Imam al Tirmidhi attacked by Ibn Taymiyya for a Ta'wil in his al-Jami

[Abul Hasan]

:salam:

I was asked here to present proof that Imam al Tirmidhi, the Hadith Master from the time of the Salaf was attacked by Ibn Taymiyya for a Ta'wil on a Hadith he presented in his al-Jami. More than that, he was attacked by Abu Bakr al Khallal, who was a Hanbali from the 4th century After Hijra.

Let the reader see the language used by the Imams of contemporary pseudo-Salafism below. This article will prove, Insha'allah, that some from the Salaf did make Ta'wil on certain occassions.

Imam al Tirmidhi in his al-Jami (vol.5, pp. 376-377, no. 3298, under Kitab Tafsir al Qur'an, as edited by the "Salafi" - Ahmad Shakir) narrated:



بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم حدثنا عبد بن حميد ، وغير واحد ، والمعنى واحد ، قالوا : حدثنا يونس بن محمد قال : حدثنا شيبان بن عبد
الرحمن ، عن قتادة ، قال : حدث الحسن ، عن أبي هريرة ، قال : بينما نبي الله صلى الله عليه وسلم جالس وأصحابه إذ أتى عليهم سحاب ، فقال نبي الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : " " هل تدرون ما هذا ؟ " " فقالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " هذا العنان هذه روايا الأرض يسوقه الله تبارك وتعالى إلى قوم لا يشكرونه ولا يدعونه " " ثم قال : " " هل تدرون ما فوقكم " " ؟ قالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " فإنها الرقيع ، سقف محفوظ ، وموج مكفوف " " ، ثم قال : " " هل تدرون كم بينكم وبينها ؟ " " قالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " بينكم وبينها مسيرة خمس مائة سنة " " . ثم قال : " " هل تدرون ما فوق ذلك ؟ " " قالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " فإن فوق ذلك سماءين ، ما بينهما مسيرة خمسمائة عام " " حتى عد سبع سماوات ، ما بين كل سماءين ما بين السماء والأرض ، ثم قال : " " هل تدرون ما فوق ذلك ؟ " " قالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " فإن فوق ذلك العرش وبينه وبين السماء بعد ما بين السماءين " " . ثم قال : " " هل تدرون ما الذي تحتكم " " ؟ قالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " فإنها الأرض " " . ثم قال : " " هل تدرون ما الذي تحت ذلك " " ؟ قالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " فإن تحتها أرضا أخرى ، بينهما مسيرة خمس مائة سنة " " حتى عد سبع أرضين ، بين كل أرضين مسيرة خمس مائة سنة . ثم قال : " " والذي نفس محمد بيده لو أنكم دليتم بحبل إلى الأرض السفلى لهبط على الله " " . ثم قرأ هو الأول والآخر والظاهر والباطن وهو بكل شيء عليم . هذا حديث غريب من هذا الوجه . ويروى عن أيوب ، ويونس بن عبيد ، وعلي بن زيد ، قالوا : لم يسمع الحسن من أبي هريرة ، وفسر بعض أهل العلم هذا الحديث ، فقالوا : إنما هبط على علم الله وقدرته وسلطانه . علم الله وقدرته وسلطانه في كل مكان ، وهو على العرش كما وصف في كتابه *

The red highlighted portion of the Hadith translates as:

"By Him in whose hand Muhammad's soul is, if you were to drop a rope to the lowest ard (land/earth), it would descend upon Allah."

Imam al-Tirmidhi expounded on this narration by saying (blue text):

"Some of the people of knowledge explained this Hadith by saying: Verily it would descend upon the knowledge of Allah, and His power and His authority, for Allah's knowledge, His power and His authority is in every place, and He is upon the Throne, as He described Himself in his Book"


Now, ibn Qayyim al Jawziyya, the student of ibn Taymiyya commented on this in his al-Sawa'iq al-Mursala:


قال ابن القيم في الصواعق ص 400

فقوله " لو دليتم بحبل لهبط على الله " اذا هبط في قبضته المحيطة بالعالم فقد هبط عليه والعالم في قبضته وهو فوق عرشه , ولو ان احدنا امسك بيده او برجله كرة قبضتها يده من جميع جوانبها ثم وقعت حصاة من اعلى الكرة الى اسفلها لوقعت في يده وهبطت عليه , ولم يلزم من ذلك ان تكون الكرة والحصاة فوقه وهو تحتها , ولله المثل الاعلى وانما يؤتى الرجل من سوء فهمه او من سوء قصده من كليهما , فاذا هما اجتمعا كمل نصيبه من الضلال
واما تأويل الترمذي وغيره له بالعلم فقال شيخنا : هو ظاهر الفساد من جنس تأويلات الجهمية بل بتقدير ثبوته , فانما يدل على الاحاطة , والاحاطة ثابتة عقلا ونقلا وفطرة .. "


The red portion above states that the Ta'wil of al Tirmidhi and other than him was commentd on by his Shaykh - meaning ibn Taymiyya - as follows:

"It is manifest depravity (zahir al fassad) from the sort of figurative interpretation's (Ta'wilat) of the Jahmiyya..."

I have located this quote to ibn Taymiyya's own work (Al-Risala al -Arshiyya) - please see the attatched scan or the link below:

Ibn Taymiyya's attack on al Tirmidhi (http://ibntaimiah.al-islam.com/Display.asp?Mode=1&DocID=17&MaksamID=2&ParagraphID=1&Sharh=2&HitNo=3&Source=1&SearchString=G%241%23%D9%C7%E5%D1%20%C7%E1%DD%D3%C 7%CF%230%230%230%23%23%23%23%23)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wassalam
------------------------------------

Post script:


Having read more into the issue of the Hanbali Abu Bakr al-Khallal attacking a certain al-Tirmidhi in his Kitab al-Sunna, I have come to the conclusion that he was not referring to Imam Abu Isa al-Tirmidhi - as discussed above, but some one else. So what i posted earlier is no longer my firm conviction and has been discarded in order to uphold the truth - unlike some who lied against Imam ibn Abdas Salam and continued to pretend they were on the Haqq in the claims against him!

All praise be to Allah, the People of the Haqq are not afraid to correct themselves whenever they err. We see this type of example amongst the Aimmatus Salaf on occassions also, so let the braggarts go ahead and rejoice if they wish, because we are prepared to accept the truth even it is more dearer than our honour in this finite Dunya.

Even the likes of Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Asqalani made some minor mistakes in Hadith as his own student: al-Hafiz Qasim ibn Qutlubugha demonstrated, and Imam ibn Hajar praised the latter with great laudation.

We are not like the rabble rousers who babble and hurl insults, just as we saw in history how some people did the same with Imam al-Bukhari - to the extent his Hadiths were left aside by such Huffaz like: Abu Hatim and Abu Zur'a al-Razi (see ibn Abi Hatim's al-Jarh wa Ta'dil under Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari).

At the end of the day, the main intention of the above article stands, as it shows that Imam al-Tirmidhi did make Ta'wil and he wasn't the only one as he himself said on the narration discussed above, BUT - the likes of ibn Taymiyya reproached Imam al-Tirmidhi with a severe Jarh!


Insha'Allah, i may show some more examples of passages from al-Jami al-Tirmidhi that some may find hard to stomach.

Alhamdulilllah wa billahi tawfiq!

[salman]

salamu Alaikum

May Allah bless you Sidi. I wonder Sidi - what they would say about Imam Dhahabi and others whom they claim to follow who also rejected the Prophets seating on the throne as one of the most "depraved sayings."

[ilm_seeker]

As sallamu alalikum

What do taweel and tafweed mean? Plz provide examples.

Wa alaikum as sallam

[Abul Hasan]

salamu Alaikum

May Allah bless you Sidi. I wonder Sidi - what they would say about Imam Dhahabi and others whom they claim to follow who also rejected the Prophets seating on the throne as one of the most "depraved sayings."


Wa alaikum salam

Barakallahu feek! Yes, i too wonder what they would think. If you do have the quote you are referring to from Imam al Dhahabi - then do post it or even better scan it up! These people still think of Imam al Dhahabi as he was in the comments he made in his early work: Kitab al Uluw - if only these people would read even that work carefully - they would be exposed in their batil aqeeda!

Hafiz al Dhahabi in that book also rejected the concept of "bi-Dhatihi" in some 2 palces if i recall. One of his last works: Siyar a'lam an Nubala - is an excellent demonstration of how his aqeeda changed with time, especially how it contravened the way of his own teacher: Ibn Taymiyya.

Imam al-Dhahabi had no problems with Tafweed al Ma'na, setting out on a journey to the Prophet's grave (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), tabarruk of the Prophetic remnants and also criticised Ibn Taymiyya in his Nasiha+Bayan Zaghlul Ilm. The latter point is denied by the pseudo-Salafiyya - though Imam al Sakhawi affirmed it in his al-I'lam bil-Tawbekh! If anyone wants proof i can scan the original quote up Insha'allah on this forum!

Wassalam

[Abul Hasan]

As sallamu alalikum

What do taweel and tafweed mean? Plz provide examples.

Wa alaikum as sallam

Wa alaikum salam

Ta'wil means to give an explanation of a Qur'anic verse. When it refers to Allah and His names and attributes, if someone was to give an interpretation which is not literal - but figurative - with some clear evidence - this is also called Ta'wil. This latter type of Ta'wil is called figurative interpretation or explaining the verse away from its literal meaning.

As for Tafweed - it means to consign the meaning (Tafweed al-Ma'na) and the "Howness" (Tafweed al Kayfiyya) of Allah's attributes to Himself alone - since we don't have full knowledge of them unless expounded upon by Allah's Messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), or major Sahaba at least.

Please read this link for examples:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2609

wassalam

[samrqandi]

salaam alaikum

shukran ya abul hasan, i really do appreciate what you have posted its really beneficial.

[salman]

Wa alaikum salam

Barakallahu feek! Yes, i too wonder what they would think. If you do have the quote you are referring to from Imam al Dhahabi - then do post it or even better scan it up! These people still think of Imam al Dhahabi as he was in the comments he made in his early work: Kitab al Uluw - if only these people would read even that work carefully - they would be exposed in their batil aqeeda!

Hafiz al Dhahabi in that book also rejected the concept of "bi-Dhatihi" in some 2 palces if i recall. One of his last works: Siyar a'lam an Nubala - is an excellent demonstration of how his aqeeda changed with time, especially how it contravened the way of his own teacher: Ibn Taymiyya.

Imam al-Dhahabi had no problems with Tafweed al Ma'na, setting out on a journey to the Prophet's grave (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), tabarruk of the Prophetic remnants and also criticised Ibn Taymiyya in his Nasiha+Bayan Zaghlul Ilm. The latter point is denied by the pseudo-Salafiyya - though Imam al Sakhawi affirmed it in his al-I'lam bil-Tawbekh! If anyone wants proof i can scan the original quote up Insha'allah on this forum!

