Quoting Your Adversary

In his essay titled, al-Qawl al-Mufhim li -man Ankara Maqâlah: Nusahhih wa Lâ Nahdim (trans. “The Irrefutable Statement to Whoever Censured the Principle of Correcting & Not Destroying”), Shaikh Abul-Hasan al-Ma’ribî states that “[i]n citation of an adversary’s expression are abundant utilities and important etiquettes, especially when some self-interests become obvious in the quarrel. In al-‘Awâsim,[1] Ibn al-Wazîr rebuked his adversary [for] not citing Ibn al-Wazîr’s words and heaped accusations against him. Due to the preciousness of these words, I am mentioning them in their entirety; and Allah is the accommodator for every good and sensible conduct.” He then brings a long and beneficial quote from Imam Muhammad bin Ibrâhîm al-Wazîr al-Yamânî (d. 840AH) where he states (with abridgement by myself, RG),

Sir,[2] may Allah aid him, has violated a great rule; it is the foundation of debate and the root of correspondence, i.e., the citation of the words of the adversary with his expression, firstly, then the undertaking of its criticism, secondly. This is something that no one from the people familiar with academics, engrossed in realities, and pursue intricacies, is unmindful of.

[O]ne [should] cite the adversary’s words with its text and rid himself of the accusation of its alteration and its omission. This is the satisfactory opinion with the emirs[3] of the theoretical sciences and the imams of the dialectical procedures; ‘Abdul-Hamîd bin Abil-Hadîd[4] had denounced the Chief Justice[5] for refuting the Sir’s[6] satisfactory words in correspondences that took place between them without mentioning his expression.

Know that leaving the adversary’s words is an obvious oppresion to him and a clear injustice against him, because certainly, he speaks his words in order to be a counterweight to his adversary’s words in the golden scale of the balance and as a parallel to them in the dialectical field; because the solitary weights more on the balance, even if light, and comes ahead in the field, even if weak. This, all of it, is if there were words preserved by the adversary and a selection is rightly refutable. From justice is clarification of his statement and mention of its expression. As for if he definitely did not have an opinion, and instead it was wrongly assumed about his opinion, and he was accused of what he did not speak of, then this is oppression upon oppression, and darknesses, some above others.

Source: as-Sulaimânî, Abul-Hasan Mustafâ bin Ismâ’îl. “al-Qawl al-Mufhim li -man Ankara Maqâlah: Nusahhih wa Lâ Nahdim.” ad-Difâ’ ‘an Ahl al-Ittibâ’: ar-Radd al-‘Ilmî ‘alash-Shaikh Rabî’ bin Hâdî al-Madkhalî (2nd ed.). Menoufia, Egypt: Dâr al-Ansâr, 2006. vol. 1, pg. 315.


[1] al-Wazîr, Muḥammad bin Ibrâhîm. al-‘Awâsim wal-Qawâsim fidh-Dhabb ‘an Sunnah Abil-Qâsim, vol. 1, pgs. 236-239. [t] Judging by the corresponding page numbers, I assume that al-Ma’ribî is quoting from Mu’asasah ar-Risâlah’s print, edited by Shaikh Shu’aib al-Arna’ūt; its 2nd edition being printed in 1992. All references I make to this book are to al-Arna’ūt’s edition.

[2] [t] Ar. sayyid (سَيِّد) – master; gentleman; Mister; Sir; lord, overlord; chief, chieftain; honorific used to denote sainthood (in Sufism) or nobility.

[3] [t] Ar. umarâ’ (أُمَرَاء) (pl. – sing. amîr (أَمٍير)) – commander; prince, emir; title of princes of a ruling house; tribal chief.

[4] [t] He is ‘Abdul-Hamîd bin Hibatillah bin Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Abil-Hadîd al-Madâ’inî, author of Sharh Nahj al-Balâghah al-Ghâlî fit-Tashayyu’. See al-‘Awâsim, vol. 1, pg. 236, footnote no. 2.

[5] [t] He is ‘Abdul-Jabbâr bin Ahmad bin ‘Abdil-Jabbâr al-Hamdhânî al-Asadâbâdî, Shaikh of the Mu’tazilah in his era and they addressed him as Chief Justice and did not apply this honorific to others. See al-‘Awâsim, vol. 1, pg. 236, footnote no. 3.

[6] [t] He is ‘Alî bin al-Husain bin Mūsâ al-‘Alawî. See al-‘Awâsim, vol. 1, pg. 237, footnote no. 1.


Finkelstein-Dershowitz Debate

This is an old debate. I had first came to know of it last year after finding one viewer’s impression of the Finkelstein-Dershowitz debate posted on Norm Finkelstein’s website, which I found absolutely hilarious. I tried looking for a full video of the debate back when I first found the post on Finelstein’s site, but gave up after a short search.

Last night, my buddy Moez sent me a link from Google Video of the entire debate. I haven’t watched the entire thing just yet (going to watch it after I post this), but I thought I’d post the videos here for your viewing enjoyment.

Read more of this post

Abualrub-Wood/White Debate Audios Posted

Brother Jalal Abualrub has posted saying that the audio files for both debates have been uploaded and posted to the at-Tasfiyah wat-Tarbiyah Publications website for download. He also mentions that the videos will be made available for free, Allah willing.

I haven’t noticed any option to download the files, but you can listen to them streamed from the site. Enjoy.

News from the Abualrub-Wood/White Debates

Brother Jalal Abualrub has posted news about the debates he had this weekend with David Wood and James White on his site. He writes (formatting slightly edited),

James White Posted Parts of the Debate

Mr White said last night that the Holy Spirit is within him.  I challenge him to post the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth,  not only segments that make him look good.  The Holy Spirit is about Truth, let us not disappont him, especially since the Holy Spirit is not within any human.  I will post the entire debates for free, whole and entire!

Read more of this post

Abualrub Debate Update

There’s been a change in the line up for brother Jalal Abuarub’s debate. Sam Shamoun is out and David Wood and James White are in. Jalal has confirmed that this will be a two-on-one affair, with him debating both of these individuals. More info can be found on his site, IslamLife.com.

Jalal Abualrub to Debate Sam Shamoun

Firstly, It’s been a while since I posted anything up here and a couple of visitors to my blog who I have contact with asked about my inactivity. I’d like to apologize for the delay. I’ve been kind of busy with a couple of things: one, a long overdue re-editing of Shaikh ‘Abdul-Muhsin al-‘Abbâd’s Rifqan Ahl as-Sunnah bi Ahl as-Sunnah, which was requested by one of the brothers @ QSS (he wanted it finished a few weeks ago). The other is a long article I’m translating, taken from Shaikh Ahmad az-Zahrânî‘s Sharh Alfâdh as-Salaf wa Naqd Alfâdh al-Khalaf fî Haqîqah al-Îmân, on whether or not the deeds of the limbs are part of faith’s root; this one’s still got a ways to go before being completed.

In any case, I thought I’d post up about this debate that’s to take place between brother Jalal Abualrub of IslamLife.com and Sam Shamoun, one of the writers for the Christian Polemic/Apologetic website Answering-Islam.

Information regarding the debates can be found here, while below is an email written by brother Jalal:

Read more of this post

Proposed Abualrub-Spencer Debate (Updated)

Looking for updates on some of the various websites I visit from time to time, I found this:

Brother Jalal Abualrub, of IslamLife.com repute and translator of numerous Islamic works, has accepted a challenge to debate Robert Spencer, renowned (pseudo)expert on Islam, anti-Islam polemicist, bigot, racist, hate-monger, and whatever else you want to describe him as (how’s that for more ad hominem attacks? Heh).

Read more of this post