Channel
@menhaj_elsunna
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Posts recorded as deleted · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
5,743subscribers
+56 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001251196590 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @menhaj_elsunna |
| Created | Between 1 March 2018 and 31 August 2021 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 4 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 24 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 4 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/menhaj_elsunna |
Religion — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 12 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 100% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 4 Nov 2026, 21:35 | 5,743 | -6 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 17:40 | 5,749 | -4 |
| 30 Oct 2026, 00:46 | 5,753 | +9 |
| 27 Oct 2026, 00:39 | 5,744 | +10 |
| 24 Oct 2026, 07:27 | 5,734 | +15 |
| 21 Oct 2026, 06:55 | 5,719 | +12 |
| 18 Oct 2026, 11:06 | 5,707 | +5 |
| 15 Oct 2026, 15:11 | 5,702 | +2 |
| 12 Oct 2026, 13:05 | 5,700 | +12 |
| 5 Oct 2026, 13:36 | 5,688 | -6 |
| 27 Sept 2026, 22:37 | 5,694 | +4 |
| 18 Sept 2026, 20:21 | 5,690 | +17 |
| 14 Sept 2026, 17:41 | 5,673 | +18 |
| 11 Sept 2026, 03:37 | 5,655 | -7 |
| 6 Sept 2026, 05:36 | 5,662 | -4 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 17:58 | 5,666 | +8 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 12:13 | 5,658 | -8 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 10:12 | 5,666 | -4 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 23:57 | 5,670 | -5 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 20:34 | 5,675 | first reading |
54 posts held, back to 29 July 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 10 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views — note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 8 of 20 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 4 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 54 (29 July 2026 – 4 November 2026) |
| Views total | 5,311 |
| Reactions total | 19 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 4 Nov 2026, 19:10 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Measured directly from 4 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
120 reactions across 32 posts, in 3 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 90.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 108 | 90.0% | |
| 👍 | 8 | 6.67% | |
| 👌 | 4 | 3.33% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 33 of the 54 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 120 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 54 most recent posts we hold, published 29 July 2026 to 4 November 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @menhaj_elsunna. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 54 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 29 July 2026 to 4 November 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 2 of 20 posts held from the last 30 days (10.0%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
«ومع ذلك فقد كان ابن الصلاح ضيِّقَ الأفق متعصبا، حين استعدى السلطات على عالم مسلم معتز بدينه وعقيدته، لا ذنب له إلا أنه يدرس التراث العقلي الإنساني، مع إعلانه أنه غير معتقد لشيء منه كمل يعترف بذلك ابن الصلاح الذي لم يتورع عن اتهام النيات. وقد رأينا شهادة ابن تيمية شيخ المدرسة السلفية للآمدي وإنصافه له». الدكتور حسن الشافعي -أطال الله بقاءه، ونفع بعلومه- ويقصد بشهادة ابن تيمية هذا النص: «حتى إن من الحكايات المشهورة …
يرى الدكتور حسن الشافعي -حفظه الله- أن ابن تيمية من قادة السلفية المستنيرين..!
أثر السياسة على انتشار المذهب الأشعري.. «..نجد ظاهرة بارزة أخرى، وهي ازدهار المذهب الأشعري، وغلبته على سائر المذاهب الأخرى. ويرجع ذلك إلى بعض الظروف السياسية؛ فإن الدول التي كانت تتقاسم النفوذ الإسلامي عندئذ، كانت على مذهب أهل السنة والجماعة مع نزعة أشعرية واضحة، كمملكة خوارزم شاه في الشرق، والأيوبيين في مصر والشام، والموحدين في المغرب، كان قبل هؤلاء السلاجقة، ودورهم في نشر المذهب السني. هذا بالإضافة إلى طبيعة المذه…
قول ابن فارس في الحروف المقطعة في أوائل السور.. «وأقرب القول في ذلك وأجمعه قولُ بعض علمائنا: إن أولى الأمور أن تُجعل هذه التأويلات كلها تأويلا واحدا، فيقال: إن الله جل وعز افتتح السور بهذه الحروف، إرادة منه الدلالةَ بكل حرف منها على معان كثيرة، لا على معنى واحد. فتكون هذه الحروف جامعةً لأن تكون افتتاحا للسور، وأن يكون كل واحد منها مأخوذا من اسم من أسماء الله جل ثناؤه، وأن يكون الله جل ثناؤه قد وضعها هذا الموضع قسما …
👍1
خطورة الخوض في العلوم الكلامية والفلسفية من غير زاد من معرفة النصوص الشرعية ودلالتها.. «كل من أمعن في معرفة هذه الكلاميات والفلسفيات، التي تعارض بها النصوص، من غير معرفة تامة بالنصوص ولوازمها، وكمال المعرفة بما فيها، وبالأقوال التي تنافيها = فإنه لا يصل إلى يقين يطمئن إليه، وإنما تفيده الشك والحيرة». ابن تيمية..
❤3👍2
«إذا أمكن حمل كلامه على مقصوده من غير تكلف، فحمله عليه أولى من حمله على ما يؤول إليه». قاضي مير الميبذي تـ910 هـ
❤1
أثر العمل بموجب العلم في تحصيل اليقين.. «يحصل اليقين بثلاثة أشياء: أحدها: تدبر القرآن، والثاني: تدبر الآيات التي يحدثها الله في الأنفس والآيات التي تبين أنه الحق، والثالث: العمل بموجب العلم». ابن تيمية
«والأمر النظري مستلزم للشك قبل العلم». «فإن كل طالب للعلم والهدى هو قبل حصول مطلوبه في نوع من الحيرة». ابن تيمية
❤3
أدب عالٍ مفقود!! «إن الرجوع إلى الاستهزاء في موضع الحاجة إلى البرهان لا يليق بأهل العلم». الرازي تـ606 هـ
❤3
بص كدا عطاك حتة بأدنى نظر خربت الدنيا! أومال لو عمقت النظر شوية هتعمل فينا وفي ابن تيمية وفي العلماء ايه يا علامة زمانك؟!
تخيل هذا التعليق اعتراض على من؟ وهذه اللغة والخطاب الذي يتحدث به عن من؟! عن ابن تيمية .. الذي لو تنخَّم؛ لأغرقه علما ومعرفة! وبمناسبة أدنى نظر وأدنى التفات، كتاب الجمع بين رأي الحكيمين وإن كان يقصد الفارابي أن يجمع بين كلام أرسطو وكلام أفلاطون؛ إلا أنه في الواقع جمع بين رأي أرسطو وأفلوطين؛ لأن كتاب التاسوعات الذي اعتمد عليه الفارابي في التعبير عن مذهب أفلاطون أنما هو لأفلوطين.. ولولا التشابه بين أفلوطين وأرسطو في …
❤1
ليست المناظرات والجدل من هدي السلف، بل ذمهم لها ولأهلها، ونفيهم السنة عن المشتغل بها كثير مشهور.. لا سيما لو كانت مناظرات على الملأ.. ولا يستدل بمناظرة الإمام أحمد لأبي دؤاد وبرغوث فقد أُرغِم عليها واضطر لها..، وكذلك مناظرة الإمام الشافعي لحفص الفرد، فقد ندم عليها، ودعا بعدها لعدم الجدل والمناظرة.. والواجب أن العارف بالحق أن يخبر به، ويدعو إليه ويسكت! ويزيد الأمر بلاء إذا كانت هذه المناظرات مع مكابرين معاندين لا …
❤5
Showing the 12 most recent of 54 posts we hold for @menhaj_elsunna. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
We recorded 1 post on @menhaj_elsunna as deleted — posts this register held that were missing from the channel’s public page on two separate reads, taken from different network addresses at least an hour apart.
A deletion is not wrongdoing. This register can see that a post it held is no longer on the channel’s public page, and when — not why. Expired ad placements, reposts, rotating links and corrections all look the same. This is a count of recorded detections, not an exact total: it misses deletions we could not see, because only a post we held and later re-read inside the page can be seen to go, and it may include a small number of wrong records. How this is measured.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 37 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 4 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“منهاج السنة || قناة: محمود سامح” (@menhaj_elsunna), 5,743 subscribers as measured 4 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/menhaj_elsunna.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.