Wassalam

Salamu Alaikum Sidi

Here it is from Imam Dhahbi in his Mizan, volume 3 under the notice of Mujahid:

] 7072 - مجاهد بن جبر [ ع ] المقرئ المفسر ، أحد الاعلام الاثبات . ذكره أبو العباس النباتي في تذييله . وقال أبو بكر بن عياش : قلت للاعمش : ما بال تفسير مجاهد مخالف - أو شئ نحوه ؟ قال : أخذها من أهل الكتاب . وقال النباتي : ذكر مجاهد في كتاب الضعفاء لابن حبان البستى ، ولم يذكره أحمد ممن ألف في الضعفاء . قال : ومجاهد ثقة بلا مدافعه . ومن أنكر ما جاء عن مجاهد في التفسير في قوله ( 1 ) : عسى أن يبعثك ربك مقاما محمودا - قال : يجلسه معه على العرش . وروى الفضل بن ميمون أنه سمع مجاهدا يقول : عرضت القرآن على ابن عباس ثلاثين مرة . * ( هامش ) * ( 1 ) سورة الاسراء ، آية 79 . ( * ) وعن مجاهد قال : قال لى ابن عمر : وددت أن نافعا يحفظ حفظك . وقال الاعمش : كنت إذا رأيت مجاهدا كأنه جمال أو خربندج ( 1 ) ، فإذا نطق خرج من فيه اللؤلؤ . وقال ابن خراش وغيره : أحاديث مجاهد عن على مراسيل ، لم يسمع منه شيئا . قال يحيى القطان : مات مجاهد سنة أربع ومائة . وأجمعت الامة على إمامة مجاهد والاحتجاج به .

- One of the most reprehensible (ankari) matters that came from Mujahid in his Tafsir of the Qur’an is what he said concerning the verse - (It may be that your Lord will raise you to an Exalted Station) – he said:
"He will seat the Prophet (s) with Him on the Throne."

Wasalam

[Abul Hasan]

Salamu Alaikum Sidi

Here it is from Imam Dhahbi in his Mizan, volume 3 under the notice of Mujahid:

] 7072 - مجاهد بن جبر [ ع ] المقرئ المفسر ، أحد الاعلام الاثبات . ذكره أبو العباس النباتي في تذييله . وقال أبو بكر بن عياش : قلت للاعمش : ما بال تفسير مجاهد مخالف - أو شئ نحوه ؟ قال : أخذها من أهل الكتاب . وقال النباتي : ذكر مجاهد في كتاب الضعفاء لابن حبان البستى ، ولم يذكره أحمد ممن ألف في الضعفاء . قال : ومجاهد ثقة بلا مدافعه . ومن أنكر ما جاء عن مجاهد في التفسير في قوله ( 1 ) : عسى أن يبعثك ربك مقاما محمودا - قال : يجلسه معه على العرش . وروى الفضل بن ميمون أنه سمع مجاهدا يقول : عرضت القرآن على ابن عباس ثلاثين مرة . * ( هامش ) * ( 1 ) سورة الاسراء ، آية 79 . ( * ) وعن مجاهد قال : قال لى ابن عمر : وددت أن نافعا يحفظ حفظك . وقال الاعمش : كنت إذا رأيت مجاهدا كأنه جمال أو خربندج ( 1 ) ، فإذا نطق خرج من فيه اللؤلؤ . وقال ابن خراش وغيره : أحاديث مجاهد عن على مراسيل ، لم يسمع منه شيئا . قال يحيى القطان : مات مجاهد سنة أربع ومائة . وأجمعت الامة على إمامة مجاهد والاحتجاج به .

- One of the most reprehensible (ankari) matters that came from Mujahid in his Tafsir of the Qur’an is what he said concerning the verse - (It may be that your Lord will raise you to an Exalted Station) – he said:
"He will seat the Prophet (s) with Him on the Throne."

Wasalam


Wa alaikum salam

Thanks for that. I think i have seen a similar rejection of Imam Mujahid ibn Jabr's view from al Hafiz ibn Abdal Barr al Maliki. In the Tafsir attributed to Mujahid, he also gave the more well known and correct Tafsir of the Ayat as follows:


تَفْسِيرُ مُجَاهِدٍ >> سُورَةُ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ >>
" الْمَقَامُ الْمَحْمُودُ شَفَاعَةُ مُحَمَّدٍ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ " *

844 أخبرنا عبد الرحمن ، قال : نا إبراهيم ، قال : نا آدم ، قال : نا ورقاء ، عن ابن أبي نجيح ، عن مجاهد ، عسى أن يبعثك ربك مقاما محمودا قال : " المقام المحمود شفاعة محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم " *


I haven't checked the authenticity of the above sanad, but if it is Sahih it shows that Mujahid believed that it refers to the Prophetic intercession, and agrees with the Sahih Hadith, as in Bukhari (6/242):


Narrated Ibn `Umar:

On the Day of Resurrection the people will fall on their knees and every nation will follow their prophet and they will say, "O so-and-so! Intercede (for us with Allah), "till (the right) intercession is given to the Prophet (Muhammad) and that will be the day when Allah will raise him to a station of praise and glory (i.e. Al-Maqam -al-Mahmud).

The likes of Khallal failed to take this narration over the one they presented in their controversial belief, to the extent it was made into a test to see who is a "Jahmi" in their estimation!

I wish to see what today's "Salafiyya" have to say about Khallal's position, and whether they agree with him or not. If they disagree then they stand accussed of Tajahhum by one of their own reference points in aqeeda!

Wassalam

[samrqandi]

salaam alaikum

masha allah i am seeing good stuff, i think this is the best method.

brother abul hasan, when you have qouted hafidth ibn abdul barr, i would like to know is there any other similar statements in his tamheed because we have that in the library as well. Also there was an article i read by the so-called salafiyyah and they cited ibn abdul barr, i asked a malaki brother since his well acquianted with the malaki sources he said that what they tend to do is qoute only half of what the imam was trying to say. Do you have any information on this? Or i might just ask the malaki brother the page numbers etc.

barak allah feekum

[maturidi sufi]

The Prophet’s (s) Seating on the Throne
(Iq‘âd al-Nabî (s) ‘alâ al-‘Arsh)
Dr. G. F. Haddad

http://www.sunnah.org/aqida/ProphetsSeatingontheThrone.htm


9. Al-Tabari’s Defense of Mujahid’s Narration


Imam al-Tabari said in his Tafsir:



Others said [concerning the verse of the Exalted Station]: “Rather [than meaning Intercession], that Praiseworthy Station to which Allah has promised to raise His Prophet is the fact that He shall seat him with Him on His Throne!”



Following is the mention of those who said this:

‘Abbad ibn Ya‘qub al-Asadi[41] said to us:

Ibn Fudayl[42] said to us:

From Layth:[43]

From Mujahid:

“Concerning the saying of Allah: [It may be that you Lord will raise you to an Exalted Station] – He shall make him sit with Him on His Throne (yujlisuhu ma‘ahu ‘alâ ‘arshihi).”



But of the two explanations concerning this question the likelier to be correct is that supported by the authentic report from the Prophet (s) such as the following from Abu Hurayra:



Abu Kurayb[44] said to us:

Waki‘[45] said to us:

From Dawud ibn Yazid:[46]

From his father [Yazid ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman]:[47]

From Abu Hurayra:

The Prophet (s) was asked about the verse: “It may be that thy Lord will raise you to an Exalted Station” and he said: “That is intercession” (hiya al-shafâ‘a).[48]



Al-Tabari then goes on to mention nine more narrations supporting the latter interpretation of the verse. However, far from rejecting Mujahid’s narration, he returns to discuss it and defends its authenticity:



Even if [the meaning of Intercession] is the sound position (al-sahîh min al-qawl) in the interpretation [of the Exalted Station] due to what we mentioned from the Prophet (s), the Companions, and the Successors – nevertheless, what Mujahid said to the effect that Allah shall seat Muhammad (s) on His Throne is a position that is by no means unsound whether from the perspective of narration or from that of reason. For there is no report from the Prophet (s) nor from any of the Companions nor Successors precluding it. As for the perspective of reason, those who profess (yantahil) Islam differ on its meaning in only three ways:



· One group said: “Allah (swt) is separate (bâ’in) from His creation. He was before He created things; then He created them without entering into contact with them; and He is exactly as He ever was. However, with regard to the things He created, since He is not in contact (mumâss) with them, it is obligatory that He be separate from them. For there is no effecter (fa‘‘âl) upon things but he is either in contact with them or separate from them.”[49]



According to that group, since Allah (swt)s the effecter of things, and since they say that it is impermissible to describe Him as being in contact with them, it is therefore incumbent – so they claim – that He be separate from them. According to their school, it follows that it is the same whether He seats Muhammad (s) on His Throne or on the ground. For it results from their position that His “separateness” (baynûna) from His Throne and “separateness” from the ground are one and the same in meaning: He is equally separate from both, equally in contact with neither.



· Another group said: “Allah Almighty was, before He created things, in contact with nothing and separate from nothing. Then He created things and brought them into existence through His power, remaining exactly as He ever was before He created things, in contact with nothing, separate (bâ’in) from nothing.”[50]



According to that group’s position also, it is equally the same whether He seats Muhammad (s) on His Throne or on His ground.[51] For, according to them, it is the same regarding His Throne or His ground in that He is in contact with neither, and He is separate from neither (la mumâss wa la mubâyin).



· A third group[52] said: “Allah Almighty was, before He created things, in contact with nothing and separate from nothing. Then He brought things into being and created them. At that time He created for Himself a Throne over which He established Himself by sitting (istawâ ‘alayhi jâlisan), and He entered into contact with it (sâra lahu mumâssan). This is just as, before He created things, there was nothing to which He granted sustenance and nothing of which He deprived it; then He created things and gave this one sustenance and deprived that one of it, giving to this one and withholding from that one. Similarly He was, before creating things, in contact with nothing and separate from nothing, then He created things and became in contact with the Throne by sitting on it as opposed to the remainder of creation.[53] Therefore, He is in contact with whatever He wishes from His creation, and He is separate from whatever He wishes from His creation.”



According to the school of that group also, it is the same whether He seats Muhammad (s) on His Throne or on a pulpit of light, for they also say that “the Lord’s sitting on the Throne does not occupy the entirety of the Throne;”[54] and [they say], similarly, that the seating of Muhammad (s) does not necessitate for him the attribute of lordship, nor does it bring him out of that of servanthood; just as the separateness of Muhammad (s) from whatever is separate from him, neither necessitates lordship for him nor brings him out of servanthood on the sole grounds that he is separate from it.[55] According to that line of thinking, just as Allah (swt) is described as separate from things, similarly, the Prophet (s) is described as separate from the Throne. They arrive at the conclusion that since the meaning of “being separate” does not necessarily preclude from the Prophet (s) the attribute of servanthood nor impose lordship upon him, similarly, his seating on the Throne of the Merciful does not necessitate either of the above for him.



In conclusion, it is clear that, as we said before, what Mujahid said is not impossible, according to all those who profess Islam, namely: that Allah (swt) shall seat the Prophet (s) on His Throne.



