Attributes of Allah Almighty and the Pious Predecessors
Imam Shafi’i, may Allah have mercy on him (204 AH), says:
وقد أثنى الله تبارك وتعالى على أصحاب رسول الله ، صلى الله عليه وسلم فى القرآن والتوراة والإنجيل ، وسبق لهم على لسان رسول الله ، صلى الله عليه وسلم ، من الفضل ما ليس لأحد بعدهم ، فرحمهم الله وهناهم بما آتاهم من ذلك يبلوغ أعلى منازل الصديقين والشهداء والصالحين ، هم أدوا إليناسنن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ، وشاهدوه والوحي ينزل عليه ، فعلموا ما أراد رسول الله ، صلى الله عليه وسلم ، عاما وخاصا ، وعوما وإرشادا وعرفوا من سنته ما عرفنا وجهلنا ، وهم فوقنا فى كل علم واجتهاد ، وورع وعقل ، وأمر استدرك به علم واستنبط به وآراؤهم لنا أحمد وأولى بنا من آرائنا عندنا لأنفسنا
“Allah Almighty has praised the Companions of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم in the Quran, Torah, and Gospel, and the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم has bestowed upon them such goodness by his own words that later generations did not receive. May Allah send His special mercy upon them and elevate them to the highest ranks of the truthful, the martyrs, and the righteous. These are the personalities who conveyed to us the beloved Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, who directly witnessed the revelation of the Divine message. They acquired knowledge of what the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم intended in general, specific, obligatory, and recommended matters. They were familiar with the Sunnah of the Noble Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, some of which we know and some we are unfamiliar with. They have precedence over us in knowledge, ijtihad, piety, abstinence, intellect, and every jurisprudential and ijtihadi issue. Our own opinions are not as good for us as their opinions are commendable and superior for us.”
Shaykh al-Islam, Allama Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him (728 AH), writes:
كل قول ينفرد به المتأخر عن المتقدمين ولم يسبفه إليه أحد منهم فإنه يكون خطأ كما قال الإمام أحمد بن حنبل: إياك أن تتكلم فى مسألة ليس لك فيها إمام
“Every statement of the later scholars that is unique and not said by any of the righteous predecessors is an error. Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allah have mercy on him, advised his student Maymuni, may Allah have mercy on him: Engage in discussion only in matters where you have an Imam among the predecessors.”
Shaykh al-Islam Thani, the pious scholar, Allama Ibn Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on him (751 AH), writes:
ثبت عن النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم فى الصحيح من وجوه متعددة أنه قال: خير القرون القرن الذى بعثت فيهم ، ثم الذين يلونهم ، ثم الذين يلونهم ، فأخبر النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم أن خير القرون قرنه مطلقا ، وذلك يقتضي تقديمهم فى كل باب من أبواب الخير ، إلا لو كانوا خيرا من بعض الوجوه ، فلا يكونون خير القرون مطلقا ، فلو جاز أن يخطئ الرجل منهم فى حكم وسائرهم لم يفتوا بالصواب ، وإنما ظفر بالصواب من بعدهم ، وأخطلوا هم لزم أن يكون ذلك القرن خيرا منهم من ذلك الوجه ، لأن القرن المشتمل على الصواب خير من القرن المشتمل على الخطأ فى ذلك الفن ، ثم هذا يتعدد فى مسائل عديدة؛ لأن من يقول: قول الصحابي ليس بحجة ، يجوز عنده أن يكون من بعدهم أصاب فى كل مسألة قال فيها الصحابي قولا ، ولم يخالفه صحابي آخر ، وفات هذا الصواب الصحابة ، ومعلوم أن هذا يأتى فى مسائل كثيرة تفوق العد والإحصاء ، فكيف يكونون خيرا ممن بعدهم وقد امتاز القرن الذى بعدهم بالصواب فيما يفوق العد والإحصاء مما أخطأوا فيه؟ ومعلوم أن فضيلة العلم ومعرفة الصواب أكمل الفضائل ، وأشرفها ، فيا سبحان الله ، أى وصمة أعظم من أن يكون الصديق أو الفاروق أو عثمان أو على أو ابن مسعود أو سلمان الفارسي أو عبادة بن الصامت ، وأضرابهم رضي الله عنهم ، قد أخبر عن حكم الله أنه كيت وكيت فى مسائل كثيرة ، وأخطأ فى ذلك ، ولم يشتمل قرنهم على ناطق بالصواب فى تلك المسائل حتى تبع من بعدهم فعرفوا حكم الله الذى جهله أولئك السادة ، وأصابوا الحق الذى أخطأه أولئك الأئمة؟ سبحانك هذا بهتان عظيم
This hadith is established through many chains; the Noble Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said:
“The best of times is the time in which I was sent, then the later ones, then those after them.” The Noble Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم indicated that his time is absolutely the best. The people of the Prophet’s time (the Companions) are foremost in every good deed, and if the superiority of the Companions was only in a few matters, then they would not be absolutely the best of generations. If it were possible that a Companion erred in issuing a fatwa on some issue, another Companion did not give the correct fatwa, and a later generation found the correct ruling, making the Companions wrong, then it would follow that the later time is better in that matter, because the time in which the correct ruling was found is superior to the time of error in that field. Thus, in many issues, the later time would be superior. For those who do not accept the statement of a Companion as proof, it would be permissible to say that the later generations are correct in every issue where a Companion gave a fatwa and no other Companion objected, and it would also follow that the correct ruling escaped the Companions. It is established that this has happened in numerous issues. So how can the Companions be superior to the later generations when the latter are correct in many issues in which the Companions erred? The reality is that the superiority of knowledge and understanding is the most complete and noble superiority. What greater disgrace can there be than that a truthful one, a Farooq, Uthman, Ali, Ibn Mas’ud, Salman al-Farsi, Ubada ibn al-Samit, or other Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, report a divine ruling as such and such, and yet be found mistaken in numerous issues, and their time not be correct according to the words of the Noble Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم? Even after them, there are people who recognize the reality of the divine ruling that the blessed group of Companions remained unaware of, and the later generations found correctness in those issues in which these Imams of guidance erred. سبحانك هذا بهتان عظيم !
Allama Ibn Rajab, may Allah have mercy on him (795 AH), writes:
وقد ابتلينا بجهلة من الناس يعتقدون فى بعض من توسع فى القول من المتأخرين أنه أعلم ممن تقدم فمنهم من يظن فى شخص أنه أعلم من كل من تقدم من الصحابة ومن بعدهم لكثرة بيانه ومقاله ، ومنهم من يقول هو أعلم من الفقهاء المشهورين المتبوعين ، وهذا يلزم منه ما قبله لان هؤلاء الفقهاء المشهورين المتبوعين أكثر قولا ممن كان قبلهم ، فإذا كان من بعدهم أعلم منهم لاتساع قوله: كان أعلم ممن كان أقل منهم قولا بطريق الأولى ، كالتوري والأوزاعى والليث ، وابن المبارك ، وطبقتهم ، وممن قبلهم، من التابعين والصحابة أيضا ، فإن هؤلاء كلهم أقل كلاما ممن جاء بعدهم ، وهذا تنقص عظيم بالسلف الصالح وإساءة ظن بهم ونسبته لهم إلى الجهل وقصور العلم ولا حول ولا قوة إلا بالله ، ولقد صدق ابن مسعود فى قوله فى الصحابة أنهم أبر الأمة قلوبا ، وأعمقها علوما ، وأقلها تكلفا ، وروي نحوه عن ابن عمر أيضا ، وفي هذا إشارة إلى أن من بعدهم أقل علوما وأكثر تكلفا ، وقال ابن مسعود أيضا: إنكم فى زمان كثير علماؤه قليل خطباؤه وسيأتي بعدكم زمان قليل علماؤه كثير خطباؤه ، فمن كثر علمه وقل قوله فهو الممدوح ، ومن كان بالعكس فهو مدموم
“Our lot has fallen upon such ignorant people who consider some long-discussing later scholars superior to the earlier ones. Some say that the later scholars are absolutely greater scholars than the earlier Companions and Tabi’in due to their verbosity and elaboration. Some consider them greater scholars than the famous followed Imams. This first statement is necessary because the discourse of the followed Imams is relatively longer than that of the predecessors. This statement implies that if the later scholars are more knowledgeable than the followed Imams, then they will be even more knowledgeable than those who speak briefly like Sufyan al-Thawri, Awza’i, Laith ibn Sa’d, Abdullah ibn Mubarak, may Allah have mercy on them, and other hadith scholars of their class. Similarly, they would be more knowledgeable than the earlier Companions and Tabi’in as well. All these personalities spoke more briefly compared to the later scholars. This leads to belittling, suspicion, ignorance, and lack of knowledge regarding the status of the righteous predecessors. There is no power nor strength except with Allah! Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Mas’ud, may Allah be pleased with him, said beautifully: The Companions of the Ummah are the most sincere-hearted, deeply knowledgeable, and straightforward. A similar statement is narrated from Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with them both. This narration proves that the later scholars have less knowledge and more affectation. Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Mas’ud also said: You are in a time when scholars are many and orators few; after you will come a time when scholars are few and orators many. Therefore, the one whose speech is scholarly and concise is praiseworthy, and the one whose speech is not so is blameworthy.”
