You're right, athari scholars not salafi scholars.

That is why famous commanaries on sahih bukhari and muslim is written by ashari/maturidi like Ibn Hajar, Nawawi, Qasallani, Zakariya Ansari, Badr din Ayni, Qadi Iyad, Al Qurtubi.

Did you even read the sharh of ibn izz? Read his footnotes son.

Even your Salafi shaykh, Salih Al ash-Shaykh, said he is a Maturidi in most of his positions. Al-Alusi's brother, Abdul-Hamid, wrote a commentary on the Maturidi poem Bad' al-Amali. Also, praising Ibn Taymiyyah doesn't mean you're a Salafi by default.

Context

It does. They push Ibn ‘Izz’s sharh to fit Salafi creed, but the base text already aligns with ours without any sharh. ​Read his sharh on #45/46: "He is Exalted above limits, ends, limbs, or tools. He is not contained by six directions.

Why do you lie? He said this couple min later.

Al-Tahawi is more in line with al Maturidi than with the Salafiyah. Just this line refutes salafi aqidah: وَتَعَالَى عَنِ الْحُدُودِ وَالْغَايَاتِ وَالْأَرْكَانِ وَالْأَعْضَاءِ وَالْأَدَوَاتِ لَا تَحْوِيهِ الْجِهَاتُ السِّتُّ كَسَائِرِ الْمُبْتَدَعَاتِ

They say accept aqidah tahawiyah but always refer to ibn izz's commentary.

Tahawiyah does contract salafi aqidah. Thats why you all refer to ibn izz bc he had similar beliefs as ibn Taymiyah. This line refutes you. عَنِ الْحُدُودِ وَالْغَايَاتِ وَالْأَرْكَانِ وَالْأَعْضَاءِ وَالْأَدَوَاتِ لَا تَحْوِيهِ الْجِهَاتُ السِّتُّ كَسَائِرِ الْمُبْتَدَعَاتِ

Which deviants hijacked the madhab? In fiqh you have marghinani, nasafi, ibn abidin. In usul you have bazdawi, sarakhsi, ibn humam. All of them were maturidi. In fact salafi islamqa.info uses them as reference. You're cutting off the branch you're sitting on.

Thats why all the major hanafi fiqh and usul al fiqh works are written by maturidis🤦🏾. Also Aqidah Tahawiyah which is aqidah of imam Abu Hanifah is in line with Maturidis and contradicts salafis.

I never said later scholars were better. You didnt understand my example. You can be a later scholar and still follow the salaf. But later scholars can answer new questions which were not present at time of salaf. And I never criticised bishr. Dont twist my words.

You do know Hanafi fiqh is built on major works, and I'm sure he studied books by al-Marghinani, Al Sarakhsi, Al Kasani, al-Nasafi, al-Mawsili, Maydani, and Ibn Abidin. You can deny it all you want, but they were all Maturidi.

The 'aqidah books of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Abd al-Wahhab are used far more than the books of the first three generations. Were they both more knowledgeable than the Salaf? You see how stupid that looks😅.

Lol you re just mad Ibn Abidin was against ibn Abdulwahab. Also Haashiyah of Ibn Abidin is used for fatawah in hanafi fiqh. I cant take u serious. Even salafi hanafis will laugh at your statements🤣

You cant answer with a question. From more than 100 hanafi scholars, you picked him lol. Says a lot about you. I can do the same and pick a hanbali who had aqidah beliefs of mujasima and karamiyah, but wont go that low.

Are hanafis sunni according to you?