Now if someone should say: “We do not deny the seating of the Prophet (s) by Allah (swt) on His Throne [since it is related]… from ‘Abd Allah ibn Salam: ‘Verily, on the Day of Resurrection, Muhammad (s) shall be on the Lord’s Throne (kursî al-Rabb), in front of the Lord (bayna yaday al-Rabb).’[56] All that we deny is that He seat him with Him.” We can reply to him: “Do you allow that He seats him on it but not with Him?” If he allows that, then he also concurs that either he is with Him [on the Throne], or that He seats him while being separate from [the Throne], or not in contact with it, or neither in contact nor separate. Whichever of these alternatives he concedes he will have accepted part of what he previously denied.[57] But if he disallows it then he will be diverging from all the different groups whose positions we mentioned, and that is a divergence from all those that profess Islam; for there is no other position than the three we have cited[58] – none of them considering what Mujahid said to be impossible.[59]



Al-Tabari’s view that both interpretations stand is confirmed by Mujahid himself, from whom is also reported the exegesis narrated by Abu Hurayra, as found in Tafsir Mujahid:



‘Abd al-Rahman [ibn al-Hasan al-Hamadhani][60] told us:

Ibrahim [ibn al-Husayn al-Hamadhani][61] narrated to us:

Adam [ibn Abi Iyas][62] narrated to us:

Warqa’ [ibn ‘Umar][63] narrated to us,

From [‘Abd Allah] Ibn Abi Najih,

From Mujahid:

[Concerning the verse] “It may be that your Lord shall raise you to an Exalted Station” Mujahid said: “The Exalted Station is the intercession of Muhammad (s).”[64]





9a. Another Position Related from al-Tabari



An incident was related to have taken place between al-Tabari and some Hanbalis in Baghdad over the explanation of the verse of the Exalted Station whereby al-Tabari reportedly recited:



subhana man laysa lahu anisun wa ma lahu fi ‘arshihi jalisu

Glory to Him Who has no comrade

nor companion sitting with Him on His Throne!



Hearing this, the account goes, the irate Hanbalis pelted al-Tabari with their inkwells and he sought shelter in his house.[65] The report seems dubious in light of the above-cited defense by al-Tabari, in his Tafsir, of Mujahid’s narration Furthermore, al-Suyuti’s report is not found anywhere else. What is well-established is that the Hanbalis persecuted al-Tabari for failing to mention Imam Ahmad in his book Ikhtilaf al-Fuqaha’. Another reason mentioned by al-Dhahabi, was the antagonism between al-Tabari and the Hanbali Abu Bakr ibn Abi Dawud, who falsely accused him of being a Râfidî.[66]

[samrqandi]

salaam alaikum

Thats a real good research done by Dr GF haddad alhamdulillah. I had to read it all hehehe :)

I like the way he presents all the sunni ulema mainly all hafiz of hadeeths and mufasireens and what their stance is on Mujahids narration. He clearly high lights the two narrations from mujahid himself. Also what Hafidth ibn abdul barr says regarding his two opinions that are not taken. I think people can read the article themselves, rather then me abridging it :cheesygri

wassalaam alaikum

May allah guide us all ameen

[Ibn_Abi_Yala]

I've invited you, Abul Hasan, in one of my posts elsewhere. I live in Amsterdam, I'm willing to arrange your travel and stay with me.

Sincerily, Moulay Abdallah.

[Abul Hasan]

I've invited you, Abul Hasan, in one of my posts elsewhere. I live in Amsterdam, I'm willing to arrange your travel and stay with me.

Sincerily, Moulay Abdallah.



Subhanallah! What kind of invitation is this when you had no shame in saying the following today in a direct attack on me and those who may agree with me on this very forum?!

Take note O Sunni's/moderators - the temperament and standards of abuse, slander and unscholarliness this person displays after reading the following calumniations that protruded from his mind, via his finger tips onto the ahwa forum he posts on these days. I have already explained my position on Khallal and the Tirmidhi he attacked, so you can go ahead and brag as you like to do on Ahwa forum O Ibn Abi Yala. Let us quote snippets of his abuse:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SHATA’IM AL-GHUZAYLI


Said Ibn Abi Yala/Moulay Abdallah/Ahmed Zbairi (all appear to be his real or false names) against me and others who remained nameless (numbering is mine):




1) Abul Hasan is a Liar!

2) Then I continue in unveiling the lies of the Ahl al-Bid'ah, with Allah's Help.

3) Was this sufficient for the Ahl al-Bid'ah? Nay! They - with their filthy minds - assumed still that it was al-Hafidh al-Tirmidhi Abu 'Isa, while the words,

4) So I ask them: How come you identify the filthy Jahmi from Tirmidh with Imam al-Tirmidhi? Do you hate him so much for what he wrote concerning 'letting pass the reports as they came' and 'without how' and other then that in his Jami'?! Curse upon the liars, the Muharrifun!

5) Do they still consider Imam al-Tirmidhi to be that man?! Tell me O liars!

6) Then I continue in unveiling the lies of the Ahl al-Bid'ah, with Allah's Help.

7) Ya Ayyuhal Khabithin!

8) Ya Ayyuhal Ahibba! Read and ponder! Ya Ayyuhal Ikhwan, see the filthness of those who still are deluded by Satan who promiss them ignorance which they take for granted!

9) Can you brothers see the impact of the above report?! Is the filthy Jahmi al-Tirmidhi al-Mubtadi' an Arab - like al-Hafidh al-Tirmidhi - or an 'Ajami?!

10) Tell me Oh Innovators and those who follow them and protect their words and speak as if they stand on the same level as us! Do not give him any respite or comfort, not in word or deed! Let him feel good what we give him because of his slander and misinformation and distortion - nay LYING.

11) Then I continue in unveiling the lies of the Ahl al-Bid'ah, with Allah's Help, and demand from the plaintiff:

12) Or will the enemy of Allah and the Wali of the Shaytan come up with Ibn Hazm to prove his point?! Is he - again - so filthy and desperate to bring in anyone to make a point he can never make?! May Allah let him ponder, even in silence, over these words - and let him know that I have nothing personally as such against him. Even if you are the greatest Jahmi I will welcome you in my house and let him come to get to know me so we can settle this strive between al-Haqq wa'l-Batil; so come and enter the Jama'a, please..

13) To continue.. making mention what I came across. And I say again: I've made this just as a short and summarized article, prepared in a few hours. So forgive my mistakes, or not proper translation in some instances, or any other point you may come across - Insha'Allah - and let me say: My intention is clear, straight and fair. I did not come to vilify or attack people personally with a bad intention. To continue..

14) If their filthy hearts do not fear Allah, nor do they use their brains - then who will convince such folk?!

15) So tell me: Are these facts related to Abu 'Isa al-Tirmidhi? Filthy lying, ignorant people!

16) Are these the attributes of Abu 'Isa al-Tirmidhi, author of the Jami' and the Fadha'il al-Sahaba in it! Speak up, you liars!

17) May Allah give the liars what they deserve! Imam al-Tirmidhi is far from that innovation and other innovations!

18) PS: To Abul Hasan: taste the dots I've filled your filthy mouth with!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let the reader decide what kind of person this is and the level of his arrogance and abuse. Would you O Sunni Muslim take up such an invitation to the house of an individual who is ready to literally dig knives and forks into the flesh of his opponents, before they have even stepped off the plane in Amsterdam?! Let them learn the art of Jadal and learn some basic adab before they spread insincerities in the name of niceties here!

Lahawla wala quwwata illa billahil ali-il-Azim

[Abul Hasan]

Said ibn Abi Yala:
Can you brothers see the impact of the above report?! Is the filthy Jahmi al-Tirmidhi al-Mubtadi' an Arab - like al-Hafidh al-Tirmidhi - or an 'Ajami?!


Who has ever said that Abu Isa al-Tirmidhi was an Arab?! Bring your proof or you stand accused of everything you accused me of! I had always thought the compilers of the Sihah Sitta were all Ajami's of Persian ancestry...

[Adam]

Ibn Abi Yala...

Your disturbing language is a manifest testimony against your self.

Fear Allah, before you claim to know the hearts of Men.

Salaam,

Adam

[Abdur_Rahman]

:subh: all this debating/bickering is quite boring, move on children and go play in separate sandboxes , you stay in your forum and he shall stay in his , what do you say eh? Can we at least "agree" to those terms. Can we have a consensus on this :rolleyes:

Leave it alone, you have your arguments you're firm upon and the brother will have his to firm upon, how come people have so much fervor to outdue one another? Case inpoint if you saw the person out in the street you'd probably just ignore the person and walk away, is it that hard to ignore people if you have a diagreement with him/her? It shouldn't be that hard, can it? It comes a point in time you have to say to yourself just move on.

Make dua for the your brother(s)/sister(s) out there whom you deem not learning this deen correctly and ask Allah to guide them and you to that which is correct.

[Adam]

Abdur Rahman...

Jazakallah for your - I am sure wellmeant - Nasiha.

Please mind your facon and Adab, lest you ask your elders to "grow up" or name people of knowledge as "children"...

Salaam,

Adam

[abu bakr]

brother abul hasan ok bro ibn abu yala ay have been a bit too harsh in his refutaions but the fact of the matter is that you have clearly been refuted in what you said about imam khallal in relation to imam tirmidhi. it is obvious you cant find an answer to brother ibn abi yalas refutation instead you have launched a perosnal attack on him by picking out the harsh words he has used and now ur saying that he cant be trusted. well brother, sidi ibn abi yala has placed the facts in balck and white right in front of our eyes and now you are the one who is diverging

[abu bakr]

it is obvious imam khallal was not talkin abt the muhaddith imam tirmidhi but he was talkin about the neo jahmite tirmidhi. please see the ahya froums for more information.

[muslim786]

brother abul hasan ok bro ibn abu yala ay have been a bit too harsh in his refutaions but the fact of the matter is that you have clearly been refuted in what you said about imam khallal in relation to imam tirmidhi. it is obvious you cant find an answer to brother ibn abi yalas refutation instead you have launched a perosnal attack on him by picking out the harsh words he has used and now ur saying that he cant be trusted. well brother, sidi ibn abi yala has placed the facts in balck and white right in front of our eyes and now you are the one who is diverging
The fact is he has not been refuted, you and your najdi mate ibn abi yala have been refuted. Also mr ibn abi yala has shown to be a [clip], no proper Maliiki would have his stance on things. He is using this label as a way to deviate people from the sahih aqeedah.
May Allah SWT guide us all to the straight path. And stop the fitnah which is spread by the wahabis.

mod: no personal insults please.

[Ibn_Abi_Yala]

I've think it would be better, Abul Hasan, to place it in a better context. You could have missed a remark.. could you?

[clip]

mod: Disturbing language... please make sure to post in accordance to SF rules (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8580&postcount=1) [the bit about personal insults] next time if you wish it to remain here. jazakallah.