Allama Shatibi, may Allah have mercy on him (790 AH), writes:
أن يتحرى كتب المتقدمين من أهل العلم المراد ، فإنهم أقعد به من غيرهم من المتأخرين ، وأصل ذلك التجربة والخبر
أما التجربة ، فهو أمر مشاهد فى أى علم كان ، فالمتأخر لا يبلغ من الرسوخ فى علم ما يبلغه المتقدم ، وحسبك من ذلك أهل كل علم عملي أو نظري ، فأعمال المتقدمين فى إصلاح دنياهم ودينهم على خلاف أعمال المتأخرين ، وعلومهم فى التحقيق أقعد ، فتحقق الصحابة بعلوم الشريعة ليس كتحقق التابعين ، والتابعون ليسوا كتابعيهم ، وهكذا إلى الآن ، ومن طالع سيرهم ، وأقوالهم ، وحكاياتهم؛ أبصر العجب فى هذا المعنى
وأما الخبر ، ففي الحديث: خير القرون قرني ، ثم الذين يلونهم ، ثم الذين يلونهم وفي هذا إشارة إلى أن كل قرن مع ما بعده كذالك
Scholars, study the books of the predecessors carefully. The knowledge of the predecessors is deeper compared to the later scholars. The evidence for this is experience and hadith.
Experience in every field of knowledge makes this clear because the later scholars have not reached the level of mastery that the predecessors had attained. Whether in the field of knowledge or practice, the predecessors alone suffice. The achievements of the predecessors in the reformation of religion and the world are distinct from those of the later scholars, and their knowledge and arts in research have the depth of an ocean. The research of the Companions in Shariah sciences is not like the research of the Tabi’in, nor is the following of the Tabi’in like the research of the Tabi’ al-Tabi’in, and so on until today. Whoever studies their biography, sayings, and events cannot help but be amazed.
Hadith: The Noble Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “The best of times is my time, then the later ones, then those after them.” This hadith indicates that every era will have the same relation with the era after it.
He also says:
الحذر الحذر من مخالفة الأولين ، فلو كان ثم فضل ما لكان الأولون أحق به
Avoid opposing the predecessors, for the first exemplars of every good are the Salaf.
Attributes of Allah Almighty and the Difference of the Deviant
Distortion and negation, anthropomorphism and likening are forbidden in the attributes of Allah Almighty.
Hafiz Zahabi, may Allah have mercy on him (748 AH), writes:
فكان الناس فى عافية وسلامة فطرة حتى نبغ جهم فتكلم فى الباري تعالى وفي صفاته بخلاف ما أتت به الرسل وأنزلت به الكتب ، نسأل الله السلامة فى الدين
“People were of sound belief and pure nature until Jahm bin Safwan came. He started such discourse about Allah and the attributes of Allah Almighty that was contradictory to the teachings of the Prophets and revealed scriptures. We pray to Allah to grant us safety in religion.”
Shaykh al-Islam Allama Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him (728 AH), states:
وطريقة سلف الأمة وأيمتها: أنهم يصفون الله بما وصف به نفسه وبما وصفه به رسوله ، من غير تحريف ولا تعطيل ، ولا تكبيف ولا تمثيل ، إثبات بلا تمثيل ، وتنزية بلا تعطيل ، إثبات الصفات ، ونفي مماثلة المخلوقات
“The righteous predecessors and the Imams of the religion have the approach regarding the attributes of Allah Almighty that they ascribe to Allah those attributes with which Allah Himself has described Himself or which the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, has described Him. They do not engage in distortion, negation, anthropomorphism, or likening. Rather, they affirm without likening and negate without negation, affirm the attributes and deny similarity with creation.”
Imam Waki’ bin Jarah says:
أدركنا إسماعيل بن أبى خالد وسفيان ومسعرا يحدثون بهذه الأحاديث ولا يفسرون شيئا
“I have seen Ismail bin Abu Khalid, Sufyan, and Mus’ar, may Allah have mercy on them; they used to narrate these hadiths without interpreting them.”
The Ash’ariyyah and Maturidiyyah accept only seven attributes of Allah, which are: hearing, sight, knowledge, speech, power, will, and life. They interpret all other attributes.
Allah Almighty says: ﴿الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتوى﴾ “The Most Merciful is established on the Throne.”
The Salaf Imams have taken the apparent meaning of this verse in its interpretation. They all agree that Allah is established on the Throne, not everywhere. Believing that Allah is everywhere is the doctrine of the Jahmiyyah, not Ahl al-Sunnah. However, Mufti Taqi Usmani Sahib writes:
Regarding this verse, all scholars have said that its apparent meaning is not intended; then some have considered it metaphorical and said it means dominance and power, and some have said this verse is among the mutashabihat (ambiguous verses) about which Allah said: ﴿وَلَا يَعْلَمُ تَاوِيلَهُ إِلَّا اللهُ﴾ “Its interpretation is known only to Allah.”
What all scholars mean is unknown; if it is the Ash’ariyyah and Maturidiyyah, then it is correct; if it is the Salaf of the Ummah, the Companions and the Followers, then their statement is not correct.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him, says:
فهذه التأويلات من باب تحريف الكلم عن مواضعه ، والإلحاد فى آيات الله ، وهى من باب الكذب على الله وعلى رسوله وكتابه ، ومثل هذه لا تجعل حقا حتى يقال: إن الله استأثر بعلمها ، بل هي باطل ،مثل شهادة الزور ، وكفر الكفار يعلم الله أنها باطل ، والله يعلم عباده بطلانها بالأسباب التى بها يعرف عباده من نصب الأدلة وغيرها وأصل وقوع أهل الضلال فى مثل هذا التحريف ، الإعراض عن فهم كتاب الله تعالى ، كما فهمه الصحابة والتابعون ، ومعارضة ما دل عليه بما يناقض ، وهذا هو من أعظم المحادة لله وللرسول ، لكن على وجه النفاق والخداع
“These interpretations are clear distortions of the Word of Allah and heresy in the clear verses. It is a lie upon Allah, His Messenger, and the Quran. If you are told that the meanings of these attributes are kept with Allah Himself, do not consider it true; rather, it is completely false. Just as false testimony and the disbelief of the disbelievers are known by Allah to be false, similarly Allah makes clear the falsehood of His servants through certain causes, such as evidence, etc. The main reason for the occurrence of distortion by the misguided is that they did not understand the Book of Allah as the noble Companions and great Followers understood it. Another major reason is that it contradicts the indications of the Book and Sunnah. They are like the disbelievers in enmity towards Allah and His truthful Messenger, peace be upon him; the only difference is that their enmity is due to hypocrisy and deception.”
