PDA

View Full Version : ********** and the Aqida of the Salaf



salman
23-12-2004, 05:36 AM
Salamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah

A brother posted a link http://www.**********/articles/aqeedah/tawheed/asmaawassifaat/taweel.htm (here) and stated that this was the "opinion" of the great scholars.

The first question i would like to ask this brother is this. If you are so blatantly against the concept of Taqlid, as most Salafis are, then how come your reliance is on a website? Have you checked each and every quote within its proper context? Do you have access to the books being used as daleel? If not then why do you believe what it says? If you answer that it is because the books being used are written by scholars and/or the article is written by a scholar then we pose the question, "Were any of the other scholars such as Imam Nawawi or Ibn Hajar or Suyuti deficient or ignorant in this regard?" and if not then why do you not look at their books and statements?

We shall now insha'Allah move onto the article and show the reality behind the opinions of the Salaf.

He states:


Imaam al-Awzaa’ee (d.157H) - rahimahullaah - said:

‘‘I asked az-Zuhree and Makhool about the aayaat pertaining to the Sifaat (Attributes of Allaah), so they said: Leave them as they are.’’


This does not prove the fact that ta'wil on these ayats is impermissible. Rather, what Imam Zuhri and others took was the precautionary position. This is proven by the fact that Imam Awza'i did indeed do ta'wil on a few occassions. Imam Nawawi states in his Sharh of Sahih Muslim in the Chapter ‏صلاة المسافرين وقصرها‏ regarding the hadith of descent:

"هذا الحديث من أحاديث الصفات، وفيه مذهبان مشهوران للعلماء: أحدهما وهو مذهب السلف وبعض المتكلمين أنه يؤمن بأنها حق على ما يليق بالله تعالى وأن ظاهرها المتعارف في حقنا غير مراد، ولا يتكلم في تأويلها مع اعتقاد تنزيه الله تعالى عن صفات المخلوق وعن الانتقال والحركات وسائر سمات الخلق، والثاني مذهب أكثر المتكلمين وجماعات من السلف وهو محكي هنا عن مالك والأوزاعي على أنها تتأول على ما يليق بها بحسب مواطنها، فعلى هذا تأولوا هذا الحديث تأويلين أحدهما:

- There are, concerning this hadith and similar one and verses on Allahs attributes two schools.

The school of the vast majority of the Salaf and some of the sholars of kalam holds that we must believe in their reality according to what befits AllahAlmighty and Exalted, but that the literal import we commonly apply to
ourselves is not meant, nor do we say anything to interpret them figuratively, believing firmly that Allah is utterly transcendent above the properties of contingence (huduth).

The second school is that of the majority of the scholars of kalam and a number of the Salaf - related from Malik and al-Awza`i - and holds that they are interpreted figuratively but only according to their appropriate contextual meanings. On that basis, this hadith has two interpretations.

(end quote)

What we see from the Salafis however is something totally different. I will now give the example of Shaikh Uthaymeen, one of the giants of the Salafis who said:

Shaikh Uthaymin said:

1. Can the vision of Allah Most High in the hereafter be other than in a direction? (Sharh Aqida Wasitiyya)
2. Says Allah has "two eyes" (Ibid)
3. Interprets the "coming" as a coming which befits the majesty of Allah without anthropomorphic imagery nor suggestion of modality. Ofcourse, he does not declare corporeality explicitly but establishing that there is a body that moves by coming and by returning . Imam Ahamd interpreted as "Order". Narrated by Ibn Hazm in al Fisal (2:173). Al Kawthari in his edition of Bayhaqis al Asma' wa Al Sifat states that Abu Ya`la also narrates it from Ahmad. See also Ibn Al Jawzis Daf` Shubah al Tashbih.
4. We believe that Allah possesses two real eyes. (Ibid)
5. Allah is sitting on his throne in person. (Aqidat Al Muslim) Does Ibn Rushud deny that the word "sitting" was used in the translation of Ibn Uthaymin by M.H. al-Johani entitled "The Muslim's Belief", 2nd edition, Saudi Arabia, page 11?
6. Allah is in the heaven in person (bi dhatihi) (Sharh Aqida Wastiyya)

So now we ask the claimant, can you bring a single proof where the Salaf, while describing Allahs attributes stated "in reality" or "Two eyes" or "Real" or "sitting" and "In person" ? If not then you have admitted to goign against the Salaf and engaging in Bidat and heresy.

Ibn Taymiyya says in his al Ta'sees:

- The Creator, Glorified and Exalted is He, is above the world (fawqu al `aalam) and his being above is literal (fawqiyyatan Haqeeqiyyatan)


He further states:


[2]:[2]: al-Waleed Ibn Muslim (d.194H) - rahimahullaah - said:

‘‘I asked Maalik, al-Awzaa’ee, Layth Ibn Sa’d and Sufyaan ath-Thawree - rahimahumullaah - concerning the reports related about the Attributes, so they all said: Leave them as they are, without asking how.’’ [2]


This once again does not negate the use of Ta'wil. We have already discussed Imam Awza'i and Imam Malik above. Sufyan thawri also engaged in Ta'wil when he interpreted the verse 20: 5 as amrun fi al-`arsh i.e. a command concerning the throne. This related by Imam Haramayn in his Kitab al Irshad and Al Yafi in his Marham. Further Imam Sufyan also stated that Allah is everywhere in "His knowledge".

He then says:


Nu’aym Ibn Hammaad (d.228H) - rahimahullaah - said:

‘‘Whosoever makes tashbeeh (resemblance) of Allaah to His creation has committed kufr (disbelief), and whosoever denies what Allaah has described Himself with has also committed kufr. Indeed, all that Allaah has described Himself with, and what His Messenger (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) has described Him with, then there is no tashbeeh in it at all.’’


First thing one should notice is the book being quoted is Imam Dhahabis Uluw. Anyone who has read this book will know that firstly it was a very early book of Imam dhahabi where he tried to gather quotations from the Salaf and Khalaf in regardings to Allah being "up there". Uluw = height. Imam Dhahabi disavowed this book as stated by the copyist of the book Ibn Nasir who read it in Imam Dhahabis on handwriting in the original manuscript.

One of the blunders you can see in the book is that Imam Dhahabi narrates many hadith saying "Bukhari narrated it and it is Sahih" when in reality neither did Bukhari narrate it nor was it Sahih. If you wish to see these hadith then i can present them to you.

Secondly, as for the narration, then the first part is definitely true. As for the second part those who do Ta'wil - which include the Salaf - only do so when there interpretation has linguistic support in the Arabic language so in reality they are not denying anything.


Imaam at-Tirmidhee (d.279H) - rahimahullaah - said: ‘‘It has been stated by more than one person from amongst the People of Knowledge about such ahaadeeth, that there is no tashbeeh (resemblance) to the Attributes of Allaah, and our Lord - the Blessed, the Most High - descends to the lowest heavens every night. So they say: Affirm these narrations, have faith (eemaan) in them, do not deny them, nor ask how. The likes of this has been narrated from Maalik Ibn Anas, Sufyaan ath-Thawree, Ibn ’Uyaynah and ’Abdullaah Ibnul-Mubaarak, who all said about such ahaadeeth, ‘‘Leave them as they are, without asking how.’’ Such is the statement of the People of Knowledge from Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah. However, the Jahmiyyah oppose these narrations and say: This is tashbeeh! However, Allaah - the Most High - has mentioned in various places in His Book, the Attributes of al-Yad (Hand), as-Sama’ (Hearing) and al-Basr (Sight) - but the Jahmiyyah make ta‘weel of these aayaat, explaining them in a way, other than how it is explained by the People of Knowledge. They say: Indeed, Allaah did not create Aadam with His own Hand - they say that ‘Hand’ means that Power of Allaah.

I did not find this anywhere in the Sunan of Tirmidhi - nor is the statement likely to be of Tirmidhis. Imam Tirmidhi did not go a step without his teacher Imam Bukhari. What is known is that Imam Bukhari also engaged in Ta'wil. This is evident from Imam Bukharis Sahih where he states regarding Istiwa:

باب قوله و كان عرشه على الماء و هورب العرش العظيم قال ابو العالية استوى الى السماء ارتفع فسو هن خلقهن و قال مجاحد استوى على العرش علا على العرش الخ

He basis his opinion on the saying of Mujahid and Abu Al aliya the interpretation being "to rise above" or "exalt Himself above" (`ala). (Sahih Bukhari)

Similarly, Imam Tirmdihi himself in his Sunan (Sura 57) relates from Abu Hurayra that the Prophet said: "By Him in Whose hand is the soul of Muhammad, if you were to extend a rope down all the way to the seventh earth, verily you would alight upon Allah!" That is interpreted again as: His knowledge, His power, His sovereignty, etc. as stated by Tirmidhi and others, while He Himself is "over the Throne," that is: exalted high above creation and free of space and location.

The oddest thing about this narration is the fact that he attributes the interpretation of "Hand" (Yad) as "Power" (Quwa) to the "Jahmis" although Imam Hasan Al Basri was well known for this interpretation. Further, this statement also envelopes the likes of Imam Tabari, Ibn Kathir and Ibn Jawzi.

Ibn Jawzi states in his Daf Shuhba:

- They claimed: we do not construe the text according to the directives of the Arabic language. Thus they refuse to construe "hand" (yad) as meaning "favor" and "power"; or "coming forth" (maji') and "coming" (ityan) as "mercy" and "favor"; or "shin" (saq) as "tribulation." Instead they say: We construe them in their customary external senses, and the external sense is what is describable in terms of well-known human characteristics, and a text is only construed literally if the literal sense is feasible."

