذات الله تعالى وندعي قدمها . وقد بينا أن تلك الصفة يستحيل وصفها بكونها عربية وعجمية ومحكمة ومتشابهة، لأن كل ذلك من صفات الكلام الذي هو عبارة عن الحروف والأصوات. والحاصل أن الكلام الذي حاولوا إثبات حدوثه، فنحن لا ننازعهم في حدوثه، والكلام الذي ندعي قدمه لا يجري فيه ما ذكروه من الأدلة 📚 (Nihāyat al-ʿUqūl 2/325) • Fakhr al-Din al-Razi said: *❝The Qurʾān is divided into that which is established in the Essence of Allāh, the Eternal Attribute, and the letters and sounds which we have with us. And there is no dispute that the words which are constructed from these letters and sounds are originated and created and the challenge to bring something like the Qurʾān was with this (the created Qurʾān) and not the Eternal Attribute.❞* أنَّ القُرْآنَ اسْمٌ يُقالُ بِالِاشْتِراكِ عَلى الصِّفَةِ القَدِيمَةِ القائِمَةِ بِذاتِ اللَّه تَعالى، وعَلى هَذِهِ الحُرُوفِ والأصْواتِ، ولا نِزاعَ فِي أنَّ الكَلِماتِ المُرَكَّبَةَ مِن هَذِهِ الحُرُوفِ والأصْواتِ مُحْدَثَةٌ مَخْلُوقَةٌ، والتَّحَدِّي إنَّما وقَعَ بِها لا بِالصِّفَةِ القَدِيمَةِ. 📚 (Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb 17/101)
• Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī said: *❝If you understand this, we say: When the Almighty wills something or dislikes something, He creates these specific sounds in a particular body to indicate His will for that specific matter or His dislike for it, or to signify His ruling on it, whether in affirmation or negation. This is what is meant by the statement that the Almighty speaks.❞* إذا عرفت هذا فنقول: انه تعالى إذا أراد شيئا أو كره شيئا، خلق هذه الأصوات المخصوصة فى جسم من الأجسام، لتدل هذه الأصوات على كونه تعالى مريدا لذلك الشيء المعين، أو كارها له، أو كونه حاكما به بالنفي أو بالإثبات. وهذا هو المراد من كونه تعالى متكلما 📚 (Al-Arbaʾīn Fī Uṣūl al-Dīn p. 248) At the end al-Rāzī says: *❝So it becomes established on account of what we have mentioned: That Allāh being “mutakallim” (one who speaks) with the meaning that is said by the Muʾtazilah is what we say, and we acknowledge it, and we do not reject it from any angle at all. Indeed, the difference between us and them is that we affirm another matter, beyond this, which they reject. And we shall mention, what that thing is.❞* فثبت بما ذكرنا: أن كونه تعالى متكلما بالمعنى الذي يقوله المعتزلة» مما نقول به ونعترف به ولا ننکره بوجه من الوجوه. إنما الخلاف بيننا وبينهم فى أنا نثبت أمرا آخر، وراء ذلك. وهم ينكرونه. وسنذكر، أن ذلك الشيء ما هو؟ 📚 (Al-Arbaʾīn Fī Uṣūl al-Dīn p. 249) • Al-Rāzī continues: *❝So that which the Muʾtazilah say that it is permitted (yajūz) that the living [entity] is [considered] mutakallim (a speaker) on account of speech (kalām) that is established in other [than Him] - is true and truthful. And that which our associates [the Ashʾarīs] say that it is impossible that the [claim of the] living [entity] being considered mutakallim (speaking) on account of speech (kalām) that is established in other [than Him] - is true and truthful. Except that the “kalām” that the Muʾtazilah are referring to has a [particular] meaning and the “kalām” that our associates are referring to has another meaning.❞* فالذي يقوله المعتزلة من أنه يجوز أن يكون الحي متكلما بكلام قائم بالغير: حق وصدق. والذى يقوله أصحابنا من أنه يمتنع أن يكون الحي متكلما بكلام قائم بالغير: حق وصدق. إلا أن الكلام الذي يشير اليه المعتزلة له معنى، والكلام الذى يشير اليه أصحابنا له معنى آخر 📚 (Al-Arbaʾīn Fī Uṣūl al-Dīn p. 251-252) • Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī said: *❝Allah the Almighty described the Qurʾān in His statement: {A Book whose verses have been perfected and then presented in detail}. [11:2] He also said: {We have revealed it (the Qurʾān) as an Arabic Qurʾān}. [**12:20**] This indicates that the Quran is composed of chapters, verses, letters, and phrases, and it indicates that the speech of Allāh the Almighty sometimes appears in Arabic and sometimes in Hebrew. All of this indicates that it is created and originated.❞* انه تعالى وصف القرآن بقوله: «كتاب أحكمت آياته، ثم فصلت» [هود ٢] وقال أيضا: «انا انزلناه قرآنا عربيا» [يوسف ۲۰] وهذا يدل على أن القرآن مركب من السور والآيات والحروف والعبارات، ويدل على أن كلام الله تعالى تارة يكون عربيا وتارة يكون عبريا. وكل ذلك يدل على أنه محدث مخلوق 📚 (Al-Arbaʾīn Fī Uṣūl al-Dīn p. 253) • Abū al-Ḥasan al-Āmidī said: *❝We unanimously agree that the true Qurʾān is not a miracle of the Prophet; rather, the disagreement lies in the matter behind it. What is this true Qurʾān? We say it is the meaning itself (al-Kalām al-Nafsī)... without any dispute that what the Prophet brought of organised letters and articulated sounds is a miracle for him, and it is called Qurʾān and speech. However, it is not eternal. The dispute is solely about what is indicated by these expressions-whether it refers to an eternal, timeless attribute or not.