He also says:
فتأويل هؤلاء المتأخرين عند الأئمة تحريف باطل
“According to the Imams of truth, the interpretations of these later people are false distortions.”
Calling the verses of attributes mutashabihat is the doctrine of the Mufawwidhah. They call the texts about attributes mutashabih, meaning that only Allah knows the meaning of the attributes of Allah and the Most Beautiful Names. The righteous Salaf and the Imams of Hadith were free from this. They entrusted the knowledge of the modality to Allah; they were aware of the meanings of istiwa’ ‘ala al-‘Arsh (establishment on the Throne), descent, etc. Calling the verses of attributes mutashabihat is turning away from Tawhid and opposing the Salaf.
No belief opposing the Salaf is valid. By calling the verses of Tawhid mutashabihat, the Qadariyyah, Jabariyyah, Jahmiyyah, Ash’ariyyah, Maturidiyyah, Rafidah, Mufawwidhah, and Kharijites have greatly benefited. Thus, many clear verses have been rendered meaningless and suspended. Every knowledgeable person knows that the attributes of Allah are the foundation of the belief in Tawhid and are proven by decisive verses.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him, says:
ومن هنا قال من قال من النفاة: إن طريقة الخلف أعلم وأحكم ، وطريقة السلف أسلم ، لأنه ظن أن طريقة الخلف فيها معرفة النفي ، الذى هو عنده الحق ، وفيها طلب التأويل لمعاني نصوص الإثبات ، فكان فى هذه عندهم علم بمعقول ، وتأويل لمنقول ، ليس فى الطريقة التى ظنها طريقة السلف ، وكان فيه أيضا رد على من يتمسك بمدلول النصوص ، وهذا عنده من إحكام تلك الطريق ، ومذهب السلف عنده عدم النظر فى فهم النصوص ، لتعارض الاحتمالات ، وهذا عنده أسلم ، لأنه إذا كان اللفظ يحتمل عدة معان ، فتفسيره ببعضها دون بعض فيه مخاطرة ، وفي الإعراض عن ذلك سلامة من هذه المخاطرة .
فلو كان قد بين وتبين لهذا وأمثاله أن طريقة السلف إنما هي إثبات ما دلت عليه النصوص من الصفات ، وفهم ما دلت عليه ، وتدبره وعقله ، وإبطال طريقة النفاة ، وبيان مخالفتها لصريح المعقول وصحيح المنقول ، علم أن طريقة السلف أعلم وأحكم وأسلم ، وأهدى إلى الطريق الأقوام ، وأنها تتضمن تصديق الرسول فيما أخبر به ، وفهم ذلك ومعرفته ، وأن ذلك هو الذى يدل عليه صريح المعقول ، ولا يناقض ذلك إلا ما هو باطل وكذب ، وأن طريقة التفاة المنافية لما أخبر به الرسول طريقة باطلة شرعا وعقلا ، وأن من جعل طريقة السلف عدم العلم بمعاني الآيات ، وعدم إثبات ما تضمنته من الصفات ، فقد قال غير الحق ، إما عمدا وإما خطأ ، كما أن من قال على الرسول: إنه لم يبعث بإثبات الصفات ، بل بعث بقول النفاة ، كان مفتريا عليه . وهؤلاء النفاة هم كذابون ، إما عمدا وإما خطأ ، على الله وعلى رسوله ، وعلى سلف الأمة وأيمتها ، كما أنهم كذابون ، إما عمدا وإما خطأ ، على عقول الناس ، وعلى مانصبه الله تعالى من الأدلة العقلية ، والبراهين اليقينية
“The deniers of the attributes of Allah say: ‘Our method is more sound and knowledgeable, whereas the method of the Salaf is safer.’ Because they think that in the method of the later people, negation (which they consider true) is known, and there is a way for interpretation in the verses affirming attributes. In the method of the later people, there is such knowledge of rationales and such interpretation of transmitted texts, which they think is not found in the method of the predecessors. This also rejects the person who follows the meanings of the texts. Thus, he strengthens the method of the later people. He thinks that the religion of the Salaf is not to pay attention to the understanding of texts because there are various possibilities; therefore, this method is safer because when a word has many meanings, in that case, ignoring all other meanings and interpreting it with only one is not free from danger, and not interpreting it is safer.
If he or others like him clearly understood that the method of the Salaf is to affirm the meanings of the verses of attributes and to acquire understanding and contemplation of them, to reject the method of those who deny attributes, and to clarify that their method is contrary to clear rationales and authentic transmitted texts, then he would know that the method of the Salaf is indeed safer, more sound, and more knowledgeable. Moreover, it is the most straightforward path and confirms the understanding and knowledge of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him. This path is in accordance with clear reason, and the method opposing it is false and wrong.
Those who deny the attributes are on falsehood, opposing reason and transmission; in reality, they deny the hadiths. Whoever considers ignorance of the meanings of texts and denial of the attributes contained therein as the method of the Salaf has spoken falsely knowingly or unknowingly. Some have lied upon the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, saying that he was not sent to affirm attributes but to support the denial of attributes. Such a person is a liar. These deniers of attributes are knowingly or unknowingly lying upon Allah, His Messenger, the predecessors of the Ummah, and the noble Imams, and likewise they are lying upon people’s intellects and the rational proofs and certain evidences given by Allah.”
He also says:
ومن آتاه الله علما وإيمانا ، علم أنه لا يكون عند المتأخرين من التحقيق ، إلا ما هو دون تحقيق السلف لا فى العلم ولا فى العمل ، ومن كان له خبرة بالنظريات والعقليات ، وبالعمليات ، علم أن مذهب الصحابة دائما أرجح من قول من بعدهم ، وأنه لا يبتدع أحد قولا فى الإسلام إلا كان خطأ ، وكان الصواب قد سبق إليه من قبله
“Whoever Allah has endowed with knowledge and faith will clearly know that the research of the later people is always less than that of the predecessors. Whoever practices theories, rationalities, and operations will find it clear that the stance of the Companions has always prevailed over the later ones. The predecessors have taken the lead towards the correct matter; therefore, whoever introduces something new in Islam will err.”
Allama Shanqeeti, may Allah have mercy on him (1393 AH), says:
لأن آيات الصفات لا يطلق عليها اسم المتشابه بهذا المعنى من غير تفصيل ، لأن معناها معلوم فى اللغة العربية وليس متشابها ، ولكن كيفية اتصافه جل وعلا بها ليست معلومة للخلق
“The word mutashabih is not used for the verses of attributes in the sense of ambiguity without detail because their meaning is known in Arabic lexicon and is not ambiguous. However, the modality of Allah being described with these attributes is unknown to creation.”
Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri Sahib writes:
“Our creed regarding such verses is to believe in them without discussing the modality. Certainly, we know that Allah, Glorified and Exalted, is free from the attributes of creation and free from signs of deficiency and origination. This is the opinion of our predecessors, and our later Imams have given correct and linguistically and legally permissible interpretations of these verses so that the less understanding may comprehend, for example, that istiwa’ may mean dominance and yad (hand) may mean power. This is also true in our view. However, we do not consider it permissible to affirm direction and place for Allah Almighty; rather, we say He is free from direction, spatiality, and all signs of origination.”