As Nawawi said in the passage quoted from his commentary on Muslim, many of the Salaf also applied such figurative interpretation (ta'wil) Allahs Hand as shown from the explanation of aydin (Hands) as meaning "strength" in the verse:

"We have built the heaven with (Our) hands" (51:47)

Imam Tabari states in his tafsir of from Ibn Abbas 51:47 :

الْقَوْل فِي تَأْوِيل قَوْله تَعَالَى : { وَالسَّمَاء بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ } يَقُول تَعَالَى ذِكْرُهُ : وَالسَّمَاء رَفَعْنَاهَا سَقْفًا بِقُوَّةٍ . وَبِنَحْوِ الَّذِي قُلْنَا فِي ذَلِكَ قَالَ أَهْل التَّأْوِيل . ذِكْرُ مَنْ قَالَ ذَلِكَ : 24962 - حَدَّثَنِي عَلِيّ , قَالَ : ثنا أَبُو صَالِح , قَالَ : ثني مُعَاوِيَة , عَنْ عَلِيّ , عَنِ ابْن عَبَّاس , قَوْله : { وَالسَّمَاءَ بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ } يَقُول : بِقُوَّةٍ. 24963 - حَدَّثَنِي مُحَمَّد بْن عَمْرو , قَالَ : ثنا أَبُو عَاصِم , قَالَ : ثنا عِيسَى ; وَحَدَّثَنِي الْحَارِث , قَالَ : ثنا الْحَسَن , قَالَ : ثنا وَرْقَاء جَمِيعًا , عَنِ ابْن أَبِي نَجِيح , عَنْ مُجَاهِد , قَوْله : { بِأَيْدٍ } قَالَ : بِقُوَّةٍ . 24964 - حَدَّثَنَا بِشْر , قَالَ : ثنا يَزِيد , قَالَ : ثنا سَعِيد , عَنْ قَتَادَة { وَالسَّمَاء بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ } : أَيْ بِقُوَّةٍ . 24965 - حَدَّثَنَا ابْن الْمُثَنَّى , قَالَ : ثنا مُحَمَّد بْن جَعْفَر , قَالَ : ثنا شُعْبَة , عَنْ مَنْصُور أَنَّهُ قَالَ فِي هَذِهِ الْآيَة : { وَالسَّمَاءَ بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ } قَالَ : بِقُوَّةٍ . 24966 - حَدَّثَنِي يُونُس , قَالَ : أَخْبَرَنَا ابْن وَهْب , قَالَ : قَالَ ابْن زَيْد , فِي قَوْله : { وَالسَّمَاءَ بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ } قَالَ : بِقُوَّةٍ. 24967 - حَدَّثَنَا ابْن حُمَيْد , قَالَ : ثنا مِهْرَان , عَنْ سُفْيَان { وَالسَّمَاء بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ } قَالَ : بِقُوَّةٍ

--- Ibn Abbas said: "It means: with strength." He reports an identical position from Mujahid, Qatada, Mansur, Ibn Zayd, and Sufyan al Thawri. This is also Imam Al Asharis explanation according to Ibn Furak in the latter's recension of Asharis school.

For those who wish to deny this - then i will quote another Tafsir. In The Tafsir of Ibn Abbas (51:47):

{ وَٱلسَّمَآءَ بَنَيْنَاهَا } خلقناها { بِأَيْدٍ } بقوة

- (Yad) (meaning) power


In complete opposition to this, The salafi scholar Khalil Harris in his commentary on the Sharh Aqida al Wasitiyya states:

- How can Allah's "hand" be interpreted to mean power when the text proves mentioning of palm, fingers, right and left, closing, opening, etc. which can happen only in the case of a "real" hand.

Once again we hear the word "Real". Is it nor a surprise that the texts all support the meaning of yad being power in certain verses, yet people still do not understand.


al-Khattaabee (d.388H) - rahimahullaah - said:

‘‘The madhhab (way) of the Salaf (Pious Predecessors) with regards to the Sifaat (Attributes of Allaah) is to affirm them as they are ’alaa dhaahir (with their apparent meaning), negating any tashbeeh (resemblance) to them, nor takyeef (asking how they are).’’


Once again, this has been quoted from the Mukhtasar Uluw. Rather, what is known about Imam Khattabi is that he certainly did allow Ta'wil. What the claimant must understand is that none of the Ahly Sunnah deny that the Salaf consigned the meaning of the verses to Allah - however, to outrightly deny Ta'wil from the above sayings is not only ignorance but is a vain attempt. This is because:

1. The narrations do not at all prohibit the use of Ta'wil in anyway. Rather, it merely states precaution.

2. The Salaf themselves engaged in ta'wil as proven through various sayings.

As for Imam Khatabi, then once again - he himself engaged in Ta'wil which proves that the sayings of the Salaf were definitely not forbidding figurative interpretation.

Let us see firstly what Imam Khattabi said about "literalism" as we have seen both Shaikh Uthaymeen as well as Shaikh Khalil using this term to describe Allah. He says (after discussing the Jahmis, who are the first group, who he says did not do ta'wil but rejected the hadith altogether):

- The second party gives its assent to the narrations and appplies their outward meanings literally in a way bordering anthropomorphism.

Thus we see that "literalism" is rejected.

Moving on Imam Khattabi uses Ta'wil in interpreting Allahs "Leg" which He will place in the Fire:

- The meaning of the qadam here is possibly a reference to those whom Allah has created of old or "sent forth" for the Fire in order to complete the number of its inhabitants. Everything that is "sent forth" is a qadam, in the same way that the verbal noun of demolishing (hadama) is a hadm or ruin, and that of seizing (qabada) is qabd or a seizure. Likewise Allah said: They have a sure foundation (qadam sidq) with their Lord (10:2) with reference to the good works which they have sent forth. This explanation has been transmitted to us from al-Hasan al-Basri.

It is supported by the Prophet's saying in the aforementioned hadith: "As for Paradise, Allah will create for it a special creation." Both meanings (i.e. respectively pertaining to the Fire and Paradise) are in agreement with
the sense that Paradise and hellfire will be provided with an additional number of dwellers to complete their respective numbers, at which point they will be full

(al-Khattabi, Ma`alim al-sunan (Hims ed.) 5:95)

Similarly, in the same book Imam Khattabi describes another hadith regarding Allahs thron and its groaning:

- If this discourse is taken in its outward sense (Dhahir), then it suggests modality (kayfiyya), which does not apply to Allah and His Attributes... In this discourse, we find ellipsis and allusiveness. Thus the meaning of his saying: "Do you know what Allah is?" means: Do you know Allah's greatness? and his saying: "It groans under him" means that it is unable to carry His Majesty and Greatness. Thus it groans under him for it is known that the reason a camel saddle groans under the rider is because of the weight of what is on it and its inability to carry it. By drawing this kind of similitude he illustrates the meaning of Allah's Greatness and Might and the height of His Throne in order for it to be known that the holder of lofty rank, mighty status, and exalted name, is not to be made an intercessor with one who lesser in position and below Him in degree.

Moving on


Imaam as-Saaboonee (d.448H) - rahimahullaah - said: So they do not distort the words from their context, by carrying the meaning of Yadayn (the two Hands of Allaah) to mean ni’matayn (two bounties) or quwwatayn (two powers) - which is the tahreef (distortion) of the Mu’tazilah and the Jahmiyyah - may Allaah destroy them. They do not ask how the Attributes are, nor do they resemble them to their creation…Allaah - the Most High - protected Ahlus-Sunnah from such tahreef, takyeef and tashbeeh and favoured them with knowledge and understanding.’’

We have already answered the claims regarding the Hands. It is firmly established firm Hasan Basri, Ibn Abbas, Sufyan Thawri, Qatada, Mujahid, Ibn Kathir, Tabari, Nawawi and others that Yad can mean "power" or bounty.

Regarding verse 51:47

In the Tafsir of Ibn Abbas it states:

وَٱلسَّمَآءَ بَنَيْنَاهَا } خلقناها { بِأَيْدٍ } بقوة

In the تفسير زاد المسير في علم التفسير by Ibn Jawzi regarding 51:47 :

{ بأَيْدٍ } أي: بقْوَّة، وكذلك قال ابن عباس، ومجاهد، وقتادة، وسائر المفسرين واللغويين «بأيد» اي: بقُوَّة.

- (Hands) meaning power. This has been said by Ibn Abbas, Mujahid, Qatada and Sa'ir...

Tafsir Ibn Kathir states for the same verse:

" بِأَيْدٍ " أَيْ بِقُوَّةٍ قَالَهُ اِبْن عَبَّاس وَمُجَاهِد وَقَتَادَة وَالثَّوْرِيّ وَغَيْر وَاحِد

--- (with Hands), meaning, with strength (al Quwwa), according to Abdullah bin Abbas, Mujahid, Qatadah, Thawri and several others.

Tafsir Al qurtubi states for the same verse:

وَمَعْنَى " بِأَيْدٍ " أَيْ بِقُوَّةٍ وَقُدْرَة . عَنْ اِبْن عَبَّاس وَغَيْره

--- The meaning of "Hands" is with power and ability (according to) Ibn Abbas and others.


Regarding the Verse: And make mention of our bondmen, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, men of parts (literally of two hands) and vision (38:45) Ibn Jawzi says:

{ أُولي الأيدي } يعني القوة في الطاعة { والأبصارِ } البصائر في الدِّين والعِلْم. قال ابن جرير: وذِكْر الأيدي مَثَلٌ، وذلك لأن باليد البطش، وبالبطش تُعرف قُوَّة القويِّ، فلذلك قيل للقويِّ: ذو يدٍ، وعنى بالبصر: بصر القلب، وبه تُنال معرفة الأشياء، وقرأ ابن مسعود، والأعمش، وابن أبي عبلة: { أُولي الأيدِ } بغير ياءٍ في الحالين. قال الفراء: ولها وجهان:

أحدهما: أن يكون القارئ لهذا أراد الأيدي، فحذف الياء، وهو صواب، مثل الجَوارَ والمناد

- meaning strenght. (he then quotes Imam Tabari, Ibn Masud and others)

In the Tafsir of Ibn Abbas for the same verse (38:45):

{ وَإِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ أُوْلِي ٱلأَيْدِي } القوة في العبادة لله

- meaning strength in Ibadtullah.