❞* فإنّا مجمعون على أن القرآن الحقيقي ليس بمعجزة الرسول، وإنما الاختلاف في أمر وراءه، وهو أن ذلك القرآن الحقيقي ماذا هو؟ فنحن نقول إنه المعنى القائم بالنفس ... على أن لا تنازع في أن ما جاء به الرسول من الحروف المنتظمة والأصوات المقطعة معجزة له، وأنه يسمى قرآنا وكلامًا، وأن ذلك ليس بقديم، وإنما النزاع في مدلول تلك العبارات هل هو صفة قديمة أزلية أم لا 📚 (Ghāyat al-Marām Fī ʿIlm al-Kalām p. 107-108) • Abū al-Faḍl al-Ījī said: *❝And this which the Muʾtazilah have said, we do not reject it. Rather we speak by it and we call it kalām lafẓī (expressed speech), and we acknowledge it is originated (ḥādith), and that it is not established with His essence. However, we affirm an [additional] matter beyond that which is the meaning established with the self (al-maʾnā al-qāʾimu bil-nafs) which is expressed through pronunciation ... Know that what the Muʾtazilah say regarding the speech of Allāh, the Exalted, which is the creation of voices and letters which indicate the desired meanings, and that they are originated, not established with His, the Exalted’s essence, then we speak with this [saying], there is no dispute between us and between them regarding that as has just preceded.❞* وقالت المعتزلة أصوات وحروف يخلقها الله في غيره كاللوح المحفوظ أو جبريل أو النبي وهو حادث، وهذا لا ننكره لكنا نثبت أمرا وراء ذلك، وهو المعنى القائم بالنفس ونزعم أنه غير العبارات. فاعلم أن ما يقوله المعتزلة وهو خلق الأصوات والحروف ،وكونها حادثة فنحن نقول به،ولا نزاع بيننا وبينهم في ذلك، وما نقوله من كلام النفس: فهم ينكرون ثبوته 📚 (Al-Mawāqif Fī ʿIlm al-Kalām p. 293-294) • Ibrāhīm al-Bājūrī said: *❝And the madhhab of Ahl us-Sunnah is that the Qurʾān, with the meaning of al-Kalām al-Nafsī [the meaning that resides eternally with the Self of Allāh] is not created. And as for the Qurʾān with the meaning of the lafẓ (the wording) that we recite, then it is created. However, it is prohibited that it be said: “The Qurʾān is created” intending by that the wording which we recite - except in the context of teaching. Because it may give the presumption that the Qurʾān, with the meaning of His The Most High’s Kalām [i.e. that which resides in the Self] is created. And for this reason, the scholars withheld from speaking with the Qurʾān [being] created.❞* ومذهب أهل السنة يعني الأشاعرة أن القرآن الكريم بمعنى الكلام النفسي ليس بمخلوق. وأما القرآن بمعنى اللفظ الذي نقرؤه فهو مخلوق لكنه يمتنع أن يقال القرآن مخلوق ويراد به اللفظ الذي نقرؤه إلا في مقام التعليم؛ لأنه ربما أوهم القرآن بمعنى الكلام النفسي مخلوق 📚 (Tuḥfat al-Murīd p. 173) • Ibrāhīm al-Bājūrī said: *❝And the outcome [of this discussion] is that every apparent [text] from the Book and the Sunnah that indicates [its] ḥudūth then it is to be carried to [be in reference] to the wording (lafẓ) that is recited and not the Kalām al-Nafsī.❞* فكل نص دل ظاهره على حدوث القرآن يحمل على اللفظ المنزل على نبينا أي على القرآن بمعنى اللفظ، لا بمعنى الكلام الذي هو المعنى النفسي 📚 (Tuḥfat al-Murīd p. 175)
• Zāhid al-Kawtharī said: *❝And the fact that the Qurʾān, in the tablet and in the tongue of Jibrīl, and the tongue of the prophet and the tongues of all reciters, their hearts and boards are all created and occurent by necessity. And whoever denies that is being stubborn and is beneath speaking to.❞* والواقِع أن القُرْآن فِي اللَّوْح وفِي لِسان جِبْرِيل عَلَيْهِ السَّلام وفِي لِسان النَّبِي ﷺ وألسنة سائِر التالين وقُلُوبهمْ وألواحهم مَخْلُوق حادث مُحدث ضَرُورَة ومن يُنكر ذَلِك يكون مسفسطا ساقِطا من مرتبَة الخطاب 📚 (Maqālāt al-Kawtharī p. 44) • Muḥammad Saʾīd Ramaḍān al-Būṭī said: *❝Here, the Muʾtazilah differed from the majority, as they did not attribute to Allāh a timeless attribute known as “speech” or “internal speech” in this sense. They [the Muʾtazilah] had said: Indeed, the sense, meaning (madlūl) of the expressions (ʿibārāt) to which you have applied the name of “al-Kalām al-Nafsī” returns in reality to the attribute of knowledge (ʿilm), if this meaning is information (khabar), and returns to the attribute of wish, (irādah), if it is a command (amr) or prohibition (nahī). As for the expressions themselves, then their words are ḥādithah, makhlūqah (recent, created) from Allāh - just as we have all agreed [upon this] - for they are not the attribute of Allāh, the Most High, but they are a creation from amongst His creatures, and the [word] “kalām” is nothing but an explanation of this (meaning).