Make your own free website on Tripod.com
Al-Mustaqeem

Ahlu-Sunnah Versus the Ashari/Sufi Movement

Home
Understanding Islam
Bayaan at-Talbees Ahlul-Takfeer
Ahlu-Sunnah Versus the Ashari/Sufi Movement
The Senior Scholars Warn Against Extremism and Exageration in Religion
Muslim Authorities
Countering Islamaphobia
To Non Muslims
E-Books
Links
Salafi Conferences With Scholars

Radd Alal Mukhalifeen wa Tadheerul Minal Bida al-Ashaa'ira wal Mutassawifa 

A Refutation against the Successive generations and the Warning from the Innovations of the Ash’aris and the Sufis

We are pleases to anounce the completion of the reply against Hischam Kabbani's online translation entitled "Ahlu-Sunnah vs the Salafi Movement" which went unanswered for far to long

Below is a brief excerpt from the original thesis

 

                         Al-Muqaddimmah

 

 

 

Praise belongs to God Who has made truth clearly distinct from error, who puts down innovation and innovators and raises high the Sunna of the Prophet, salallahu alaihi wa sallam, and the people who follow it. Praise belongs to God Who in every century inspires a group of scholarly people to defend the Way of the Prophet, salallahu alaihi wa sallam, from the distortions of the ignorant and the fabrications of the liars, those who accuse the way of the people who strictly restrict themselves upon the consolidated beliefs of the first three generations of Muslims as we were commanded, and who adhere to their methodology in all matters of the religion from adaab, akhlaaq, fiqh, hadeeth, tafseer, aqeedah, and others matters, accuse such a people of being mubtadi, mujassimah, mutashabiha, mutashadidoon, hashawiyyah,  mukafireen (those who make takfeer), falsely claiming that their way in aqeedah and the stances that they have taken that had no authentic route to the salafu-saalih, is the saved way, and they are ahlu-sunnah wa taifatul-mansoorah, al firqatu-naajiya. Wa sallallahu alaihi wa mubaraka an Muhammadan wa ala ahlili wa sahbihi ajma’een ama b’ad

 

 

The reason for this risalah:

This article is a direct reply to the rather humorous and radical statements made against ahlu-sunnah under the risalaa entitled “ahlu-sunnah versus the salafi movement” which the name itself is a contradiction against historical precedent and reality itself.

 

Included in this risala will have bi ithnillah, the statements of reliable Imaams of sunnah, who’s aqeedah is attested to be saleem upon which the relying of their way has more right than those who adopted stances contrary to the stances of the salafu-saalih and the true fuqaha who followed the madhaahibul arb’aa al-islamiyyah.

 

Islam in the understanding of Muslims from every generations from the prophet on down is that the only Islam is the Islam of ahlu-sunnah wal jama’ah, the jam’ah being the jama’ah of the salafu-saalih. Their Islam is Islam and the opposite of their Islam is the representation of no Islam, only the religion of the opinions of the one who formulated it. Their Islam was Islam and other than their Islam is not the correct Islam and Islam is only looked at from the route of how they viewed the Islamic etiquettes from manners all the way to fiqh and  aqeedah to be.

 

So the reality of salafiyyah is that anyone who follows the way laid down by the salafu-saalih is in reality sunni. The reason why is because our Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal said “the Sunnah with us is what the companions were upon”

 

This immense statement entails some fundamental realities. Some of them are the fact that Ahmad

 

  • did not begin with the Quraan
  • did not begin with the Sunnah of the prophet. Why, because
  • He started off with saying that this sunnah is the sunnah of what the companions were upon.

 

So to us there is no quraan except upon the way the companions understood it, there is no sunnah of the prophet except the way the companions understood that sunnah. So without being upon the way of the companions i.e. tariqa asalafiyyah, one will not, EVER, attain the quran nor the sunnah in any aspect. That reality is realized by Ahmad who was reported to have said something to the effect of “the one who traverses upon kalaam and arrives at what is right is in error and the one who is upon sunnah and lands on something wrong is still correct” while the obvious application of it was to the ahlul-kalaam, it is understood to be generally anything other than the way of the companions, and since sunnah equals, at least to Ahmad, the way of the companions and anything other than their way cannot ever be as sunnah EVER.