In the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir for the same verse (38:45):

[وَاذْكُرْ عِبَادَنَآ إِبْرَهِيمَ وَإِسْحَـقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ أُوْلِى الاٌّيْدِى وَالاٌّبْصَـرِ ]


- (And remember Our servants, Ibrahim, Ishaq, and Ya`qub, Ulil-Aydi wal-Absar.) meaning, righteous deeds, beneficial knowledge, strength in worship and insight. `Ali bin Abi Talhah reported that Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said:


[أُوْلِى الاٌّيْدِى]


(Ulil-Aydi) "Of great strength and worship;


[وَالاٌّبْصَـرُ]


(wal-Absar) means, understanding of the religion.'' Qatadah and As-Suddi said, "They were given strength in worship and understanding of the religion.''

( see link here http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=38&tid=44789 (Ibn Kathir)

Regarding verse 3:73 "Lo the Bounty is in Allahs Hands."

Tafsir ibn Abbas says:

{ بِيَدِ ٱللَّهِ يُؤْتِيهِ مَن يَشَآءُ } يعطيه من يشاء يعني محمداً وأصحابه

- Coming of (Mercy or favor) i.e. on the Prophet and his sahaba.

In the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir:

- (Say: "All the bounty is in the Hand of Allah; He grants to whom He wills.) meaning, all affairs are under His control, and He gives and takes. Verily, Allah gives faith, knowledge and sound comprehension to whomever He wills. He also misguides whomever He wills by blinding his sight, mind, sealing his heart, hearing and stamping his eyes closed. Allah has the perfect wisdom and the unequivocal proofs.


That should suffice.

Continuing - if this is the Imam Sabuni the Mufasiur then this is what Albani said about him:

- A thief, a liar, an ignorant and one who misguides others" (beginning of his "Sahiha" vol. 4)

If it is The Ash'ari Imam then Albani said:

- Two of the most ignorant of those who spoke on this matter, especially al-Rifa`i who is the most audacious in his extensive ignorance" ("da`ifa" 1988 ed. 4:51) -- "they lied, by Allah" ("da`ifa" 3:361).



Continued

salman
23-12-2004, 06:15 AM
Continued from first post

Alhamdulilah hi Rabil Alameen Wasalatu Wasalam Ala Mursileenn, ama Ba'ad



Qaadee Aboo Ya’laa (d.458H) - rahimahullaah - said:

‘‘The proof for the futility of ta‘weel is that the Companions and those who followed them from the Taabi’een, understood them (the Attributes) ’alaa dhaahir (upon their literal meaning) - and they did not take recourse to ta‘weel, nor did they move away from the dhaahir meaning. If ta‘weel were permissible, then they would have preceded us in it…’’


The first problem with this quote is ofcourse the narrator - Abu Ya'ala who was undoubtebly leanings towards anthropomorphism. This was the same person who believed in the groaning of the Kursi due to Allahs "pressure". Regarding this Ibn Jawzi stated:

- As for al-Qadi Abu Ya`la's words: the groaning is because of the pressure of Allah's Essence on it: this is overt anthropomorphism. (Ibn al-Jawzi, Daf` shubah al-tashbih p. 268)

Abi Ya'la was also the one who said:

- What is meant by "aboveness" is Allah's istiwa' in person on the Throne.

Inshallah we shall discuss the phrase "in person" later.

Further, we have already shown the opinion of one of the previous scholars you quoted regarding this, Imam Khattabi, which outrightly contradicts such a thing. As Imam Khattabi said, if this is taken literally then it is Anthropomorphism.

As for claim that the Salaf did not precede us when it came to ta'wil, Certainly they did precede us in it. Imam Nawawi states in his Sharh of Sahih Muslim:

وهذا أشهر المذهبين للمتكلمين: وقال آخرون لا تتأول بل يمسك عن الكلام في معناها ويوكل علمها إلى الله تعالى ويعتقد مع ذلك تنزيه الله تعالى وانتفاء صفات الحادث عنه: فيقال مثلا نؤمن بأن الرحمن على العرش استوى ولا نعلم حقيقة معنى ذلك والمراد به مع أنا نعتقد أن الله تعالى (ليس كمثله ش&#1574 وانه منزه عن الحلول وسمات الحدوث وهذه طريقة السلف أو جماهيرهم وهي أسلم إذ لا يطالب الانسان بالخوض في ذلك فإذا اعتقد التنزيه فلا حاجة إلى الخوض في ذلك والمخاطرة فيما لا ضرورة بل لا حاجة إليه فان دعت الحاجة إلى التأويل لرد مبتدع ونحوه تأولوا حينئذ: وعلى هذا يحمل ما جاء عن العلماء في هذا والله أعلم

- If there is a need for interpretation (ta'wil) in order to refute innovators and their like, then they (the Salaf) went ahead and applied interpretation. This is the correct understanding of what has reached us from the scholars concerning this subject, and Allah knows best.

Shaikh al Islam Izz says the same regarding refuting the Mubtadis in his al Mulha.

To be continued

Abul Hasan
24-12-2004, 12:11 AM
Imaam at-Tirmidhee (d.279H) - rahimahullaah - said: ‘‘It has been stated by more than one person from amongst the People of Knowledge about such ahaadeeth, that there is no tashbeeh (resemblance) to the Attributes of Allaah, and our Lord - the Blessed, the Most High - descends to the lowest heavens every night. So they say: Affirm these narrations, have faith (eemaan) in them, do not deny them, nor ask how. The likes of this has been narrated from Maalik Ibn Anas, Sufyaan ath-Thawree, Ibn ’Uyaynah and ’Abdullaah Ibnul-Mubaarak, who all said about such ahaadeeth, ‘‘Leave them as they are, without asking how.’’ Such is the statement of the People of Knowledge from Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah. However, the Jahmiyyah oppose these narrations and say: This is tashbeeh! However, Allaah - the Most High - has mentioned in various places in His Book, the Attributes of al-Yad (Hand), as-Sama’ (Hearing) and al-Basr (Sight) - but the Jahmiyyah make ta‘weel of these aayaat, explaining them in a way, other than how it is explained by the People of Knowledge. They say: Indeed, Allaah did not create Aadam with His own Hand - they say that ‘Hand’ means that Power of Allaah.



I did not find this anywhere in the Sunan of Tirmidhi - nor is the statement likely to be of Tirmidhis. Imam Tirmidhi did not go a step without his teacher Imam Bukhari....

:salam:

Akhi Salman, you presented some very useful arguments, alhamdulillah. Anyway, the narration quoted from Imam al Tirmidhi does exist in his al-Jami (see vol. 3, p. 50-51, under no. 662, Ahmad Shakir edn), with the wording:

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو كُرَيبٍ مُحَمَّدُ بنُ العَلاءِ أَخبرنَا وَكِيعٌ أَخبرنَا عَبَّادُ بنُ منصورٍ أَخبرنَا القاسمُ بنُ مُحَمَّدٍ قَالَ: سمعتُ أَبا هُرَيْرَةَ يقولُ:

قَالَ رَسُولُ الله صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: "إِنَّ الله يقبلُ الصَّدَقَةَ ويأَخُذُها بيَمينِهِ فَيُرَبِّيها لأَحدِكُم كَمَا يُرَبِّي أَحدُكُم مُهرَهُ، حتَّى إِنَّ اللُّقمَةَ لتصيرُ مثلَ أُحُدٍ، وتصديقُ ذلكَ في كتابِ الله عزَّ وجلَّ {وهُوَ الَّذِي يَقبَلُ التَّوبَةَ [ص 87] عن عِبَادِهِ ويَأْخُذُ الصَّدَقَاتِ} {ويَمْحَقُ الله الرَّبَا ويُرْبِي الصَّدَقَاتِ}.
قَالَ هَذَا حديثٌ صحيحٌ.
وقد رُوِيَ عن عائِشةَ عن النَّبيِّ صَلَّى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ نحوُ هَذَا.
وقد قَالَ غَيرُ واحدٍ من أَهلِ العلمِ في هَذَا الحديثِ وما يُشبِهُ هَذَا من الرِّواياتِ من الصِّفاتِ ونُزُولِ الرَّبِّ تَبارَكَ وتَعَالى كُلَّ لَيلَةٍ إِلى السَّماءِ الدُّنيَا، قَالُوا: قد تثُبتُ الرَّواياتُ في هَذَا ويُؤمنُ بِها ولا يُتَوَهَّمُ ولا يُقَالُ كَيفَ. هَكذَا رُوِيَ عن مالكِ بن أَنسٍ وسُفيانَ بن عُيَينَةَ وعَبدِ الله بن المباركِ أَنهُم قَالُوا في هَذَهِ الأَحاديثِ: أَمِرُّوَها بلا "كَيفَ"، وهَكذَا قَولُ أَهلِ العلمِ مِن أَهلِ السُّنَّةِ والجَمَاعَةِ. وأَمَّا الجَهميَةُ فأَنكرَتْ هَذَهِ الرَّواياتِ وقَالُوا هَذَا تَشبِيهٌ. وقد ذَكَرَ الله تَبَاركَ وتَعَالى في غَيرِ مَوضعِ من كتابِهِ اليَدَ والسَّمعَ والبَصَرَ فتأَوَّلتْ الجَهميةُ هَذَهِ الآياتِ وفَسَّرُوها عَلَى غَيرِ ما فَسَّرَ أَهلُ العلمِ، وقَالُوا إِنَّ الله لَمْ يخلُقْ آدَمَ بِيدِهِ، وقَالُوا إِنَّمَا معنى اليَدِ القُوَّةُ.
وقَالَ إِسحاقُ بنُ إِبراهيمَ: إِنَّمَا يكُونُ التَشـبِيهُ إِذَا قَـالَ يدٌ كَيَدٍ أَو مثلُ يَدٍ، أَو سَمْعٌ كَسَمْعٍ أَو مثلُ سَمْعٍ، فإذا قَالَ سَمْعٌ كَسَمْعٍ أَو مثلُ سَمْعٍ فَهَذَا تَشبِيهٌ. وأَمَّا إِذَا قَالَ كَمَا قَالَ الله يَدٌ وسَمْعٌ وبَصَرٌ ولا يقولُ كَيفَ ولا يقولُ مثلُ سَمْعٍ، ولا كَسَمْعٍ، فَهَذَا لا يكُونُ تَشبِيهاً وهُوَ كَمَا قَالَ الله تَبَاركَ وتَعَالى في كتابه {لَيسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ وهُوَ السَّمِيعُ البَصِيرُ}.


