Ibn Qudama al-Hanbali the Mufawwid and todays Pseuo-Salafiyya

[Abul Hasan]

Assalamu alaikum

Bismillah was-salatu was salamu ala Ashraf al-Anbiya

Amma ba’d:

In continuation to the thread created by the hand of Br. Faqir:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5349

I wish to present some concrete evidence from the pens of the pseudo-Salafi Shuyukh of this age that the Hanbali faqih: Muwaffaqud-Din Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH), though he was anti-Ash'ari in certain creedal respects, nevertheless held to the belief like the Ash’ari’s and Maturidi's, that the best way to affirm the Attributes of Allah is by:

Consigning the Meaning (Tafweed al-Ma'nawiyya) and Consigning the How-ness of the Sifat (Tafweed al-Kayfiyya) to Allah alone. This is also known as the doctrine of Bila Kayf wala Ma’na: Without describing the How of it or delving into its meaning when related to the Sifat of Allah ta’ala. By definition the one who adheres to this methodology is thus known as a Mufawwid on the Sifat of Allah.

Ibn Qudama was also vehemently anti-Ta'wil, though his contemporary Hanbali: Ibn al-Jawzi, who was more greater in overall rank as an accomplished scholar took the line that Ta'wil of the Sifat when called for has a basis in the way of the Salaf and classical Arabic language. Ibn al Jawzi's line has close resemblance to some of the Asha'ira in this respect.

This is not the topic at hand today, as the issue of Ta'wil has also been analysed in more detail on this forum and Insha'Allah I will mention more when time allows.

The following attachment contains crystal clear evidence from a recent pseudo-Salafi work i acquired printed under the title:

"Fundamentals of the Salafee Methodology: An Islaamic Manual for Reform" ascribed to the late Nasir al-Albani with numerous footnotes.

On p. 57 of this work, there is a long footnote which affirms a fact known to us for some time now, that Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi al-Hanbali, affirmed, like many of the Asha'ira/Maturidiyya, that Tafweed of the Meaning of the Attributes of Allah was His Way in Aqeeda. I have highlighted the crucial points and the names of those who attacked him in denying that this was the way of the Salaf!

Ibn Qudama in his al-Luma al-I’tiqad said:


وكل ما جاء في القرآن أو صح عن المصطفى عليه السلام صفات الرحمن وجب الإيمان به وتلقيه بالتسليم والقبول وترك التعرض له بالرد والتأويل والتشبيه والتمثيل وما أشكل من ذلك وجب إثباته لفظا وترك التعرض لمعناه ونرد علمه إلى قائله ونجعل عهدته على ناقله اتباعا لطريق الراسخين في العلم الذين أثنى الله عليهم في كتابه المبين بقوله سبحانه وتعالى ( والراسخون في العلم يقولون آمنا به كل من عند ربنا) آل عمران 7 وقال في ذم مبتغي التأويل لمتشابه تنزيله فأما الذين في قلوبهم زيغ فيتبعون ما تشابه منه ابتغاء الفتنة وابتغاء تأويله وما يعلم تأويله إلا الله ) آل عمران 7 فجعل ابتغاء التأويل علامة على الزيغ وقرنه بابتغاء الفتنة في الذم ثم حجبهم عما أملوه وقطع أطماعهم عما قصدوه بقوله سبحانه وما يعلم تأويله إلا الله .

قال الإمام أبو عبد الله أحمد بن محمد بن حنبل رضي الله عنه في قول النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إن الله ينزل الى سماء الدنيا و إن الله يرى في القيامة وما أشبه هذه الأحاديث نؤمن بها ونصدق بها لا كيف ولا معنى ولا نرد شيئا منها ونعلم أن ما جاء به الرسول حق ولا نرد على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ولا نصف الله بأكثر مما وصف به نفسه بلا حد ولا غاية (ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصير) الشورى 11 ونقول كما قال ونصفه بما وصف به نفسه لا نتعدى ذلك ولا يبلغه وصف الواصفين نؤمن بالقرآن كله محكمه ومتشابهه ولا نزيل عنه صفة من صفاته لشناعة شنعت ولا نتعدى القرآن والحديث ولا نعلم كيف كنه ذلك إلا بتصديق الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم وتثبيت القرآن .