 

This reality would mean by default that the sunnah is limited and only found in the way our companions were found to have done. That means a sunni is what they, the salaf, were. Sunnah does not lie in other than their way, and on that premise anyone who is sunni is by default salafi. Since the athari creed is nothing but the enumeration or the corpus of creedal aspects laid down and implemented by our salaf, then it follows that anyone who follows the athari aqeedah is by default salafi. And the world of Islam is based upon the understanding of the sunnah being, what the companions were upon.

 

That is why when, contrary to the neo ashari/jahmi rhetoric of today, that when Ibn Taymiyyah went through the mihaan events, and the end result of the two inquisitions made against him by ash’aris about his alledged “tashbeeh” and “tajseem” was that when all the scholars were unanimous that he was not what his detractors fabricated of him, they said “you have relayed the aqeedah of none other than Imaam Ahmad [note: this statement alone is an exoneration of Ibn Taymiyyah even by those who put him in the trial] , and his reply was “No, this is rather the aqeedah of all of the salafu-saalih, not just Imaam Ahmad”. To further slice more of the reality of his aqeedah being flawlessly saleem like his predecessor Ahmad, He gave his opponents THREE YEARS, 3 years, to come up with anything found in the works of the salaf by which they could find a hint of deviation between what he wrote in his wasitiyyah and what they have found. And of that time, Allah failed their efforts in providing even 1 issue where he left the aqeedah of the salaf upon.

 

Hence, as I said, the athari aqeedah is nothing but the enumeration or the corpus of the creedal aspects laid down and implemented by our salaf. Ahmad is, will always be, and was always held as the criterion and a hujjah in and of himself in measuring a person’s adherence to sunnah or bida.

 

 

It is based upon this reality that it is most applicable to narrate what Imaam al-Barbaharee stated first when he said “Know that Islam is the Sunnah and the Sunnah is Islam, one cannot be established without the other”

 

There can be no sunnah devoid of salafiyyah. The analogy of making distinction between the two is saying that there is a difference between Islam and Islam. It does not logically make any sense to anyone who understands what the reality of the sunnah is.

 

 

It is unfortunate how the talbees of Iblees reigns in some of the false claiments of adhering to this methodologically established way. And from the tablees of the shayateen is in their making fair seeming the excesses and strange oddities in religion that never had anything to do with the religion in the first place and sanctioning it through the fabrications of the previous liars in the history of Islam.

 

One of the make believe concepts invented by those who adopted some of this talbees is

 

Such an appellation is baseless since the true Salaf knew no such school as the "Salafi" school nor even called themselves by that name;

 

 

It would be enough from those among them who go to extremes by calling him Imaamul-Atham that Imaam Abu Haneefa said

 

  •  "Adhere to the athar (narration) and the tareeqah (way/following) of the Salaf (Pious Predecessors) and beware of newly invented matters for all of it is innovation" [Reported by As-Suyootee in Sawn al Mantaq wal-Kalaam p.32]

 

 

Apparently Abu Haneefah who passed away over a century and a half before their innovated beliefs even came to formulation understood the necessity of this tariqa asalafi, a way to be followed. It is also quite strange as this claiment of the above said this over 1280 years after what Abu Haneefah said.

 

Again

This reference would spark a burning rage inside of some of their hearts, however to prove a point in the strange claim they bring up here is a statement of probably the most knowledgeable and greatest of Imaams of the seventh century when he said

 

  • There is no blame on the one who manifests/proclaims the way (madhdhab) of the Salaf, who attaches himself to it and refers to it. Rather, it is obligatory to accept that from him by unanimous agreement (Ittifaaq), because the way (madhdhab) of the Salaf is nothing but the Truth (Haqq)." [From Majmoo al-Fataawaa li Ibni-Taymiyyah, 4:149]

His saying is seven centuries before this strange claim that came about in our times.

 

It is recorded in al-Insaab by Imaam as-Samani (d.562H)

 

 

"As-Salafi: this is an ascription to the Salaf and following their ways, in that which is related from them."

 

lbn al-Atheer (d.630H) said in al-Lubaab fee Tahdheebul-lnsaab (2/162), commenting upon the previous saying of as-Sam'aanee:

 

"And a group was known by this ascription." So the meaning is: that the term Salafi, and its ascription to them, was a matter known in the time of Imaam as-Sam'aanee, and before him .

 

There are only two possibilities on this matter. Either we accept the claim of these newly arisen people in modern times (in the past 2 centuries) and disregard what history testifies against them, or we submit to even the logical and rational proofs on this matter in that they have no idea what it is they are speaking of and are doing so without any knowledge. Of course what logic and reason dictate (and obviously the book and sunnah) is the latter.

 

Historical backround:

 

This group that decided to oppose the way of ahlu-sunnah even consist of those who follow the fuqaha of the four sunni or salafi schools of fiqhiyyah ash-shar’i (Law and Jurisprudence)

 

The historical background contained in the madhaab of asharism is attributed to Abu Hasan al-Ashari. However the actual origination of this misguidance was found with the mutakallim known as Abu Muhammad Ibnul-Kullab.

 

As for the sufi oriented adherents, the actual founder of this madhaab was found with the individual named Harith al-Muhasibi. Both of these individuals were contemporaries in the same era of the time of Ahmad ibn Hanbal, a time that was at the end of the third blessed generation of muslims and it is said that Imaam at-Tirmidhee was the seal of that glorious age.

 

Correction of a historical understanding:

 

The actuality of tassawuf and that of ash’arism are not exactly synonymous. Asharism deals with the creedal aspects in the technicalities of the Tawheed of Allah’s names and attributes. This is the only variance that they separated themselves from the main group ahlu-sunnah wal-ja’ma’ah.

 

Tassawuf is the science of the spiritual aspects of Islam and the methodology in which to traverse in that way.

 

The tassawuf of the original mutassawifa like Fudayl ibn Iyaad, Imaam Junayd and others was really the salafi science of uloom ar-raqa’iq or commonly known to us a tazkiyyatun-nafs, ihsaan being the focal point and attribute which is so ardently being sought for. This in itself is and will always be part of that methodological way of the tariqa asalafi.

 

 

So in essence, the people that this risalah is being addressed to are madhaabi muqallideen in fiqh from one of the madhahibul arba’a, ashari/maturidi in aqeedah or in the emaan aspects of the religion and tassawuf of the mukhalifeen (inventions of the latter day transgessors against the jama’ah). So the three levels of Islam they adopt different mutakhasisa (specialist) of each of their sciences that sought to follow even if the statements of their aimah had opposed the aqeedah and ijmaa of ahlu-sunnah.

 

 

                         A Reply to the Introduction of Their Article

 

They say

Al-Zahawi displays a profound mastery of the proofs of Ahl al-Sunna which he presents in a clear and systematic style. The book is divided into concise sections tracing the origins of the Wahhabi/Salafi movement and the teachings that this movement promotes in isolation of the doctrine of the majority of Muslims. After a brief historical overview of the bloody origins of Wahhabism and the "Salafi" creed, the author turns to investigate the foundations of the shari`a which have been targeted by the Wahhabi/Salafi movement for revision, namely:

His (Zahawi’s) points will be broken down piece by piece in an effort to clarify whatever became obscure and or caused people to stray or have misconstruences bi ithnillah.

the Wahhabi/Salafi tampering of the doctrine of the pious Salaf concerning God's essence and attributes, and his freedom from body, size, or direction;

The position of ahlu-sunnah wal jama’ah is that the methodology traversed by the salaf in the matters of dawah, following, and even fundamentals of creed, and in this aspect, the asma’a wa sifaat (Names and Attributes of Allah) has been a methodology that has been preserved and unlost and expounded upon by which no group or no individual no matter how big or small could come and perform such a feat as “tampering” with what they had already established. SO such a saying is tantamount to saying that such and such people has tampered with the quraan wa iyaadhubillah.

 

As for what they say concerning this matter, inshallah it will be addressed according to the claims they make.

their rejection of ijma` (scholarly consensus) and qiyas (analogy);

It is necessary to break the first part “ijmaa” into two.

Firstly, the ijmaa is what the scholars and Imaams of sunnah have united upon even if there are a handful who had opposed them. Example of this is the aqeedah in emaan where tasdeeq or assent of the heart, affirmation of the tongue and the actions of the limbs are all counted as emaan and are all pillars of faith. Every single Imaam on the face of the earth and under the heavens had affirmed this despite 5 (I mean by this a handful, no more than 10 of them) other Imaams, among them Abu Haneefah who had opposed this aqeedah. So the ijma was what everyone else had held concerning emaan. The same applies for many others issues as well.

 

Secondly, the ijmaa that they call is not an ijmaa. Ahlu-Sunanh wal Jama’aah derive their religion from the first three generations of Islam and their Islam is what all other generations refer their Islam back to in matters of their creed. However they call their ijmaa the people who came after the third generation and figures who had even adopted the views of the mubtadiah (innovators). I will explain this later. The point to get across is that ijmaa is something the salafi derives his proof from. When the salafi brings a claims, his claim is mostly provided by an abundance of Imaams of the past to prove the haq that he is bringing. So it is more correct for these people to say “And they oppose us” and not “they oppose ijmaa” because for one, the ijmaa of the muslims on issues and what they hold on issues are the distances from the heavens to the earth, far removed they are from the actual ijmaa, and secondly, they hold deen to be their way and misguidance in other than their way.

 

As for replying to the qiyaas part, their claim is absurd and makes no sense. Their own has rejected qiyaas. It sounds as if theperson who threw up this nonsense was hanafi. So the rpely is Maalikis , Shafi’ees, and Hanbalis upon their millah also reject qiyaas. Qiyaas is a fiqhiyyah and a matter of disagreemenet which does not warrant enmity and hatred of them muslims. Basically Salafis only comprise of a smaller group of a rather large amount of muslims in the world who reject qiyaas as their guiding tool in understanding Islam.

their rejection of the sources and methodological foundations of ijtihad (deriving qualified judgment) and taqlid (following qualified judgment).

We ask “what rejection”. We, and the rest of the muslim ummah, and what we have been ordered with was ittibaa. We are muttabi’een, followers of ahlul-ilm from the fuqaha, muhaditheen and the generality of the masha’ikh of al-Islam. The reality is that the only thing rejected here, are the rejction of their unfounded notions and the notions brought about form the imams that they follow by which their stances have already been clarified by the “mujtahid Imaams” of the Sunnah. So they have a proof that we rejct the mujtahideen. And that proof is correct. We do oppose those who have erred in their ijtihaad as made clear by the Imaams of Sunnah. However they call us to follow what came after the salaf. So in that respect the muslims is obligated to reject their claims and obligated to call them back to the following of those in the time of the salaf who did not err in aqeedah and from this aspect they reject. They do not follow the ijthiaad of the mujtahid Imaams of the salaf. They call everyone to follow their Imaams after the salaf but not the salaf. So rejecting what they call to is waajib and  accepting what they don’t follow is waajib.

 

As for taqlid, they always seem to have a misconstuence and interchange between ittibaa and taqleed by where they would use taqleed, as the person indicated in parenthesis, with the meaning of ittibaa. So we say “We are the people who follow qualified judgement even more so than you”.

  1. They themselves don’t follow qualified judgement. They follow the judgement which have been deemed by actual qualified mujtahideen to be dhalaah and utter error that removes one away form ahlu-sunnah. So they fell short in this and “salafis” have not
  2.  The actual qualified judgement of basically every Imaam that existed in this ummah that we do follow is something they oppose and refute us in, just like the matters pertained in their reprehensible risalah made by their shaykh Zahawi.

 

 

The author then narrows down on the Wahhabi/Salafi practice of takfir, which is their declaring Muslims unbelievers, according to criteria not followed by the pious Salaf but devised by modern-day "Salafis."

 

Since this is a rather delusional claim I would save its refutation in the places where their author had made such claims in depth.

 

The author shows that the "Salafis" went out of bounds in condemning the Umma (Muslim Community) on the question of taqlid, declaring unbelievers all those who practice taqlid, that is, the majority of Muslims

 

The proof is in the pudding. I urge you readers to go and ask a salafi is he makes takfeer just because of taqleed. Go and read the statements of the salafi Imaams from the sahib and the tabi’een like Sa’eed ibnu-Jubair, Ibnu-Mussayyid, and other than them all the eway till now if they made takfeer based off of taqleed. And then even worse is that they slander the “majority” of the muslims by saying they are muqalideen.

Finally, the author turns to the linchpin of "Salafi" philosophy: leaving the ijma` of the true Salaf in declaring unbelievers all Muslims who use the Prophet Muhammad's intercession, Peace be upon him, as a wasila or means of blessing.

That will be addressed when the issue is brought up to save space and time inshallah.

 

 

 

 

 

      Refutations of Ahlu-Sunnah wal Jama’aah on the Ashari/ Sufi Heresies

 

  Since they produced a list of so called refutations of ahlu-sunnah whom they call heresies of salafis, then in accordance with meeting an eye with an eye, we will produce the greatest of works amongst ahlu-sunnah form established Imaams of Sunnah and not people of shakk and majhooleen (unknowns) as they have produced against us inshallah.