Imam al-Tirmidhi did also make Ta'wil and he has been attacked by ibn Taymiyya for that (I have a scan somehwere if anyone needs it).


'Continuing - if this is the Imam Sabuni the Mufasiur then this is what Albani said about him:

- A thief, a liar, an ignorant and one who misguides others" (beginning of his "Sahiha" vol. 4)

If it is The Ash'ari Imam then Albani said:

- Two of the most ignorant of those who spoke on this matter, especially al-Rifa`i who is the most audacious in his extensive ignorance" ("da`ifa" 1988 ed. 4:51) -- "they lied, by Allah" ("da`ifa" 3:361).



Continued


As for al-Albani's attacks you quoted above, then they are directed to just one Sabuni, and he is the currently alive Syrian Mufassir, Shaykh Muhammad Ali al-Sabuni, hafizahullah - Professor at Umm al Qurra University, Makka. As for al-Rifa'i - then he seems to be the former colleague of Al-Albani's by the name of Muhammad Nasib al-Rifa'ie - They fell out after some 25 years of association! Al-Rifa'i died before al-Albani.


Wassalam

samrqandi
25-12-2004, 03:38 PM
Salaam alaikum

The thread is very good, because it gives a more in depth understanding into this matter and the sources presented. However I would want brother abul hasan, to show ibn taymiya's attack on imam tirmidhi may Allah be pleased with him, for taweel if that is ok brother. jazak allah.

Salman you know when you have stated about the issue: yadd means power, people still appose that and say that grammatically its correct in a singular sense but not in the case of the dual. Thereafter they pose the question; so does it mean that Allah has two powers when he mentions two hands in the qur'an?

Although they fail to understand what the word POWER denotes, because if we say that 'Allah is all powerful' then would that mean power only resides in one hand? In addition when we use the word power it is not limited to a specific number. However there is proof that imam hasan al-basree may Allah be pleased with him, said that yadd in its dual sense means Allah’s compassion.

Other examples will include: when we say in Arabic assda eelay yadda (to do someone a favour), ann yaddahu (with his help, through his good offices), thul yadd (powerful, holder of actual control). Also when we say: ‘Abdul was in safe hands’ which means Abdul was in safe protection. For further examples please refer to the classical Arabic lexicons al-qamus, lisan ul arab and taj ul-uroos.

The Prophet himself (Allah bless him and give him peace) used hand as a figure of speech in the rigorously authenticated (sahih) hadith, Al-Muslimu man salima l-Muslimuna min lisanihi wa yadih "The Muslim is he who the Muslims are safe from his tongue and his hand," where hand means anything within his power to do to them, whether with his hand, his foot, or by any other means.

Somebody asked me a question that when Allah used the word hand whether in its literal sense or not then that still means that Allah has a hand, otherwise Allah would not use the word hand! This claim was answered for example we say in the language 'we get on like a house of fire' a homeless person can use this phrase hence it does not mean that the homeless person posses a house. Also when we say 'the eye of heaven shone on us', does not mean that heaven posses an eye but is referring to the sun.

Somebody also posed the question that the asharees say Allah hears and see's without any organs, only the way Allah knows (he was referring to the 13 sifaats of Allah that are wajib to learn in the asharee texts). Thereafter he stated that we say the same Allah has a hand, face, feet and shin (in its literal sense) only the way Allah knows. Trying to show that he has refuted the asharee stance, however when the asharees state that Allah is all hearing and seeing (the attributes in Arabic are: al-basr and as-samee) these things are clear and not ambiguous. In addition, when the terms hearing and seeing are used; these are understood to be abstract in their meanings an example will include Allah being compassionate we cannot touch compassion nor can we feel it but we know it exists. However when using the term hand (in its literal sense) we know that it is tangible, consists of movements and touches and is limited. We all know that Allah is not limited in anyway.

When the scholars of the past mentioned that we should recite the verses but assign the meaning to Allah, they knew the implications when unqualified people start to interpret these verses, such as the so-called salafiyyah. What else needs to be understood is that they go one step further then the salaf because the salaf said yadd allah bila kayfiyyah, ayn allah bila kayfiyyah, saaq allah bila kayfiyyah, but the so-called salafi’s say aynayn haqiqan (two real eyes) etc. That is why the scholars use taweel as a means to answer them as imam Nawawi may Allah be pleased with him has stated in his sharh saheeh Muslim; otherwise we assign the meaning to Allah. What really needs to be highlighted is the so-called salafi methodology when dealing with these verses; since they are obsessed with using the additional terms haqiqan, physically etc. And taking the literal meanings, however they have inconsistencies in their methodology since they only choose what verses to take literally and are reluctant to apply the same rule for other verses, as is apparent from their methodology.

Such examples will include:

"Allah is with you, wherever you are" Suratal-Hadid ayah 4 (literally this would mean Allah is everywhere, which would contradict the so-called salafi understanding that Allah is sitting on the throne in person)

"Allah surrounds everything" Surat-Fussilat, ayah 54

"Allah is in the countries of ash-Sham" (if taken literally) Suratas-Saffat, ayah 99

"Allah’s hand is above their hands" Qur’an 48:10 (literally this would mean Allah’s hand is above the peoples hands, so does it further mean Allah’s hand is in this created world, the question would also arise of how big is Allah’s hand?)

"To Allah belong the East and the West, and where so ever you turn, there is Allah's face" Qur’an 2:115 (literally this would mean that where ever you turn you see the face of Allah, the question would arise how many faces does a person see?)

"Everything will perish save His face" Qur’an 28:88 (literally this would mean that even Allah’s hands, shin, and feet will perish)

"And [mention] when your Lord said to the angels, 'Truly, I will create a man from clay. So when I have completed him, and breathed into him of My spirit, then fall down prostrate to him.' And the angels prostrated, one and all. Save for Satan, who was too proud to, and disbelieved. He said to him, 'O Satan, what prevented you from prostrating to what I have created with My two hands? Are you arrogant, or too exalted?' He said, 'I am better than he; You created me from fire and created him from clay'" (Qur'an 38:71-76). (Literally this would mean that Allah’s spirit is divisible, so is Adam peace be upon him, apart of Allah?)

Also the tradition in saheeh bukharee:

Muhammad ibn Uthmãn ibn Karãma < Khalid ibn Mukhallad < Su1aym ibn Bilãl < Sharik ibn Abdallah ibn Abi Nimr, that Abu Hurayra said: ‘Allah’s Messenger said: “Allah the Exalted has said: ‘whoever harms a friend [wali] of Mine, I declare war on him. My slave draws near to Me with nothing more beloved to Me than that which I have made obligatory upon him. And My slave continues to draw nearer to Me with optional acts of devotion [nawafil] until I love him. And when I love him, I am his ear with which he hears, his eye with which he sees, his hand with which he strikes, and his foot on which he walks. If he asks Me, I surely bestow it upon him, and if he asks My protection, I surely grant it to him. I do not hesitate in anything which I am to do more than in taking the soul of the believer; he dislikes death, and I dislike to bring him harm.”
Does the above tradition mean that Allah comes into the man?

So-called salafiyyah logic against them
Since the so-called salafiyyah believe that Allah comes down to the lower heavens in person i.e. physically using the following verse as a proof:

"And your Lord shall come . . ." (Qur’an 89:22)

Now using their view/logic that Allah comes down physically would need further elaboration, since we all know the tradition in which the Prophet may peace and blessings be upon him: as said regarding the kursi compared to the arsh:

“Compared with the kursi (seat of honor), the whole universe is as little as a ring thrown upon a desert. Similarly, compared with the ‘arsh (throne), the kursi is as little as a ring thrown upon the desert.” (Tafsir a-Tabari)

So now when Allah comes physically down does Allah get smaller since the universe is smaller then the kursi which is smaller then the arsh? To further carry on we know the tradition in which the Prophet may peace and blessings be upon him as said:

That the heaven and earth of full of angels worshipping Allah (Para-phrasing, I can’t remember the reference for this tradition insha allah I will find it). Also the tradition in which the Prophet may peace and blessings be upon him as said:

“If you are merciful to those on earth, the angels, who occupy the heavens, will bring onto you the mercy of Allah” (tirmidhi)

So would this further mean that Allah has to squeeze past the angels whilst physically coming to the lower heaven, since they are everywhere in the heaven worshipping Allah.

Correct understanding of this ayah according to ahlus sunnah:

It was related that Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, who is among the authorities of the Salaf, said that this ayah means: [An indication of the Power of Allah has come.] In his book, Manaqib Ahmad, Hafidh Imam alBayhaqiyy, established that the sanad (chain) of narrators is sahih (authentic). Also, Ibn al-Jawziyy alHanbaliyy, one of the authorities of the school of Imam Ahmad, related that Imam Ahmad assigned specific, acceptable meanings to the ayat which are mutashabihat. He also said this is a proof that Imam Ahmad did not believe that themaji'ah (a noun for the verb ja'a) in the ayah is that of movement from one place to another. Imam Ibn alJawziyy also said: "It is not possible that Allah would move." Yet, the mushabbihah insist on taking the literal meaning and say that ja'a means "Your Lord comes" (i.e., from one place to another.)

Copying from Imam al-'Ash^ariyy, Imam alBayhaqiyy, in his book, Al-Asma' was-Sifat, page 488, said: "Allah,ta^ala, is not in a place. Movement, coming to rest, and sitting are among the attributes of bodies."