Shaykh al-Islam, Allama Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him (728 AH), says:
فلفظ الجهة قد يراد به شيء موجود غير الله فيكون مخلوقا ، كما إذا أريد بالجهة نفس العرش أو نفس أريد السموات ، وقد يراد به ما ليس بموجود غير الله تعالى ،كما إذا أريد بالجهة ما فوق العالم
ومعلوم أنه ليس فى النص إثبات لفظ الجهة ولانفيه ، كما فيه إثبات العلو و الاستواء والفوقية والعروج إليه ونحو ذلك . وقد علم أن ما ثم موجود إلا الخالق والمخلوق، والخالق مباين للمخلوق سبحانه وتعالى ، ليس فى مخلوقاته شيء من ذاته ، ولا فى ذاته شيء من مخلوقاته . فيقال لمن نفى الجهة: أتريد بالجهة أنها شيء موجود مخلوق ، فالله ليس داخلا فى المخلوقات ، أم تريد بالجهة ما وراء العالم ، فلا ريب أن الله فوق العالم ، بائن من المخلوقات ، وكذلك يقال لمن قال: إن الله فى جهة ، أتريد بذلك أن الله فوق العالم ، أو تريد به أن الله داخل فى شيء من المخلوقات ، فإن أردت الأول فهو حق ، وإن أردت الثاني فهو باطل
“The word ‘direction’ (jihah) will never mean anything existing other than Allah; in that case, it would be called creation. If direction is taken to mean the Throne or the sky, it is also creation. Sometimes it means something non-existent other than Allah, such as the direction above the universe. It is known that the text neither affirms nor negates the word ‘direction.’ But it affirms elevation, establishment, superiority, and ascent. It is also true that in the universe, either something is Creator or creation (there is no third). The Creator is separate from creation; neither is there any element of the Creator’s essence in creation nor any part of creation’s essence in the Creator.
If one denies direction, he will be asked whether he calls some existing created thing ‘direction.’ Allah is not among creation. And if he takes direction to mean a place beyond the universe, then Allah is above the universe and separate from creation.
Those who affirm direction for Allah will be asked whether they mean that Allah is above the universe or that He is inside some creation. If the first is meant, it is correct; if the second, it is false.”
He also writes:
وهؤلاء أخذوا لفظ الجهة بالاشتراك وتوهموا وأوهموا أنه إذا كان فى جهة كان فى كل شيء غيره ، كما يكون الإنسان فى بيته ، وكما يكون الشمس والقمر والكواكب فى السماء ، ثم رتبوا على ذلك أنه يكون محتاجا إلى غيره ،والله تعالى غني عن كل ماسواه ، وهذه مقدمات كلها باطلة
“The Jahmiyyah considered the word ‘direction’ as common between Creator and creation. They themselves fell into delusion and misled others that if Allah has any direction, then everything is in some direction, like a person in his house and the sun, moon, and stars in the sky. Then they said that each one needs the other, whereas Allah Almighty needs none. Therefore, Allah has no direction. All these premises are false.”
Declaring interpretations based on Arabic lexicon permissible to accommodate the less understanding against the Salaf’s approach is contrary to the creed of Tawhid. Turning the attributes of Allah from their apparent meanings to metaphorical meanings is against the intent of Allah and His Messenger. This is heresy and false distortion in the attributes. Is Tawhid such a thing that its appearance should be corrupted for the masses?
Istiwa’ meaning dominance and the attribute yad (hand) being turned towards metaphorical meanings of power and strength is against the clarifications of the Salaf.
It is simple that the attributes of Allah are befitting to His Majesty, and the attributes of creation are befitting to them. The attributes of Allah have perfection and permanence, whereas the attributes of creation do not. The need for distortion and interpretation arises only when someone says that the Creator’s attributes are like those of creation. Therefore, every innovator and distorter first likens the Creator’s attributes to creation, becoming a mushabbih (likener), then resorts to interpretation and distortion.
Paving the way for interpretation and distortion to explain to the masses causes a defect in the Book of Allah. Is the creed of Tawhid beyond the understanding of the masses that misguidance has crept into it?
Allama Ibn Abi al-‘Izz, may Allah have mercy on him, writes:
فلذلك صار كلام المتأخرين كثيرا ، قليل البركة ، بخلاف كلام المتقدمين ، فإنه قليل ، كثير البركة ، لا كما يقوله ضلال المتكلمين وجهلتهم: إن طريقة القوم أسلم ، وإن طريقتنا أحكم وأعلم ، ولا كما يقوله من لم يقدرهم من المنتسبين إلى الفقه: إنهم لم يتفرغوا لاستنباط الفقه وضبط قواعده وأحكامه اشتغالا منهم بغيره ، والمتأخرون
تفرغوا لذلك ، فهم أفقه !
فكل هؤلاء محجو بون عن معرفة مقادير السلف ، وعمق علومهم ، وقلة تكلفهم ، وكمال بصائرهم .
“The speech of the later people is lengthy and has little blessing. The speech of the predecessors was concise and immensely blessed. The misguided and those devoid of knowledge and insight say that the method of the predecessors was safer, and ours is more sound and knowledgeable. Similarly, the so-called ‘fuqaha’ say that the predecessors, due to other engagements, were unable to compile jurisprudence, principles of jurisprudence, and rulings, and the later people paid attention to these; therefore, the later people are great jurists! Their statement is outright false; they do not know the status and rank of the Salaf, how little was their affectation, and how insightful and profound in knowledge they were.”
Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi writes:
“After negating matters, there are two methods. One is the method of the Salaf, which is to take it in its real meaning and entrust the reality of the real meaning to divine knowledge without specifying any modality. The second is the method of the later people, who interpret it suitably so that the misguided sects of mushabbihah and mujassimah do not fall into error. For example, they say that Allah Almighty is established on the Throne, and the meaning of establishment is apparent, meaning sitting and resting, so it is known that Allah Almighty sits on the Throne like we sit on a throne, so He is a physical thing like us. May Allah protect us! The answer to this doubt, according to the method of the Salaf, is that establishment is affirmed, but it is not like our establishment, which necessitates a body; rather, it is something else unknown to us, and this answer is correct. But it is difficult to explain to the masses that establishment is affirmed but not like ours. Similarly, they may raise the doubt that the Quran mentions Allah’s ‘yad’ (hand) and the hadith mentions ‘wada’ qadam’ (placing the foot), and it is apparent that hands and feet are physical limbs, so it is known that Allah Almighty has physical limbs. The correct answer, according to the method of the Salaf, is that ‘yad’ and ‘qadam’ exist but not like ours. However, understanding this is also difficult for the masses, whose minds incline towards anthropomorphism and likening. It was obligatory to save them from this belief of anthropomorphism and likening; therefore, the later scholars devised this method of interpreting such realities in such a way that neither the Quran and hadith are abandoned nor do they fall into the belief of anthropomorphism and likening, for example, interpreting istiwa’ ‘ala al-‘Arsh as metaphorical for enforcing commands, ‘yad’ as power, and ‘wada’ qadam’ as subjugation.”
Absolutely correct that the correct method in the attributes of Allah Almighty is that of the righteous Salaf. It refutes the mushabbihah and mujassimah. However, we do not agree with the next statement that interpretation was done to refute the mushabbihah; this itself is objectionable. Where the Salaf rejected likening and anthropomorphism, they also rejected interpretation.
Husain Ahmad Madani Sahib says:
“The Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah consider interpretation of all these attributes necessary. ‘Yad’ means power because there are two approaches among Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah regarding these mushabbihah. The righteous Salaf say: لله يد كما يليق بشانه ، لا كأيدينا, because according to ليس كمثله شيء, He is free from likening and from what is inappropriate. But the later people considered these matters difficult for the masses to understand, so they said it is possible that ‘yad’ means blessing or power, as in Arabic these usages are interchangeable, so the later people interpreted them.”
The Salaf kept the attributes to their apparent meanings and did not interpret or distort them, as Madani Sahib himself stated. Now what has happened that the Salaf forbid interpretation and we say “Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah consider interpretation of all attributes necessary”? Are Ahl al-Sunnah opposed to the Salaf? Ahl al-Sunnah are those who agree with the Salaf in belief and practice.
