0:28 Knowing Dr Ramon Harvey, his book 1:49 his academic background 6:11 affinities with Imam al-Maturidi 8:05 summarizing the precedent 10:44 Why not enough focus on Maturidis ? 17:17 how much of it's related to linguistic reasons ? 20:36 brief overview of Imam al-Maturidi's works 24:06 Dr Harvey's book rely on "Kitab-ut Tawhid" 27:08 on Dr Rudolph's work on Imam al-Maturidi 30:22 what makes Maturidi creed unique (compared to ash'arism)? 34:29 rational inclinations of Hanafi thought 36:10 Hanafi ash'arism and what Imam al-Maturidi brings 38:59 positif and negatif theology 41:59 God's actions are eternal 43:29 on "Hikma (Wisdom)" in maturidism 49:27 on Divine speech 50:40 difference with Ashari conception on Divine speech 53:41 Maturidi stance on God's intention 55:52 on moral properties, revelation 1:01:52 quick summary 1:04:25 theological side 1:06:51 link in the description
‘Ahl al-sunnah wa’l-jama‘ah is three groups: Atharis, whose leader is Ahmad b. Hanbal, may Allah be pleased with him; Ash‘aris, whose leader is Abu’l-Hasan al-Ash‘ari, may Allah have mercy on him; and Maturidis, whose leader is Abu Mansur al-Maturidi.’1
May Allah bless Dr Ramon and make him steadfast upon the truth. Some criticisms: As for the doctors statement rejecting attribution of Fiqh al-Akbar II, westerners stated this based off of lack of historical understanding, circular reasoning, misunderstandings and ignoring the isnad tradition. Lack of historical understanding: "Fiqh al-Akbar cannot be Abu Hanifa's work as it mentions the Qadariyyah who come after Abu Hanifah" Correction: The Prophet Salallahu Alayhi Wa Salam mentions (prophesises) the Qadariyyah, and they were already a sect at the time of Abu Hanifah. The fact that he names them and naming them is more popular later cannot be used to disprove the attribution of Fiqh al-Akbar, it is only proof that he is one of the scholars after the prophet alayhis salam to make mention of the Qadariyyah. Circular Reasoning: "The work contains later (maturidi ideas) and therefore cannot contain the ideas of Abu Hanifa as he did not have these later ideas" Exposition: What they are basically saying is, "Abu Hanifah does not have later Maturidi ideas and Fiqh al-Akbar II has later Maturidi ideas, therefore Abu Hanifah did not write Fiqh al-Akbar II, therefore Abu Hanifa did not have later Maturidi ideas" What is the independent evidence that Abu Hanifah does not have later Maturidi ideas? Note: A similar line of circular reasoning may be employed to try and question whether the Prophet Alayhis Salam prophesised the Qadariyyah, ignoring that he is a prophet. You cannot disprove a prophet by saying that "as what he has said has come true, the statement must have come after" as you are essentially assuming prophesy is impossible and this assumption is what you are tring to prove (circular reasoning). Of course physical evidence of prophesy coming true whilst manuscripts in the past record the prophet's statements can be given as examples of the reality of prophesy, e.g. lofty buildings in Sihah Sittah - find any manuscript from hundreds to over a thousand years ago. Or the prophesy relating to Isis, go read the manuscript of Nuaym bin Hammad's Kitab al-Fitan, hundreds of years old, or even a printed edition from over twenty years ago. Misunderstandings by Western Scholars: A certain western academic writes that it cannot be his work as it changes tense from the first person to third person, therefore someone started by claiming these are the words of Abu Hanifah and then dropped the pretense later on. Correction: Abu Hanifah quotes the well known statement of affirmation of Iman, "Amantu Billahi..." found in Hadith Jibreel, this is the reason for tense change. Note: Similar to this is the criticism that he uses the terminology of the philosophers. I have read that Sarfaraz Khan makes the point that this terminology was present in the time of Abu Hanifa and it is well known that Abu Hanifa used to refute heretics (e.g. see Akhbar Abi Hanifa, Tarikh Baghdad, Manaqib Abi Hanifa li Makki, Athmar al-Janiyya li Mulla Ali Qari, ‘Uqud al-Jaman li Salihi, Khayratul Hisan li Haytami etc.) Kufa was filled with such heretical philosophies likely using this term. Moreover I have read that Ibn Khaldun writes that the full translation of Icledius was completed in the time of Abu Ja'far, who famously imprisoned Abu Hanifa. That advanced greek terminology including and in excess of the terms Abu Hanifa used was published during the end of Abu Hanifa life, is enough proof that Abu Hanifa could have used more general terms in his fiqh al akbar. Ignoring the Isnad Tradition: Shaykh Wahbi ibn Sulayman Ghawiji, who accepts Fiqh al-Akbar II to be from Abu Hanifah, bases his acceptance of the attribution on his seeing a good manuscript in Maktaba of Arif Hikmat in Madinah with the following Isnad going back to Abu Hanifa: Ali Ibn Ahmad al-Farisi from Nasr ibn Yahya from Abu Muqatil (aka Hafs ibn Muslim al-Samarqandi) from Isam ibn Yusuf from Hammad Ibn Abu Hanifa from his father. None of them are unknown - AbdruRahman Ibn Yusuf writes biographies of them on his translation of Magnisawi's commentary on fiqh al-Akbar. In summary, Fiqh al-Akbar II is reliably attributed Abu Hanifa (who dictated it to his students). As for Fiqh al-Absat, it has an isnad too.