To conclude:

The best option is that of tafweed since that’s the method which is the safest i.e. read the ayat in Arabic as it has come and assign the meaning to Allah, however if the salafiyyah insist on using translations and start to use extra terms which the salaf did not use then taweel is the means to refute them.

To carry on we should further not that the so-called salafiyya collate evidences and start to compose books, in which it seems that they are try to solve a jig saw puzzle! Or putting Allah into place! For example in their books on creed they start off from Allah’s face, then stating that he has two real eyes with a smile, then move on to saying that he has a back and has two hands (i.e. two right hands) which consists of palms, fingers that also open and close. Then they further state that he has a shin and a foot and is sitting on his throne in person and comes down to heaven physically. There after stating that Allah knows best and saying without a how, but they still use the terms such as haqiqan.

Why cant they just read the ayats where they are in the qur’an and say bila kayfiyyah instead of composing these ayats into one book.

‘Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi says in his ‘aqida manual Usul al-din [The fundamentals of the religion]:

Anyone who considers his Lord to resemble the form of a person [. . . ] is only worshipping a person like himself. As for the permissibility of eating the meat he slaughters or of marriage with him, his ruling is that of an idol-worshipper.

. . . Regarding the anthropomorphist of Khurasan, of the Karramiyya, it is obligatory to consider them unbelievers because they affirm that Allah has a physical limit and boundary from underneath, from whence He is contact with His Throne (al-Baghdadi, Usul al-din [Istanbul: Matba‘a al-Dawla, 1346/1929], 337).

Imam Tahawi says in his aqida:

Anyone who describes Allah as being in any way the same as a human being has become an unbeliever. All those who grasp this will take heed and refrain from saying things such as the unbelievers say, and they will know that He, in His attributes, is not like human beings. (At-Tahawi, matn aqeeda tahawiyya point 34, 239-321 A.H)

I won’t comment further on this issue since what I have stated is clear. I am not doing takhfir of anyone. Any mistakes are from me and may Allah guide us all ameen.

Wassalaam alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatahu

Abul Hasan
26-12-2004, 06:49 PM
Salaam alaikum

The thread is very good, because it gives a more in depth understanding into this matter and the sources presented. However I would want brother abul hasan, to show ibn taymiya's attack on imam tirmidhi may Allah be pleased with him, for taweel if that is ok brother. jazak allah.

:salam:

Please see this new link:


http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?p=25950#post25950


wassalam

samrqandi
28-12-2004, 04:59 PM
salaam alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatahu

May Allah help us all ameen and show us the correct understanding of the deen ameen.

Hanafi approach to the sifaat of allah

I think people are trying to high jack the hanafi method in dealing with the sifaat of allah by continously qouting Abu Hanifa, and Abu Yusuf. But no references are made to the actual aqeeda manuals taught. Shah wali allah 1114AH/1702CE is his book: al-fauz al-kabir fi usul al-tafsir explains both methods tafweed and taweel and opts to choose tafweed, under the heading of taujih and states that this is the method of malik, thawri and ibn mubarak. However under the heading of mutashabih (allegorical) he qoutes the ayat “wa maa y^lam ta’walahu illalah wa al-rasikhuna fil ilm” and under the heading of kinayah (allusion) he states as an example: “yadah mabsutatan” as refering to generosity. If you see the work of his student qadi thana ullah 1125AH/1810CE (mala budda minhu) under the chapter of kitab ul imaan he opts for the tafweed view as well. Both are sufi’s in its real sense. (the above two books are not the aqeeda books taught, but used to give an example). Also if you refer to earlier scholars and their books like aqeeda an-Nasafi by shaykh an-nasafi 710AH, kitab at-tauheed by imam abu Mansur al-maturudi 333AH you will find both taweel and tafweed. Imam tahawee’s 239-321AH aqeeda manual who generally uses tafweed as the stance as is apparent. Some people qoute the statements of the Imam (abu hanifa) and his sahabayn (qadi abu yusuf and imam muhammad) in regards to tafweed as if the hanafis have been ignorant of this fact.

Below I will show how some individuals try to qoute hanafi scholars to viciously attack the maturudis and the asharee’s:

Abu hanifa said in his al-Fiqh al-akbar: "Allah has no limits, nor any rivals... He who says: 'I do not know if my Lord is in the heavens or on the earth' is a disbeliever, and he who says: 'He is on the Throne, and I do not know whether the Throne is in the heaven or on the earth,' he is also a disbeliever." Imam Abu Mansur al-Maturidi explained this to mean: "The reason is that by such words he suggests a place for Allah and this is idolatry."

Recently I have read an article by some so-called salafiyyah by the name of abu hudayfa, who stated that, what abu hanifa has stated (above) is correct and casts aside what imam abu Mansur al-maturidi said (i.e. his explanation) as is apprent from his article. However what he fails to understand is that abu mansur is regarded as an authority when comentating on the aqeeda of abu hanifa and ahlus sunnah. Whats even more surprising is that abu mansur has a short sanad going back to abu hanifa as can be seen below:

Imam of Guidance Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (d. 333 AH),
who took fiqh from Abu Bakr al-Jawjazani
who took fiqh from Abu Sulayman Musa ibn Sulayman al-Jawjazani
who also took fiqh from the Imam Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani.
Al-Shaybani took fiqh from the founder of the madhhab Imam Abu Hanifa al-Nu`man (d. 150 AH).

What should be understood is that abu hudayfa whoever this guy is wont even have a sanad back to abu hanifa, unless I am wrong which is a less of a chance. Abu hudayfa who has come in the 1400AH is going to tell us what’s right and what’s wrong. Abu mansur had far greater knowledge then him and was from amongst the salaf and one of the foremost hanafis especially in regards to aqeeda. As for his aspersions we don’t even need to look at or waste time reading what he has to say. In addition abu hudayfa enjoys quoting Mulla Ali Qaree al-Hanafi, but what will be shocking is what mulla ali qaree has to say (corresponds with what Abu Mansur said above):

Indeed a whole group of them [the early Muslims], as well as later scholars, said that whoever believes Allah to be in a particular physical direction is an unbeliever, as al-Iraqi has explicitly stated, saying that this was the position of Abu Hanifa, Malik, al-Shafi'i, al-Ashari, and al- Baqillani (Mirqat al-mafatih: sharh Mishkat al-masabih. 5 vols. Cairo 1309/1892. Reprint. Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, n.d., 2.137).

Abu hudayfah uses kitab al-uluw by hadifth thahabiyy and sharh aqeeda tahawiyyah by abil izz al-hanafi. To enhance his argument he re-iterates what they have to say however the kitab al-uluw is a book that was written when the imam was young (25 years old), which the imam which he later disavowed as related by its copyist the hadith master Ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi. Also it has blatant mistakes or fabrications attributed to imam bukharee which in reality isn’t the case. As for the sharh by abil izz, it needs to be further researched into since salafi words cannot be taken. But what is established in aqeeda tahawiyyah by imam tahawee (who expounds the aqeeda of abu hanifa, abu yusuf and imam Muhammad ash-shaybani) is this: before saying what imam tahawee said what needs to be shown is the sanad going back to imam tahawee:

MUHAMMAD BIN YAHYA NINOWY narrates with the permission of, my Shaykh and Father Sayyedi As-Sayyed Yahya bin Muhammad bin Sa'eed bin Muhammad an-Ninowy Al-Musawy Al-Husayny - May Allah forgive him and raise his rank in paradise- [ also in the same way and through the same honorable chain of scholars, I narrate it through Sayyedi Abdullah bin Assideeq, and Sayyedi Ibrahim bin Assideeq] and they narrated it by way of, Al-Hafedh Al-Mujtahed As-Sayyed Abul-Fayd Ahmad bin Assideeq Al-Ghumari Al-Hasany -may Allah bless his soul- by way of, Shaykh Al Imam Sayyed Muhammad bin Assideeq Al-Ghumari, by way of Shaykh Al-Imam Muhammad Duwaidaar At-Tallawy, by way of, the Shaykh Al-Usooli Ibrahim Al-Bajoory, by way of, Al-Imam Al-Amir Al-Kabeer, by way of, the Shaykh Al-Badr Al-Hafny, by way of, Al-Allama Shaykh Al-Badayri, by way of, the Shaykh Ibrahim Al-Kurdi, by way of, the Shaykh Safiyyudeen Al-Qashashy, by way of, the Imam Allama Shaykh Ashams Arramly, by way of, the Shaykh Al-Imam Al-Faqeeh Zakariyyah Al-Ansaary, by way of, the Imam Al-Hafeth Ahmad bin Hajr Al-Asqalany, by way of, Abu Hurayra (son of Al-Hafeth Ath-ahabi), by way of his father Al-hafeth Atha-haby, by way of, Abdulrahman bin Muhammad Al-Faqeeh, by way of, Omar bin Tabarzad, by way of, Muhammad bin Abdul Baqiy, by way of, Abu Muhammad Al-Jawhary, by way of Muhammad bin Al-Muzaffar, he said: Abu Ja'far At-Tahhawiyy -rahimahu Allah- told us this.

- وتعالى عن الحدود والغايات، والأركان والأعضاء والأدوات، لا تحويه الجهات الست كسائر المبتدعات.

He is clear of being attributed with having limits, nor ends, nor having parts, nor organs, nor limbs. Nor is He contained by the six directions as all created things are.

Explanation to this:

Imam At-Tahhawiyy statement relieves every believer and asserts our firm faith that Allah Ta'ala is The Creator of heavens and earths. He existed before they were created, and just as He existed (before creating the seventh heavens and the seventh earths) without a place (because there was no place). He still exists without a place.

Imam Bukhari and Bayhaqi related in their Saheeh, that the Prophet, Sall Allahu alayhi wa Aalihi wa sallam, said : " Allah existed eternally and there was nothing else." This Saheeh Hadeeth clearly and beyond doubt proves that only Allah existed alone in eternity without a beginning, and everything else has been created i.e. there was nothing with Him, Ta'ala, no space, no place, no heaven, no sky, no earth, no galaxies, no time, no day, no night, no light, no darkness...etc. there was absolutely nothing but Allah.