[abu bakr]

brothers i dont think you have seen the actual orignal refutation by brother ibn abi yala on the ahya forums. sidi abul hasan has posted his own modified version where has picked parts of the refutation and used it agianst ibn abi yala.

[Ibn_Abi_Yala]

al-Salamu 'Alaikum wa-Rahmatullahi,

Dear moderator,

If what you've said is applied to all of us, I would never have posted elsewhere in the first place.

I suggest therefore that the "Shata'im al-Ghuzayli" should have also been removed, because comparing the quality and quantity of both reports I gave at least the benefit of quoting one of the classical creeds of early Islam, with an clarification of who "al-Tirmidhi" is.

Should you, brother, not be consequent and delete 'the bit about personal insult' also from the post of Abul Hasan? Or does that not qualify under the rubric of 'Disturbing language'...

..Its in fact coming from the same author! So would you, please, clarify that point, or else tolerate what I've written in full for what another has cleverly 'cut & passed' to make apoint that's not relevant.

As for my remaining here: you should know that disturbing language can be find here and there in many posts of Abul Hasan and others who disagree with me. But I do not tolerate, rather I respond, whoever attacks the scholars of early Islam, let alone the Sunnah of the Prophet and that of the Salaf.

So, Mr. Moderator, it would be better if you review your respond to me, and consider what I've said. Its not the first time that I've been 'rebuked' or 'warned' for something others already have done, indeed tolerated by you. So in all fairness - let us all be fair.

wa-Salamu 'alaikum [and to Abul Hasan: wa-Salam 'ala man ittaba' al-huda as he likes it]

PS:
JazakAllah al-Khair.

[abu bakr]

i couldnt agree more brother

[faqir]

:salam:

Ibn Abi Ya'la's insults are truly disgusting. Actually, the forum he posts on is full of insults directed towards many of the users of this forum [including myself]. Never mind, what do they say about sticks and stones....? :p


.

[AbuTaymiyah]

As Salamu Aleykum

Abul Hassan was asked on Ahya to explain these words of Imam Tirmidhi

Imaam at-Tirmidhee (d.279H) said : "It has been stated by more than one person from the People of Knowledge about such ahaadeeth, that there is no tashbeeh (resemblance) to the Attributes of Allaah, and our Lord - the Blessed and Most High - descends to the lowest heaven every night. So they say: "Affirm these narrations, have eemaan (faith) in them, do not deny them, nor ask how." The likes of this has been related from Maalik ibn Anas, Sufyaan ath-Thawree, Ibn Uyainah and Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak, who all said about such ahaadeeth: "Leave them as they are, without asking how." Such is the saying of the People of Knowledge from the Ahl us-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 Attribute of al-Yad (Hand), as-Sama' (Hearing), and al-Basr (Seeing) - but the Jahmiyyah make ta'weel of these aayaat, explaining them in a way, other than how they are explained by the People of Knowledge. They say: Indeed, Allaah did not create Aadam with His own Hand - they say that Hand means the Power of Allaah."

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=2&Rec=1076

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=2&Rec=4152

Also the sayings of Mulla Ali Qaree that the safe way is that of Salaf about believing in Qadam of Allah

Also Ibn Abideen saying about Allah's Mercy being Haqeeqee and not Majazee.

Zaad ul Ma’ad, vol 1 p 19 with Tahqeeq of two Arnaut, in note N 1, after saying from Imam Khatabbee the madhab of salaf, also saying that Abu Ma'ali Juwaini also choosed it at the end as in his Nithamiyah, it is said : “

Allamah ibnul ‘Abideen said in Rad Al Mukhtar ( 1/5) : “ Is describing Him Ta’ala with Mercy upon reality or metaphorical from In’am or from his Iradah… ?
The famous saying is the second and the tahqeeq is the first, because mercy being from A’radh ( Nafsaniyah) is with us, and it does not necessitates it being the same for Allah, so we have to make it a metaphor. As ‘Ilm, Qudrah, Iradah, and others from Sifat, their meaning stand with us from A’radh and nobody said : It is for Allah metaphorical..

In Arabic : “ Hal Wasfuhu Ta’ala BiRahmati Haqiqatun aw Majazun ‘anil In’am aw ‘an Iradatihi, Lianaha min A’radhi Nafsaniyati Mustahilatu Lillahi Ta’ala, fayuradu Ghayatuha ? Al mashoor Ath Thanni waT Tahqeequ Al Awalu, Lianna Rahmata hya minal A’radhi qaimatun bina, wala yalzimu kawnuha fi Haqihi Ta’ala kazalika hatta takumu Majazan. Kal Ilmi wal Qudrati wal Iradati, wa gayriha minas Sifati, Ma’aniha qaimatun bina minal A’radhi wa lam yaqul Ahadun Innaha fi Haqihi Ta’ala Majazun”.

Abul Hassan can you please explain these words ?

Do you consider Imam Tirmidhi who belives in Qadam of Allah, Hands, and say leave the how, to be doing Tashbeeh ?

[abu bakr]

imam tirmidhis rejection of taweel which brother abu taymiyah has shown is mentioned in Sunanut-Tirmidhee (3/24)

[Abdur_Rahman]

Abdur Rahman...

Jazakallah for your - I am sure wellmeant - Nasiha.

Please mind your facon and Adab, lest you ask your elders to "grow up" or name people of knowledge as "children"...

Salaam,

Adam
:salam:

:jazak: I appreciate the nasiha that was given!

Perhaps it's better to re-word it as "acting" like children (from both individuals, be it elder or youth ), and therefore move on and cease the boring on-line wrestling match.

People tend to be so caught up in debates that some tend to lose focus on certain issues that needed to be addressed

Allahu alim

[faqir]

:salam:


Shaykh al-Islam Imam Nawawi [RH] 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 those like it among the hadiths and verses of the divine Attributes, two well-known schools of thought.

The school of the vast majority of the Salaf and some of the scholars of kalam holds that we must believe in their reality according to what befits Allah Almighty 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.




Imam Nawawi [RH] has also stated in his sharh of saheeh 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 شئ 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.”




.

[abu bakr]

The school of the vast majority of the Salaf and some of the scholars of kalam holds that we must believe in their reality according to what befits Allah Almighty 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).

from the saying of imam nawawi we can basically see how it is the opion of the salaf that they did not apply tawil as they avoided figurative interpretation. imam nawawi uses the phrase the "vast majority of the salaf" however as far as i know there are no salaf (first 3 generations) who applied tawil. if they did proof has to be provided. imam nawawi also mentions that "some scholars of kalam" also never applied tawil and took the apprent meaning of the text without making resemblance to creation. it is clear that imam nawawi is referring to the early ashari scholars not the latter day asharis who do the complete opposite. we see from the second portion of imam nawawis saying that "most of the scholars of kalam" applied tawil. here imam nawawi is referring to the latter day asharis who have took a compltely different path to the salaf.

it is clear from imam nawawis extract who is on the straight path. i mean should we folow the salaf(early generations) or the khalaf (later generations). nabi saw said in hadith that the best genrations are the first three.

just something to ponder about. even imam nawawi says "vast majority of salaf".

[faqir]

:salam:


from the saying of imam nawawi we can basically see how it is the opion of the salaf that they did not apply tawil as they avoided figurative interpretation. imam nawawi uses the phrase the "vast majority of the salaf" however as far as i know there are no salaf (first 3 generations) who applied tawil. if they did proof has to be provided. imam nawawi also mentions that "some scholars of kalam" also never applied tawil and took the apprent meaning of the text without making resemblance to creation. it is clear that imam nawawi is referring to the early ashari scholars not the latter day asharis who do the complete opposite. we see from the second portion of imam nawawis saying that "most of the scholars of kalam" applied tawil. here imam nawawi is referring to the latter day asharis who have took a compltely different path to the salaf.

it is clear from imam nawawis extract who is on the straight path. i mean should we folow the salaf(early generations) or the khalaf (later generations). nabi saw said in hadith that the best genrations are the first three.

just something to ponder about. even imam nawawi says "vast majority of salaf".


Read on Habeebi:

Imam Nawawi [RH] has also stated in his sharh of saheeh 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 شئ 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.”


And, my dear brother, please understand this, we do not have a problem with Absolute Tafwid! Who ever said we had a problem with this? The problem is those who reject Absolute Tafwid and instead practice a distorted type of Tafwid.

As for the Ta'wil of the Salaf then perhaps you do not believe Imam Nawawi in what is quoted above akhi?

If this is the case then you should read this thread thoroughly - many posts therin are relevant to your question:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4030

In it you will even find a useful discussion on the Ta'wil of Imam Ahmad - the chain of narration for which some of the "salafi" heroes tried to falsely weaken!

.

[muslim786]

it is clear from imam nawawis extract who is on the straight path. i mean should we folow the salaf(early generations) or the khalaf (later generations). nabi saw said in hadith that the best genrations are the first three.

just something to ponder about. even imam nawawi says "vast majority of salaf".
Then why do people like you reject the noble salaf such as Imam Al Azam Abu Hanifa RA or Imam Shafi RA and instead follow mr albani an ibn tamiyya? neither of them were from the salaf.

[abu bakr]

brother as far as imma nawawis saying regarding tawil is concerned then there is no proof for his statement. no doubt imam nawawi was a great scholar but that doesnt mean he was infallible. this is the beauty of salafiyyah whenever a saying is in contradiction to the quran and sunnah then we leave that saying. ive got question for u why do u follow the saying of imam nawawi why dont you follow what imam dhabhi, imma ibn rajab and imma ibn qudamah and what the majority of the scolars say on this topic.

and to muslim 786 i dont follow any one particular imam for exmaple i dnt follow everything what imam ibn taymiyah or imam albani say. if there saying is in accordance wiht quran and sunnah then i follow them howver when their saying contradicts the quran and the sunnah then i dont folow them. and another question why dont u asharis follow imam abu hanifah when it comes to the attributes of allah swt.

[Mossy]

brother as far as imma nawawis saying regarding tawil is concerned then there is no proof for his statement. no doubt imam nawawi was a great scholar but that doesnt mean he was infallible. this is the beauty of salafiyyah whenever a saying is in contradiction to the quran and sunnah then we leave that saying. ive got question for u why do u follow the saying of imam nawawi why dont you follow what imam dhabhi, imma ibn rajab and imma ibn qudamah and what the majority of the scolars say on this topic.

and to muslim 786 i dont follow any one particular imam for exmaple i dnt follow everything what imam ibn taymiyah or imam albani say. if there saying is in accordance wiht quran and sunnah then i follow them howver when their saying contradicts the quran and the sunnah then i dont folow them. and another question why dont u asharis follow imam abu hanifah when it comes to the attributes of allah swt.

That's bad form. You used Imam Nawawi's saying as a "proof", extrapolating on it, but when his position was elucidated utilising another quote from one of his most reliable works, you suddenly decide to reject him.

Something I'm curious about - can you give me a couple of topics on which Imam ibn Taymiyyah and Imam Albani's sayings contradict the "Quran and Sunnah"?

Jazakhs.