Yet how can it be three sects, when the hadith clearly speaks of one saved-sect? Well, in this broader view of ahl al-sunnah, the Atharis, Ash‘aris and Maturidis aren’t looked upon as different sects, but different ‘orientations’ or ‘schools’ with the same core tenets. And since all three ‘orientations’ consent to the integrity and authority of the Sunnah and that of the Companions, and to ijma‘ - contrary to the seventy-two other sects - they are all included under the banner of ahl al-sunnah. Differences between them may either be put down to semantics, variations in the branches of the beliefs (furu‘ al-i‘tiqad), or to bonafide errors of ijtihad.
The Traditional Prophetic theological thought was firmly grounded on Allah's inspiration - alwahy. AsSyariah and AlMaturidiyah theological thought are deviated from the prophetic manhaj by adapting and adopting the philosopical truth appraisal methodology. The obvious inadequacy of the philosopical methodology is that the absence of truthfulness testing mechanism. It is circular in the sense that a philosophical claim of truthfulness is began with propositional thought and is verifiable by thought too without mean of testing their true truthfulness. It is a kind of illusion. Philosophy is metaphysically blind.
Philosophy has divided the ummah. If you wamt yo be a simple Muslim truing to follow the sunnah, then you are labelled wahabi and salafi. What innovations have salafis brought? They are not a sect. Maturidis, adjaris, barelvus are sefts from Sufis.
Saying “In a matter that befits his majesty.” after certain aqeedah statements is bid’ah. This is done like disclaimers and the Salaf never did it in this way.
![MV วิถีชีวิตใต้ - ผา อัยย๊ะ [Official MV HD]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nODlkOUu9B0/mqdefault.jpg)
0:28 Knowing Dr Ramon Harvey, his book
1:49 his academic background
6:11 affinities with Imam al-Maturidi
8:05 summarizing the precedent
10:44 Why not enough focus on Maturidis ?
17:17 how much of it's related to linguistic reasons ?
20:36 brief overview of Imam al-Maturidi's works
24:06 Dr Harvey's book rely on "Kitab-ut Tawhid"
27:08 on Dr Rudolph's work on Imam al-Maturidi
30:22 what makes Maturidi creed unique (compared to ash'arism)?
34:29 rational inclinations of Hanafi thought
36:10 Hanafi ash'arism and what Imam al-Maturidi brings
38:59 positif and negatif theology
41:59 God's actions are eternal
43:29 on "Hikma (Wisdom)" in maturidism
49:27 on Divine speech
50:40 difference with Ashari conception on Divine speech
53:41 Maturidi stance on God's intention
55:52 on moral properties, revelation
1:01:52 quick summary
1:04:25 theological side
1:06:51 link in the description
Jazakallahu hayr ahi
‘Ahl al-sunnah wa’l-jama‘ah is three groups: Atharis, whose leader is Ahmad b. Hanbal, may Allah be pleased with him; Ash‘aris, whose leader is Abu’l-Hasan al-Ash‘ari, may Allah have mercy on him; and Maturidis, whose leader is Abu Mansur al-Maturidi.’1
Just ordered the book, I can't wait to read it. Barakallah Beik Ramon, I appreciate your work. I'd love to join that what'sapp group
Great interview, really illuminating
Yes, Shaykh Umar Faruq Abdullah also mentioned Maturidi interacting with buddhist
Exciting stuff. Will need to get the book. Thank you
Very interesting.
May Allah bless Dr Ramon and make him steadfast upon the truth. Some criticisms:
As for the doctors statement rejecting attribution of Fiqh al-Akbar II, westerners stated this based off of lack of historical understanding, circular reasoning, misunderstandings and ignoring the isnad tradition.
Lack of historical understanding: "Fiqh al-Akbar cannot be Abu Hanifa's work as it mentions the Qadariyyah who come after Abu Hanifah" Correction: The Prophet Salallahu Alayhi Wa Salam mentions (prophesises) the Qadariyyah, and they were already a sect at the time of Abu Hanifah. The fact that he names them and naming them is more popular later cannot be used to disprove the attribution of Fiqh al-Akbar, it is only proof that he is one of the scholars after the prophet alayhis salam to make mention of the Qadariyyah.
Circular Reasoning: "The work contains later (maturidi ideas) and therefore cannot contain the ideas of Abu Hanifa as he did not have these later ideas" Exposition: What they are basically saying is, "Abu Hanifah does not have later Maturidi ideas and Fiqh al-Akbar II has later Maturidi ideas, therefore Abu Hanifah did not write Fiqh al-Akbar II, therefore Abu Hanifa did not have later Maturidi ideas" What is the independent evidence that Abu Hanifah does not have later Maturidi ideas?
Note: A similar line of circular reasoning may be employed to try and question whether the Prophet Alayhis Salam prophesised the Qadariyyah, ignoring that he is a prophet. You cannot disprove a prophet by saying that "as what he has said has come true, the statement must have come after" as you are essentially assuming prophesy is impossible and this assumption is what you are tring to prove (circular reasoning). Of course physical evidence of prophesy coming true whilst manuscripts in the past record the prophet's statements can be given as examples of the reality of prophesy, e.g. lofty buildings in Sihah Sittah - find any manuscript from hundreds to over a thousand years ago. Or the prophesy relating to Isis, go read the manuscript of Nuaym bin Hammad's Kitab al-Fitan, hundreds of years old, or even a printed edition from over twenty years ago.
Misunderstandings by Western Scholars: A certain western academic writes that it cannot be his work as it changes tense from the first person to third person, therefore someone started by claiming these are the words of Abu Hanifah and then dropped the pretense later on. Correction: Abu Hanifah quotes the well known statement of affirmation of Iman, "Amantu Billahi..." found in Hadith Jibreel, this is the reason for tense change.
Note: Similar to this is the criticism that he uses the terminology of the philosophers. I have read that Sarfaraz Khan makes the point that this terminology was present in the time of Abu Hanifa and it is well known that Abu Hanifa used to refute heretics (e.g. see Akhbar Abi Hanifa, Tarikh Baghdad, Manaqib Abi Hanifa li Makki, Athmar al-Janiyya li Mulla Ali Qari, ‘Uqud al-Jaman li Salihi, Khayratul Hisan li Haytami etc.) Kufa was filled with such heretical philosophies likely using this term. Moreover I have read that Ibn Khaldun writes that the full translation of Icledius was completed in the time of Abu Ja'far, who famously imprisoned Abu Hanifa. That advanced greek terminology including and in excess of the terms Abu Hanifa used was published during the end of Abu Hanifa life, is enough proof that Abu Hanifa could have used more general terms in his fiqh al akbar.
Ignoring the Isnad Tradition: Shaykh Wahbi ibn Sulayman Ghawiji, who accepts Fiqh al-Akbar II to be from Abu Hanifah, bases his acceptance of the attribution on his seeing a good manuscript in Maktaba of Arif Hikmat in Madinah with the following Isnad going back to Abu Hanifa:
Ali Ibn Ahmad al-Farisi from Nasr ibn Yahya from Abu Muqatil (aka Hafs ibn Muslim al-Samarqandi) from Isam ibn Yusuf from Hammad Ibn Abu Hanifa from his father.
None of them are unknown - AbdruRahman Ibn Yusuf writes biographies of them on his translation of Magnisawi's commentary on fiqh al-Akbar.
In summary, Fiqh al-Akbar II is reliably attributed Abu Hanifa (who dictated it to his students). As for Fiqh al-Absat, it has an isnad too.
jazakallah khairan
Yet how can it be three sects, when the hadith clearly speaks of one saved-sect? Well, in this broader view of ahl al-sunnah, the Atharis, Ash‘aris and Maturidis aren’t looked upon as different sects, but different ‘orientations’ or ‘schools’ with the same core tenets. And since all three ‘orientations’ consent to the integrity and authority of the Sunnah and that of the Companions, and to ijma‘ - contrary to the seventy-two other sects - they are all included under the banner of ahl al-sunnah. Differences between them may either be put down to semantics, variations in the branches of the beliefs (furu‘ al-i‘tiqad), or to bonafide errors of ijtihad.
This is so basic but can sm1 give me a quick intro to ashari/maturidi theology or refer me to some accessible reads?
hey what have you learned
D u know russian?
Maturudi theology is mostly in the subcontinent, Afghanistan.
Not true, Hanafis are 2/3 Maturidi, Shafi are 1/4, Maliki are 1/16 and Hanbali are 1/24
The Traditional Prophetic theological thought was firmly grounded on Allah's inspiration - alwahy. AsSyariah and AlMaturidiyah theological thought are deviated from the prophetic manhaj by adapting and adopting the philosopical truth appraisal methodology.
The obvious inadequacy of the philosopical methodology is that the absence of truthfulness testing mechanism. It is circular in the sense that a philosophical claim of truthfulness is began with propositional thought and is verifiable by thought too without mean of testing their true truthfulness. It is a kind of illusion. Philosophy is metaphysically blind.
Philosophy has divided the ummah. If you wamt yo be a simple Muslim truing to follow the sunnah, then you are labelled wahabi and salafi. What innovations have salafis brought? They are not a sect. Maturidis, adjaris, barelvus are sefts from Sufis.
Saying “In a matter that befits his majesty.” after certain aqeedah statements is bid’ah. This is done like disclaimers and the Salaf never did it in this way.
Both asha'ari and maturidi are not proper Sunnis .
Salafis and Wahabis sure as hell aren't.
I doubt you even know who the Ash'ari and the Ma'turidi are.
@@zion-istslayer I know them very well.
@@maxmudxareed1345 What do you know about them?
@@zion-istslayer A lot