Imam Muslim related in his Saheeh Vol.4/61 that the Prophet, Sall Allahu alayhi wa Aalihi wa sallam, said: "O Allah, You are (Al Awwal) The One who existed eternally without a beginning, and You are (Al Akher) The One who exists everlastingly without an end, and Your are (Ath-Thaher) The One Above and nothing above You, and You are (Al Baaten) The One underneath Whom nothing exist."

This Saheeh Hadeeth clearly proofs that Allah, Ta'ala, is not designated with a place. Moreover, scholars said based on this Hadeeth: " Hence, He exists without a place. His Existence is obvious by proofs, and He is clear of the delusions of bodily attributes.

Al-imam Al-Hafedh Al-Bayhaqi, radiyallahu anhu, commented on this Saheeh Hadeeth in his highly valuable book " Al Asma'a was-Sifaat" page 400:
" Our people (Scholars of Ahlus Sunnah) determined based on this Hadeeth that Allah, Ta'ala, is not designated with a place, since He is the One above Whom nothing exists and underneath Whom nothing exists; hence, He exists without a place."

Al-imam Abdul Qaher Al-Bagdadi, rahimahullah, who is a renowned Muslim scholar from the first three centuries of Hijrah, said in his Book "The differences between sects" page333:
"By consensus (of Muslim scholars) that Allah is not subject to a place nor time."

It is an obvious issue to a person with a sound mind, but Allah Ta'ala said in Surat Al Israa, Ayah 72:
( ومن كان في هذه اعمى فهو في الاخرة اعمى واضل سبيلا )

Which means: (But those who are blind in this world, will be blind in the Hereafter, and more astray from the Path.)

The Ayah mentioned blindness with the idea that being blind is not necessarily a loss of vision, but many times is being farther and farther away from the true path.

Furthermore, Al-Qur’an Al-Kareem stresses this fact in Surat Al-Hajj, Ayah 46 saying :

( فانها لا تعمى الابصار ولكن تعمى القلوب التي في الصدور )

Which means: (Truly it is not the eyes that are blind, but the Hearts which are in their chests.)

Al-imam Al-Hafedh Ibn Hajr Al-Asqalaani, radiyallahu anhu, said in " Sharhu Saheeh Al Bukhari" vol.6/136 : " The two directions up and down do not negate that Allah Ta'ala is above. Because He is above any imperfection, and it is impossible for His to be attributed with being above physically."

Al-imam Al-Bayhaqi, radiyallahu anhu, related in his book " Al Asma'a was- Sifat" explaining the name of Allah Al-Muta'ali :

"It means the One Who is above being attributed with the attributes of the creatures like marriage, children, limbs, organs, sitting on the sarir (Arsh), being hidden behind veils so that the eyes wouldn't see Him, moving from one place to another, and the like. Some of these attributes dictate ending, some dictate need, and some dictate change. All of that is non-befitting and not permissible to attribute to He Whose Existence is without a beginning."

Imam Abu Hanifa (d. 150) says in his Wasiyya: "Had He been in a place and needing to sit and rest before creating the Throne, then the question 'Where was Allah?'

The fourth righteous caliphate of Rasoolullah, Al-imam Ali bin Abi Taleb, karramallahu wajhahu, said: " Allah existed eternally and there was no place, and He now is as He was, i.e. without a place."

Al-Hafedh Abu Na'eem, rahimahullah, reported in his Hilyah, that a man entered the quarters of the khalifah and said to Imam Ali: O'Ameer-Al Mu'mineen, there are forty Jews at the door wanting to talk to you.

Imam Ali replied: let them in. When they entered they asked Imam Ali: " describe your Lord for us, the One Who is in the sky. How is He? How was He? When was He? On what is He?." Imam Ali sat up and said: "O’ Jews, hear me out and you wouldn't have to ask anyone else. My Lord, The Exalted is Al-Awwal (exists eternally without a beginning). He is not from anything, nor mixed with anything, nor deluded about, nor a person that would be sought, nor is veiled thus contained, nor did He exist after He had not been existing. Allah spoke to Musa without limbs or instruments or lips nor uvulas. He who claims that our Lord is limited, then he is ignorant about the Creator Who is worshipped."

End of explanation (the explanation is abridged)

Now lets see what the other hanafis have to say like imam an-Nasafi 710AH, his aqeeda manual is taught in both hanafi and shafee madrasa’s, it has an excellent commentary by a shafee imam Sa^d al-Din al-Taftazani (he is regarded as an authority in aqeeda):

He (Allah) is not a body (jism), nor an atom (jawhar), nor is He something formed (musawwar), nor a thing limited (mahdud), nor a thing numbered (ma^dud), nor a thing portioned or divided, nor a thing compounded (mutarakkab), nor does He come to end in Himself. He is not described by quiddity (al-ma^hiya), or by quality (al-kayfiyya), nor is He placed in space (al-makan), and time (al-zaman) does not affect Him. Nothing resembles Him, that is to say, nothing is like Him? (See: Sa^d al-Din al-Taftazani & Najm al-Din al-Nasafi, Sharh al-Aqa^id al- Nasafiyya, 92-97).

To further comment whats more interesting is that abu hudayfa always tries to qoute the salaf that we read the ayat and assign the meaning to allah however whats more halirious he tries to answer an article, so he starts to translate hadeeths which regard allah and I don’t see him make any mention that we assign the meaning to allah. But rather translates it and says that that’s the aqeeda of the salaf. So whos the contradiction?

I would like to comment further since this is essential as abu hudayfa tries to be even more cunning. He qoutes the statement of imam malik about the istiwa i.e. imam malik says maloom (that its known) but we don’t know how (bila kayfiyyah). However abu hudayfa further comments and does what I call tahreef or twist imam maliks words to suite his own desires. He starts to say:


“Imaam Maalik said: "Istawaa is known, but the 'howness' is unknown." So we repeat that the meaning of Istawaa is known…”

Now it doesn’t take a genius to figure out what imam malik said! It’s known because it’s mentioned in the quran that’s what imam malik meant! Otherwise imam malik himself would have said istiwa means yajlisu or his physically seated above! But what we know of imam malik, imam awzai, including imam jafar as sadiq; as Mulla ali qaree said that they applied figurative interpretations to the hadeeth of decent!

Abu hudayfah also comments which is really interesting:


“Understanding the meanings of the Attributes of Allaah is the only way to know our Lord, the Most Perfect, and it is for this purpose that mankind was created: I have not created jinn and man except to worship Me. (51:56). Both at-Tabaree and ibn Katheer give one of the meanings of this verse to be that Allaah did not create us except to know Him. So if we do not know the meanings of the Attributes with which He has described Himself, how can we then know Him? And how could we then fulfil the purpose for which we have been created?”

So now it would be interesting that we can be given the chance to comment: Allah said in Ayah 7 in Surat Al-^Imran means: [No one knows their true meanings except Allah and those who are firmly rooted in the knowledge of the Religion. The latter say, "We believe in it, all of it is from our Lord" and none will understand the message except men of comprehension."] In relation to this ayah, Ibn ^Abbas said: "I am one of those who are firmly rooted in the knowledge of the Religion." It is well known that Ibn ^Abbas is generally regarded as being foremost among the Companions in the explanation of the meanings of the ayat of the Qur'an. The Prophet, sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam. Al-Bukhariyy related that the Prophet made a du^a' (a supplication) for Ibn ^Abbas. The Prophet said: which means: <<O Allah, teach him the Knowledge of Hadith and the explanation of the Qur'an.>>

Now it is clearly known that ibn abbas did taweel, which doesn’t even need to be commented upon. But just for the sake of argument I will include a sample:

“A day on which the saaq (shin, as some people translate it) shall be laid bare” 68:42. Imam Jafar as-saadiq has said ‘that shin has 8 meanings, 5 of which are obsolete and the other 3 are the parts of the body between the knee and the ankle, hence shin can also mean guard or slope of a hill and these are all created’. Imam bayhaqi narrates in his kitab asma was-sifaat that ibn abbas said ‘saaq means hardship (shida), mujahid said the same including imam fakr ud-din ar-razi.

Now getting back to the hanafi understanding of things, lets quote what the famous HANAFI linguist in the Arabic language who is an authority Imam Murtada az-Zabidiyy in his book, Ithafus-Sadatil-Muttaqin, refuted those who reject acceptable meanings be assigned to the ayat which are mutashabihat and insist on taking them by their literal meanings. He said: "In essence they are slandering the office of Prophethood; they are claiming that the Prophet did not know the meaning of the attributes of Allah that were revealed to him; and they are claiming he called the creation to believe in that of which he was ignorant." However, Allah says in the Qur'an in Surat ash-Shu^ara', ayah 195: which means: [The Qur'an was revealed in clear, explicit Arabic.] Az-Zabidiyy proceeded to say: "Those people who take a position against assigning acceptable meanings are basically likening Allah to the creation." However, they camouflage it by saying that he has a 'hand,' not like the hands of the creation and a 'shin' not like the shins of creation and a physical istiwa', that we cannot comprehend. He addressed them with: "Your saying, 'we take it by its literal meaning and it is incomprehensible' is contradictory in itself. If you take by its literal meaning, then 'as-saq' in Suratal-Qalam,ayah 42, is a 'shin' which is a part made up of flesh, bones, muscle, and nerves. If you take by that literal meaning, then you have committed blasphemy, and if you deny it, then how do you claim to take by the literal meaning?"

Some of the other books he mentions like aqeeda hamawiyyah by ibn taymiya, al uluw, by hafidth thahabiyy (as explained above) and by ibn qayyim are questionable, including others! Another thing the book fiqh ul akbar needs to be taken with precaution as well, people don’t have enough of adding things to what imam abu hanifa has said. Also the issue of the imam's repenting from their former belief i.e. juwayni, razi, ghazali etc are just mere claims.