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

First, It is better to understand the madhab of the salaf from their own books like Kitab tawheed of ibn Khuzaymah, Kitab Sharee'ah of Ajuree, and others

Then we do not take Albanee, Ibn Baz and Ibn Taymiyah to reject the salaf's views, rather we take their tahqeeq and tarjeeh among one of the salaf saying, these Imam always have their views among scholars from salaf, sahabah, Tabi'een, Imam fuqahas like the four and others like Awzai, Thawree, Abu Thawr, Layth and others

If you have any of these Imam's saying that none of the salaf said, then you can bring it.

For 3 talaq in one majlis, you have the saying of Ibn Abbas and his students, and even scholars of Al Azhar gave preference to it, as said by Peer Karam Shah Al Azhari in of his risalah on this topic, where he also choosed the view of ibn Abbas

So we honour the Salaf, and in their ikhtilaf we look who's daleel is the best,

As for beliefs, then salaf agreed on forbiding Taweel, as saib by Imam Tirmidhi, and if the saying of some in one or two matters is even established it wouild be shadh, towards great number forbiding strictly Taweel

One should also think why Salaf some salaf made takfeer of Jahmee, why theu wrote books against them, and Imam Tirmidhi said they say Hand is Power

So who is better to be followed, people of Salaf or people sharing the same veiws as Jahmiyah on issues of Hands of Allah

I am still waiting an answer from Abul hassan, as from others I did not see any answer

[Abul Hasan]

As Salamu Aleykum

Abul Hassan was asked on Ahya to explain these words of Imam Tirmidhi

Imaam at-Tirmidhee (d.279H) said : "It has been stated by more than one person from the People of Knowledge about such ahaadeeth, that there is no tashbeeh (resemblance) to the Attributes of Allaah, and our Lord - the Blessed and Most High - descends to the lowest heaven every night. So they say: "Affirm these narrations, have eemaan (faith) in them, do not deny them, nor ask how." The likes of this has been related from Maalik ibn Anas, Sufyaan ath-Thawree, Ibn Uyainah and Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak, who all said about such ahaadeeth: "Leave them as they are, without asking how." Such is the saying of the People of Knowledge from the Ahl us-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 Attribute of al-Yad (Hand), as-Sama' (Hearing), and al-Basr (Seeing) - but the Jahmiyyah make ta'weel of these aayaat, explaining them in a way, other than how they are explained by the People of Knowledge. They say: Indeed, Allaah did not create Aadam with His own Hand - they say that Hand means the Power of Allaah."

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=2&Rec=1076

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=2&Rec=4152

Also the sayings of Mulla Ali Qaree that the safe way is that of Salaf about believing in Qadam of Allah

Also Ibn Abideen saying about Allah's Mercy being Haqeeqee and not Majazee.

Zaad ul Ma’ad, vol 1 p 19 with Tahqeeq of two Arnaut, in note N 1, after saying from Imam Khatabbee the madhab of salaf, also saying that Abu Ma'ali Juwaini also choosed it at the end as in his Nithamiyah, it is said : “

Allamah ibnul ‘Abideen said in Rad Al Mukhtar ( 1/5) : “ Is describing Him Ta’ala with Mercy upon reality or metaphorical from In’am or from his Iradah… ?
The famous saying is the second and the tahqeeq is the first, because mercy being from A’radh ( Nafsaniyah) is with us, and it does not necessitates it being the same for Allah, so we have to make it a metaphor. As ‘Ilm, Qudrah, Iradah, and others from Sifat, their meaning stand with us from A’radh and nobody said : It is for Allah metaphorical..

In Arabic : “ Hal Wasfuhu Ta’ala BiRahmati Haqiqatun aw Majazun ‘anil In’am aw ‘an Iradatihi, Lianaha min A’radhi Nafsaniyati Mustahilatu Lillahi Ta’ala, fayuradu Ghayatuha ? Al mashoor Ath Thanni waT Tahqeequ Al Awalu, Lianna Rahmata hya minal A’radhi qaimatun bina, wala yalzimu kawnuha fi Haqihi Ta’ala kazalika hatta takumu Majazan. Kal Ilmi wal Qudrati wal Iradati, wa gayriha minas Sifati, Ma’aniha qaimatun bina minal A’radhi wa lam yaqul Ahadun Innaha fi Haqihi Ta’ala Majazun”.

Abul Hassan can you please explain these words ?

Do you consider Imam Tirmidhi who belives in Qadam of Allah, Hands, and say leave the how, to be doing Tashbeeh ?

Abu Taymiyah, i trust that is your real Kunya.. Please tell your colleague Abu Alqama that cowardice is not part of this Abd-Allah's way and since he is so adamant that i respond then let him be patient and Insha'allah I will respond soon. I would have told him directly but my privilege to post on Ahwa was frozen back in 2001 without any warning. Anyway, i did ask where had Abu Alqama asked me this back in the days i used to post there? May be you can help me get the link to his so called challenge..

Tell him also if he has recorded on his hard-drive the defeat he received from Abu Abdal Halim al-Dimashqi?! And does Abu Alqama still take his understanding of Sahih al-Bukhari from French editions?! And does Abu Alqama have the radd i wrote to him which caused me to be banned from his Ahwa forum? Tell him also to get ready a copy of his Shaykh: Abdar Rahman al-Mubarakpuri's Sharh on al-Jami al-Tirmidhi...


As for the last bit, no we Sunni's do not consider Imam al-Tirmidhi to be a Mushabbih or a Jahmi for that matter - but Abu Alqama and his friend Ibn Abi Yala have the common Master in Aqeeda: ibn Taymiyya - who disgracefully attacked Imam al-Tirmidhi and accused him by saying so boldly:

"It is manifest depravity (zahir al fassad) from the sort of figurative interpretation's (Ta'wilat) of the Jahmiyya..."


If you missed this then go back to page 1 of this thread, and let all the pseudo-Salafiyya clarify if they agree with ibn Taymiyya or was he mistaken?! These are the divertory games of the People of Ahwa, may Allah guide them, just as he guided Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali to leave the way of ibn Taymiyya in the end!

[haqq]

Found this to be some what related to the subject.



–Salafis–
The Blindest Taqleed (http://www.themajlis.net/Sections-article283-p1.html)

The blindest form of taqleed (following) is the form of taqleed practised by the deviate Salafi group. While this deviant sect castigates and abuses the Qur'aanic and Sunnah Taqleed of the FOUR authentic Math-habs of Islam–the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama'ah–they have no qualms about blindly following the deviate, Al-Albaani who is the imaam of their math-hab.

Inspite of their vociferous assertions of independent reasoning and independent following of the Sunnah, they in reality follow every opinion handed to them by Al-Albaani who sprang up only a few years ago.

Indeed, it is self-deception to abandon a superior and a holy Taqleed–the Taqleed of the Sahaabah and their Students–and to adopt the taqleed of a modernist of this century who possesses no rank in the firmament of Islamic Knowledge. While the Ahlus Sunnah follow the Sahaabah and the Fuqaha (the Students of the Sahaabah), the modernist Salafis follow a man of this age who has no relationship with the Salf-e-Saaliheen. Shaitaan has truly duped them and is leading them into the fox's den to their doom.

[Abul Hasan]

salam aleykum


So we honour the Salaf, and in their ikhtilaf we look who's daleel is the best,

As for beliefs, then salaf agreed on forbiding Taweel, as saib by Imam Tirmidhi, and if the saying of some in one or two matters is even established it wouild be shadh, towards great number forbiding strictly Taweel




If you really look at whose daleel is the best then tell us if you affirm that Allah has "two eyes" and where is the direct and undisputable proof for this - as one of those your scholars admire at times: ibn Hazm rejected this, as did the Hanbali's: Ibn Aqil and Ibn al-Jawzi! Who from the Salaf besides Ibn Khuzayma and al-Darimi held this position? Please don't say al-Ash'ari believed this (as I am working on disproving this still).

As for you saying the Salaf forbade Ta'wil - then you could not have read the authentic statements from the Salaf making Ta'wil (like on the Saaq, Kursi etc) - read Fath al Bari of Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar carefully and you will see examples and this is why the likes of Safar al-Hawali and Mahmud al-Haddad attacked this Imam, as did others from pseudo-Salafiyya in this age (proof later Insha'allah). The Salaf generally made Tafweed, and on certain occassions made Ta'wil as Imam al-Nawawi said.

Did you read the beginning of this thread carefully? Why are you feigning ignorance of the fact that Imam al-Tirmidhi himself gave an example of Ta'wil and your grand Imam: Ibn Taymiyya blasted him for doing this! Don't digress from the topic, otherwise i recommend you open another thread...

[samrqandi]

Assalaamu^Alaikum

Alhamdulillah, I have read the response by brother abul hasan and I say masha-allah in terms of accepting and changing ones stance since that’s how it should be. Everyone is talib from cradle to grave. May Allah increase our knowledge and give us barakah in time, forgive out sins and accept our dua with the barakah of the prophet muhammad (allah send blessings and peace upon him) ameen.

I have just read the post by abu taymiya, when some of the salaf did say stay away from ta'weel (like the qowl’s of abu hanifa and imam tirmidhi etc), then that’s due to precautionary stance and no ashari denies that. Imam al-Bayhaqi related in a chain back to al'Awzai and Imam Malik and Sufyan ath-Thawri and al-Layth Ibn Sad that when they were asked about the ayat and the ahadith that are mutashabihat, they said: "Accept them as they came without applying a 'how' to them." This is because if one asked the question 'how?' the answer would be, 'Like this or that.'
As for ta'weel then we say it is permissible and yes some of the salaf did make ta'weel: and I am not going to re-iterate what has already been posted on this forum. But some of them include: Abdullah ibn abbas (which has an entire thread dedicated to it), imam hasan al-basri (as mentioned by hafidth abdur rahman ibn jawzi), imam sufyan al-thawri (as mentioned by imam juwayni in his kitab irshad), imam ahmad ibn hanbal (as mentioned by hafidth bayhaqi in his asma was sifaat –if im still right about the book) imam bukhari (in his saheeh) etc. As for what was being discussed about imam tirmidhi and his ta’weel on a specific hadeeth namely:

He interpreted the following hadeeth in his Kitab Jami (vol.5, pp. 376-377, no. 3298, under Kitab Tafsir al Qur'an, as edited by the "Salafi" - Ahmad Shakir) narrated:

والذي نفس محمد بيده لو أنكم دليتم بحبل إلى الأرض السفلى لهبط على الله

Which means: "By Him in whose yadd Muhammad's soul is, if you were to drop a rope to the lowest ard (land/earth), it would descend upon Allah."

Imam Tirmidhi said it means:

فقالوا : إنما هبط على علم الله

Verily it would descend upon the knowledge of Allah.

(brother abul hasan has cited the full narration on the first page of the thread).

The narration cited above can be looked at in many angles since taking if the so-called salafiyyah believe that Allah is in the heavens in person then what would this imply, that the rope hits or lands on Allah? And if they give taweel to this, then they should know that ibn taymiya (their shaykh) called imam tirmidhi a jahmee for doing taweel to this hadeeth. Ibn taymiya called imam tirmidhi a jahmi in his risala arshiyyah for not taking the literal interpretation:

الرسالة العرشية
فَإِنَّ التِّرْمِذِيَّ لَمَّا رَوَاهُ قَالَ : وَفَسَّرَهُ بَعْضُ أَهْلِ الْحَدِيثِ بِأَنَّهُ هَبَطَ عَلَى عِلْمِ اللَّهِ وَبَعْضُ الْحُلُولِيَّةِ والاتحادية يَظُنُّ أَنَّ فِي هَذَا الْحَدِيثِ مَا يَدُلُّ عَلَى قَوْلِهِمْ الْبَاطِلِ ؛ وَهُوَ أَنَّهُ حَالٌّ بِذَاتِهِ فِي كُلِّ مَكَانٍ وَأَنَّ وُجُودَهُ وُجُودُ الْأَمْكِنَةِ وَنَحْوُ ذَلِكَ . وَالتَّحْقِيقُ : أَنَّ الْحَدِيثَ لَا يَدُلُّ عَلَى شَيْءٍ مِنْ ذَلِكَ إنْ كَانَ ثَابِتًا فَإِنَّ قَوْلَهُ : { لَوْ أَدْلَى بِحَبْلِ لَهَبَطَ } يَدُلُّ عَلَى أَنَّهُ لَيْسَ فِي الْمُدْلِي وَلَا فِي الْحَبْلِ وَلَا فِي الدَّلْوِ وَلَا فِي غَيْرِ ذَلِكَ وَأَنَّهَا تَقْتَضِي أَنَّهُ مِنْ تِلْكَ النَّاحِيَةِ ؛ وَكَذَلِكَ تَأْوِيلُهُ بِالْعِلْمِ تَأْوِيلٌ ظَاهِرُ الْفَسَادِ مَنْ جِنْسِ تَأْوِيلَاتِ الجهمية

"It is manifest depravity (zahir al fassad) from the sort of figurative interpretation's (Ta'wilat) of the Jahmiyya..." (as mentioned by abul hasan in the post above).

As for your claim and mixing up the jahmiyyah sect with the ashari (Allah preserve them) then you are mistaken. If the ulema have accepted true tafweed as their method then alhamdulillah. No one states that they have committed tashbeeh. It seems to me that people are ignorant of how the ashari’s approach the ayaat. Since its tafweed which is afdal than ta’weel. (ive said this many times in this forum before).

As for there being slight differences amongst the ashari imams then that doesn’t mean that they have left the ashari school and gone on to another band wagon. Rather its intellectual honesty. Showing a list on that ahya forum of a few people becoming so-called salafi’s then what I state is this: the prophet said with his blessed tongue that it will be a time of confusion, so for me that’s clear and does that supposed to make me shake, alhamdulillah. What imam nawawi said about the issue of tafweed and ta’weel was clear cut. (And abu bakr your reasoning I wouldn’t even waste time with, I ask you why is it that you make reference to a handful of hanabali scholars which have or had issues with creedal matters? [and just to add imam dhahabi was more of a shafi who changed many of his positions] What about the malaki, hanafi and the shafi’s?). To further comment since we have fans of the innovator ibn uthaymeen, in his sharh to riyad us saliheen confirms that imam nawawi and ibn hajr where in fact ashari’s im stating this because some of the so-called salafiyyah state that they weren’t.

The question should be asked, is imam tirmidhi a jahmi or not? What I have heard is that imam tirmidhi statement about the issue of ta’weel was a general one and what substantiates that is that imam tirmidhi himself resorted to it at times, as the example shown above. There are also other instances in which imam tirmidhi tries to explain certain ahadeeth. In addition I am trying to get my hands on a certain sharh to imam tirmidhi’s jami which I am finding hard to obtain.

Also don’t forget the questions asked to ibn abi yala

Brother abul hasan your right the thread should stay to the topic and not digress. as for the ayn issue they have no qati nusoos what so ever and they will use kalaam etc they even know that, but are over ardent to admit it! and tend to digress the issue to qadim etc!

And Allah truly knows best and all mistakes are from me!

Wassalaamu alaikum

[muslim786]

and to muslim 786 i dont follow any one particular imam for exmaple i dnt follow everything what imam ibn taymiyah or imam albani say. if there saying is in accordance wiht quran and sunnah then i follow them howver when their saying contradicts the quran and the sunnah then i dont folow them. and another question why dont u asharis follow imam abu hanifah when it comes to the attributes of allah swt.
You people seem to find many flaws in Imam Al Azam Abu Hanifa, of course non of these are actual flaws just an example of the ignorance and stupidity of some. So if you can find flaws in such a great man of the Salaf, what about mr albani and mr ibn tamiyyya, how comes you do not readily point out there flaws but are more than quick to denounce many of the salaf? Or is that you think these two men are greating than the salaf?
Can you please give examples of places where mr albani and mr tamiyya in your view went against quran and sunnah, if you cant for these two what makes u have the ability to denounce many of the ulama of the salaf, which by your own admittance were much better.
May Allah SWT guide us all and stop people doing making fools of themselves by following desidents in Islam. Also stop this anthromorphistic aqeedah of the wahabis who borrowed it no doubt from christains. This is the worse from of shirk ever to compare Allah SWT to his creation.
Allso InshAllah Allah SWT will give you the ability inshAllah to show some proper respect to the salafi and prefer them ove dissidents who came centuries later.

[faqir]

brother as far as imma nawawis saying regarding tawil is concerned then there is no proof for his statement.


:salam:

Akhi, what do you mean there is no proof? No proof of the ta'wil of the Salaf? Sidi, please read through the various examples of ta'wil of the salaf provided in the following thread:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4030

InshaAllah it will clear up this misconception.



no doubt imam nawawi was a great scholar but that doesnt mean he was infallible.

No doubt. We believe that none other than the Anbiya are free from sin.



this is the beauty of salafiyyah whenever a saying is in contradiction to the quran and sunnah then we leave that saying.

I am yet to see this ;)




ive got question for u why do u follow the saying of imam nawawi why dont you follow what imam dhabhi, imma ibn rajab and imma ibn qudamah and what the majority of the scolars say on this topic.


I do follow what the majority of scholars say on this topic. :) Namely, that whilst absolute tafwid is superior, ta'wil may on occasion be needed to refute the innovators - and this is confirmed from the sahaba , salaf and the majority of Ulema of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah through the ages.

[see link above for proof of the ta'wil of the Sahaba, salaf]

By the way, you mention Ibn Qudamah [RH] [as he is convenient to quote for you given his statements on ta'wil], but do you ascribe to his position on Tafwid al-Ma'na [for which he is criticised by some of the "Salafi" theologians] as well?

Or do the following words of Imam Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Jawzi in his Daf shubah al-tashbih bi akaff al-tanzih apply to you?

If you had said, "We but read the hadiths and remain silent," no one would have condemned you. What is shameful is that you interpret them literally. Do not surrreptiously introduce into the madhhab of this righteous, early Muslim man [Ahmad ibn Hanbal] that which is not of it. You have clothed this madhhab in shameful disgrace, until it can hardly be said "Hanbali" any more without saying anthropomorphist"

And Allah knows best.

Please forgive my mistakes.

Wasalam.

[ibn ajiba]

bismillah Al-Rahman Al-Raheem

assalam alaikum wa rahmatullah.

the following question is a tangent to the main thread. please forgive my ignorance when (you’re) answering:

said brother abu bakr (post #33):

“and to muslim 786 i dont follow any one particular imam for exmaple i dnt follow everything what imam ibn taymiyah or imam albani say. if there saying is in accordance wiht quran and sunnah then i follow them howver when their saying contradicts the quran and the sunnah then i dont folow them.”

forgive me akhi, the above statement always confuses me. how do you determine whether the particular saying of an imam is or isn’t in accordance with the Book & Sunna? the way you have phrased it implies that on one hand you have the statements of the imams and on the other you have the Book & Sunna. as if the Qur’an and Sunna themselves impart their meanings in the absence of imams. how exactly do you assess if the sayings of imams are *in accordance* with the Qur’an and Sunna? what does it mean to be in accord? surely what you mean is that you measure the saying of one (set of) imam(s) against the (understanding of) the Qur’an and Sunna (by another (set of) imam(s))? in other words, there is no independent comprehension of the Book & Sunna which exists devoid of the insight of fallible humans (in this case the imams of the sciences which are prerequisite for understanding the Book of Allah tabarak wa ta’ala and the Sunna). because at the end of the day the Qur’an comprises words, and the Sunna comprises words/deeds and consent, and the meaning of both sources is derived by ‘Ulema. the meanings of the Qur’an and Sunna are always inferred, even from implications which may exist in either/both. yet the way your phrasing is, makes it seem as if you think there is some monolithic meaning attached to the Kitab & Sunna which has no link to human comprehension, and therefore you can measure any fallible human’s understanding against two infallible sources. correct me if i am wrong, but this seems like a clear contradiction of a tautology, which is why your words intrigue, and confuse me. especially since oftentimes the meaning which is understood from the Qur’an and Sunna is probable, not certain, which by definition means you cannot attribute that understanding definitively. of course, where/when the meaning is taken to be qat’i [definitive/conclusive] then there is left no room for ikhtilaf [difference of opinion]. but that is not the point i’m contending here.

an example:

Shaykh al-Albani makes a statement, which you feel contradicts the Book & Sunna. but this sense of contradiction which you have, ultimately comes from some understanding of the texts that you have based on what some other scholar has related to you. that, or, from your own reading/comprehension of the texts. either way, you are referring to *someones* understanding; your own, or anothers. but never is it a measure independent of that, such that you can say you are measuring the saying of Shaykh al-Albani against the Book & Sunna. what is more correct is that you are measuring his saying, against the understanding of someone else, and you feel that the latter’s understanding preponderates.

is that a fair summation of what you mean?

otherwise i struggle to understand the logic in what you have said, and would be grateful if you could elaborate. i ask that genuinely, not with intention of kickstarting some polemic. so please be gentle in your reply when explaining, as i have taken care not to attack or insult, that we may preserve our adab with one another.

tabarak’Allah in anticipation,

ibn ajiba

[Ibn_Abi_Yala]

al-Salamu 'Alaikum wa-Rahmatullahi,

Dear moderator,

If what you've said is applied to all of us, I would never have posted elsewhere in the first place.

I suggest therefore that the "Shata'im al-Ghuzayli" should have also been removed, because comparing the quality and quantity of both reports I gave at least the benefit of quoting one of the classical creeds of early Islam, with an clarification of who "al-Tirmidhi" is.

Should you, brother, not be consequent and delete 'the bit about personal insult' also from the post of Abul Hasan? Or does that not qualify under the rubric of 'Disturbing language'...

..Its in fact coming from the same author! So would you, please, clarify that point, or else tolerate what I've written in full for what another has cleverly 'cut & passed' to make apoint that's not relevant.