Ali al-Timimi (a pseudo-Salafi awaiting full imprisonment currently) from the USA gave a lesson on ibn Qudama’s Luma a few years ago at al-Muntada al-Islami (London), and this is how he translated the points (as in the Arabic above) which prove that Ibn Qudama affirmed the reality of Tafweed al-Ma’nawiyya:

------------
All what is mentioned in the Qur'an or is authentically reported upon "the Chosen One" (al-Mustafa) - 'alayhis-salam - from among the attributes of al-Rahman, it is incumbent :

to believe in [that report]

to receive it with submission and acceptance

and to forsake resisting it by (i) rejection, (ii) allegorically interpretation (at-ta'wil, or by resembling (at-tashbih) or likening (at-tamthil) [the attribute to that of His creation].

Whatever of [these reports that we find] difficult [to comprehend] it is required to affirm its wording and to forsake delving into its meaning. We [rather] entrust knowledge of its reality to He who has spoken it and we place the responsibility [of our faith in it] upon he who transmitted it. Thereby following the way of those firmly grounded in knowledge whom Allah has praised in His Clear Scripture by His statement - subhanahu wa ta'ala, "And those firmly rooted in knowledge say, `We believe in it; all is from our Lord."' (3:7) While He has said in condemnation of those who seek the interpretation (at-ta'wil) of the ambiguous (mutashabih) of His revelation: "As for those in whose hearts is swerving, they follow the ambiguous part, desiring dissension, and desiring its interpretation; and none knows its interpretation, save only Allah." So He made seeking its interpretation an indication of perversity [of the heart] and He linked it in its condemnation with seeking dissension (fitna). He then veiled them from that which they sought and He cut off their hope [of ever reaching that] by His statement - subhanahu, "And none knows its interpretation, save only Allah."

Imam Abu `Abdullah Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Hanbal - may Allah be pleased with him - has said regarding the Prophet's statements - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam- that Allah descends to the lowest heaven, that Allah will be seen on the day of Resurrection, and what resembles such statements. "We have faith and believe in them without [saying] how [is their modality] or [interpreting their] meaning. We do not reject any of [these reports]. We know that what the Messenger came with is the truth. We do not reject what the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - has brought. Nor do we describe Allah with more than what He has described Himself without [ascribing to Him] a limit or an end. 'Like Him there is naught. And He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing.' (42:1 1). We say as He has said and we describe Him as He has described Himself. We do not transgress that. The descriptions of men do not reach Him. We believe in the whole of the Qur'an - its definitive (mukham) and its equivocal (mutashabih). We do not separate from Him any of His attributes due to the protests of anyone. We do not transgress the Qur'an and the hadith. Nor do we know the reality of [these attributes] except by believing the Messenger - sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam - and affirming the Qur'an."


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

The rabble rousing abuser and calumniator, calling himself with the bogus name, Son of Abu Yala, put out the Dhamm al-Ta’wil of ibn Qudama on the net and I saw this from p. 7 of his edition (see below for the Arabic quote), where Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal affirms the Sifat of Allah be taken without delving into the Kayf or the Ma’na (wala Kayf wala Ma’na).

Note well this was mentioned by Ibn Qudama via a route leading back to Hanbal ibn Ishaq, who is Thiqa (trustworthy), and his report was not rejected by ibn Qudama, unlike later people who try to reject these types of narrations from Hanbal (like they did with the Ta’wil from Imam Ahmad as recorded by al-Bayhaqi with his sanad that he authenticated, and mentioned as such by Ibn Kathir in al-Bidaya wal Nihaya from al-Bayhaqi):


أبو بكر الخلال أخبرنا المروذي قال : ( سألت أبا عبد الله عن أخبار الصفات ، فقال : نمرها كما جاءت ) . قال وأخبرني علي بن عيسى أن حنبلا حدثهم قال : ( سألت أبا عبد الله عن الأحاديث التي تروى إن الله تبارك وتعالى : " ينزل كل ليلة إلى السماء الدنيا " ، " وأن الله يرى " ، " وإن الله يضع قدمه " ، وما أشبهه ، فقال أبو عبد الله : ( نؤمن بها ، ونصدق بها ، [U]ولا كيف ، ولا معنى ، ولا نرد منها شيئا ، ونعلم أن ما جاء به الرسول حق إذا كانت بأسانيد صحاح ، ولا نرد على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قوله ، ولا يوصف الله تعالى بأكثر مما وصف به نفسه ، أو وصفه به رسوله ، بلا حد ، ولا غاية . . { ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصير } [الشورى:11] . ولا يبلغ الواصفون صفته وصفاته منه ، ولا نتعدى القرآن والحديث ، فنقول كما قال ، ونصفه كما وصف نفسه ، ولا نتعدى ذلك . نؤمن بالقرآن كله : محكمه ، ومتشابهه . ولا نزيل عنه صفة من صفاته لشناعة شنعث ) .

I am surprised that the “Son of Abu Yala” did not comment on this, as this point from ibn Qudama, as well as what is in the Luma on Tafweed al-Ma’nawiyya is a slap in the face of the manhaj adopted by the likes of ibn Taymiyya, ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya and virtually all of today’s pseudo-Salafiyya, who reject Tafweed al-Ma’nawiyya as being the way of the pious Salaf. Take note, that Hafiz al-Dhahabi had no problem with Tafweed al Ma’nawiyya (as a quote in his Siyar a’lam an-Nubala shows) in contradistinction to Ibn Taymiyya and his ilk!

Do not be surprised O Sunni, that these people who attack those who affirm Tafweed al-Ma’nawiyya are labeled with derogatory remarks like “Neo-Jahmiyya” etc. Will they dare call Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi the same? The answer is obvious and so some of them will make excuses and write much to explain it away (as the likes of ibn Uthaymin attempted with baseless deductions)!

An Arabic forum contributor mentioned the following as Ibn Taymiyya’s position on Tafweed al-Ma’nawiyya (I have no access to re-check this so let his admirers tell us what the truth is if they wish) in his Kitab al-Muwafiqa (1/180):

فتبين أن قول أهل التفويض الذين يزعمون أنهم متبعون للسنة والسلف من شر أقوال أهل البدع والالحاد


Let us read what the pseudo-Salafi Shaykh: Abdar Razzaq Afifi affirmed by passing a fatwa that Imam ibn Qudama was a Mufawwid based on what is in his Luma al-I’tiqad:


عبد الرزاق عفيفي - -

عن بعض عبارات الامام ابن قدامة في لمعة الاعتقاد التي يفهم منها التفويض ؟

فاجاب:

مذهب السلف هو التفويض في كيفية الصفات لا في المعنى ، وقد غلط ابن قدامة في لمعة الاعتقاد ، وقال : بالتفويض ولكن الحنابلة يتعصبون للحنابلة ، ولذلك يتعصب بعض المشايخ في الدفاع عن ابن قدامة ، ولكن الصحيح ان ابن قدامة مفوض

المصدر:-

فتاوى ورسائل عبد الرزاق عفيفي

الطبعة الثانية - ص 347 - فتاوى العقيدة سؤال رقم 4


_____________

The above quotation was also referred to in the scan attached from the pens of the pseudo-Salafiyya themselves.

The Sunni position of Tafweed bila Kayf wala Ma’na has also been ascribed to Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal by Hanabila like: ibn Batta al-Ukbari and Abu Ya’la (the one accused of Tashbih by Ibn al Jawzi and others).

Conclusion: Ibn Qudama affirmed Tafweed al-Ma’nawiyya and showed it to be the way of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal by quoting him; hence this way of affirming the Sifat of Allah is in line with the Asha’ira and Maturidiyya, thus this is the real Salafi-Way.


Wassalam

Abul Hasan

PS – As a side line, I wish to mention to the enemies of the Hanafi Madhhab, that Imam ibn Qudama was a Hanbali faqih who said that there is Ijma on the validity of Taqleed in his Rawdat al-Nazir, he also has no problems like his Imam: Ahmad ibn Hanbal on placing the hands beneath the navel in Salah and he also said that 20 Rak’ats of Taraweeh is like an Ijma (see his al-Mughni and other works).