To conclude:

Rest assured that the methodologies of both the Salaf and the Khalaf are correct and neither of them attribute anything to Allah that does not befit Him. In simple terms, one correct way of explaining the mutashabihatayat in the Qur'an is to say one believes in them according to the meaning that Allah willed without saying what that meaning is; and without a 'how,' i.e., without attributing to Allah sitting, standing, occupying places, sensuous attributes, or any of the meanings that apply to humans and other creations. Following this method, one would say: "Allah has an istiwa' which befits Him--which is not sitting, and Allah has a yad which befits Him--which is not a hand, and a wajh that befits Him--which is not a face." The second correct way of explaining the mutashabihatayat in the Qur'an is to give specific meanings to them which are in accordance with the Religion and the language. Following this method, one would say: "His istiwa' means 'He preserves the throne,' His yad means 'His Care,' His wajh means 'His Self,' 'His Dominion,' or 'His Qiblah.'"

The rest of abu hudayfah’s comments are not even worth commenting upon its like what my teacher said giving a parable of the so-called salafiyyah: “They are people who have built a boat recklessly and the boat is sinking so they are trying their utmost to stop the boat from sinking (i.e. hammering away)”!

I will conclude with this post especially on this topic insha allah.

wassalaam alaikum

Everyone please do dua for all the ummah

faqir
28-12-2004, 08:49 PM
Asalamu alaykum,

Great stuff Akhi!

Wasalam.

Abdur_Rahman
28-12-2004, 09:04 PM
:salam:

ya Salam have you brought this to the site admin to Troid/Spubs? This is very informative :mash: :thumbsup:

samrqandi
28-12-2004, 11:44 PM
salaam alaikum

I think finding a single refutation is going to be hard, some of the sources i use is not from shaykh jibreel foud haddad. (i take good from everywhere to be honest). However he has some real good articles. I have read some of the so-called salafiyyah refutations, infact i read quiet alot of articles by two people namely abu hudayfah and abu rumaysah. Abu Hudayfah's method of refutation seems to have so many flaws in it, i wont comment further. Abu Rumaysahs articles i am still reading, but its seems to contain the same content or more like re-iterating what the past so-called salafi's have said, but focussing more on defending ibn taymiya.

To be honest you wont find everything in an organised form rather they are all scattered. What you have in this thread and other threads you wont find on websites in one form or some of the information wont even be on the websites (sometimes i scan in information).

some articles you can read:

1. Link to arabic sources:
http://www.aicp.org/IslamicInformation/IslamicInformationinArabic.htm

2. An explanation to aqeeda tahawiyyah 126 pages:
http://www.ummah.net/Al_adaab/aqeedah/satisfying_the_need.html

3. Article on muhkamat and mutashabihat:
http://www.aicp.org/IslamicInformation/English/TheAyatoftheQur'an.htm

4. Article on whether its permissable to belief allah is in teh sky in its literal sense
http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/inthesky.htm

5. Article Allah exists without a place:
http://www.aicp.org/IslamicInformation/English/AllahExistsWithoutAPlace.htm

7. Istiwa' is a Divine Act:
http://www.abc.se/~m9783/istiwa_e.html

8. An explanation to aqeeda ibn asakir about 20+ pages:
http://www.aicp.org/IslamicInformation/English/TheExplanationofTheAqidahofIbnAsakir.htm

9. GF Haddad's official site:
http://www.abc.se/~m9783/

10. Ibn Jahbal on Ibn Taymiyya (this should be on the website soon as stated by gf haddad):
http://www.abc.se/~m9783/n/ijit_e.html

11. Sunni Articles on ibn taymiya:
http://www.aicp.org/IslamicInformation/English/TheSunniyyArticles.htm

samrqandi
30-12-2004, 02:16 PM
salaam alaikum

I think this is essential to read, i always had the thought that ibn abil izz is some unknown dodgy guy, this is what i said above:


As for the sharh by abil izz, it needs to be further researched into since salafi words cannot be taken.

And this is what Shaykh GF Haddad shows:

Ibn Abi al-`Izz's commentary on al-Tahawi's `Aqida. The latter is a normative classic of Islam but Ibn Abi al-`Izz is an unknown, unacceptable as a source for Ahl al-Sunna teachings. Examples of his unreliability are his rejection of al-Tahawi's articles §35 ("The Seeing of Allah by the People of the Garden is true, without their vision being all-encompassing and without the manner of their vision being known") and §38 ("He is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs, nor is He contained by the six directions as all created things are") by the statements, "Can any vision be rationally conceived without face-to-face encounter? And in it there is a proof for His elevation (`uluw) over His creatures," and "Whoever claims that Allah is seen without direction, let him verify his reason!"2 He also endorses Ibn Taymiyya's view of the finality of Hellfire3 in flat contradiction of the al-Tahawi's statement, §83. "The Garden and the Fire are created and shall never be extinguished nor come to an end." There is also doubt as to Ibn Abi al-`Izz's identity and authorship of this Sharh (cf. 4.1.3).

Ibn Abi al-`Izz: Imam Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari said: "A commentary was published [on the `Aqida Tahawiyya], authored by an Unknown spuriously affiliated with the Hanafi school, but whose handiwork proclaims his ignorance of this discipline and the fact that he is an anthropomorphist who has lost his compass."16 The late Imam of hadith and usûl of Damascus, Sayyid Ibrahim al-Ya`qubi, suspected that "Ibn Abi al-`Izz" of being a pseudonym for Ibn al-Qayyim given away by the author's systematic abandonment of the Maturidi - and even Sunni - position on not one but several key points in favor of Ibn Taymiyya's innovations, as confirmed in the following lines.

Al-Qari said in Sharh al-Fiqh al-Akbar (p. 180): "One must not pay any attention to what the innovators imagine on rational bases. The commentator of al-Tahawi's `Aqida [Ibn Abi al-`Izz in Sharh al-`Aqida al-Tahawiyya (p. 195)] committed a mistake in this regard when he said: `Can any vision be rationally conceived without face-to-face encounter? And in it there is a proof for His elevation (`uluw) over His creatures.' It seems that he applies the upward direction to his Lord, whereas the doctrine of Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`a is that He - exalted is He - is not seen in any direction! The Prophet's saying: 'You shall see your Lord just as you see the moon on the night it is full' [from Abu Hurayra by al-Tirmidhi (hasan gharîb) and Abu Hanifa in his Musnad and, in a slightly different wording, from Jarir ibn `Abd Allah al-Bajali by al-Bukhari and Muslim] is a simile (tashbîh) between two types of sightings generally speaking, not a simile between two objects of vision from every perspective."

Ibn Abi al-`Izz also said in his Sharh (p. 195): "Whoever claims that Allah is seen without direction, let him verify his reason!" Note his casual dismissal of - and deviation from - Imam al-Tahawi's position in the `Aqida (§35. "The Seeing of Allah by the People of the Garden is true, without their vision being all-encompassing and without the manner of their vision being known." §38 "He is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs. Nor is He contained by the six directions as all created things are") and Imam Abu Hanifa's position in al-Wasiyya (p. 3-4): "The meeting (liqâ') of Allah ( with the dwellers of Paradise is without modality, nor simile, nor direction." (Liqâ' Allâh ta`âlâ li ahl al-janna bi al-ru'ya al-basariyya bilâ kayf wa lâ tashbîh wa lâ jiha), cited by al-Qari in Sharh al-Fiqh al-Akbar (p. 176-177). Imam al-Haramayn said in al-Irshad (p. 167): "Among their [the Mu`tazila's] insinuations are claims that stem, in fact, from pure speculation, such as their saying: `one who sees must be facing opposite what he sees, or virtually facing' (al-râ'î yajib an yakûna muqâbilan li al-mar'î aw fî hukm al-muqâbil). We say to them: Do you know for certain what you are claiming, or do you know it on speculative bases? If they claim that they know it for certain and accuse whoever disagrees with them of denial, their credibility collapses and their untruth becomes manifest. The same reasoning applies to the anthropomorphists.... And the Creator sees His creation without direction, therefore it is possible that He be seen without direction."

Ibn Taymiyya's doctrine that Hellfire is of finite duration and shall come to an end was endorsed by Ibn Abi al-`Izz in his commentary on al-Tahawi in flat contradiction of the latter's statement, §83. "The Garden and the Fire are created and shall never be extinguished nor come to an end," cf. Sharh (p. 427-430). Ibn Taymiyya was refuted by Shaykh al-Islam al-Subki in his al-Durra al-Mudiyya fi al-Radd `ala Ibn Taymiyya and by Muhammad ibn Isma`il al-San`ani in his Raf` al-Astar li-Ibtal Adilla al-Qa'ilin bi-Fana al-Nar ("Exposing the Nullity of the Proofs of Those Who Claim That Hell-Fire Shall Pass Away").17

Ibn Abi al-`Izz also adopts Ibn Taymiyya's famous invention of three tawhîds: one for Godhead (tawhîd al-ulûhiyya), one for Lordship (tawhîd al-rubûbiyya), and one for the Divine Names and Attributes (tawhîd al-asmâ' wa al-sifât).18 To our knowledge, this is found in no other commentary of the Tahawiyya, not even the "Salafi" commentary by Hasan al-Busnawi, although the latter does follow Ibn Abi al-`Izz in other matters. Abu Hamid ibn Marzuq's critique of Ibn Taymiyya's trinitarian monotheism has been translated and published.19

Finally, Ibn Abi al-`Izz subscribes, exactly like Ibn Taymiyya, to the philosophy that contingencies subsist (qiyâm al-hawâdith) in the Godhead; that the world is "generically pre-existent" (qadîmun bil-naw`); that Allah ( speaks with letters and sounds; and that He has "limits which He alone knows" although he himself reports: "The Salaf all agree that human beings have no knowledge of any limit for Allah, and they do not give any of His Attributes any limits. Abu Dawud al-Tayalisi said: `Sufyan, Shu`ba, Hammad ibn Zayd, Hammad ibn Salama, Sharik, and Abu `Awana did not attribute any limits [to Allah], nor any likeness, nor any simile'"!20

16 Al-Kawthari, al-Hawi fi Sira al-Imam al-Tahawi (p. 38).
17 Ed. Albani (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami, 1984).
18 In his Fatawa (1:219, 2:275); Minhaj al-Sunna (2: 62); Risala Ahl al-Suffa (p.34).
19 See http://sunnah.org/history/Innovators/Default.htm notice on Ibn Taymiyya.
20 Ibn Abi al-`Izz, Sharh al-`Aqida al-Tahawiyya (1391/ 1971 ed. p. 239).