As for my remaining here: you should know that disturbing language can be find here and there in many posts of Abul Hasan and others who disagree with me. But I do not tolerate, rather I respond, whoever attacks the scholars of early Islam, let alone the Sunnah of the Prophet and that of the Salaf.

So, Mr. Moderator, it would be better if you review your respond to me, and consider what I've said. Its not the first time that I've been 'rebuked' or 'warned' for something others already have done, indeed tolerated by you. So in all fairness - let us all be fair.

wa-Salamu 'alaikum [and to Abul Hasan: wa-Salam 'ala man ittaba' al-huda as he likes it]

PS:
JazakAllah al-Khair.

al-Salamu 'Alaikum,

I would appreciate a response.

wa-Salamu 'Alaikum wa 'ala man Ittaba'a al-Huda

[Abul Hasan]

The question should be asked, is imam tirmidhi a jahmi or not? What I have heard is that imam tirmidhi statement about the issue of ta’weel was a general one and what substantiates that is that imam tirmidhi himself resorted to it at times, as the example shown above. There are also other instances in which imam tirmidhi tries to explain certain ahadeeth. In addition I am trying to get my hands on a certain sharh to imam tirmidhi’s jami which I am finding hard to obtain.

Also don’t forget the questions asked to ibn abi yala




:salam:

You have hit the nail on the head Brother! This is what the claimants to the Salaf, the one's who think they are on the way of Imam al-Tirmidhi are clearly avoiding to answer! Those who can see the beginning of this thread can clearly see that Ibn Taymiyya attacked Imam al-Tirmidhi and implied he was on the Way of the Jahmiyya for making Ta'wil on one narration!

Then they divert away completely from this devastating point which destroys their whole manhaj which claims that no one from the pious Sunni Salaf ever made Ta'wil of the Sifat!! They blind their senses by avoiding a response to ibn Taymiyya's attack on Imam al-Tirmidhi, as they are fanatically attatched to him; and in attempting to feign this, they bring in another statement from Imam al-Tirmidhi on not doing Ta'wil! As i said before - this is the way they create diversions to save their blackened faces. But in reality they fall deeper into the pit of ignorance and arrogance.

They forget to mention or not know of the other narrations where Imam al-Tirmidhi demonstrated his views on Ta'wil connected to other Ahadith! This will be shown Insha'Allah in my radd on Abu Alqama who i recall is known as Hassan Ali Khan (let him correct me if I am wrong), originally from Pakistan, and now based probably in France...

And yes Brother, they have had weeks to answer those 3 simple questions - they are all avoiding the answer to these at Ahwa and over here. Then they have the gaul to call us liars, cowards, terrified to answer the likes of Ibn Abi Yala... blah blah blah...

I am working in my spare time to compile answers with Allahs' help alone, so let us pray patiently to seek the Wajh of Allah alone, and not brag with puerility like the Mukhallifin. We are not here to point score but to achieve what is closest to the Haqq, even if it means we need to go back on mistakes. This is the way of the pious Salaf, unlike the Hashwiyya from the Mushabbiha.


Wassalam

Abul Hasan

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

Where did the salaf do Taweel of Saaq ?

Taweel is denying real meaning to turn to metaphorical

Where did Ibn Abbas and others denied Allah having a Qadam or having a Qadam is tashbeeh ?


see from some stuff posted on Ahya by a brother

Then the aayah mentions the saaq (shin) which is one of the Attributes of Allaah - the Most High - This is clearly seen from the hadeeth of Abu Sa'eed al-Khudree[26] in which there occurs: "...Then the Almighty will come to them in a form other than that which they saw the first time, and He will say "I am your Lord" and they will say:"You are not our Lord". And none will speak to Him but the Prophets, and it will be said to them: "Do you know of any sign by which you can recognise Him?" They will say: "The shin (saaq)", so then Allaah will uncover His shin and every believer will prostrate to Him..."

And with regard to the aforementioned claim about the saying of Ibn Abbaas - may Allaah be pleased with him - about the aayah: "It is the Day of Resurrection, a day of grief and calamity" reported with various chains from him by at-Tabaree in his tafseer, the Ash'ariyyah say that this is a case of ta'weel.

This is however not the case since as is pointed out by Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah and mentioned by Shaikhs Muhammad Jameel Zainoo and Bakr ibn Abdullaah Aboo Zayd - the Salaf have two different sayings about this aayah:

a) Those who say that it is not an aayah relating to Allaah's attributes, but is rather a description of the Day of Judgement and its being a day of grief and calamity - as is reported from Ibn Abbaas.
This is based on the fact that the aayah does not clearly state the 'saaq' as being Allaah's saaq (shin) and that in the Arabic language this phrase can be used to express the severity of a situation as in the saying: 'Shaalat al-harbu an saaqin', meaning - the war has raised up its terrors and harshness.
So since the aayah did not unequivocally declare this as being an Attribute of Allaah - some of the Salaf did not understand it to be an aayah describing one of His Attributes, which is why we find Ibn Abbaas [if the narrations are authentic from him][27] explaining it according to the language.

Therefore this is not case of someone taking an established Attribute of Allaah, such as, for example His yad (hand) and interpreting it with ta'weel to mean something different eg. His Power which is what the Ash'ariyyah do and seek support with this saying of Ibn Abbaas - may Allaah be pleased with him. So there is no proof for them in this.

Furthermore:

b) The correct saying as pointed out by Ibn Taymiyyah and others from the Salaf, including Abu Sa'eed al-Khudree who say that this aayah is an aayah relating to Allaah's Attributes. The proof for this is the hadeeth of Abu Sa'eed al-Khudree - may Allaah be pleased with him - where the 'saaq' is also mentioned, except that here it is clearly shown to be an Attribute of Allaah - (fayakshifu an saaqihi) - "so Allaah will uncover His Shin". So it is possible that this hadeeth did not reach Ibn Abbaas - just as the ruling that the grandmothers inherit did not reach Abu Bakr - may Allaah be pleased with him - and so on, and if it had reached him then he would have explained the aayah according to it.

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

Also the claim for this Ayat has been answered

No Salaf denied that Allah has real Hands, Taweel is to deny reral meaning, where did they deny Allah having Hands ?

And we constructed the Heaven with power (bi aidin)... [Dhaariyaat 51:47]

The tafseer of Tabaree and the reports that Nuh Keller quotes from the Salaf explain 'aidin' to mean 'power' which is what it indeed does mean and it can be found in any dictionary under alif yaa daa. Nor is there any contradiction between it and between aayaat affirming Allaahs Hands (aidee and yadaan)

Do they not see that We have created for them of what Our Hands (aideena) have created... [Soorah Yaa Seen 36:71]

Nay, both His Hands (yadaahu) are outstretched [Soorah Maa'idah 5:64]

So from the mistake of the Ash'ariyyah is that they also declare that Allaah's Hand (yad) has to be explained to mean his Power!! So then what about His Two Hands?! Two powers?!

Furthermore, this is rebutted by the aayah where it is mentioned that Allaah created Adam with His Two Hands. Abu Hasan al-Ash'aree stated in his Maqaalaat: "...And that He has Two Hands without asking how, just as He has said:

(Allaah said): O Iblees! What prevents you from prostrating yourself to one whom I have created with My Two Hands?" [Soorah Sa'd 38:75]

And also, the hadeeth of intercession where Aadam is being addressed as the one whom Allaah created with His Hand[22]. And likewise the hadeeth wherein it is mentioned that: "On the Day of Resurrection, Allaah will grasp the (whole planet of) Earth by His Hand all the heavens in His Right, and then He will say: I am the King".[23]

But from the mistake of Nuh Keller, he translated the aayah in question as: "And the sky, We have built with Hands, verily We outspread it."

Translating 'aidin' as 'Hands' instead of 'power' (which is what it actually means in this verse) enabling himself thereby, to justify his falsehood that the Salaf have done ta'weel of this aayah because they explain it to mean 'with power' and by claiming that at-Tabaree has ascribed this figurative explanation (ta'weel) to Ibn Abbaas, Qataadah, Mansoor ibn Zadaana and Sufyaan ath-Thawree - free and innocent are they from denying Hands of Allah

He is obviously ignorant or feigning ignorance of the fact that 'aidin' in the language has the meaning of 'power' and that this is the natural explanation given, which is devoid of any ta'weel, and which at-Tabaree has quoted from the Salaf.

[Abul Hasan]

Abu Taymiyah, have some patience - i have already said here that please let us not digress to other questions if it is not related to this thread directly. Why not take this question you posted to the thread started by Br. Faqir on Ta'wil of the Sahaba? Answers are in the pipeline...

I note the name of Jamil Zainu above - do you know he has been refuted by Shaykh Muhammad Kayyali from Egypt in a book printed in excess of 590 pages! Do you want me to scan the cover? If so then i'll put it up on the Ta'wil section.

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

About the Kursee, the saying of it is knoledge is weak, see Majmu fatawa vol 6 p 584 and Silsilah Sageehah n 109

and opposing saheeh tafseer of ibn Abbas that it is Mawdi'ul Qadamayni, which is narrated by Ibn Ahmad in Sunnah 586, ibn Abi Shaybah in Al Arsh n 61, ibn Khuzaymah in his Tawheed p 248 and Hakeem in Mustadrak vol 2 : 282, who said saheeh according to conditions of Bukhari and Muslim and Imam Dhahabi agreed as well as Albani in his Mukhtasar al uluw p 45

So this weak narration opposes what is saheeh from the Imam

Also how can the Kursi be knowledge while there is a saheeh hadeeth : The 7 heavens and the 7 earths by the side of ther Kursee are naught but as a ring thrown down in a desert land and such is al Kursee with respect to the 'Arsh"

Narrated by Ibn Abee Shaybah Al Asrh 58, and Bayhaqee Al Asma wa Sifat p 862

So we see it can never be Ilm, it is real as Arsh

As for the madhab of the Salaf, there are clear sayings

Qaadee Abu Ya’laa (d. 458H) said: "The proof for the futility of ta’weel is that the Sahaabah, 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…" Ibtaal ut-Ta’weelaat li-Akhbaar is-Sifaat (p.21 - manuscript form)

In At-Tamheed (7/145) of Ibn Abdul Barr (d. 463H) : "Ahl us-Sunnah are agreed in affirming all the Sifaat (Attributes of Allaah) which are related in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, having eemaan (faith) in them and understanding them alal-haqeeqah (in a real sense) not alal-majaaz (metaphorically). How they are is not to be asked. However, the Jahmiyyah, the Mu’tazilah, and the Khawaarij all deny them and do not carry them alal-haqeeqah; claiming that whoever affirms them has made tashbeeh (resemblance), and they claim that whoever recites them (as they are) is a mushabbih (a person doing tashbeeh)."

also Dhamm ut-Ta’weel of Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdisee (p.11) :

"The way of the Salaf is to have eemaan (faith) in the Names and Attributes of Allaah that He has described Himself with in His Revelation, or upon the tongue of His Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) - without increasing nor decreasing in it, nor exceeding the limits, nor explaining them (i.e. like the Mu’tazilah), nor making ta’weel of them in a way that opposes the dhaahir (apparent) meaning."