* وهنا افترق المعتزلة عن الجمهور، إذ إنهم لم ينسبوا إلى الله تعالى صفة قديمة بهذا المعنى اسمها الكلام أو الكلام النفسي. فقد قالوا: إن مدلول العبارات الذي أطلقتم عليه اسم الكلام النفسي، راجع في الحقيقة إلى صفة العلم إن كان هذا المدلول خبراً، وراجع إلى صفة الإرادة إن كان أمراً أو نهياً ( وقد علمت أنهم يرون الإرادة والأمر بمعنى واحد (أما العبارات نفسها فألفاظ حادثة مخلوقة من الله ، كما اتفقنا جميعاً، فهي ليست صفة الله تعالى ولكنها مخلوق من مخلوقاته، وليس الكلام إلا عبارة عن هذا *When you reflect upon what we have mentioned, you will have grasped the point of difference between the Muʾtazilah and Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jamāʾah [he means the Ashʾarīs], and it is: There is a meaning of the words of the Qurʾān from which the command (al-amr), prohibition (al-nahī), information (al-khabar) are composed of and which are directed to mankind and which is eternal (qadīm) [referring here to the meaning, maʾnā]. So what is the name of this meaning (maʾnā)?* إذا تأملت فيما ذكرناه أدركت النقطة الخلافية بين المعتزلة وأهل السنة والجماعة- ويعني بأهل السنة والجماعة- الأشاعرة، وهي أن هناك معنى لألفاظ القرآن يتكون فيه الأمر والنهي والأخبار المتوجه إلى الناس، وهو قديم. فما اسم هذا المعنى؟ *The Muʾtazilah [say]: It’s name is knowledge (al-ʿilm) if it is informing with knowledge (ikhbār), and wish, desire (al-irādah) if it is command or prohibition.* المعتزلة: اسمه العلم إذا كان أخبارا، والإرادة إذا كان أمرا ونهيا. *The majority (meaning of the Ashʾarīs) [say]: It's name is “al-Kalām al-Nafsī,” and it is an attribute in addition to both knowledge (ʿilm) and wish (irādah), which is established with the essence of Allāh.* الجمهور: اسمه الكلام النفسي، وهو صفة زائدة على كل من العلم والإرادة قائم بذاته تعالى. *As for the speech (al-kalām) which is the wording (al-lafẓ), then they are agreed [the Ashʾarīs and Muʾtazilah] that it is created (makhlūq), and that it is not established with His essence - with the exception of Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal and some of his followers. For they held [the view] that these letters and voices are also eternal in and of themselves, and that they are the meaning of the attribute of al-kalām (speech).* وأما الكلام الذي هو اللفظ، فاتفقوا على أنه مخلوق، وعلى أنه غير قائم بذاته سبحانه. باستثناء أحمد بن حنبل وبعض أتباعه، فقد ذهبوا إلى أن هذه الحروف والأصوات أيضا قديمة بذاتها، وإنها هي المعنى بصفة الكلام. *And we do not enter - after you have come to know the point of agreement and difference [between the Ashʾarīs and the Muʾtazilah] - into anything of debate and argument that have arose regarding this study [of this subject], due to our belief that [short] discourses are easier than [all of that]. And though we believe what the majority [i.e. of the Ashʾarīs] have tended to that the meaning (maʾnā, present with Allāh) which is the [original] sense, or meaning (madlūl) behind of the expressions (ʿibārāt), its name is al-Kalām al-Nafsī”, and that it is an attribute in addition to both the attribute of knowledge and wish (al-ʿilm wal-irādah), except that the Muʾtazilah are all agreed, entirely, with the majority [meaning of Ashʾarī scholars] in affirming this meaning for Allāh, the Most High, and that it is an eternal attribute established with His essence, even if they do not call it “kalām” like we do.* ثم قال: ولا تدخل- بعد أن عرفت نقطة الوفاق والخلاف- في شيء من المناقشة والجدال اللذين قاما حول هذا البحث، لاعتقادنا بأن الخطب أيسر من ذلك، وإن كنا نعتقد ما ذهب إليه الجمهور من أن المعنى الذي هو مدلول العبارات اسمه الكلام النفي، وأنه صفة زائدة على كل من صفتي العلم والإرادة غير أن المعتزلة متفقون على كل مع الجمهور في ثبوت هذا المعنى الله تعالى، وأنه صفة قديمة قائمة بذاته، وإن لم يسموها مثلنا كلاماً *And most of what you hear of the alarming reverberations of the historical difference in this matter, then the origin of it [all] is the difference between Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal - may Allāh be pleased with him - and the other sects such as the Jahmīyyah and Muʾtazilah.❞* ومعظم ما تسمعه من الأصداء الرهيبة للخلاف التاريخي في هذه المسألة، إنما منشؤه الخلاف بين أحمد بن حنبل رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُ والفرق الأخرى كالجهمية والمعتزلة. 📚 (Kubrā al-Yaqīnīyyāt p. 126-127)
Look how confusing, rhetorical and philosophical these beliefs are - yet the Asha’irah believe it is necessary to know these things. Compare this to how simple the manhaj of Ahlus Sunnah is; Allah said and his messenger ﷺ said.