So abu rumaysah and the likes trying to qoute hanafis (well that ones HIGHLY dodgy) is not going to get anywhere since he is no one to represent the hanafi's.

faqir
30-12-2004, 04:50 PM
You can see how they promote his ideas here: http://www.islaam.com/Scholar.aspx?id=117

Abdur_Rahman
30-12-2004, 05:23 PM
:salam:

I've spoken with the imam here in my area who adhere to the dawah of the salaf and I asked him about the book (tahawiyah along with the commentary) and he said that all he knows is that the book is quite good and very in depth if wanting to enhance about learning aqeedah even more.

Hopefully some classes will be given about this book :insh:

faqir
31-12-2004, 04:36 PM
:salam:

I've spoken with the imam here in my area who adhere to the dawah of the salaf


Must be on the Ashari / Maturidi Creed then! :lol:

faqir
31-12-2004, 09:19 PM
salaam alaikum

I think this is essential to read, i always had the thought that ibn abil izz is some unknown dodgy guy, this is what i said above:



And this is what Shaykh GF Haddad shows:

Ibn Abi al-`Izz's commentary on al-Tahawi's `Aqida. The latter is a normative classic of Islam but Ibn Abi al-`Izz is an unknown, unacceptable as a source for Ahl al-Sunna teachings. Examples of his unreliability are his rejection of al-Tahawi's articles §35 ("The Seeing of Allah by the People of the Garden is true, without their vision being all-encompassing and without the manner of their vision being known") and §38 ("He is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs, nor is He contained by the six directions as all created things are") by the statements, "Can any vision be rationally conceived without face-to-face encounter? And in it there is a proof for His elevation (`uluw) over His creatures," and "Whoever claims that Allah is seen without direction, let him verify his reason!"2 He also endorses Ibn Taymiyya's view of the finality of Hellfire3 in flat contradiction of the al-Tahawi's statement, §83. "The Garden and the Fire are created and shall never be extinguished nor come to an end." There is also doubt as to Ibn Abi al-`Izz's identity and authorship of this Sharh (cf. 4.1.3).

Ibn Abi al-`Izz: Imam Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari said: "A commentary was published [on the `Aqida Tahawiyya], authored by an Unknown spuriously affiliated with the Hanafi school, but whose handiwork proclaims his ignorance of this discipline and the fact that he is an anthropomorphist who has lost his compass."16 The late Imam of hadith and usûl of Damascus, Sayyid Ibrahim al-Ya`qubi, suspected that "Ibn Abi al-`Izz" of being a pseudonym for Ibn al-Qayyim given away by the author's systematic abandonment of the Maturidi - and even Sunni - position on not one but several key points in favor of Ibn Taymiyya's innovations, as confirmed in the following lines.

Al-Qari said in Sharh al-Fiqh al-Akbar (p. 180): "One must not pay any attention to what the innovators imagine on rational bases. The commentator of al-Tahawi's `Aqida [Ibn Abi al-`Izz in Sharh al-`Aqida al-Tahawiyya (p. 195)] committed a mistake in this regard when he said: `Can any vision be rationally conceived without face-to-face encounter? And in it there is a proof for His elevation (`uluw) over His creatures.' It seems that he applies the upward direction to his Lord, whereas the doctrine of Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`a is that He - exalted is He - is not seen in any direction! The Prophet's saying: 'You shall see your Lord just as you see the moon on the night it is full' [from Abu Hurayra by al-Tirmidhi (hasan gharîb) and Abu Hanifa in his Musnad and, in a slightly different wording, from Jarir ibn `Abd Allah al-Bajali by al-Bukhari and Muslim] is a simile (tashbîh) between two types of sightings generally speaking, not a simile between two objects of vision from every perspective."

Ibn Abi al-`Izz also said in his Sharh (p. 195): "Whoever claims that Allah is seen without direction, let him verify his reason!" Note his casual dismissal of - and deviation from - Imam al-Tahawi's position in the `Aqida (§35. "The Seeing of Allah by the People of the Garden is true, without their vision being all-encompassing and without the manner of their vision being known." §38 "He is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs. Nor is He contained by the six directions as all created things are") and Imam Abu Hanifa's position in al-Wasiyya (p. 3-4): "The meeting (liqâ') of Allah ( with the dwellers of Paradise is without modality, nor simile, nor direction." (Liqâ' Allâh ta`âlâ li ahl al-janna bi al-ru'ya al-basariyya bilâ kayf wa lâ tashbîh wa lâ jiha), cited by al-Qari in Sharh al-Fiqh al-Akbar (p. 176-177). Imam al-Haramayn said in al-Irshad (p. 167): "Among their [the Mu`tazila's] insinuations are claims that stem, in fact, from pure speculation, such as their saying: `one who sees must be facing opposite what he sees, or virtually facing' (al-râ'î yajib an yakûna muqâbilan li al-mar'î aw fî hukm al-muqâbil). We say to them: Do you know for certain what you are claiming, or do you know it on speculative bases? If they claim that they know it for certain and accuse whoever disagrees with them of denial, their credibility collapses and their untruth becomes manifest. The same reasoning applies to the anthropomorphists.... And the Creator sees His creation without direction, therefore it is possible that He be seen without direction."

Ibn Taymiyya's doctrine that Hellfire is of finite duration and shall come to an end was endorsed by Ibn Abi al-`Izz in his commentary on al-Tahawi in flat contradiction of the latter's statement, §83. "The Garden and the Fire are created and shall never be extinguished nor come to an end," cf. Sharh (p. 427-430). Ibn Taymiyya was refuted by Shaykh al-Islam al-Subki in his al-Durra al-Mudiyya fi al-Radd `ala Ibn Taymiyya and by Muhammad ibn Isma`il al-San`ani in his Raf` al-Astar li-Ibtal Adilla al-Qa'ilin bi-Fana al-Nar ("Exposing the Nullity of the Proofs of Those Who Claim That Hell-Fire Shall Pass Away").17

Ibn Abi al-`Izz also adopts Ibn Taymiyya's famous invention of three tawhîds: one for Godhead (tawhîd al-ulûhiyya), one for Lordship (tawhîd al-rubûbiyya), and one for the Divine Names and Attributes (tawhîd al-asmâ' wa al-sifât).18 To our knowledge, this is found in no other commentary of the Tahawiyya, not even the "Salafi" commentary by Hasan al-Busnawi, although the latter does follow Ibn Abi al-`Izz in other matters. Abu Hamid ibn Marzuq's critique of Ibn Taymiyya's trinitarian monotheism has been translated and published.19

Finally, Ibn Abi al-`Izz subscribes, exactly like Ibn Taymiyya, to the philosophy that contingencies subsist (qiyâm al-hawâdith) in the Godhead; that the world is "generically pre-existent" (qadîmun bil-naw`); that Allah ( speaks with letters and sounds; and that He has "limits which He alone knows" although he himself reports: "The Salaf all agree that human beings have no knowledge of any limit for Allah, and they do not give any of His Attributes any limits. Abu Dawud al-Tayalisi said: `Sufyan, Shu`ba, Hammad ibn Zayd, Hammad ibn Salama, Sharik, and Abu `Awana did not attribute any limits [to Allah], nor any likeness, nor any simile'"!20

16 Al-Kawthari, al-Hawi fi Sira al-Imam al-Tahawi (p. 38).
17 Ed. Albani (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami, 1984).
18 In his Fatawa (1:219, 2:275); Minhaj al-Sunna (2: 62); Risala Ahl al-Suffa (p.34).
19 See http://sunnah.org/history/Innovators/Default.htm notice on Ibn Taymiyya.
20 Ibn Abi al-`Izz, Sharh al-`Aqida al-Tahawiyya (1391/ 1971 ed. p. 239).

So abu rumaysah and the likes trying to qoute hanafis (well that ones HIGHLY dodgy) is not going to get anywhere since he is no one to represent the hanafi's.


Also from sh. g.f haddad:


The T.ah.āwiyya received many commentaries.

Shaykh Muh.ammad al-Ya‘qūbī said the most reliable is Akmal al-Dīn al-Bābartī’s, a Māturīdī commentary. Among the reliable Ash‘arī commentaries: ‘Abd al-Ghanī al-Ghunaymī al-Maydānī’s and al-Bājūrī’s (Ash‘arī).

Al-Kawtharī said:

The ‘Aqīda Tah.āwiyya received several commentaries, among them that of Najm al-Dīn Abū Shujā‘ Bakbars al-Nās.irī al-Baghdādī – among Sharaf al-Dīn al-Dimyāt.ī’s Shaykhs – that of Sirāj al-Dīn ‘Umar ibn Ish.āq al-Ghaznawī al-Mis.rī, that of Mah.mūd ibn Ah.mad ibn Mas‘ūd al-Qūnawī, that of Sharh. al-S.adr ‘Alī ibn Muh.ammad al-Adhra‘ī and others. A commentary was published, authored by an unknown [Ibn Abī al-‘Izz] spuriously affiliated with the H.anafī school, but whose handiwork proclaims his ignorance of this discipline and the fact that he is an anthropomorphist who has lost his compass.5

Abdur_Rahman
03-01-2005, 12:08 PM
Must be on the Ashari / Maturidi Creed then! :lol:
Actually he's never stated about being upon the Creed of Ashari
;)

:lol: