Wahabi contention: Asharis are forced to believe that Allah’s Will for the creation of time occured before time II

A wahabi put a response to my post “Wahabi contention: Asharis are forced to believe that Allah’s Will for the creation of time occured before time ” in a forum. The below is my answer to that response.

That wahabi said:

Hahaha, it seems like Abu Adam the so called rational Sheikh got irritated from this post of mine and decided to write a response to me. You can tell how irritated and emotional he is to the extent that he even declared me to be a kaafir:

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

It remains to be said that our belief that Aļļaah eternally willed all created things is not in contradiction with sound reason, even though we say that time is created. It is your hateful, kaafir heart and flawed reasoning that mislead you to a conclusion contrary to this fact.

He wrote emotionally and wasn’t thinking straight. Asharis are already so angry that we have the plain and apparent meaning of the Qur’an and authentic hadeeth on our side backed up by the understanding of the Salaf. The only thing that Asharis have to grasp on to is their logic. So when they see a Salafi refute them with logic as well, they go nuts just like how Abu Adam did.

Comment: I am not very emotional, I am just doing what I should be doing, which is to be tough against kuffaar; Aļļaah said about the companions of the Prophet (Al-Fatĥ, 29):

“وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاءُ عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ رُحَمَاءُ بَيْنَهُمْ”,

Meaning: “Those who are with him (the Prophet şallaahu ˆalayhi wasallam) are tough on the blasphemers and are merciful toward one another (as Muslims).”

Accordingly, the rational thing to do here is to treat you toughly.

As for your saying being kufr, this is not my idea, but the traditional judgment of Sunni authorities. Abuu Manşuur ˆAbdulQaahir Al-Bagħdaadiy (429 H), in his book Uşuulu-d-Diin, states about those who say that Aļļaah has a body, or that events happen in Him or His attributes (such as hearing or seeing one thing after another as they happen to creation) : “All those who disagreed with them say that they are blasphemers, so in this respect they are the worst of all the deviant sects.”(P. 338) He also commented: “By claiming that Aļļaah has events happen to Him, they ruined for themselves the proof of the monotheists which holds that bodies are creations since they have events in them. Based on this principle of theirs, they cannot prove that the world has a beginning, and thus they have no way of knowing the Creator of the world. Consequently, they are like all others who do not know Him.” (Uşuulu-d-Diin 337-338) . Ed. That is, they are idolaters.

In case anyone is wondering who Abū Mansūr is, Al-Dhahabīy described him in his book Sīyar A’lām Al-Nubalā’ as: “the great, outstanding, and encyclopedic scholar…. He used to teach 17 different subjects and his brilliance became the source for proverbs.” Al-Dhahabīy said further that he would have liked to write a separate, more complete article about him, and quoted Abū ‘Uthmān Al-Sābūnīy saying: “Abū Mansūr is by scholarly consensus counted among the heads of the scholars of belief and the methodology of jurisprudence, as well as a front figure of Islām.”

Wahabi said:

Let me expose his logically fallacious arguments.
He said:

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

This is ascribing to Aļļaah, who is eternally without a beginning, attributes that did not exist and then became existing.

and

Quote:

It has been established with unequivocal proofs that something eternal without a beginning cannot have attributes that have a beginning. This is because this will that you describe as emerging from non-existence, and ascribe to Aļļaah, would be an attribute of perfection, which means that Aļļaah would be lacking this perfection before it occurred.

He is attacking strawman. I never said that Allah’s attribute of “will” began to exist. I believe that Allah has had the ability to will from eternity. However, what I do believe is what the Qur’an states and that is that Allah wills whenever He pleases (e.g. when He wanted to create the universe He said Be and it immediately came). So just because Allah can temporally will something to occur, it doesn’t logically follow that this entire attribute of will is not eternal. More on this below.

So here we see the first logically ridiculous Ashari response.

Comment: The problem is that you do not understand the implications of what you are saying. You said that Allaah was not willing to create the world, and then He became willing, upon which the world immediately existed. This means that Allaah was not willing and then became willing, according to you. This willing is an attribute according to you, because it occurred in the Creator Himself, i.e. exists in Him. This shows that you think His will is like our will, which is in reality a collection of many different wills at many different times. So for example, when I willed to write you the first time, this was one will, and then it passed, and now I am willing something else. This is not in reality one will, but many different wills associated with me. I might call it “my will” in the singular, but in actual reality it is a collection of events, many different existing, and then annihilated wills, spread over time. You think Allaah’s will is like that, and this is because you think the Creator is like what He creates.

Your claim of being able to detect logical fallacies, and then your attempt to expose them seriously makes me think you have mental issues. I don’t mean that just as an attempt to mock or make you angry, it honestly does. Your level of delusion indicates that you have difficulty distinguishing between what is real and what is not. Do you think an argument becomes logically fallacious by merely labeling it as such? Just like you think that a body is not a body if you say it is not a body? And just like you say an emergent thing is not created, if you say it is not created? Please see a doctor, maybe he can help you, and then maybe you will even become Muslim, and we can have a big party celebrating your conversion.

Wahabi said:

Moving on…

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

The reality of the matter, however, is that the People of the Truth, the People of the Sunnah, Ashˆariyys and Maaturiidiyys, believe that what Aļļaah has willed to happen by His beginninglessly eternal Will, happens at its specified time, and without any delay.

When I say “delayed” I didn’t mean to say that Asharis believe that Allah is incapable of having the effect come out immediately if He wanted to. My only point was to show that you don’t believe that the cause and effect are simultaneous.

Comment: Actually, we do not call Allaah or His Will a cause at all. I already explained this in my post.

Wahabi said:

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

So you made, according to your claim, Aļļaah ever- and continuously changing. This is in disagreement with all sound minded people in history, who all said, “Aļļaah is the one that is clear of imperfection – He changes things, and does not change.”

Yes Allah does not change, but only sounded minded people unlike you understand what this actually means.

You understand “change” as “immobility”, which is absurd. No rational person understands it like this. Rather, what we mean by Allah not changing is that Allah remains fully God in all situations and His attributes of love, justice, mercy, power, goodness and other attributes are not diminished or corrupted under any circumstances.

Comment: This means you believe that He changes, but that His status of being god remains unchanged. This is hardly a categorical denial of change, but a denial of change in status only.

As for your saying that we understand change as immobility. I suppose you mean “no change as immobility.” This is a lie, and based on your lack of understanding of the concept of eternity, and on your principle that nothing exists except bodies and their attributes, and that Allaah is a body. What we say is that Allaah wills without a beginning, and without an end, and without renewal or change, because renewal and change need to be brought into existence according to a specification, which means that they are in need of a creator. This is because creation’s need for a creator is based on the fact that it needs specification for how it is to be, and needs to be brought into existence.

Wahabi said:

So how on earth does Allah wanting to will for something temporally indicate any intrinsic changes in Him?

Comment: because if you say that Allaah’s will for something “occurs,” i.e. begins to exist, then this is a temporary change in His will according to you, and His Will is an attribute that is intrinsic to Him. Does this really need to be explained?

Wahabi said:

The problem with your absurd understanding of “changeless” disallows Allah of ever performing any new acts. Rather, that is false and I gave you the correct understanding of changeless in context to Allah and on that correct understanding it doesn’t logically follow that Allah willing temporally implies any changes or compromises in His attributes. (just because He exercises His attribute of will at a non-eternal point that doesn’t mean that His actual attribute of will has changed)

Comment: Leave it to a Wahabi to say that change doesn’t mean change, just like they say created is not the same as being brought into existence etc…. First he says Allaah does not change, then he says, “just because He exercises His attribute of will at a non-eternal point that doesn’t mean that His actual attribute of will has changed.” Actually it does, because you are saying that His will has an occurrence in it, which is (according to you) an act of specifying that did not previously exist, and then existed. This means that the will is changing, because it is willing something at this point, and then something else at another.

Your statement: “changeless disallows Allah of ever performing any new acts,” is a strange one. Do you not know that Allaah has predestined everything? What is this newness you speak of? Don’t you know that Allaah knows everything that will be in the future? Your problem is, again, that you think of Allaah in human terms.

Wahabi said:

Moving on…

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

In your third point, you said, “Asharis believe that time is the created effect out of Allah’s pre-eternal will being implemented,” and then you claimed this means that Allah’s pre-eternal will is the cause of time’s existence. This is not the case. Rather, we believe that time is a matter of consideration, tied to our minds, for all created things, as any creation may become nonexistent after its existence. We also believe that the existence of time, like other created things, is according to the beginningless Will, Power and Knowledge of Aļļaah.

What???????????????? And this is the man who accuses of me intellectual stagnation????

Did you not just admit that you believe that time is a creation when you said:

Quote:

time is created in our view

If you believe that time is a creation, it logically follows that you believe that it is an effect. Things are either uncaused or caused. Created objects are not uncaused, so that means that they are caused and are effects.

So since time is an effect you must believe that there is a cause to it. What is that cause, besides the Will of Allah wanting it to come into existence?

He defends this position by saying:

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

We do not say that Aļļaah’s Will is the cause of time’s existence, as you claim, because we do not call Aļļaah a cause. Rather He is the creator of causes and effects. A cause, literally speaking, is something that begins and then ends when its effect takes place, and Aļļaah’s Will is eternal and therefore unchanging. Strictly speaking then, Aļļaah’s Will is not a cause, and the world is not its effect, because Allaah’s Will does not begin or end.

We are playing word games here. If we were to use Abu Adam’s logic that means we can’t say that Allah is the cause for the creation of the universe because…

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

literally speaking, is something that begins and then ends when its effect takes place

There is absolutely no foundation for this definition of cause. This Abu Adam is a fake and knows absolutely nothing about kalaam, which he claims to adore.

Aristotle distinguished between four kinds of causes and one of them is the “efficient cause”. For example, if Khalid throws the basketball into the hoop, Khalid is the “efficient cause” for the effect (i.e. basketball going into the hoop). No philosopher would say “Khalid is not the cause because the cause must cease to exist after the effect is gone, but since Khalid would still exist after the ball falls into the hoop, he can’t be the cause”, which is what Abu Adam’s definition of the word “cause” would necessitate.

So Abu Adam is playing word games and redefining words unjustifiably.

Cause is the reason for bringing out the effect. Asharis believe that Allah’s Will brings out the creation of time because Allah willed time to be created. It logically follows then that Allah’s Will is the cause. Full stop. I am not an intellectually bankrupt Ashari to fall for these semantical distortions and games.

Comment: I explained what I meant, and why, so I was not playing word games. Rather, I was making a point, which was that Allaah’s Will is not like what we usually refer to as cause, in that it is not something that occurs. Since the attribute of Will is the topic, and it does not have a beginning or an end, I did not want to use the word cause, even though I might be less stringent in other contexts and use it as a translation of tarjiiĥ. The second is that one cannot call Allaah or His Will a cause, because we have no revealed permission to do that, and this word is both misleading and lacks a sense of glorification. So all this noise on your part is meaningless clamor. If neither Allaah, nor His attributes can be called cause, then only creation is left, and creation begins and ends, so causes and effects begin and end. Moreover, causes are no more than signs of their effect, and have no actual and real influence, because all emergent events are specified and brought into existence by Allaah. This is in any case not the topic of discussion.

Wahabi said:

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

To clarify, we know that Aļļaah has a will, because He specified how creation is to be. Someone who believes this might claim that this will’s existence is intrinsically necessary in itself, or intrinsically possible in itself, there is no third alternative. What we believe is that its existence is necessary, and not merely possible, which means that Aļļaah’s Will is eternal and does not change.

Yes, the attribute of Allah’s will is intrinsically necessary and not just possible, however it is possible for Allah to exercise this attribute of His whenever He wants to. You can’t say that Allah does not have the ability to exercise a new will right now. You are confusing implementation of attribute with Allah’s eternal existence/potentiality of such an attribute.

Let me spoon feed you further:

Example of Necessity for Allah

His eternal ability to exercise His will

Example of Possibility for Allah

Allah willing to create the universe.

If I said that Allah willed to destroy the earth right now and not eternally, this won’t in any way change the fact that He has the eternal ability to exercise His will.

Comment: You do not understand the meaning of necessarily existing. This is your problem. I have already explained it in my post. When you say that Allaah’s will for the world to exist is emergent, then you are saying that this Will of Allaah was non-existent and became existent. This means that it must have been brought into existence. This would mean that someone by power and Will brought that Will into existence. If this act was also emergent, then it too would have to be brought into existence. It continues like this in an infinite past loop. To avoid saying this, it must be that Allaah’s willing for the world to exist must be without a beginning or end. I explained all this already, but you ignored it.

Your statement: “it is possible for Allah to exercise this attribute of His whenever He wants to” is description of a created will, because you say it is “exercised” “whenever he wants to” i.e. whenever He wills, i.e. according to another will. I.e. you believe that Allaah has one will that wills another will of His. This is exactly what I said in the first post that your belief about His will “occurring” necessitates, and now you have said it plainly. Have you no mind?

The reason for this incredible fumbling is that you think Allaah’s will is like ours; that it is a collection wills for different things occurring at different times. The problem is of course, that a will that begins to exist needs to be specified and brought into existence. In fact, this is one of the ways we know that Allaah exist: by knowing that our will for something begins to exist, and therefore that it must have been specified and brought into existence, and it is not ourselves who do that, so it must be other than ourselves.

Wahabi said:

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

There is no escape from this, and calling it “emergent, but not created” does not solve the problem, because we are concerned about meanings of words, not words and letters in themselves, and the essential meaning of creating is as we have stated: to bring into existence according to a specification. The world exists because Aļļaah brought it into existence as specified by His Will, i.e. created it. An emergent will has to be brought into existence according to specification, so it must be created.

As I have explained here (snip….- you should have brought it here if you had an argument-Abu Adam) emergence of Allah’s acts do not necessitate that these acts are created.

Comment: changing the meanings of words does not help, the real question is if you believe whether the emergent (i.e. what did not previously exist) must be specified and brought into existence in order to exist. If you do, then you have said that it is created, because that is exactly why the world needs a creator; it is in need of specification and being brought into existence. This need of emergent things is the pillar of proofs for Allaah’s existence.

Wahabi said:

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

Your fourth point was: “According to sound logic the cause of an effect either precedes its effect or occurs simultaneously along with it in a temporal sense.” If you mean by this that the tie between causes and effects is a must, then this is not correct. Rather, there is no mentally necessary relation between causes and effects. This is because Aļļaah could create a cause, without the existence of the effect, or an effect, without the existence of its cause. An example of the first is a fire that does not burn, like in the case of Prophet Ibraahiim, and of the second, ashes created by Aļļaah without a prior fire.

Your statement:

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

there is no mentally necessary relation between causes and effects.

is absolutely absurd (wow you have no grasp of logic at all). Of course there is a necessary relationship between them.

The example you gave about the fire show how you are confusing between material causes and efficient causes.

Aristotle differentiated between “efficient cause” and “material cause”.

Efficient cause is that agent ultimately responsible for seeing that the effect occurs.

Material cause is the material stuff utilized in seeing that the effect occurs.

For example… a constructed building.

The efficient cause are the engineers, construction workers, etc.

The material cause is the cement, blocks, steel, etc.

In the example that you gave about the fire and Ibrahim, the fire is only the material cause while Allah is the efficient cause for allowing it to occur. Allah being the efficient cause that He is can easily transform the material cause that He utilizes into any form that He pleases. So Allah is the efficient cause in ensuring that the fire did not harm Ibrahim. So the cause is Allah, with the effect being Ibrahim saved from the fire. So even according to your own example, we still see a necessary relation between cause and effect.

Furthermore, you are appealing to exceptions of the general rule. Generally if the fire burnt someone, the fire would be the cause of the person’s burning.

Comment: Nobody has said that fire does not usually burn, what I said is that it is not necessary in the minds eye. I think you know that very well, but you are trying to put words in my mouth in order to appear clever. Anyway, this discussion is not about the meaning of cause. I explained what I meant clearly. We do not call Allaah cause, as this is not one of His names. This means that only the created can islamically be called a cause, and there is no necessary relation between created causes and effects, because both the cause and the effect, whenever they occur, are created by Allaah. Your resorting to the mushrik Aristotle as your authority speaks volumes. Kufr is one nation indeed.

Wahabi said:

He said:

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

Your fifth point was your claim that we do not believe that Aļļaah’s Will is simultaneous with the creation of time, as time is created in our view, and Aļļaah’s Will is beginninglessly eternal, and not created.


and then he went on to say:

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

This misleadingly suggests that we believe that Aļļaah’s Will is something that occurred eternally and then became non-existent. This is not the case, because eternity does not cease. In other words, we believe that Aļļaah’s Will is eternally without a beginning, and it is now as it was eternally, before the existence of any creation, and does not change.

My argument does not at all suggest that “Aļļaah’s Will is something that occurred eternally and then became non-existent” because as I previously demonstrated your definition of cause is flawed.

Comment: What I said is based on the fact that the scholars all agreed that Allaah cannot be called “cause.” You, on the other hand, call this flawed and resort to the mushrik Aristotle for an authentic definition in your view. We already know what you believe from your “Allaah wills whenever He wants,” or “a will to will another will” theory.

Wahabi said:

Quote [of Abu Adam’s post]:

Your sixth point was, “Asharis are forced to believe that Allah’s will of the creation of time occurred before time.” This is not correct, because Aļļaah’s Will is not something that has a beginning, so we do not say that it “occurs.” Rather, His Will is an eternal, unchanging, unceasing, perfect and necessary attribute of Aļļaah that He absolutely must be attributed with.

Perhaps I should have reworded my self better and said “Asharis are forced to beleive that the implementation and enactment of Allah’s will of the creation of time occurred before time.”

At the end of the day you haven’t escaped the argument.

Comment: What argument? I have already made it perfectly clear that we do not believe that Allaah’s will occurs, because it does not begin or end, and does not change or renew.

Wahabi said:

I know Abu Adam that it burns you up that we have on our side the plain and apparent meaning of the Qur’an and authentic hadeeth on our side backed up by the understanding of the Salaf.

Comment: I suppose it is pleasant to live in an illusion? I have exposed your “understanding” in very many posts, among them:

The ‘simple’ wahabi belief
The ‘simple’ wahabi belief ii contradiction versus narration
Ibn Taymiyyah says that Allaah has six limits and could have settled on a mosquito
Bodies have limits but not Allaah

Wahabi said:

And on top of that we have refuted you with sound logic and exposed your ignorance of kalaam that you claim to adore. But please be humble and accept the truth and stop being an arrogant takfeeri bigot.

Comment: Their ’emergence’ that is not created, their ’emergence’ that is ‘not change,’ their thing with limits in place that is ‘not a body’…., and now: ‘successful refutation’ that is not logical.

I think that my first post was adequate for most people. Now it has been clarified further, and it is enough for the fair minded. At least his initial argument looked like a seriously meant attempt, on his part, to defend his blasphemy. Now, on the other hand, he completely ignored by main argument and fails to even bother himself to understand the concept of intrinsically necessary existence. He decided instead to pick on the meaning of the word cause, based on referring to Aristotle as his authority that cannot be opposed. You can also see a fair amount of claims of the “I am victorious” kind, in order to boost his image in front of an audience who understand even less than he, so they won’t realize that his arguments are flawed or irrelevant. By spewing out words he achieves his aim of providing the illusion that the wahabis have an answer to the arguments of Sunnis.