They try give meaning and explanation to thing the prophet saw and the companions never did they ask question and ask how when the companions never did there aqeedah is not that of the sahabah and was invented many hundred years later
Ask this people, did they know Allah more than the prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم that they have to enter all this philosophies. How can you understand The creator when paradise situations is unknown to anyone and our minds have never thought of the kinds of things in paradise. It's just examples given to us. May Allah guide us all to the straight path Aameen
He was asked “if my car broke down on the highway can i call the prophet saw for help” He replied “yes” Refer the the debate he had with Abdul Rahman hassan
even though i believe his belief is misguided and wrong, i still think its better akhi al habeeb to specify his view with regards to Istigatha and not generalise it since this may not be what he believes. Either way, making dua to the Prophet ﷺ is shirk
@@محمد-س3ك9ج Asrar Rashid’s cope is that the reason he isn’t calling upon the ‘dead’ is because they are actually ‘alive’ not in the barzakh but rather there no distinction in us being alive & the awliya being alive
@@Ibnalqayyim345another really dumb argument he brings is, we will seek intercession with the Prophet ﷺ on the day of judgment. "Isn't that receiving aid from the Prophet ﷺ after his ﷺ death?" Boggles my mind that this deviant thinks we are ignorant of the fact that everyone will be resurrected, including the Prophet ﷺ and thus it will be seeking his ﷺ help when we, including the Prophet ﷺ are all alive.
My simple question to these pseudo hanafis is: "why do u reject the creed of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) for a deviant person like raazi" by ash'ari they mean ahlu sunnah wal jam'aat ... hahaha by ash'ari they mean a deviant sect that does in no way subscribe to the creed of three righteous generations.
They believe kalam nafsi is one and undivided. So the Quran and injeel are one and the same or in another word is it part of kalam nafsi or the whole? Pure nonsense. Also whenever these imam of ashairoh said regarding Allah using the word "when", like "when Allah dislike something".. so did Allah previously not dislike that thing and now He dislike it or Allah always dislike that thing from eternity.. again, pure nonsense and contradiction.
قران is actually مقروء in it’s meaning so how can the true Quran being something that is the antonym of read/recited. That’s like the the jahmis saying Allah is samee’ without Sam’
• Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʾarī said:
*❝His speech is one, comprising commands, prohibitions, news, inquiries, promises, and warnings. These aspects relate to expressions within his speech, not to a numerical count within the speech itself. The expressions and words revealed on the tongues of angels to the prophets, peace be upon them, are indications of eternal speech. The indication is created and originated, while what is indicated is eternal.❞*
وكلامه واحد هو أمر ونهي وخبر واستخبار، ووعد ووعيد وهذه الوجوه ترجع إلى اعتبارات في كلامه لا إلى عدد في نفس الكلام. والعبارات والألفاظ المنزلة على لسان الملائكة إلى الأنبياء عليهم السلام دلالات على الكلام الأزلي، والدلالة مخلوقة محدثة، والمدلول قديم أزلي
📚 (Al-Milal wal-Niḥal p. 108)
• Abū Bakr al-Bāqillānī said:
*❝That which is descended, and that which is transmitted from region to region [the Qurʾān], is in reality the statement of Jibrīl, and the evidence for this statement is the saying of Allāh: {Indeed it is the statement of a Noble Messenger (Jibrīl)} … And this is Allāh informing us that the Arabic text we have which is an expression of the speech of Allāh is in reality the statement of Jibrīl and not the statement of a poet or a sorcerer.❞*
والنازل على الحقيقة المنتقل من قطر إلى قطر قول جبريل عليه السلام هذا إخبار من الله تعالى بأن النظم العربي الذي هو قراءة كلام الله تعالى قول جبريل لا قول شاعر ولا قول كاهن
📚 (Al-Inṣāf p. 92)
• Abū al-Maʾālī al-Juwaynī said:
*❝Know after it [the preceding discussion regarding what is “kalām” and “mutakallim”] that [our] speech with the Muʾtazilah and all the opposers in this issue is connected to negation and affirmation. For what they have affirmed and determined to be “kalām” (speech), then in and of itself, it is established, affirmed. And [then] their saying [thereafter], “It is the speech of Allāh, the Most High,” when it is subjected to a scientific study, the speech (kalām) [simply] returns back to [one of] languages and appellations. For the meaning of their saying: “These are the expressions of the speech of Allāh” is that they are His creation, and we do not reject that they are the creation of Allāh, but we prohibit from calling the Creator of [this] speech as “mutakallim” on account of them. So we have come to an agreement [with the Muʾtazilah] upon the meaning but we have disputed, after this agreement, about its appellation (i.e. what to call this meaning).❞*
واعلموا بعدها أن الكلام مع المعتزلة وسائر المخالفين في هذه المسألة يتعلق بالنفي والإثبات، فإن ما أثبتوه وقدّروه كلامًا فهو في نفسه ثابت، إنه كلام الله تعالى إذ [لعل صوابها إذا] رد إلى التحصيل آل الكلام إلى اللغات والتسميات فإن معنى قولهم: هذه العبارات كلام الله، أنها خلقه، ونحن لا ننكر أنها خلق الله، ولكن نمتنع من تسمية خالق الكلام متكلمًا به فقد أطبقنا على المعنى، وتنازعنا بعد الاتفاق في تسميته
📚 (Al-Irshād p. 116-117)
• Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī said:
*❝The cover has been lifted, revealing the existence of a meaning that is implied by the word, in addition to other meanings. We call this speech, which is a kind contrary to sciences, intentions, and beliefs. Its existence is not impossible; rather, it must exist, as it is a type of speech. Thus, it is what is meant by eternal speech. As for the letters, they are created and are indications of speech and the indicator is different to the indicated, nor are they described with the attribute of the indicated. Even if their indication is self-referential, like knowledge, they are still created and indicate an eternal creator. So, how could it be far-fetched for created letters to indicate an eternal attribute?❞*
فقد انكشف الغطاء ولاح وجود معنى هو مدلول اللفظ زائداً على ما عداه من المعاني، ونحن نسمي ذلك كلاماً وهو جنس مخالف للعلوم والإرادات والاعتقادات، وذلك لا يستحيل ثبوته الله تعالى، بل يجب ثبوته؛ فإنه نوع كلام، فإذا هو المعني بالكلام القديم. وأما الحروف فهي حادثة وهي دلالات على الكلام والدليل غير المدلول، ولا يتصف بصفة المدلول، وإن كانت دلالته ذاتية كالعالم فإنه حادث ويدل على صانع قديم، فمن أين يبعد أن تدل حروف حادثة على صفة قديمة.
📚 (Al-Iqtiṣād Fī al-Iʾtiqād p. 187)
• Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī said:
*❝One of them is through sound and letter, and the other is through the inner speech that is not expressed in sound and letter. This is a perfection, and it is with respect to Allāh, the Exalted, neither impossible nor indicative of temporality.❞*
أحدهما: بالصوت والحرف: - والآخر بكلام النفس الذي ليس بصوت وحرف؛ وذلك كمال، وهو في حق الله - تعالى - غير محال ولا هو دال على الحدوث.
📚 (Al-Iqtiṣād Fī al-Iʾtiqād p. 183)
• Al-Shahrastānī said:
*❝So al-Ashʾarī innovated a third saying and judged with the emergence of the letters, and this is the destruction of the ijmāʾ and he judged that what we read is Allāh’s speech only metaphorically not in reality - and this is pure innovation.❞*
فأبدع الأشعري قولاً ثالثاً وقضى بحدوث الحروف وهو خرق الإجماع وحكم بأن ما نقرأه كلام الله مجازاً لا حقيقة وهو عين الابتداع
📚 (Nihāyat al-Aqdām p. 313)
• Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī said:
*❝We dispute the application of the terms “the Qurʾān” and “the speech of Allāh” to these letters and sounds. What they (the Muʾtazilah) have mentioned as evidence only implies the Qurʾān’s createdness with this interpretation, which is unanimously agreed upon. However, thereafter, we claim a quality inherent to the essence of Allah and assert its primordial nature. We have explained that this attribute cannot be described as Arabic, non-Arabic, clear, or ambiguous because all of these are attributes of speech, which consists of letters and sounds. Consequently, as for the speech they attempted to prove is created, we do not dispute its created. However, the speech for which we claim primordiality does not align with the evidence they presented.❞*
ننازع في إطلاق لفظ "القرآن" و "كلام الله تعالى" على هذه الحروف والأصوات. وما ذكروه [أي: المعتزلة] من الأدلة فهو إنما يفيد حدوث القرآن بهذا التفسير، وذلك متفق عليه، وإنما نحن بعد ذلك ندعي صفة قائمة بذات الله تعالى وندعي قدمها . وقد بينا أن تلك الصفة يستحيل وصفها بكونها عربية وعجمية ومحكمة ومتشابهة، لأن كل ذلك من صفات الكلام الذي هو عبارة عن الحروف والأصوات. والحاصل أن الكلام الذي حاولوا إثبات حدوثه، فنحن لا ننازعهم في حدوثه، والكلام الذي ندعي قدمه لا يجري فيه ما ذكروه من الأدلة
📚 (Nihāyat al-ʿUqūl 2/325)
• Fakhr al-Din al-Razi said:
*❝The Qurʾān is divided into that which is established in the Essence of Allāh, the Eternal Attribute, and the letters and sounds which we have with us. And there is no dispute that the words which are constructed from these letters and sounds are originated and created and the challenge to bring something like the Qurʾān was with this (the created Qurʾān) and not the Eternal Attribute.❞*
أنَّ القُرْآنَ اسْمٌ يُقالُ بِالِاشْتِراكِ عَلى الصِّفَةِ القَدِيمَةِ القائِمَةِ بِذاتِ اللَّه تَعالى، وعَلى هَذِهِ الحُرُوفِ والأصْواتِ، ولا نِزاعَ فِي أنَّ الكَلِماتِ المُرَكَّبَةَ مِن هَذِهِ الحُرُوفِ والأصْواتِ مُحْدَثَةٌ مَخْلُوقَةٌ، والتَّحَدِّي إنَّما وقَعَ بِها لا بِالصِّفَةِ القَدِيمَةِ.
📚 (Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb 17/101)
• Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī said:
*❝If you understand this, we say: When the Almighty wills something or dislikes something, He creates these specific sounds in a particular body to indicate His will for that specific matter or His dislike for it, or to signify His ruling on it, whether in affirmation or negation. This is what is meant by the statement that the Almighty speaks.❞*
إذا عرفت هذا فنقول: انه تعالى إذا أراد شيئا أو كره شيئا، خلق هذه الأصوات المخصوصة فى جسم من الأجسام، لتدل هذه الأصوات على كونه تعالى مريدا لذلك الشيء المعين، أو كارها له، أو كونه حاكما به بالنفي أو بالإثبات. وهذا هو المراد من كونه تعالى متكلما
📚 (Al-Arbaʾīn Fī Uṣūl al-Dīn p. 248)
At the end al-Rāzī says:
*❝So it becomes established on account of what we have mentioned: That Allāh being “mutakallim” (one who speaks) with the meaning that is said by the Muʾtazilah is what we say, and we acknowledge it, and we do not reject it from any angle at all. Indeed, the difference between us and them is that we affirm another matter, beyond this, which they reject. And we shall mention, what that thing is.❞*
فثبت بما ذكرنا: أن كونه تعالى متكلما بالمعنى الذي يقوله المعتزلة» مما نقول به ونعترف به ولا ننکره بوجه من الوجوه. إنما الخلاف بيننا وبينهم فى أنا نثبت أمرا آخر، وراء ذلك. وهم ينكرونه. وسنذكر، أن ذلك الشيء ما هو؟
📚 (Al-Arbaʾīn Fī Uṣūl al-Dīn p. 249)
• Al-Rāzī continues:
*❝So that which the Muʾtazilah say that it is permitted (yajūz) that the living [entity] is [considered] mutakallim (a speaker) on account of speech (kalām) that is established in other [than Him] - is true and truthful. And that which our associates [the Ashʾarīs] say that it is impossible that the [claim of the] living [entity] being considered mutakallim (speaking) on account of speech (kalām) that is established in other [than Him] - is true and truthful. Except that the “kalām” that the Muʾtazilah are referring to has a [particular] meaning and the “kalām” that our associates are referring to has another meaning.❞*
فالذي يقوله المعتزلة من أنه يجوز أن يكون الحي متكلما بكلام قائم بالغير: حق وصدق. والذى يقوله أصحابنا من أنه يمتنع أن يكون الحي متكلما بكلام قائم بالغير: حق وصدق. إلا أن الكلام الذي يشير اليه المعتزلة له معنى، والكلام الذى يشير اليه أصحابنا له معنى آخر
📚 (Al-Arbaʾīn Fī Uṣūl al-Dīn p. 251-252)
• Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī said:
*❝Allah the Almighty described the Qurʾān in His statement: {A Book whose verses have been perfected and then presented in detail}. [11:2] He also said: {We have revealed it (the Qurʾān) as an Arabic Qurʾān}. [**12:20**] This indicates that the Quran is composed of chapters, verses, letters, and phrases, and it indicates that the speech of Allāh the Almighty sometimes appears in Arabic and sometimes in Hebrew. All of this indicates that it is created and originated.❞*
انه تعالى وصف القرآن بقوله: «كتاب أحكمت آياته، ثم فصلت» [هود ٢] وقال أيضا: «انا انزلناه قرآنا عربيا» [يوسف ۲۰] وهذا يدل على أن القرآن مركب من السور والآيات والحروف والعبارات، ويدل على أن كلام الله تعالى تارة يكون عربيا وتارة يكون عبريا. وكل ذلك يدل على أنه محدث مخلوق
📚 (Al-Arbaʾīn Fī Uṣūl al-Dīn p. 253)
• Abū al-Ḥasan al-Āmidī said:
*❝We unanimously agree that the true Qurʾān is not a miracle of the Prophet; rather, the disagreement lies in the matter behind it. What is this true Qurʾān? We say it is the meaning itself (al-Kalām al-Nafsī)... without any dispute that what the Prophet brought of organised letters and articulated sounds is a miracle for him, and it is called Qurʾān and speech. However, it is not eternal. The dispute is solely about what is indicated by these expressions-whether it refers to an eternal, timeless attribute or not.❞*
فإنّا مجمعون على أن القرآن الحقيقي ليس بمعجزة الرسول، وإنما الاختلاف في أمر وراءه، وهو أن ذلك القرآن الحقيقي ماذا هو؟ فنحن نقول إنه المعنى القائم بالنفس ... على أن لا تنازع في أن ما جاء به الرسول من الحروف المنتظمة والأصوات المقطعة معجزة له، وأنه يسمى قرآنا وكلامًا، وأن ذلك ليس بقديم، وإنما النزاع في مدلول تلك العبارات هل هو صفة قديمة أزلية أم لا
📚 (Ghāyat al-Marām Fī ʿIlm al-Kalām p. 107-108)
• Abū al-Faḍl al-Ījī said:
*❝And this which the Muʾtazilah have said, we do not reject it. Rather we speak by it and we call it kalām lafẓī (expressed speech), and we acknowledge it is originated (ḥādith), and that it is not established with His essence. However, we affirm an [additional] matter beyond that which is the meaning established with the self (al-maʾnā al-qāʾimu bil-nafs) which is expressed through pronunciation ... Know that what the Muʾtazilah say regarding the speech of Allāh, the Exalted, which is the creation of voices and letters which indicate the desired meanings, and that they are originated, not established with His, the Exalted’s essence, then we speak with this [saying], there is no dispute between us and between them regarding that as has just preceded.❞*