It is important to note that asharims is really a developed form of Kullabiyyah where Abu Hasan al-Ashari took the concept from the mutakalim Jahmee Abu Muhammad ibnu-Kullab

 

 

Ibnu-Jawzee, Abul-Farj Abdur-Rahman (597 ah) famous work “Talbees Iblees” a one of he wonders amongst ahlu-sunnah wal jama’aah in refutation against the deviated sects, therein he mentions the deviated Sufis.

 

Imaam Waasitee, Ahmad ibn Sinaan was known to have refuted the belief of the mutakalim Ibnu-Kullab.

 

Muslim, ibnul-Hajjaj an-Naysaabooree also dedicated a work in refutation againt the originds of asharism  which in that time was a radd against Ibnu-Kullab

 

Bukharee, Muhammad ibn Isma’eel who dedicated a a work to the overthrow of asharism called “Radd alal Jahmiyyah”

 

Al-Baqaa’ee, Burhaanudeen dedicated two works in the refutation of the mystic Sufis and they are Tanbeebul-Ghabee ilaa Takfeer Ibn 'Arabee and Tahdheerul-'Ibaad min Ahlil-'Inaad bibid'atil-Ittihaad

 

Imaam al-Muhadith Ihsaan Ilaahi Dhaheer has several works refuting the Sufis one is “Sufism; Its Source and Origin”

 

Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah, Shaykhul-Islam Abul-Abbass Taqiu-deen Ibn Abdul-Haleem Ahmad, dedicated a number of works to the eradication of the enemies of Islam and the Sunnah, namely the qubooree Sufis, asharis, and other deviated sects in his Majmoo Fatwa, Manhaju-Sunnah, Awliyyatu Rahmaan wal Awliyyatu-Shaytaan. Also his work “Mawquf Ibn Taymiyyah min al-Asha’irah”

 

Imaam Ibn Qudamaa (620 AH), Muwaafiqu-Deen al-Haafidh Abu Muhammad Abullah ibn Ahmad al-Maqdisee wrote some works in the refutation of Sufis, one work in question is his titled “Dhammu maa Alaihi Muddaa’oo at-Tassawuf”. He also has some works on creed, a couple of them refuting ashari ulema one of them being called “Hikayat al-Munazarah fi al-Qur'an ma'a ba'd Ahl al-Bid'ah” as well as Ithbaat Sifaat al ‘Uluww

 

As-Saboonee, al-Haafidh Shaykhul-Islam al-Imaam Abu Uthmaan Isma’eel dedicated a work to the ummah of Muhammad called “Aqeedatu-Salaf Ashaabul-Hadeeth in refutation of the deviated heretics, among them the distorter of the Sifaat (both the mujassima and the asha’ira and jahmiyyah)

 

Abu'l-Wafa b. 'Aqil al-Hanbali (d.513) is the author of many works and large compilations which have much benefits in it. From those works that reached us - and they are few - we have an important critique of the Ash'irah on the Qur'an. The work is called: al-Radd 'ala'l-Ash'irah al-'Uzzl wa-Ithbat al-Harf wa’l-Sawt and it is one of the best works of its types. This work has been edited by G. Makdisi

 

Al-Andaloosee, al-Haafidh al-Imaam al-Mujtahid Ibn Hazm has a major work refuting the asha’irah called “Mawquf Ibn Hazm min al-Madhaab al-Asha’irah”

 

at-Tartushi, Haafidh al-Imaam, has a wonderful book in dedication to the annialation of the fantasies of the heretics among these groups of people including the mutassawifa and the asha'irah and other heretics entitled :Hawadith al-Bida (Fables and Bidas)

 

Ibn Waddah, al-Alamaat, has also dedicated a work known as "Inkar al-Hawadith wal-Bida (Renunciation of Fables and Bidas)

 

Ahmad Ibn Abdur-Rahman al-Qaadi, his bookMadhhab Ahl al-Tafwd fi Nuss al-Sift” it is one of the few works dedicated specifically in refuting the Mufawwidah or Ahl al-Tafwd.

 

Ridha b. Na’san al-Mu’ti, has a worked entitledAlqat al-Ithbt wa’l-Tafwd bi-Sift Rabb al-‘lamn” This is the other work which has been written on Tafwd, Shaykh al-Mahmud’s Mawquf (see volume 3, p.1177). He said about this book:

“For the subject of <Tafwid> a researcher has dedicated a single independent book for it; he made clear in it the truth on this issue..”.

 

Alimah Huda Bint Naasir, wrote a book entitled “Ar' al-Kullbiyyah al-'Aqadiyyah wa-atharuh fi'l-Ash'ariyyah.” discusses the original theological thoughts of the Ash’ari Madhhab by going back to its real source: the Kullbiyyah. Shaykha Huda bt. Nsir may be thanked much for writing an excellent book in which she compares the Kullabite views with that of the Ash’arites, thereby revealing the origin of many Ash’arite tenets.

The books four parts are titled: Biographies of the important Kullabites and Ash’arites, The important views of the Kullabiyyah on the Attributes of Allah, The important views of the Kullabiyyah on Predestination, and The views of the Kullabiyyah in matters of Belief. Each part discusses beside the views of the Kullabiyyah also their traces in the thought of the Ash’arite Madhhab.

 

Shaykh Hassan al-Huwaiynee, his book “al-Kullbiyyah wa-Atharuh fi al-Madrasat al-Ash'ariyyah.” It discusses the origin of the Ash’ari Madhhab by tracing the Kullabite traces in their theology.

 

Ibn Hanbali - Abd al-Wahhab b. Abd al-Wahid b. Muhammad b. Ali al-Ansari al-Shirazi al-Dimashqi (d. 537)[b]

 Dedicated a major work titled “al-Risala al-Wadiha fi Radd 'ala al-Ash'ariyyah”

As the title suggest The clear treatise in refutation of the Asharites is a valuable book by the Hanbali scholar Ibn al-Hanbali. He is praised by Ibn Rajab, Dhahabi, Abu Tahir al-Silafi, Ibn al-'Imad, al-Dawudi and others. The researcher gives the reason that the book was authored to subdue the fitnah of Asharites (al-Qushayri and his son) and the other reason to expose the Asharite creed.
The author follows the Athari methodology i.e. quotes all the text with complete Isnad as opposed to the Kullabi or Ahl al-Kalam style (see the books of Abu Mansur al-Baghdadi, al-Nasafi or Taftazani. More theory and less athar).

 

Imaam al-Laalika’ee, al-Haafidh, al-Mujtahid, has a wonderus and a masterpiece as his work on creed called “Sharh al-Usool al-Itiqaad” in included in it has refutations refuting the pillars of asharism.

 

Ibn Abdul-Barr, al-Imaam al-Haafidh Shaykhul-Islamc also has some works on creed refuting the repugnant innovations of the beliefs of the asharis.

 

Ahmad Ibn Abdul-Hadee, al-Haafidh al-Imaam. A devout and close student of Ibn Taymiyah and an expert traditionist. He wrote at length the legendary accounts of his beloved teacher Ibn Taymiyah. He is also the author of “al-Sarim al-Munki fi al-Radd ‘Ala al-Subki, a violent rebuttal of al-Subki’s attempt to justify taking long journeys for the visitation of the Prophet’s grave. Unfortunately, he died before completing this book at the age of forty.

 

Abu Nasr 'Ubaydallah b. Sa'id b. Hatim al-Sijzi or al-Sidjistani (444 AH). He was either a Shafi'ite  and Imam of Makkah, the city wherein he settled. There he issued Fatwa's for all people who came for the pelgrimage and others. He is a staunch Sunnite, author of the great al-Ibanah - a work written against the Lafziyyah (those who say: the Lafz of the Qur'an is created). Unfortunately this major Anti-Ash'arite compilation is lost. We have however another important book of him entitled Risalah ila Ahl al-Zubayd fi'l-Radd 'ala man ankara al-Harf wa'l-Sawt (The Epistle to the People of Zubayd in Refutation of those who reject the Letter and the Sound), a letter he send to the people of Azerbeidjan (?)

 

Ibnul-Qayyim, al-Haafidh, al-Imaam Muwafiqqudeen, Shamsu-Deen, Shaykhul-Islam

Al-Jawziyyah also wrote many works in many fields, some being of aqeedah by which he refutes both Sufis and asharis. One of them being “Za’adul-Ma’ad fi Hadyi Khairil-Ibaad” and in it refutes the scrupulous acts commited at graves done by qubooree Sufis. He also has a work dedicated against the deviations of Asharism and lumped them to their original forefathers, the jahmiyyah, and he was one of may among the noble aimah who understood the reality of the offspring of the jahmiyyah who were the asharis, and his work is a masterpiece as it utilizes the explaination of the creed (in refutation of the asharis) and combines it with a superb mastery of the arabic grammer and is entitled "al-Qaasidah an-Nuniyyah".

 

Itiqaad Ahlul-Hadeeth of Abu Bakr Isma’eeli ash-Shafi’ee in refutation of the heretical ahlul-kalaam

 

Itiqaad al-Usool of Haafidh al-Imaam Ibn Abi Hatim ar-Razi

 

 

Kitaab al I’tisaam bi al Kitaab was Sunnah of Ahmad ibn Nasr (d. 231 AH)

 

al Emaan of Ibn Abee Shaybah (d. 235 AH)

 

al Haydah of ‘Abd al Azeez al Kinaanee (d. 240 AH)

 

Imaam ahlu-Sunnah Ahmad bin Hanbal Shaykhul-Islam

ar Radd ‘Ala al Zanaadiqa wal Jahmiyyah, Usoolu-Sunnah

 

Khalq Af’aal al ‘Ibaad fee al Lafdh wa ar Radd ‘alaa al Jahmiyyah of Ibn Qutaybah (d. 276 AH)

 

ar Radd ‘ala Bishr al Mirreesee of Ad Darimee (d. 280 AH)  

 

ar Radd ‘ala al Jahmiyyah of Ad Darimee (d. 281 AH)

 

Risaala fee anna al Quran ghayru makhlooq of Imaam al Harbee (d. 285 AH)

 

as Sunnah of Ibn Abee Aasim (d. 287 AH)

 

as Sunnah of Abdullah ibn Imaam Ahmad (d. 290 AH) whom the Satanic Innovator al-Kawthari accuses him and every Imaam of his time as pagans, and would like to impose that on Ahmad (see his maqalaat)

 

as Sunnah of al Marwadhee (d. 294 AH)

 

Kitaab al ‘Arsh of Ibn Abee Shaybah (d. 297 AH)

 

at Tabseer fee ad Deen of at Tabaree (d. 310 AH) as well as his Sareeh as-Sunnah

 

 

 

Kitaab at Tawheed wa Ithbaat Sifaat ar Rabb of Imaamul-Aimah Ibn Khuzaymah Shaykh al-Islam ash-Shafi’ee (d. 311 AH)

 

as Sunnah of Abu Bakr al Khallaal (d. 311 AH)

 

al Qaseedah al Ha’iyyah of Abdullah Ibn Imaam Aboo Dawood (d. 316 AH) as well as his “al-Ba’th

 

al Aqeedah at Tahawiyyah of Aboo Ja’far at Tahaawee (d. 321 AH)

 

al Ibaanah of Abu Hassan al Ash’aree (d. 324 AH). His Ibanah is disputed by the heretics, so therefore refer to his other works affirming the sunni creed against the ash’ari heretics like his “Maqalaat al-Islamiyyeen” and “Risalah Ahlul-Thagr” which are affirmed for him. Ibn Asaakir, the ash’arite flag bearer affirmed the Ibaanah for Abu Hasan, as well as Shahrastaani, another Ash’arite

 

Sharh al Sunnah of al Barbaharee (d. 329 AH)

 

al Shareeah of Abu Bakr Al Aajurree (d. 360 AH)

 

Kitaab as Sifaat of al Daraqutnee (d. 385 AH) as well as his Kitaab an-Nuzool

 

 

al Kitaab al Ibaanah ‘an Sharee’ at al Firqat an Naajiyyah of Ibn Battah al ‘Ukburee (d. 387 AH)

 

al Eeman of Ibn Mandah (d. 395 AH) as well as his Tawheed, and “ar-Radd alal Jahmiyyah”, and “asi-Sifaat.

 

Usool as Sunnah of Ibn Abee Zamaneen (d. 399 AH)

 

Risaalah fee Ithbaat al Istiwa wal Fawqiyyah of Abdullah al Juwaynee (d. 438 AH)

 

Dhamm al Kalaam wa Ahlihee of Aboo Isma’eel al Harawee (d. 481 AH)

 

al Iqtisaad fee al I’tiqaad of Abdul Ghanee al Maqdisee (d. 600 AH)

 

Ithbaat Sifaat al ‘Uluww of Ibn Qudaamah al Maqdisee (d. 620 AH)

______________________________________________________
Download full version in PDF
 
 
refer to more sources on the subject here