[abu bakr]

brother what are your three questions perhaps you can remind us??

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

Imam Baghawee said in Sharhu Sunnah vol 1 p 168 and after and quoted from imam Dhahabee in his Mu'jam Al Lateef n 66: " The Finger is an attribute from among attributes of Allahm and likewise everything of this nature that occurs in the Book and the Sunnah, for example the Face ( wajh), Eye ( ayn), Hand ( Yad) Leg ( Rijl), Coming ( Ityan and Majee) and the descent to rthe lowest heaven, his rising over his Throne, Laughter ( Dahak), Joy ( Farh)..so these and their likes are attributes of Allah in which it is obligatory to have faith in, and to leave them ipon their litteral meanings turning away from taweel and disatncing from Tashbeehm with the belief that none of the attributes of Allah resemble anything from from the attributes of the creation...And it was upon this the Salaf of this nation and the scholars of the Sunnah were uponm they accepted them all with faith and stayed away from tamtheel and Taweel"

So here is the affimation of Eyes to Allah

Why would Salag belief in Hands and deny Eyes ?

Is not the rule the same for all attributes ?

If they were to forbid Taweel, then why changing rule for this ?

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

By the way Abul Hassan, I know it is not related to the topic

but what is your opinion on breilwis ?

Is it true you met GF Haddad, while he believes in Hadheer and Nadheer ? Did you read some books of Maulana Sarfraz Safdar Khan on bralwi like Izalatu rayb and others ?

Do you aknowledge Saqqaf did revile some Sahabah ?

If yes, then is he still a sunni scholar for you ?

I know you are preparing an asnwer to imam Tirmidhi saying, and trying to explain why he said the taweel of hands to mean power is the saying of Jahmiyah

And how Ashairah share this with Jahmiyah

But If you could also put saying of Mulla Qari and Ibn Abideen with it

Also if you have time the belief of Imam Tahawi on Anger of Allah and not making Taweel of it, while Ahsaree make Taweel of it.

As for people who do not understand the position of ibn Taymiyah and Salafee, they are lover of the Sunnah,

Ibn Taymiyah has wrote many risalah about no saheeh hadeeth being against Qias. he broughyt many Risalah on the Hujjah and ilm Yaqeen of Khabar Ahad, he answered christians, Rawafid, batinis, people of Mantiq, different other innovators, he even participated in Jihad against tatars

So some people should have respect when talking about this Hero of Islam

Salafee love the Sunnah, they will never say Daleel and Haqq are with someone else but we will still follow our Imam

Imam Mubarakpuree is the Lion of the Sunnah, people who in a hostile place, published the Sunnah, taught Saheeh Ahadeeth to people

Who is better than someone who spends his life teaching the saying of the Last Prophet saw.

May Allah give us Tawfeeq to love the Sunnah and prefer it over saying of scholars

[Abul Hasan]

salam aleykum

By the way Abul Hassan, I know it is not related to the topic

but what is your opinion on breilwis ?

Is it true you met GF Haddad, while he believes in Hadheer and Nadheer ? Did you read some books of Maulana Sarfraz Safdar Khan on bralwi like Izalatu rayb and others ?

Do you aknowledge Saqqaf did revile some Sahabah ?

If yes, then is he still a sunni scholar for you ?

I know you are preparing an asnwer to imam Tirmidhi saying, and trying to explain why he said the taweel of hands to mean power is the saying of Jahmiyah

And how Ashairah share this with Jahmiyah

But If you could also put saying of Mulla Qari and Ibn Abideen with it

Also if you have time the belief of Imam Tahawi on Anger of Allah and not making Taweel of it, while Ahsaree make Taweel of it.

As for people who do not understand the position of ibn Taymiyah and Salafee, they are lover of the Sunnah,

Ibn Taymiyah has wrote many risalah about no saheeh hadeeth being against Qias. he broughyt many Risalah on the Hujjah and ilm Yaqeen of Khabar Ahad, he answered christians, Rawafid, batinis, people of Mantiq, different other innovators, he even participated in Jihad against tatars

So some people should have respect when talking about this Hero of Islam

Salafee love the Sunnah, they will never say Daleel and Haqq are with someone else but we will still follow our Imam

Imam Mubarakpuree is the Lion of the Sunnah, people who in a hostile place, published the Sunnah, taught Saheeh Ahadeeth to people

Who is better than someone who spends his life teaching the saying of the Last Prophet saw.

May Allah give us Tawfeeq to love the Sunnah and prefer it over saying of scholars

OK, again this is off the main topic and i see you didn't take heed of the Nasiha on not to post other points related to Aqeeda on this thread when it is not connected to the main title of the thread i started back in December 2004.

Anyway, i know what you are trying to say about meeting Dr GF Haddad. Let me say on oath to the World - that I know Dr GF Haddad was in the UK recently - But i did not meet him or speak to him in anyway whatsoever when he was recently here - so your colleague: Zulfiqaar Ali - the one who thinks Qadiyani's are better than Barelwi's is spreading lies from his so called trustworthy friends! Will he be honourable enough to retract this vicious lie?!

As for Dr GF Haddad, we quote him on points where there is no major conflict amongst Sunni's and he is generally meticulous in his claims. He is a man and he can make mistakes, so may Allah reward him for the good and forgive him for what errors may have appeared, and Allah knows best. As for the lie that we have exchanged Ijazah's - or vice versa - where do such lies emanate from? All I know is that DR GF Haddad and I have Ijazah's from some common teachers in the arab lands...

Secondly, I have never read any book by Shaykh Safdar Khan, nor met him or know much about him. He is a major Deobandi Shaykh, while I personally do not classify myself as an ardent Deobandi or Barelwi, but merely a Sunni in aqeeda, Hanafi in Madhhab, nor do i have Bay'a to any Sufi tariqa for that matter - so let the liars take note of their calumniations.

As for Hasan al-Saqqaf - then you should read what was said in my short article on AR Qadri and ibn Abi Yala some 3 weeks ago (see here to download it along with other useful articles i've put out to date:
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/profile.php?do=editattachments )

As for Ibn Taymiyya, we consider him a scholar who fell into great deviation, and I have proof that even the great Hanbali Sufi: Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali departed from the Way of ibn Taymiyya! This is the same ibn Rajab who took from Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya. As for al-Mubarakpuri, he was an enemy to all Ahnaf in the Indian subcontinent. His attacks are unjust at times and there are indirect replies to his as well as his friend: Shamsul Haqq Azimabadi - by the Hanafi Muhaddithin like:

Imam Muhammad al-Nimawi in his Athar al-Sunan, Ta'liq al-Hasan, Ta'liq al-Ta'liq, his Risala on Taqlid..

Shaykh Anwar Shah al-Kashmiri - (who was praised by the "Salafi" - Rashid Rida) - in his Fayd al-Bari and his Sharh on Tirmidhi and his follow upto al-Nimawi's Athar al-Sunan

Shaykh Khalil Ahmad in his Badhlul majhud fi Hall Sunan Abu Dawud (i have a copy printed in 20 volumes)

Shaykh Muhammad Zakariyya in his Sharh on Muwatta known as Awjaz al-Masalik (i have a copy in 15 volumes)

Shaykh Muhammad Yusuf al-Binuri's Sharh on al-Tirmidhi known as Ma'arif al-Sunan in 6 incomplete volumes

Shaykh Zafar Ahmad al-Uthmani in his 18 volume I'la al-Sunan (which provides major proofs for Hanafi positions)

and other works...

[faqir]

:salam:

Abu Taymiyyah, the article by Abu Rumaysah you have cut and pasted various excerpts from has been addressed already here:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4030

In it you will find information as to the correct meaning of ta'wil a refutation of the weakening of various narrations by Abu Rumaysah and various examples of the ta'wil of the Sahaba and the salaf.

No need to repeat all the nonsense in Abu Rumaysah's article in this thread as well!

[samrqandi]

Assalaamu^alaikum


You have hit the nail on the head Brother! This is what the claimants to the Salaf, the one's who think they are on the way of Imam al-Tirmidhi are clearly avoiding to answer! Those who can see the beginning of this thread can clearly see that Ibn Taymiyya attacked Imam al-Tirmidhi and implied he was on the Way of the Jahmiyya for making Ta'wil on one narration!

Alhamdulillah brother that’s the thing about these people they are the claimants to haqq when in reality they side line the real issue at hand!

So is Imam Tirmidhi al-hafidth (the student of Imam al-Bukhari) the compiler of al-Jami condsidered a jahmi or not?

Ibn abi yala was asked the following questions:

i) What is the Salafi [or your] position on one who says that the ayat: Kullu shayin halikun illa wajhuh: Everything shall perish except His face, means: Illa Mulkuhu: Except His Dominion. Is such a man a Jahmi Muattil or a Mubtadi Muawwil whose aqeedah should never be taken from?

ii) What is the Salafi position on one who says that Kursi of Allah means His Ilm (knowledge)?! is he a Jahmi Muattil or Mubtadi Muawwil?

iii) What is the Salafi position on someone who tampers with a Hadith in the Musnad of Imam Ahmad - in order to spread his aqeeda?

[AbuTaymiyah]

off-topic

[faqir]

^ snore

[AbuTaymiyah]

off-topic

[samrqandi]

assalaamu^alaikum

Abu taymiya the question is about Imam Tirmidhi, and you wanted to see the other three questions, and what kind of answer did you give?

You did exactly what that other chap did from the issue of ayn he went to qadeem, stay to one issue at a time

Whats the issue of taraweeh got to do with this?

I will remain silent

[AbuTaymiyah]

off-topic

[AbuTaymiyah]

off-topic

[Ibn_Abi_Yala]

al-Salamu 'Alaikum,

I would appreciate a response.

wa-Salamu 'Alaikum wa 'ala man Ittaba'a al-Huda

It seems there's no response.. I now realize how you work here. It wouldn't surpise me that those involved in the differences we have are themselves the moderators - seeing how they handled AbuTaymiyyah,

Hasbiya Allah wa ni'ma al-wakil

[samrqandi]

assalaamu^alaikum

what the admin did was good, people should stick to the topic, why not start a new thread if there is an issue how hard is it! and what was being discussed here was clear. He wanted the questions and he even got them as well.

[abu bakr]

i think the admin should have moved bro abu tyamiyahs posts into the relevant threads rather than deleting them altogether.

[Live for Islam]

It seems there's no response.. I now realize how you work here. It wouldn't surpise me that those involved in the differences we have are themselves the moderators - seeing how they handled AbuTaymiyyah,

Hasbiya Allah wa ni'ma al-wakil

Please utilise the 'Report bad post' feature (found next to each and every post), it's there for a reason. Our new 'report tracking' (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5026) means you can see how the moderators have dealt with the reported post or what they are doing about it.

The above goes for all SF members.

Jazakallahu khair.