Is he really Ash'ari? Let's see ibn as-Salah versus the Asha'irah.
Firstly, in Tabaqat al-Fuqaha' ash-Shafi'iyyah, ibn as-Salah makes mention of many Shafi'i scholars who were taught by ibn Khuzaymah, and ibn as-Salah calls ibn Khuzaymah an Imam repeatedly. Here's an example:
Yet the Asha'irah like Fakhr ud-Deen ar-Razi believe ibn Khuzaymah authored books of shirk and that he was deficient in intelligence. Wal-Iyyadhu billah
Secondly, Imam adh-Dhahabi tells us that Abu'l-Hassan al-Karji's poem which mentions that Allah is above His Throne in His Essence was written in the handwriting of ibn as-Salah, and he [ibn as-Salah] commented, "This is the 'aqidah of Ahl us-Sunnah and As'hab ul-Hadith"
Thirdly, in Tabaqat ash-Shafi'iyyah, ibn Katheer says that ibn as-Salah didn't approach Fakhr ud-Deen ar-Razi because ibn as-Salah didn't like him. How is it that ibn as-Salah somehow didn't like one of the leading scholars in the Ash'ari creed?
Fourthly, ibn as-Salah transmits a statement of al-Khattabi where he affirms that Allah is above His Throne and he refutes the proposition that استوى (establishing) could mean استولى (conquering), al-Khattabi says that the line of poetry proving this meaning is majhul.
Meanwhile, Fakhr ud-Deen ar-Razi says here that it is obligatory to say استوى means استولى (conquering).
As for this, do read ibn al-Mibrad’s refutation:
Oh, and I'd like to point out a contradiction you've made, you said that there is no difference of opinion that the mujaddid of the fifth century was al-Ghazali even though ibn ‘Asakir mentioned Qadir Billah as the mujaddid, but he chose al-Ghazali out of his own preference
Why does ibn Asakir tell us Qadir Billah is the mujaddid of the fifth century and then tells us that he prefers al-Ghazali? I thought there was no difference? 🤔
Keep in mind, Qadir Billah was an Athari. We know this because adh-Dhahabi transmits a statement from Qadir Billah wherein he mentions that Allah rose above His Throne and that the attributes of Allah are literal, not metaphorical.
Thank you for providing us with the statements of Ibn Asakir wherein he mentions the two possible candidates as mujaddid of the fifth century, it is clear which of the two [Qadir Billah and al-Ghazali] is more suitable for the role.
I'll leave you with this, the claim that ibn as-Salah was an Ash'ari is in reality nothing but slander upon the Imam, I am sure we've understood that by now. And, none of the first five centuries had a non-Athari mujaddid.
والسلام
والسلام
Loading suggestions...