What a tragedy and an embarrassment it is to be associated with these baboons. They call themselves Muslims, and have a belief system that will be mocked at by anyone who uses his mind. This makes it look as if Muslims have just another silly creed. Imagine, in their view there is a shape that created all other shapes, but does not need a creator. This of course necessitates that the others do not need one either, because a shape is a shape, and consequently, that there is no way of proving the creator’s existence. Now above, they have also shown that they believe that our will is specified and brought into existence by another will that is specified and brought into existence in Allaah Himself by yet another will in Allaah, etc. in an infinite past loop for each and every creation. This of course means again, based on their principles, that Allaah can only create something not in Him after specifying and bringing into existence infinitely many wills in Himself -i.e. never, because infinity cannot be completed, so how is that “willing whenever He wants?” Laˆanahum Allaah.

May Allaah mend our predicament, aamiin.

6 Responses to Wahabi contention: Asharis are forced to believe that Allah’s Will for the creation of time occured before time II

  1. Ahmad-Qadri says:

    mr wahabi man

    1) “… backed up by the understanding of the Salaf”

    I didn’t know you guys included aristotle in your list of the “salaf”!

    2) What do you mean by “new will” in your comment regarding the “ability to exercise a new will”.

    PLEASE define what YOU mean by “new will” when you speak regarding Allah.

    3) Please give your definition of “emergent”. Please also give the Arabic word that you have in mind when you say emergent.

    4) Please give your definition for “creation”. Again, give the Arabic word that you have in mind when you say creation.

    ————-

    Sheikh Abu Adam, I do not like to bring comedy into serious discussion, but this piece of satire exposes BEAUTIFULLY the real mujassima beliefs of the wahabis and WHY they think more than half the actions a sane human performs in his life are shirk. Obviously it rests on their beliefs of attributing a body (ie matter) and creations attributes to Allah, wal 3eyadhu billah. So they think all other bodies need to be quarantined against what they perceive to be shirk.

    The site seems to be run by their brothers in dhalalah, whom they can’t face, like the 2 sides of a coin – the shias, or other minimally knowledgeable “moderates”. I do not advocate for such “religious” oriented satire, but this is an exception, for demo purposes, it shows beautifully their mujassima beliefs. Plus I cant help saying its a real hoot, and the picture on that site is a million bucks. LOL

    http://figtribune.wordpress.com/2009/03/27/wahhabi-man-chops-off-his-right-hand-fearing-it-was-being-worshipped/

    QUOTE SATIRE PIECE
    Washington, DC- Abu Simzim, a known Wahhabi area man, has chopped off his own right hand. His friends tried in vain to prevent him for sanity reasons, but Abu Simzim felt that Tawheed would be better served by his right hand removed.

    “As soon as a homeless beggar kissed his hand he knew that it had to go,” says Omar Lili, Abu Simzim’s best friend. “We tried to tell him that it’s okay, but he insisted that only God is to be revered not his right hand.”

    Citing the Wahhabi demolitions of tombs, historic sites, and holy structures, Abu Simzim concluded that his right hand must be chopped off because it was being worshiped.

    “No, he is wrong,” says Sheikh Al Nibaani, his mentor, “Abu Simzim is wrong, we only demolish mosques, houses of Sahaba, erase Prophet’s memories, and chopping other people’s hands, that’s our job not chopping our own hands.”

    Abu Simzim is recovering but is worried about his head being worshipped because the Sheikh kissed his head.
    UNQUOTE

  2. Amir says:

    HashalilLah !

    For the wahhabies, the attributes of Allah are instruments.

    That’s why they say : “it is possible for Allah to exercise this attribute of His whenever He wants to” (!!!)