وقالت المعتزلة أصوات وحروف يخلقها الله في غيره كاللوح المحفوظ أو جبريل أو النبي وهو حادث، وهذا لا ننكره لكنا نثبت أمرا وراء ذلك، وهو المعنى القائم بالنفس ونزعم أنه غير العبارات. فاعلم أن ما يقوله المعتزلة وهو خلق الأصوات والحروف ،وكونها حادثة فنحن نقول به،ولا نزاع بيننا وبينهم في ذلك، وما نقوله من كلام النفس: فهم ينكرون ثبوته
📚 (Al-Mawāqif Fī ʿIlm al-Kalām p. 293-294)
• Ibrāhīm al-Bājūrī said:
*❝And the madhhab of Ahl us-Sunnah is that the Qurʾān, with the meaning of al-Kalām al-Nafsī [the meaning that resides eternally with the Self of Allāh] is not created. And as for the Qurʾān with the meaning of the lafẓ (the wording) that we recite, then it is created. However, it is prohibited that it be said: “The Qurʾān is created” intending by that the wording which we recite - except in the context of teaching. Because it may give the presumption that the Qurʾān, with the meaning of His The Most High’s Kalām [i.e. that which resides in the Self] is created. And for this reason, the scholars withheld from speaking with the Qurʾān [being] created.❞*
ومذهب أهل السنة يعني الأشاعرة أن القرآن الكريم بمعنى الكلام النفسي ليس بمخلوق. وأما القرآن بمعنى اللفظ الذي نقرؤه فهو مخلوق لكنه يمتنع أن يقال القرآن مخلوق ويراد به اللفظ الذي نقرؤه إلا في مقام التعليم؛ لأنه ربما أوهم القرآن بمعنى الكلام النفسي مخلوق
📚 (Tuḥfat al-Murīd p. 173)
• Ibrāhīm al-Bājūrī said:
*❝And the outcome [of this discussion] is that every apparent [text] from the Book and the Sunnah that indicates [its] ḥudūth then it is to be carried to [be in reference] to the wording (lafẓ) that is recited and not the Kalām al-Nafsī.❞*
فكل نص دل ظاهره على حدوث القرآن يحمل على اللفظ المنزل على نبينا أي على القرآن بمعنى اللفظ، لا بمعنى الكلام الذي هو المعنى النفسي
📚 (Tuḥfat al-Murīd p. 175)
• Zāhid al-Kawtharī said:
*❝And the fact that the Qurʾān, in the tablet and in the tongue of Jibrīl, and the tongue of the prophet and the tongues of all reciters, their hearts and boards are all created and occurent by necessity. And whoever denies that is being stubborn and is beneath speaking to.❞*
والواقِع أن القُرْآن فِي اللَّوْح وفِي لِسان جِبْرِيل عَلَيْهِ السَّلام وفِي لِسان النَّبِي ﷺ وألسنة سائِر التالين وقُلُوبهمْ وألواحهم مَخْلُوق حادث مُحدث ضَرُورَة ومن يُنكر ذَلِك يكون مسفسطا ساقِطا من مرتبَة الخطاب
📚 (Maqālāt al-Kawtharī p. 44)
• Muḥammad Saʾīd Ramaḍān al-Būṭī said:
*❝Here, the Muʾtazilah differed from the majority, as they did not attribute to Allāh a timeless attribute known as “speech” or “internal speech” in this sense. They [the Muʾtazilah] had said: Indeed, the sense, meaning (madlūl) of the expressions (ʿibārāt) to which you have applied the name of “al-Kalām al-Nafsī” returns in reality to the attribute of knowledge (ʿilm), if this meaning is information (khabar), and returns to the attribute of wish, (irādah), if it is a command (amr) or prohibition (nahī). As for the expressions themselves, then their words are ḥādithah, makhlūqah (recent, created) from Allāh - just as we have all agreed [upon this] - for they are not the attribute of Allāh, the Most High, but they are a creation from amongst His creatures, and the [word] “kalām” is nothing but an explanation of this (meaning).*
وهنا افترق المعتزلة عن الجمهور، إذ إنهم لم ينسبوا إلى الله تعالى صفة قديمة بهذا المعنى اسمها الكلام أو الكلام النفسي. فقد قالوا: إن مدلول العبارات الذي أطلقتم عليه اسم الكلام النفسي، راجع في الحقيقة إلى صفة العلم إن كان هذا المدلول خبراً، وراجع إلى صفة الإرادة إن كان أمراً أو نهياً ( وقد علمت أنهم يرون الإرادة والأمر بمعنى واحد (أما العبارات نفسها فألفاظ حادثة مخلوقة من الله ، كما اتفقنا جميعاً، فهي ليست صفة الله تعالى ولكنها مخلوق من مخلوقاته، وليس الكلام إلا عبارة عن هذا
*When you reflect upon what we have mentioned, you will have grasped the point of difference between the Muʾtazilah and Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jamāʾah [he means the Ashʾarīs], and it is: There is a meaning of the words of the Qurʾān from which the command (al-amr), prohibition (al-nahī), information (al-khabar) are composed of and which are directed to mankind and which is eternal (qadīm) [referring here to the meaning, maʾnā]. So what is the name of this meaning (maʾnā)?*
إذا تأملت فيما ذكرناه أدركت النقطة الخلافية بين المعتزلة وأهل السنة والجماعة- ويعني بأهل السنة والجماعة- الأشاعرة، وهي أن هناك معنى لألفاظ القرآن يتكون فيه الأمر والنهي والأخبار المتوجه إلى الناس، وهو قديم. فما اسم هذا المعنى؟
*The Muʾtazilah [say]: It’s name is knowledge (al-ʿilm) if it is informing with knowledge (ikhbār), and wish, desire (al-irādah) if it is command or prohibition.*
المعتزلة: اسمه العلم إذا كان أخبارا، والإرادة إذا كان أمرا ونهيا.
*The majority (meaning of the Ashʾarīs) [say]: It's name is “al-Kalām al-Nafsī,” and it is an attribute in addition to both knowledge (ʿilm) and wish (irādah), which is established with the essence of Allāh.*
الجمهور: اسمه الكلام النفسي، وهو صفة زائدة على كل من العلم والإرادة قائم بذاته تعالى.