He writes:
“For example, in the verses about istiwa’ ‘ala al-‘Arsh, the Wahhabi group (Saudi scholars) affirm the apparent meaning of istiwa’ and directions, which necessitates affirming corporeality, etc., but these noble elders all suspend the consequences of origination and corporeality like the Salaf or permit interpretations like the later people.”
Readers! You have observed how Madani Sahib objects to the unanimous belief of the Imams of Ahl al-Sunnah that if istiwa’ is taken in its apparent meaning, then corporeality is necessitated. The meaning is clear that the Salaf’s belief is defective and the later people’s belief is correct. Whereas this is obviously false because the Salaf’s belief is safer, more sound, and more knowledgeable. If taking the apparent meaning of the attributes of Allah necessitates corporeality, then what is necessitated by affirming the existence of Allah Almighty?
Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah say that Allah is the Being who has these attributes, and these attributes are affirmed for Him in a manner befitting His Majesty. Allah has informed about Himself that He is established on the Throne; therefore, we also say that Allah is established on the Throne, but how? In a manner befitting His Majesty.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him, says:
كما أن الرب نفسه ليس كمثله شيء ، فصفاته كذاته
“Since there is nothing like Allah’s Essence, His attributes are like His Essence.”
He also says:
كنه ذاته وصفاته التى لا يعلمها غيره
“Knowledge of the reality of Allah’s Essence and attributes is with Him alone.”
Madani Sahib further says:
“Affirming descent and ascent for Allah Almighty, although He is free from place and direction, is by way of likening. Like the kings of the world descend from their palaces to their subjects, similarly on the last night, the descent of Allah’s attention to creation occurs. Another interpretation is that ينزل رحمة الله أو ملك الله. The third interpretation of the Salaf is that we keep these narrations in their original meaning but do not know their modality, ينزل كما يليق بشانه, like the descent of the sun’s rays, the descent of angels and jinn is not like our descent.”
The belief of Ahl al-Sunnah regarding the descent of Allah is that Allah Himself descends; this is the real descent of Allah, befitting His Majesty. Its modality is known only to Him. The descent of Allah’s command is negligible for several reasons:
1. It contradicts authentic hadiths and the consensus of the righteous Salaf.
2. Allah’s command descends continuously; it is not specific to any part of day or night.
3. It is impossible that Allah’s command says: من يدعوني فأستجيب له
Allah’s descent from the heaven to the earth does not contradict His elevation. There is none like Allah. Allah’s descent cannot be compared to the descent of creation.
Imam Abu Ja’far Tirmidhi Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Nasr, may Allah have mercy on him (201-295 AH), was asked about the hadith of the Prophet, peace be upon him: إن الله تعالى ينزل إلى سماء الدنيا:
فالنزول ، كيف يكون يبقى فوقه علو؟
If descent is accepted, how will the attribute of elevation remain?
He replied:
النزول معقول ، والكيف مجهول والإيمان به واجب ، والسوال عنه بدعة
“The meaning of descent is known; its modality is unknown. Belief in it is obligatory, and asking about its modality is an innovation.”
Maulana Idris Kandhlawi writes:
“Similarly, understand that istiwa’ ‘ala al-‘Arsh does not mean the apparent and sensory meaning that Allah Almighty is sitting on the Throne, but it indicates Allah’s elevation and exalted status, as Allah says: رفيع الدرجات ذو العرش. Likewise, the hadith mentioning that Allah descends every night to the heaven of the world does not mean, God forbid, that He is a body who descends from the Throne to the heaven of the world; rather, it means the descent of His mercy or the descent of an angel of mercy to the heaven of the world at that particular time.”
Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani, may Allah have mercy on him, says:
وينبغي إطلاق صفة الاستواء من غير تأويل ، وأنه استواء الذات على العرش لا على معنى القعود والمماسة كما قالت المجسمة والكرامية ، ولا على معنى العلو والرفعة كما قالت الأشعرية ، ولا على معنى الإستيلاء والغلبة كما قالت المعتزلة ، لأن الشرع لم يرد بذلك ، ولانقل عن أحد من الصحابة والتابعين من السلف الصالح من أصحاب الحديث ، بل المنقول عنهم حمله على الإطلاق
“The attribute of istiwa’ should be stated without interpretation; it means the establishment of Allah Almighty on the Throne, not sitting or touching, as the mujassimah and karamiyyah say. Nor does it mean elevation and exalted status as the Ash’ariyyah say, nor does it mean dominance and supremacy as the Mu’tazilah say. Because none of these meanings are proven by the Shariah nor narrated from any Companion or Tabi’i among the righteous Salaf. Rather, it is proven to be taken in its apparent meaning.”
Mufti Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi writes:
“To say that Allah has hands and face (from Naqil) is against reason; therefore, these verses must be interpreted.”
Muhammad Abdul Hakim Sharaf Qadri Sahib writes:
“The noble hadith affirms ‘yad’ (hand) and ‘anamil’ (fingers) for Allah Almighty, and these are among the mutashabihat whose reality is beyond our intellect. Allah Almighty is free from body, hands, and fingers.”
Allama Ibn Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on him, says:
قوله تعالى: ﴿ما منعك أن تسجد لما خلقت بيدي﴾ ﴿بل يداه مبسوطتان﴾ (Al-Ma’idah: 64) The Jahmiyyah said: It is metaphorical for blessing or power, and this is false for several reasons: First, the original is the reality, so claiming metaphor contradicts the original. Second, it contradicts the apparent; both the original and apparent reject this claim. Third, the claimant of metaphor must provide:
1. Evidence that excludes the reality, as the claimant has both original and apparent and contradicts both.
2. Whether the word linguistically allows the metaphorical meaning; otherwise, it is a new invention.
3. Whether the context allows such meaning; not every possible meaning of a word is possible in every context. Many have erred here by not distinguishing between the linguistic possibilities and the specific context.
4. Evidence indicating that the metaphorical meaning is intended, as it is unlikely to be intended without any indication in the text.
When asked for these four things, their inability becomes clear.
الوجه الرابع: أن اطراد لفظها فى موارد الاستعمال وتنوع ذلك وتصريف استعماله يمنع المجاز
Regarding Allah’s statement: ﴿مَا مَنَعَكَ أَن تَسْجُدَ لِمَا خَلَقْتُ بِيَدَيَّ﴾ ﴿بَلْ يَدَاهُ مَبْسُوطَتَانِ﴾ (Al-Ma’idah: 64) (“I created him with My own hands, why did you not prostrate to him?”) and (“Rather, both His hands are spread out.”), the Jahmiyyah say that ‘hands’ mean blessing or power metaphorically.
This is false for several reasons:
1. The original is the reality; claiming metaphor contradicts the original.
2. It contradicts the apparent; both original and apparent reject this claim.
3. The claimant of metaphor must:
a. Provide evidence excluding the reality, as the claimant has both original and apparent and contradicts both.
b. Show that the word linguistically allows the metaphorical meaning; otherwise, it is a new invention.
c. Show that the context allows such meaning; not every possible meaning of a word is possible in every context.
d. Provide evidence that the metaphorical meaning is intended, as it is unlikely to be intended without any indication in the text.
When asked for these four things, their inability becomes clear.
The frequent and consistent use of the word prevents metaphorical meaning.
”
He also says:
كذلك قوله: ﴿خلقت بيدي﴾ meaning by His power and blessing. It is said: This is false because His saying: ﴿بيدي﴾ necessitates affirming two hands as His attributes. If the meaning is power, then He must have two powers, whereas you claim Allah has only one power. How can you attribute two powers to Allah? The consensus of Muslims who affirm and deny attributes is that it is not permissible to affirm two powers for Allah; therefore, your claim is false.