    For them, Allah would have an instrument like a brain He would use when He wants to exercise His several Wills. More, For them, the predestination would be His intention and it could change when He wants… Na3udhu billah

    In the same way, for the wahhabies, the Speech of Allah would be an instrument like an mouth, that’s why they say Allah speak when He wants and He’s silent when He wants. And when He would be silent, He had still this instrument of speech He will would use when He wants. This is their anthroporphistic belief.

    They use analogies with humain being and imagination, not sound mind.

    They don’t know what is a3yaan and a3rad, they don’t understand this is for the creation and this is impossible for Allah. For them, the attributes of Allah would have a3yan and a3rad. That’s why use this ugly word “cause” for Allah…

    Nas’alullah an yahdi hadha l-wahhabiyy wa amthaluhu, wa nas’alullah an yanfa3na bi 3ilmi Shaykh Abu Adam. amin !

  3. Abu Abdillah says:

    Assalaamu ‘Alaikoem Shaykh Abu Adam,

    Your statement: “it is possible for Allah to exercise this attribute of His whenever He wants to” is description of a created will, because you say it is “exercised” “whenever he wants to” i.e. whenever He wills, i.e. according to another will. I.e. you believe that Allaah has one will that wills another will of His. This is exactly what I said in the first post that your belief about His will “occurring” necessitates, and now you have said it plainly. Have you no mind?

    Subhan Allah ! Couldn’t be answered better ! I also had doubt about this Shaykh but now you have shattered it away, all praise belongs to Allah.

    JazakumAllah khayran, keep going Shaykh but don’t let these wahabi ‘wannabe mutakallimun’ waste your time too much. :D

  4. Sam K says:

    Salam brothers,

    I cant keep silent to this clown.. Shayk Abu Adam has already ripped him to shreds in the belief debate. This is some of what the Wahabi wrote about Abu Adam and Ash^aries: Hahaha, it seems like Abu Adam the so called rational Sheikh got irritated… You can tell how irritated and emotional he is to the extent that he even declared me to be a kaafir… He wrote emotionally and wasn’t thinking straight… Asharis are already so angry…

    I have realised that Wahabies contrict themselves, not only with there religious beliefs, but also in their debates. This Wahabi has not only shown us how stupid they really are, but he has also helped Shayk Abu Adam’s cause in eradicating doubt within the true Sunni followers… Oh Wahabies, you have done it again… You accuse the Shayk of being irritated and emotional… What do you call this? You wrote: they go nuts just like how Abu Adam did… He is attacking strawman… logically ridiculous Ashari response… but only sounded minded people unlike you understand… your absurd understanding… This Abu Adam is a fake and knows absolutely nothing about kalaam, which he claims to adore… I am not an intellectually bankrupt Ashari to fall for these semantical distortions and games… Let me spoon feed you further… I know Abu Adam that it burns you up… stop being an arrogant takfeeri bigot…

    Now Mr Wahabie clown, who is emotional? And let me focus on the last point I have cut and pasted (takfeeri bigot).. Is it not true that you Wahabies believe that only you people are the true Muslims and nobody else? Is it not true that you believe Abdul Wahab came and revived Islam after all the other Muslims committed Shirk? Is it not true that you believe that Shayk Abu Adam is a kaafir, and also kaffir all the other Muslims who go against your corrupt and twisted belief? We all know the answer to these questions is YES you hypocrites. Your not fooling anybody. We all know what you believe, and we have even seen what you people look like. It might appear to some that whilst you where developing in your mothers whom, you just made it before down syndrome kicked in… I think I know what the problem is. You know at school when there was the ‘Special class’ for the slow learners? To me that would explain why you are still not understanding the Shayk correctly… He tells you we dont say its black. You come back and say, we say its black. Are you going to came back again and accuse us of believing things we dont believe again? Are you going to make us laugh some more freak man? SHayk Abu Adam is right, you really need to see a doctor.

  5. The wahabi is at it again. He tried to put a link here to their site to pull people to there. Anyway, this time I will answer their claims one by one in separate posts. They all come back to their failure to understand what necessary and eternal existence means. They think it is something happening in time. Some brief comments:

    Wahabi says:
    Wahabi said:Maybe Abu Adam should read verses such as 16:125 next time.