*As for the speech (al-kalām) which is the wording (al-lafẓ), then they are agreed [the Ashʾarīs and Muʾtazilah] that it is created (makhlūq), and that it is not established with His essence - with the exception of Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal and some of his followers. For they held [the view] that these letters and voices are also eternal in and of themselves, and that they are the meaning of the attribute of al-kalām (speech).*
وأما الكلام الذي هو اللفظ، فاتفقوا على أنه مخلوق، وعلى أنه غير قائم بذاته سبحانه. باستثناء أحمد بن حنبل وبعض أتباعه، فقد ذهبوا إلى أن هذه الحروف والأصوات أيضا قديمة بذاتها، وإنها هي المعنى بصفة الكلام.
*And we do not enter - after you have come to know the point of agreement and difference [between the Ashʾarīs and the Muʾtazilah] - into anything of debate and argument that have arose regarding this study [of this subject], due to our belief that [short] discourses are easier than [all of that]. And though we believe what the majority [i.e. of the Ashʾarīs] have tended to that the meaning (maʾnā, present with Allāh) which is the [original] sense, or meaning (madlūl) behind of the expressions (ʿibārāt), its name is al-Kalām al-Nafsī”, and that it is an attribute in addition to both the attribute of knowledge and wish (al-ʿilm wal-irādah), except that the Muʾtazilah are all agreed, entirely, with the majority [meaning of Ashʾarī scholars] in affirming this meaning for Allāh, the Most High, and that it is an eternal attribute established with His essence, even if they do not call it “kalām” like we do.*
ثم قال: ولا تدخل- بعد أن عرفت نقطة الوفاق والخلاف- في شيء من المناقشة والجدال اللذين قاما حول هذا البحث، لاعتقادنا بأن الخطب أيسر من ذلك، وإن كنا نعتقد ما ذهب إليه الجمهور من أن المعنى الذي هو مدلول العبارات اسمه الكلام النفي، وأنه صفة زائدة على كل من صفتي العلم والإرادة غير أن المعتزلة متفقون على كل مع الجمهور في ثبوت هذا المعنى الله تعالى، وأنه صفة قديمة قائمة بذاته، وإن لم يسموها مثلنا كلاماً
*And most of what you hear of the alarming reverberations of the historical difference in this matter, then the origin of it [all] is the difference between Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal - may Allāh be pleased with him - and the other sects such as the Jahmīyyah and Muʾtazilah.❞*
ومعظم ما تسمعه من الأصداء الرهيبة للخلاف التاريخي في هذه المسألة، إنما منشؤه الخلاف بين أحمد بن حنبل رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُ والفرق الأخرى كالجهمية والمعتزلة.
📚 (Kubrā al-Yaqīnīyyāt p. 126-127)
Look how confusing, rhetorical and philosophical these beliefs are - yet the Asha’irah believe it is necessary to know these things. Compare this to how simple the manhaj of Ahlus Sunnah is; Allah said and his messenger ﷺ said.
@@louisdeniau8571 can you elaborate
They try give meaning and explanation to thing the prophet saw and the companions never did they ask question and ask how when the companions never did there aqeedah is not that of the sahabah and was invented many hundred years later
Ask this people, did they know Allah more than the prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم that they have to enter all this philosophies. How can you understand The creator when paradise situations is unknown to anyone and our minds have never thought of the kinds of things in paradise. It's just examples given to us. May Allah guide us all to the straight path Aameen
Asrar Rashid the same person who allows asking the dead for help
He was asked “if my car broke down on the highway can i call the prophet saw for help”
He replied “yes”
Refer the the debate he had with Abdul Rahman hassan
even though i believe his belief is misguided and wrong, i still think its better akhi al habeeb to specify his view with regards to Istigatha and not generalise it since this may not be what he believes.
Either way, making dua to the Prophet ﷺ is shirk
@@محمد-س3ك9ج Asrar Rashid’s cope is that the reason he isn’t calling upon the ‘dead’ is because they are actually ‘alive’ not in the barzakh but rather there no distinction in us being alive & the awliya being alive
@@Ibnalqayyim345another really dumb argument he brings is, we will seek intercession with the Prophet ﷺ on the day of judgment. "Isn't that receiving aid from the Prophet ﷺ after his ﷺ death?"
Boggles my mind that this deviant thinks we are ignorant of the fact that everyone will be resurrected, including the Prophet ﷺ and thus it will be seeking his ﷺ help when we, including the Prophet ﷺ are all alive.
Show we one evidence of your claim ?
The same guy that got owned by Ustadh Abderrahman Hassan. Seems he couldn't take the L
This are deep and difficult concepts hard for my mind to understand.
He is Sufi Barelvi
My simple question to these pseudo hanafis is: "why do u reject the creed of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) for a deviant person like raazi"
by ash'ari they mean ahlu sunnah wal jam'aat ... hahaha
by ash'ari they mean a deviant sect that does in no way subscribe to the creed of three righteous generations.
They believe kalam nafsi is one and undivided. So the Quran and injeel are one and the same or in another word is it part of kalam nafsi or the whole? Pure nonsense.
Also whenever these imam of ashairoh said regarding Allah using the word "when", like "when Allah dislike something".. so did Allah previously not dislike that thing and now He dislike it or Allah always dislike that thing from eternity.. again, pure nonsense and contradiction.
Who translated these statements ?
بارك الله فيك for exposing these deviants
Isske saath charger milega ke nahi aur bluetooth keyboard use kar sakte he kya for word, PPT
can u send the original video where asrar says this?
قران is actually مقروء in it’s meaning so how can the true Quran being something that is the antonym of read/recited. That’s like the the jahmis saying Allah is samee’ without Sam’
is this for or against asrar rashid ?