Similarly, Allah’s statement: ﴿خَلَقْتُ بِيَدَيَّ﴾ (“I created him with My own hands.”) is taken to mean His power and blessing. They will be told that this meaning is false because the word ﴿بِيَدَيَّ﴾ requires affirming two hands as His attributes. If power is meant, then it necessitates two powers, whereas you also believe Allah has only one power. How can you attribute two powers to Allah? The consensus of Muslims who affirm and deny attributes is that it is not permissible to affirm two powers for Allah; therefore, your claim is false.”
Sayyid Abul A’la Maududi Sahib has erred in the attributes of Allah Almighty:
1. He translates ثم استوى على العرش as:
“Then He appeared on the throne of dominion.”
This is against the Quran, Sunnah, and consensus of the Ummah; certainly, this is distortion. The Quran, hadith, consensus, and nature prove that Allah, the Most Merciful, is established on His Throne.
2. Regarding the statement that God’s Throne was on water, its meaning to us is that God’s dominion was on water.
Is God’s dominion not now on water? None of the Salaf interpret it as God’s dominion was on water. The interpretations and meanings of the Quran and Sunnah that are proven from the Companions and Imams of the Salaf are valid.
Hafiz Ibn al-Jawzi, may Allah have mercy on him (597 AH), writes:
وإجماع السلف منعقد على أن لا يزيدوا على قراءة الآية ، وقد شذ قوم فقالوا: العرش بمعنى الملك ، وهذا عدول عن الحقيقة إلى التجوز ، مع مخالفة الأثر ، ألم يسمعوا قوله عز وجل: ﴿وكان عرشه على الماء﴾ Do you think the dominion was on water?
“The consensus of the Salaf is not to add to the reading of the verse. Some people, deviating, said the Throne means dominion. This is a shift from reality to metaphor and contradicts hadith. Have they not heard Allah’s statement: ﴿وَكَانَ عَرْشُهُ عَلَى الْمَاءِ﴾ His Throne was on water? Did they not hear? Was Allah’s dominion (kingdom) on water?”
3. “The Creator Himself is not established in any place.”
Allah has informed about Himself that He is established on the Throne. This is the creed of Ahl al-Sunnah. If a child is asked where Allah is, he will point upwards or say Allah is above.
4. “It is not conceivable that Allah Almighty resides in any specific place because His Essence is free from the constraints of time and place.”
5. “The conception of Allah’s Essence given to us in the Quran also prevents thinking that He is a body and spatial and established somewhere and that some creature carries Him.”
If a person becomes independent of the righteous Salaf, even the truth appears false to him. The Ahl al-Sunnah are cautious regarding the attributes of Allah Almighty. They take the texts in their apparent meanings. They affirm what Allah has informed about Himself, negate what He has negated, and remain silent where the Salaf remained silent.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him (728 AH), says:
وحقيقة الأمر فى المعنى أن ينظر إلى المقصود ، فمن اعتقد أن المكان لا يكون إلا ما يفتقر إليه المتمكن ، سواء كان محيطا به أو كان تحته فمعلوم أن الله سبحانه ليس فى مكان بهذا الاعتبار ، ومن اعتقد أن العرش هو المكان ، وأن الله فوقه ، مع غناه عنه ، فلا ريب أنه فى مكان بهذا الاعتبار ، فمما يجب نفيه بلا ريب افتقار الله إلى ماسواه ، فإنه سبحانه غني عن ماسواه ، وكل شيء فقير إليه ، فلا يجوز أن يوصف بصفة تتضمن افتقاره إلى ماسواه
“The reality is that the purpose should be considered. Whoever thinks that place means that which requires a resident, whether the place surrounds him or is beneath him, then obviously Allah is not in any place in this sense. Whoever believes that the Throne is a place and Allah is above it but He is not dependent on it, then in this sense, Allah is in a place. Therefore, what must be negated is that Allah is dependent on anyone; everything is dependent on Him. It is not permissible to ascribe to Him any attribute that necessitates His dependence.”
He also says:
لكن قياس الله الخالق لكل شيء الغني عن كل شيء الصمد الذى يفتقر إليه كل شيء بالمخلوقات الضعيفة المحتاجة عدل لها برب العالمين ومن عدلها برب العالمين فإنه فى ضلال مبين
“But Allah Almighty, who is the Creator of all, self-sufficient, and so indifferent that everything depends on Him, to compare Him to dependent and weak creatures is equivalent to equating the Creator with creation, and whoever equates creation with the Lord of the Worlds is clearly misguided.”
Allama Ibn Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on him (751 AH), writes:
واستواؤه وعلوه على عرشه سلام من أن يكون محتاجا إلى ما يحمله أو يستوي عليه بل العرض محتاج إليه وحملته محتاجون إليه فهو الغني عن العرش وعن حملته وعن كل ماسواه فهو استواء وعلو لا يشو به حصر ولا حاجة إلى عرش ولا غيره ولا إحاطة شيء به سبحانه وتعالى بل كان سبحانه ولا عرش ولم يكن به حاجة إليه وهو الغني الحميد بل استواؤه على عرشه واستيلاؤه على خلقه من موجبات ملكه ، وقهرم من غير حاجة إلى عرض ولا غيره بوجه ما ونزوله كل ليلة إلى سماء الدنيا سلام مما يضاد علوه وسلام مما يضاد غناه وكماله سلام من كل ما يتوهم معطل أو مشبه وسلام من أن يصير تحت شيء أو محصورا فى شيء تعالى الله ربنا عن كل ما يضاد كماله وغناه وسمعه وبصره سلام من كل ما يتخيله مشبه أو يتقوله معطل وموالاته لأوليائه سلام من أن تكون عن ذلك كما يوالي المخلوق المخلوق ، بل هي موالاة رحمة وخير وإحسان وبر
Allah’s establishment and elevation on His Throne is free from the necessity that Allah depends on any bearer or that which He is elevated upon. Rather, the Throne and its bearers depend on Him. Allah is free from the Throne, its bearers, and everything else. This establishment and elevation is such that no confined thing is found in it. Allah does not need the Throne or anything else, nor is He encompassed by anything. There was a time when Allah existed but the Throne did not, nor did He need the Throne. He is self-sufficient and exalted. Rather, His establishment on the Throne and elevation over His creation are among the causes of His dominion and might, which do not require ‘arad (a term in kalam meaning an accident or attribute that exists with a substance but not essentially). His nightly descent does not contradict His elevation and self-sufficiency. Likewise, He is free from all the illusions of suspended and ambiguous and free from being subject to anything or confined by anything. Our Lord is free from every defect that contradicts His perfection, self-sufficiency, hearing, and sight. Allah Almighty is free from the thoughts of mushabbihah and the inventions of mu’attila. His love and affection for His saints is not like the love of creation for creation but is due to mercy, goodness, kindness, and benevolence.”
6. “Having power in His hand does not mean He has a physical hand; rather, the word is used metaphorically for possession. Like in our language, when we say that the authority is in someone’s hand, it means he owns all authority and no one else has a share.”
Imam Abu Hanifah, may Allah have mercy on him, is attributed to have said:
وله يد ووجه ونفس كما ذكره الله تعالى فى القرآن ، فما ذكره الله تعالى فى القرآن من ذكر الوجه واليد والنفس فهو له صفات بلا كيف ولا يقال: إن يده قدرته أو نعمته لان فيه إبطال الصفة وهو قول أهل القدر والاعتزال ولكن يده صفته بلا كيف
“Allah Almighty has hand, face, and soul as mentioned in the Quran. The hands, face, and soul mentioned in the Quran are His attributes whose modality cannot be described, nor can it be said that His hand means power or blessing because that would negate the attribute, which is the belief of the Qadariyyah and Mu’tazilah. Rather, hand is an attribute of Allah whose modality is unknown.”
He says:
لا يوصف الله تعالى بصفات المخلوقين ، وغضبه ورضاه صفتان من صفاته بلا كيف وهو قول أهل السنة والجماعة وهو يغضب ويرضى ولا يقال: غضبه عقو بته ورضاه ثوابه ونصفه كما وصف نفسه أحد صمد لم يلد ولم يولد ولم يكن له كفوا أحد حى قيوم قادر سميع بصير عالم ، يد الله فوق أيديهم ليست كأيدي خلقه وليست جارحة ، وهو خالق الأيدي ووجهه ليس كوجوه خلقه وهو خالق كل
الوجوه ونفسه ليست كنفس خلقه وهو خالق كل النفوس ﴿ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصير﴾
“Allah is not described with the attributes of creation. Anger and pleasure are attributes of Allah, but their modality is not described; this is the method of Ahl al-Sunnah. Allah Almighty is angry and pleased. It is not said that Allah’s anger means His punishment and pleasure means His reward. We describe Allah’s attributes as Allah أحد صمد لم يلد ولم يولد ولم يكن له كفوا أحد حي قيوم قادر سميع بصير عَالِمٌ has described Himself. يد الله فوق أيديهم Allah’s hand is above their hands. Allah’s hand is not like the hands of creation nor is it a physical limb; He is the Creator of all hands. Similarly, His face is not like the faces of creation; He is the Creator of all faces. His soul is not like the souls of creation; He is the Creator of all souls. Allah Almighty says: ﴿لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ البَصِير﴾ (There is nothing like Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing).”
Khatib Baghdadi, may Allah have mercy on him, says:
أما الكلام فى الصفات ، فإن ما روي منها فى السنن الصحاح ، ملعب السلف إنباتها وإجراؤها على ظواهرها ، ونفي الكيفية والتشبيه عنها ، وقد نفاها قوم ، فأبطلوا ما أثبته الله ، وحققها قوم من المثبتين ، فخرجوا فى ذالك إلى ضرب من التشبيه والتكييف ، والقصد إنما هو سلوك الطريقة المتوسطة بين الأمرين ، ودين الله تعالى بين الغالي فيه والمقصر عنه
وَالْأَصْلُ فِي هَذَا أَنَّ الْكَلَامَ فِي الصِّفَاتِ فَرْعُ الْكَلَامِ فِي الذَّاتِ ، وَيُحْتَذْى فِي ذَلِكَ حَذْوُهُ وَمِثَالُهُ ، فَإِذَا كَانَ مَعْلُوْمًا أَنَّ إِثْبَاتَ رَبِّ الْعَالِمِينَ إِنَّمَا هُوَ إِثْبَاتُ وُجُوْدٍ لَّا إِثْبَاتُ كَيْفِيَّةِ ، فَكَذَالِكَ إِثْبَاتُ صِفَاتِه إِنَّمَا هُوَ إِثْبَاتُ وُجُوْدِ لَّا إِثْبَاتُ تَحْدِيدٍ وتَكييف . فَإِذَا قُلْنَا : لِلَّهِ يَدٌ وَسَمْعٌ و بصر ، فَإِنَّمَا هِيَ صِفَاتٌ أَثْبَتَهَا اللهُ لِنَفْسِهِ ، وَلَا نَقُولُ : إِنَّ مَعْنَى الْيَدِ الْقُدْرَةُ ، وَلَا إِنَّ مَعْنَى السَّمْع وَالْبَصَرِ العِلمُ ، وَلَانَقُولُ : إِنَّهَا جَوَارِحُ ، وَلَا نُشَبهُهَا بِالْأَيدِي وَالأَسْمَاعِ وَالْأَبْصَارِ الَّتِي هِيَ جَوَارِحُ وَأَدَوَاتٌ لِلْفِعْلِ ، وَنَقُولُ : إِنَّمَا وَجَبَ إِثْبَاتُهَا لِأَنَّ التَّوْقِيفَ وَرَدَ بِهَا ، وَوَجَبَ نَفِي التَّشْبِيهِ عَنْهَا لِقَوْلِهِ : لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ الشَّوْرى : 11 ، وَوَلَمْ يَكُنْ لَّهُ كُفُوًا أَحَدٌ
“The attributes of Allah Almighty narrated in authentic hadiths are affirmed by the Salaf with their apparent meanings, negating modality and likening. Some groups deny these attributes, thus nullifying what Allah has affirmed. Some affirm but fall into the errors of likening and anthropomorphism. The correct approach is to take the middle path between these two groups, and the religion of Allah Almighty is between exaggeration and deficiency.
Talking about the attributes of Allah Almighty is talking about the Essence of Allah Almighty. The same method should be adopted as is done regarding the Essence of Allah Almighty. It is obvious that affirming the Lord of the Worlds is affirming His Essence, not His modality. Similarly, affirming attributes is affirming existence, not modality and limitation. Therefore, when we say that the attribute of hand, hearing, and sight is affirmed for Allah, it means these attributes are affirmed which Allah has affirmed for Himself. We do not say that hand means power, hearing and sight mean knowledge, nor do we consider them limbs or liken them to hands, ears, and eyes which are physical limbs and instruments of action. Rather, we say their affirmation is obligatory because they are proven by the Shariah, and negating likening is also extremely necessary, as Allah says: ﴿لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْ﴾
“Allah Almighty has no likeness.” He said: ﴿وَلَمْ يَكُن لَهُ كُفُوًا أَحَدٌ﴾
“And there is none equal to Him.”
7. The original words are ‘jaa’ rabbuka,’ literally meaning ‘Your Lord will come.’ But obviously, Allah Almighty does not move from one place to another.”
Allama Ibn Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on him (751 AH), writes:
مما يوضح لك ذلك أن النزول والمجيء والإتيان ، والاستواء ، والصعود والارتفاع كلها أنواع أفعال ، وهو الفعال لما يريد ، وأفعاله كصفاته قائمة به ، ولولا ذلك لم يكن فعالا ولا موصوفا بصفات كماله ، فتزوله ومجيته واستواؤه وارتفاعه وصعوده ونحو ذلك ، كلها أفعال من أفعاله ، التى إن كانت مجازا فأفعاله كلها مجان ولا فعل له فى الحقيقة ، بل هو بمنزلة الجمادات ، وهذا حقيقة من عطل أفعاله ، وإن كان فاعلا حقيقة فأفعاله نوعان : لازمة ومتعدية ، كما دلت النصوص التى هي أكثر من أن تحصر على النوعين
وبإثبات أفعاله وقيامها به تزول عنك جميع الإشكالات ، وتصدق النصوص بعضها بعضا وتعلم مطابقتها للعقل الصريح ، وإن أنكرت حقيقة الأفعال وقيامها به سبحانه اضطرب عليك هذا الباب أعظم اضطراب ، وبقيت حائرا فى التوفيق بين النصوص وبين أصول التفاة ، وهيهات لك بالتوفيق بين النقيضين والجمع بين الضدين
يوضحه : إن الأوهام الباطلة والعقول الفاسدة لما فهمت من نزول الرب ومجيئه ، وإتيانه وهبوطه ودنوه ما يفهم من مجيء المخلوق وإتيانه وهبوطه ودنوه وهو أن يفرغ مكانا ويشغل مكانانفت حقيقة ذلك فوقعت فى محذورين : محذور التشبيه ومحذور التعطيل ، ولو علمت هذه العقول الضعيفة أن نزوله سبحانه ومجيئه وإتيانه لا يشبه نزول المخلوق وإتيانه ومجيئه ، كما أن سمعه وبصره وعلمه وحياته كذالك ، بل يده الكريمة ووجهه الكريم كذلك ، وإذا كان نزولا ليس كمثله نزول ، فكيف تنفى حقيقته ، فإن لم تنف المعطلة حقيقة ذاته وصفاته وأفعاله بالكلية وإلا تناقضوا ، فإنهم أى معنى أتبتوه لزمهم فى نفيه ما ألزموا به أهل السنة المثبتين لله ما أثبت لنفسه ، ولا يجدون إلى الفرق سبيلا
“It is clear that the attributes of descent, coming, arrival, establishment, ascent, and elevation are all ‘attributes of action.’ Allah, whom He wills, can do perfectly. His attributes of action are like His essential attributes. If this were not so, He would not be ‘Fa’al’ (Doer) nor characterized by attributes of perfection. Allah’s attributes of descent, coming, arrival, establishment, ascent, elevation, and other attributes are His actions. If these active attributes are metaphorical, then all His actions would be metaphorical, and in reality, no action would remain; rather, all actions would become like inanimate objects. This is the reality of the Mu’attila. If Allah is accepted as a real doer, then His actions are of two types:
1. Necessary (lazimiyyah)
2. Transitive (muta’addiyyah)
Countless texts indicate both types.