    Comment: It doesn’t apply to zanaadiqah.

    Wahabi says: Secondly, I agree that Allah doesn’t have a body so why attack strawman?

    Comment: You do believe He is in a location, and that means you believe He is a body.

    Wahabi says: Abu Adam is appealing to Imam Al Dhahabi’s opinion?

    Abu Adam said: You generally accept what he says, so I quoted him.

    Wahabi says: You as an Ashari argue that Allah willed everything from eternity and can’t will anything anymore.

    Comment: No, we believe His will is one, and is not sequential and is not renewed, it does not begin or end in any sense. What you are saying we believe is that it went from a state of willing to a state of cannot will. This is because you think of eternity as a point in time.

    Wahabi said: Yes I believe that Allah changes in some sense

    Comment: No comment needed.

    Wahabi says: You are not being consistent. Here is why: Allah created Adam (peace be upon him). The act of creating Adam (peace be upon him) by Allah was in accordance with His own will. So, you will have to believe that not only Adam was created, but God’s action of creating Adam was also created.

    Comment: Oops, is this what they call a Freudian slip? He just admitted that Allaah’s acts are created in his school of thought, because he agrees with the premises he himself presented. Who brought it into existence and specified it according to him, and if that act also has a beginning, who brought it into existence and specified that act? If all bringing into existence has a beginning, then this means that each and every bringing into existence needs a completed infinite loop of bringings into existence, which means that nothing with a beginning can ever exist. That is why we must say that Allaah’s act of bringing into existence does not begin or end.

    Wahabi said: When Allah exercises this attribute, that doesn’t make the attribute created, for the attribute is connected and related to His essence, which is eternal.

    Comment: As I pointed out, this means that you believe His willing something is specified and brought into existence, etc., etc. etc. This has been explained again and again.

    Wahabi said: the Qur’an says that Allah Himself will be judging us on the Day of Judgment. Is Allah judging us on the Day of Judgment from eternity?

    Comment: We will be given the ability to hear His judgment on the day of judgment, but His judgment does not have a beginning or end.

  6. Sam K says:

    Subhanallah… By this Wahabi coming back constantly for a proper ^Akeeda lesson, we are also gaining a nice revision from you Shaykh… Wahabi, come on man, it’s really freaking me out that your still not getting this… I think you know there is something about what you believe that doesn’t make sense (if you don’t then there is seriously some issues you need to address). Even the Christians state in the Old Testament that God doesn’t change (but they contradict this later anyway)… Change can only be attributed to creatures who exist in places and are bound to time and of course have a beginning.

    Why don’t you actually consider what you are believing when attributing change to Allah… If you say Allah changed and gained an attribute (He was not attributed with will until He wills), then this means He was not all perfect and then became perfect only after He willed something, or if you say Allah was perfect (He was attributed with Will) then change occurred in Him (He no longer was attributed with will because He was not willing anything), which means He is no longer perfect, and both these outcomes are impossible to be attributed to Allah. Allah is Perfect!

    Also change needs specification, and whatever is specified is created.. of course we do not believe Allah nor His attributes are created. Allah is not His attributes, nor is He other than them, we don’t say Allah is Will, nor do we say Allah is not attributed with Will… We can not imagine Allah… The wahabies do not seem to except this and continue to preach about Allah as if they are preaching about something which their minds are familiar with, and this is wrong because our minds are not and will never be familiar with the One who existed eternally, as our minds did not exist eternally. If we leave our religion in the hands of these Wahabies, they will preach it the way the trinity is preach (not logically possible to be), although, Allah has protect the Quran. Something I have noticed with Wahabies is so many different sects believe so many different things about Allah, but when you discuss Allah with any proper Sunni in any part around the world, they will always tell you the same things about Allah (He exists without a how and without a place, nor does Allah change).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: