"for believing kufr"

Wait, hold on a second. Does he say really that this form of tajsīm is kufr? Did he really accuse the ṣaḥāba of kufr? Or is the salafi trying to give a negative twist to ash'arism? https://twitter.com/S4_31/status/1338617021567803392

Actually, the salafi author of this thread seems to me unable to understand the subtilty of what Al-'Izz is saying.

A simple answer is : no, he's not accusing them of kufr, and the arguments for this are clear and strong.

Here is the whole discussion. In it, al-'izz start by discussing the concept of God being knowledgeable with knowledge, powerful with power etc. He says that it's a complicated matter and the *complexity* (iltibās) lead people to differ.

He says it's the same for :
Pre-eternity of Divine speech
Face
Two Hands
Two Eyes

Are they divine characteristics present in the Divine being (صفات معنوية قائمة بذاته) or must they be interpreted metaphorically.

He then says : it's the same for direction, and the debate about it is long, and knowing the proofs about it is difficult

He then explicitely said that it is an issue in which it's not possible to declare every **MUJTAHID** as correct as the truth can necessarily only be one, and the rest are FORGIVEN because the issue IS DIFFICULT

He says this is especially the case for people believing direction. He then says that nobody, in the natural stage, reaches the belief in a being that does not move, does not stay still, not in and not outside the world (at the same moment),

and it's only possible to believe in this after analyzing difficult proofs, and so God FORGAVE common people about that.

Then comes the quote that he twitted in Arabic, in which he says that people who believe that are to be judged Muslims and are forgiven by God.

Then he says : and whoever believes that God is contained (hulūl) in an object, be it a man or something else, then he's a kāfir, CONTRARILY to someone believing in direction, because ḥulūl is something rarely believed and does is not held by someone who has some reasonability.

Then he goes on saying that analyzing the proofs is not obligatory. He shows clear disagreement for takfīr about issues related to kalām.

On page 203 he mentions that al-ash'ari abandoned the idea of declaring people of the qibla kuffār for ignoring some ṣifāt. He then explains that not agreeing on all the characteristics is not the equivalent of being in disagreement about the thing that is described.

He says : the difference of opinion of the Muslims about the characteristics of their God is not a difference about the fact that he's their Creator, Master that deserves their obedience and worship.

And if someone says : but declaring that God is in a direction entails that he's ḥādiṯ (came to existence)!

We (Al-'Izz) answer : the implications of an opinion are not the opinion, because the mujassima affirm with certainty that he's in a direction, pre-eternal, not created (ليس بمحدث) so

IT IS NOT PERMISSIBLE to attribute to them the contrary of what they say even if it is the implication.

And then he mentions that Ash'aris themselves differ about many ṣifāt and they still don't accuse each other of kufr.

Similarly : the mu'tamad of the Māliki maḏhab, and I think this is the same for shāfi'is, is that if someone believes that God is a jism not like the other ajsām then he's not judged as a kāfir.

Of course, it's even more clear that they say that an opinion that (supposedly/potentially) entails tajsīm (like direction etc), without it being clear for most people, is not something that is judged as kufr.

So many scholars explicitly say that some form of tajsīm are not considered kufr. Here, al-'izz is saying that people don't understand these philosophical discussions and thus should not be held to the standard of believing that God is in a direction or not.

After all of this, if someone says that Al-'Izz is accusing these pople of KUFR, while he constantly
1-gave them excuses
2-said that the logical implications of their beliefs is not the same as their belief
3-said they are to be judged Muslims
4-called them MUJTAHIDIN

5-Showed strong disagreement about declaring them kuffār

Then he's either 1-a retarded 2-a dishonest person

Btw, this comes from a salafi. I already did a thread about Ibn Taymiyya explaining that there's no takfīr before iqāma al-ḥujja/explaining 'udhr bil-jahl and taking as example no one else than 'āisha.

According to IT, she did not know that God knew what people concealed, which is a basic belief.

Salafis also use the ḥadīṯ of ḏāt anwāṭ and interpret it as meaning that many ṣaḥāba asked the prophet to designate for them an idol.

So who is really accusing ṣaḥāba of disbelief?