|
|
Post by iqadeer on May 15, 2015 21:19:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by iqadeer on May 17, 2015 15:12:05 GMT
Dr. Emad narrates an interesting point made by Shaykh Habib al-Rahman al Azami in one of his rejoinders to Shaykh Albani stating that you claim to be a "dhahiri" i.e., a literalist in the same vein as Ibn Hazm yet we see that he discusses an issue and reaches one conclusion while you discuss the same issue and reach another. If the "dhahiri" or textualist approach is supposed to simply convey the text on it's apparent meaning why do you both reach different conclusions?
|
|