Affirming the attributes of actions and establishing them with the Essence of Allah removes all your doubts. All texts confirm each other, and you will understand them in accordance with clear reason. If you deny these attributes or do not establish them with Allah Almighty, you will be severely confused and keep seeking agreement between texts and deniers of the attributes of Allah Almighty. It is impossible to reconcile two opposites.
Further clarification: When false imaginations and corrupt intellects take the descent, coming, lowering, and nearness of the Lord to mean what is meant by the descent, coming, lowering, and nearness of creation, which necessitates moving from one place to another, they deny the reality of these attributes and fall into two errors:
1. Likening
2. Negation
If these weak intellects understood that Allah’s descent and coming are not like the descent and coming of creation, similarly His hearing, sight, knowledge, and life are not like those of creation, and His hand and face are not like those of creation, then denying the reality of these attributes would not occur. The Mu’attila have denied the reality of Allah’s Essence, attributes, and actions, falling into contradiction because whatever meaning they affirm, the same objection arises in denying attributes as arises for Ahl al-Sunnah in affirming the attributes of Allah Almighty, and they find no way out of this difference.”
He also says:
وهذا النزول إلى الأرض يوم القيامة قد تواترت به الأحاديث والآثار ودل عليه القرآن صريحا
“Regarding Allah’s descent towards the earth on the Day of Resurrection, the hadiths and the reports of the Companions are mutawatir, and the Quran also clearly indicates it.”
Maulana Sarfaraz Khan Safdar writes:
“There is a doctrine of the predecessors regarding the descent of the Lord that the descent is the real descent, but its modality is unknown. Similarly, the attributes of hearing, sight, hand, and establishment on the Throne are according to the predecessors. The later people interpret and say it means the pleasure of Allah, satisfaction, and attention. The excellent statement is that of the predecessors.”
Indeed, the excellent statement is that of the predecessors, but the later mutakallimun have no right to differ from the predecessors in the Tawhid of Allah Almighty. The later people have committed negation in the attributes of Allah under the pretext of likening.
9. “It is known that the soul breathed into man is actually a reflection or image of the divine attributes.”
This belief is borrowed from the Sufis. Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah shudder at this conception.
Mufti Taqi Usmani Sahib writes:
“There are many statements in Tafheem al-Quran contrary to the established beliefs and sayings of the majority; therefore, it is not correct to read or teach it uncritically, as the questioner said.”
Review of Some Accusations:
A gentleman says:
“I stated: My Imam’s belief is that Allah is everywhere.”
He further said:
“No’man’s belief, the belief of the Hanafis regarding the Lord’s essence is that Allah is everywhere; Allah is not only on the Throne.”
This belief has been attributed to the Imam by some people, although it is not proven from him. Ibn Abi al-Izz al-Hanafi, may Allah have mercy on him, writes:
ولا يلتفت إلى من أنكر ذلك ممن ينتسب إلى مذهب أبى حنيفة ، فقد انتسب إليه طوائف معتزلة وغيرهم ، مخالفون له فى كثير من اعتقاداته ، وقد ينتسب إلى مالك والشافعي وأحمد من يخالفهم فى بعض اعتقاداتهم ، وقصة أبى يوسف فى استتابة بشر المريسي ، لما أنكر أن يكون الله عز وجل فوق العرش مشهورة
“Some people attributed to the Hanafis, who deny this belief, their denial is not worthy of attention. Because many groups of the Mu’tazila themselves claim to be followers of Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, yet they oppose him in many theological issues. Those who oppose some beliefs of Imams Malik, Shafi’i, and Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on them, also claim to be their followers. The story of Qadi Abu Yusuf is famous that when Bishr al-Marisi denied Allah’s establishment on the Throne, he told him to repent.”
Shaykh al-Islam Allamah Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him (728 AH), writes:
وكذالك الحنفي يخلط بمذاهب أبى حنيفة شيئا من أصول المعتزلة والكرامية والكلابية ، ويضيفه إلى مذهب أبى حنيفة
“Similarly, the Hanafis have incorporated much into the doctrine of Abu Hanifa that was actually the principles and beliefs of the Mu’tazila, Karramiyya, and Kalabiyya, and then they attached it to the doctrine of Abu Hanifa.”
He also states:
ما من إمام إلا وقد انتسب إليه أقوام هو منهم برىء قد نتسب إلى مالك أناس مالك برىء منهم وانتسب إلى الشافعي أناس هو بريء منهم وانتسب إلى أبى حنيفة أناس هو بريء منهم
“Every Imam has some people attributed to him, while the Imam is free from them. Many people falsely attribute things to Imam Malik, while he, may Allah have mercy on him, is free from them. Many who call themselves Shafi’is exist, while the Imam is free from them. Similarly, many people attribute themselves to Abu Hanifa, while he is free from them.”
Allamah Abu Muzafar Asfar Ayni, may Allah have mercy on him (471 AH), writes:
وقد نبغ من أحداث أهل الر أى ، من تلبس بشيء من مقالات القدرية والروافض مقلدا فيها وإذا خاف سيوف أهل السنة نسب ما هو فيه من عقائده الخبيثة إلى أبى حنيفة تسترا به فلا يغرنك ما ادعوه من نسبتها إليه فإن أبا حنيفة بريء منهم ومما نسبوه إليه
“Many newborn people of opinion have appeared who have mixed some of the beliefs of the Qadariyya and the Rafidah incorrectly, then when the swords of Ahl al-Sunnah cause fear, they quickly color their beliefs with the hue of Hanafism. (O addressee!) Do not be deceived by their attributions, because Imam Abu Hanifa is completely free from them and their attributed beliefs.”
Allamah Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri (1346 AH) writes:
وهذا الحديث يثبت كونه سبحانه وتعالى فوق عرشه ، والجهمية ينكرونه
“This hadith proves that Allah, Glorified and Exalted be He, is (high) on His Throne, while the Jahmiyyah deny this.”
The belief of the pious predecessors and the Imams of Ahl al-Sunnah regarding the attributes of the Lord is the truth, and deviation from it is not appropriate in any way.
Are Islamic beliefs so complicated that false interpretations must be resorted to for their understanding? These statements make it clear that this belief is a deviation from Ahl al-Sunnah. Should the foundation of Islamic beliefs be laid on Arabic linguistics or on the understanding of the pious predecessors?
The predecessors did not engage in interpretation (ta’wil) of the attributes of the Lord; for us too, safety and success lie in this. To say that if the attributes of the Lord are accepted according to the methodology of the Salaf, then this will necessarily lead to such and such, is not true, because the Salafi methodology is the most sound, wise, and knowledgeable. Having ill opinion about the Salaf and deviating from their methodology leads away from the path of truth. Whereas the Salaf were the most knowledgeable and pious, far from unnecessary hardships. They explained the correct interpretations of the texts of the Qur’an and Hadith.