A larger scan will be in a post below Insha'allah

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v281/abulhasan/IbnQudamatheMufawwid.jpg

[samrqandi]

assalaamu^alaikum

Masha-allah aakhi, allah reward you ameen. What you have mentioned above is to the point, since tafweed al-ma3na and tafweed al-kayfiyyah is something that was practised by the scholars. The Claiments to the salaf, i.e. the so-called salafiyyah should stay to that and they will be safe. But they dont! they go one step ahead and commit tashbeeh etc. And a good example of that was when i asked the question about translating the word saaq as SHIN, i believe they dont even know what shin means, unless they would like to explain to us the reality of that word. I wont change the topic of this thread but jazak-allah for your efforts brother. May Allah guide us all to the straight path ameen.

wassalaam

[abu bakr]

to asnwer your side point Ibn Qudamah said, "Taqleed in the peripherals is permissible by consensus (ijma`), and so the proof therein is the consensus." [Rawdat an-Nazir, 206.]

now where is imma ibn qudamah saying that it is wajib to follow one of 4 madhabs it is certiainly permissable we dont deny that however it is the blind fanaticism that we are agianst and scholars such as imma ibn qudamah were also against.

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

A very nice joke.

Some scholars have some clear sayings, and some unclear, and people instead of refering to their clear sayings rather come with their unclear to cause fitanh among ahle Sunnah and present their doubts

I ams ure that Insha Allah ibn Abi Yala will show clear sayings from imam Ahmad from his other books shwoing eh belives in meaning of Sifat

One can wonder wether Imam Ahmad was also making tafweed of meaning of Seeing, Hearing, Qudrah, ilm, Iradah, Life...

He was saying Allah sees us, but I do not know what Seeing means

Allah talked to Mussa but I do not know meaning of talking, it can be Listening to Mussa.

Whover reads salaf's saying will see clearly that meaning that they were denying were meanings given by Jahmiyah amd Mu'atilah

It is very starnge for people calling their opponents of being Zahiri to take Thahir saying of some scholars, without undertsnading the dee p meaning and context.

Imam tahawee said Allah's Anger and Plesaure are not like creations.

So does it mean he makes tafweed of Anger and Pleasure.

So why did he say it is different from creation, so his saying this affirms his undertsnading that Allah's Anger and Pleasure have same meaning as that as creation, only KKayf is different

When Imam Tirmidhee quoted Imam Ishaaq saying Hand but not like My Hand, Tahsbeeh is when one say Hands like my hand.

So can you compare two things meaning, when one of the meaning is unknown.

If one says Zayd is like Lion, you affirm that both have courage

So one one says Hand but not like that of creation, it clearly means that meaning of botrh of them is known, else you cannot say they are different.

When Salaf and Imam Ahmad say we belive in Sifat of Allah, what is a Sifat that has no meaning ?

When you describe Zayd with Anger, and if you say I do not know what Anger means, Have you described him ?

So a Sifat is only when you give a meaning to Allah's Dhat.

Saying Salaf belived in Sifat but without giving a meaning to these Sifat is like saying they did not give Allah any Sifat.

So this is a real joke, salaf made tafweed

Just one things, did they made tafweed of Seeing and Hearing ?

If no, then they did that for all attributes

Why would Allah give a description of Himself, I am Satisfied with this, Angry with this, if his creation that are adressed with his speech do not understand it.

It means Allah's speech is meaningless

There is no meaning Allah is Seeing all you do, Allah Loves belivers, Allah hate these people

AN ATTRIBUTE THAT HAS NO MEANING IS NOT AND NEVER AN ATTRIBUTE

BELIEVING IN TAFWEED IS BELIVEING IN NOTHING

May Allah protect the Ummah from people denying Allah;s attribute

[faqir]

salam aleykum

A very nice joke.


BELIEVING IN TAFWEED IS BELIVEING IN NOTHING




:lol: You crack me up Akhi. Your statement was "a very nice joke"

Just to let you know that Tafwid is to consign the meaning to Allah swt - not to claim that there is no meaning!


You can read ali al-tamimi's translation here also:

http://www.sunnahonline.com/ilm/purification/0081_page2.htm

[Abul Hasan]

salam aleykum

A very nice joke.

Some scholars have some clear sayings, and some unclear, and people instead of refering to their clear sayings rather come with their unclear to cause fitanh among ahle Sunnah and present their doubts

I ams ure that Insha Allah ibn Abi Yala will show clear sayings from imam Ahmad from his other books shwoing eh belives in meaning of Sifat

One can wonder wether Imam Ahmad was also making tafweed of meaning of Seeing, Hearing, Qudrah, ilm, Iradah, Life...

He was saying Allah sees us, but I do not know what Seeing means

Allah talked to Mussa but I do not know meaning of talking, it can be Listening to Mussa.

Whover reads salaf's saying will see clearly that meaning that they were denying were meanings given by Jahmiyah amd Mu'atilah

It is very starnge for people calling their opponents of being Zahiri to take Thahir saying of some scholars, without undertsnading the dee p meaning and context.

Imam tahawee said Allah's Anger and Plesaure are not like creations.

So does it mean he makes tafweed of Anger and Pleasure.

So why did he say it is different from creation, so his saying this affirms his undertsnading that Allah's Anger and Pleasure have same meaning as that as creation, only KKayf is different

When Imam Tirmidhee quoted Imam Ishaaq saying Hand but not like My Hand, Tahsbeeh is when one say Hands like my hand.

So can you compare two things meaning, when one of the meaning is unknown.

If one says Zayd is like Lion, you affirm that both have courage

So one one says Hand but not like that of creation, it clearly means that meaning of botrh of them is known, else you cannot say they are different.

When Salaf and Imam Ahmad say we belive in Sifat of Allah, what is a Sifat that has no meaning ?

When you describe Zayd with Anger, and if you say I do not know what Anger means, Have you described him ?

So a Sifat is only when you give a meaning to Allah's Dhat.

Saying Salaf belived in Sifat but without giving a meaning to these Sifat is like saying they did not give Allah any Sifat.

So this is a real joke, salaf made tafweed

Just one things, did they made tafweed of Seeing and Hearing ?

If no, then they did that for all attributes

Why would Allah give a description of Himself, I am Satisfied with this, Angry with this, if his creation that are adressed with his speech do not understand it.

It means Allah's speech is meaningless

There is no meaning Allah is Seeing all you do, Allah Loves belivers, Allah hate these people

AN ATTRIBUTE THAT HAS NO MEANING IS NOT AND NEVER AN ATTRIBUTE

BELIEVING IN TAFWEED IS BELIVEING IN NOTHING

May Allah protect the Ummah from people denying Allah;s attribute

So to you the Salafi Imam: Ahmed ibn Hanbal believed in a joke did he? Or how about Ibn Qudama? We can quote also: Imam al-Suyuti, Imam Ibn Hajar al Asqalani, Hafiz al-Dhahabi and others to back our way....

Problem is you have a distorted understanding of what tafweed is and so you guess and make a grave mistake as though you knew the words of the Salaf better than the likes of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Do not distort the words we quoted from Ibn Hanbal and ibn Qudama without proof.

We don't deny the Sifat like the Hashwiyya claim...

[Ibn_Abi_Yala]

al-Salamu 'Alaikum,

Its indeed a joke to believe in Tafweed.. a dangerous joke!

I would like to debate this with Abul Hasan in public - thorugh paltalk with live sound.

I've asked him before to debate this joke; we can debate also teh joke of Ibn Qudama's supposed Tafweed which he alleged.

What some righteous knowledgeable scholars have said about it, for example Shaykh al-'Afifi, is incorrect from more then one prespective as the people with whom he disagreed in this matter made clear.

If anyone just reads his Ithbat Sifat al-'Uluww - in fact only the Book-title and chapter-titles - then how can someone say he made Tafweed of Ma'na?!?! Let alone if you pick all te prooftexts - both authentic as weak - from this book and connect them with the overall aim of the author?! How can you say with all of this: he made Tafweed of Meaning, i.e. he gave these ascriptions/attributes no meaning at all, but rather are hollow words! Just read the khutba of this book and all of his other books - as of many other authors! - were he connected the phrases of Tamhid etc. with the contents of the book and its objects!?!

So beside Tafweed is a joke, also claiming Ibn Qudama to be an Mufawwid is laughable from more then one perspective.. notwwithstanding the mistakes of others.

I hope I can answer that in an article some day, with the help of some brother who's willing to assist me in that.

wa-salam.

[faqir]

You don't believe in Tafwid?

You people are dodgy!




note: the scan posted by sidi Abul Hasan later in this thread looks small - here it is in larger format

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f378/faqir/karmiquotingsuyutiontafweed3kz.jpg

[Ibn_Abi_Yala]

al-Hamdulillah, Tubah for the Ghuraba! Amin.

[Abul Hasan]

You don't believe in Tafwid?

You people are dodgy!

:salam:

Leave aside Tafwid, these people think they know the meaning of Istiwa to be: Istiqrar, besides other points. Then they want us to debate publicly with them when they use vile language and words like: ****, distort my name to Abu Qabih etc, when Allah said:

"O ye who believe! Let not some men among you laugh at others: It may be that the (latter) are better than the (former): Nor let some women laugh at others: It may be that the (latter are better than the (former): Nor defame nor be sarcastic to each other, nor call each other by (offensive) nicknames: Ill-seeming is a name connoting wickedness, (to be used of one) after he has believed: And those who do not desist are (indeed) doing wrong." [Surah al-Hujurat 49:11 ]

The "joke" is on them - for we did not say anything about ibn Qudama directly without mentioning their own "Imams of Huda": like the notes to al-Albani's book mentioned above, the words of Afifi, Muhammad ibn Ibrahim etc... as conveyed in print by the pseudo-Salafi press in the West. Even after a scan was presented people have little shame at times in their games to beguile the un-clued.

So let them refute these people before they play the digression technique with fanciful folly. When they dare not openly abuse these names like they do with us they make the most petty of divertory excuses. May Allah guide these self styled "Ghuraba", the Hashwiyyatul Asr who can not even answer 3 simple questions from weeks ago. What do they fear on the 3 answers?

I have no time for their puerile games and antics. Debating these people only enrages them further and puffs them up with more pride and dishonour - as though they are 100 % correct and our tradition spanning more than 1000 years with Muttasil Asanid is wrong on many issues! And where is their Asanid to the Book of Allah, the major books of Ahadith, nay the Imams of the Salaf?!

Our Ulama are alive and the Hashwiyya backbite them but fear debating many of them live and face-to-face. So do not be surprised to see these names attacking the likes of Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Imam al Nawawi etc.. Even the burning of the magnum opus: Fath al-Bari was witnessed in this time O Sunni's by these Hashwiyya.

Insha'Allah, we will show what they objected to when it came down to the aqeeda of al-Hafiz al-Waqt, Amir al-Mu'minin fil-Hadith, Baqiyyatus Salaf: Ahmed ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (al-Shafi'i al-Ash'ari), soon in another thread...

As indeed I hope bi-Idhnillah, to show the statements of other major Ulama on Tafweed later.

Wassalam

PS - Safe trip to the Gharb Ya akhi Faqir

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

here is an article of Abu Rumaysah

The 'Bukhaari of the west', the Imaam, the haafidh, ibn Abdul Barr (d.423), the Imaam of the Sunnah of his time said in his work at-Tamheed under the commentary of the 8th hadeeth:

"From Abu Hurayra that the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) said, 'Our Lord descends every night to the lowest heaven when the last third of the night remains and says: "who is there calling upon Me that I may answer? Who is there asking of Me that I may give him?"'

"This hadeeth is established from the point of view of transmission having an authentic isnaad, the Ahlul Hadeeth do not differ as to it's authenticity...

...and in this is an evidence that Allaah is over (fee) the heaven, over (alaa) Throne, above (fawqa) the seven heavens, as is said by the Jama'ah, and this is their proof against the Mu'tazila and the Jahmiyyah in their saying that Allaah is in every place, not over the Throne. And the evidence for what the People of truth say on that is His saying:

'The Most Merciful rose over the Throne'(20:5)
'Then He rose over the Throne...' (32:4)
'Then He rose over the heaven when it was smoke' (41:11)
'Then they would surely have sought out a way to (ilaa) the Lord of the Throne' (17:42)
'To Him ascend all goodly words...'(35:10)
'So when His Lord appeared to the mountain, He made it to collapse to dust' (7:143)
'Do you feel secure that he who is over (fee) the heaven will not cause the earth to sink on you?' (67:16)
'Glorify the name of your Lord Most High' (87:1)
And this is from al-Uluww and likewise his saying:

'The Most High, the Most Great' (2:255)
'The Most Great, The Most High' (13:9)
'Owner of High ranks, owner of the Throne.' (40:15)
'They fear their Lord from above them' (16:50)
And the Jahmi says he is lower (than them)

'He arranges every affair from the heavens to the earth, then it (affair) will go up to him.' (32:5)
'O Jesus! I will take you and raise you to Myself' (3:55)
'Rather, Allaah raised him to Himself.' (4:158)
'From Allaah, the Lord of the ways of ascent. The Angels and the Spirit ascend to Him.' (70:2-3)
As for His saying, 'do you feel secure that he who is "fee" the heaven', then the meaning is 'who is over ('alaa) the Heaven' i.e. over the Throne. And the word fee is being used with the meaning 'alaa. Do you not see His saying, 'so travel freely fee the land' (9:2) meaning 'upon ('alaa) the land', and His saying, 'and I will surely crucify you on (fee) the trunks of the palm trees' (20:71) and all of this (i.e. interpretation of fee) is supported by His saying, 'the angels and the spirit ascend to Him'

And what we have recited and the like of it from the verses to do with this topic are clear in their denial of the saying of the Mu'tazila (i.e. Allaah is everywhere). And as for their taking istawaa metaphorically, and in ta'wil to mean istawlaa (conquering) then this is not a meaning of it because it is not clear (ghayru dhaahir) in the language. And the meaning of istawlaa in the language is conquering/overcoming, and Allaah the Exalted does not (need to) overcome or overwhelm anyone. And He is the One, the Eternal.

And from the right of the Words (of Allaah ) is that they be taken upon their literal meanings ('alaa haqeeqatihi), until the ummah is agreed that what is meant is the metaphorical meaning, when there is no way to follow what is revealed to us from our Lord except in that way. And the speech of Allaah is directed towards it's most famous and obvious meanings if that (i.e taking it upon its most famous meanings) is not stopped by something we have to submit to. And if all the claims of metaphors were allowed for every claimant then nothing would be established from the actions of worship. And it befits Allaah that he speaks only with that which the Arab understands according to the constraints of the speech (ie everyday language) from what is the correctly understood by the listener. And istawaa is known in the language and understood to be: Highness (uluww) and rising above something and establishing (at-tamkinu) and settling in it (istiqraar feehee).

Abu Ubaid said about His saying, 'the Most Merciful Istawaa upon the Throne' - 'Above ('alaa)...'

And others said, Istawaa meaning istaqarra (settling) and they seek support in His saying, 'and when he attained his full strength and was perfect (istawaa)' (28:14) i.e. completed his youth and grew settled and there was not any increase in his youth.

Ibn Abdul Barr said, and istawaa is istiqraar in highness (uluww) [i.e. He has settled in being high], and this is what Allaah informs us, 'In order that you may mount firmly (tastu) on their backs, and then may remember the favours of your Lord when you mount (istawaytum) thereon...' (43:13), and Allaah said, 'and it rested (wastawat) on Mount Judi' (11:44), and He the Exalted said, 'so when you embark (istawayta) and those with you on the ship' (23:28). [i.e. all the examples show itiwaa to mean coming to rest in an elevated position]

....and as for their using as proof the narration of Ibn Abbaas about the saying of Allaah, 'The Most Merciful istawaa upon the Throne' -'He conquered/overcame (istawlaa) all His opponents and He is everywhere.'

Then the answer is that this hadeeth is munkar to Ibn Abbaas (RA) and is transmitted by unknown and weak narrators ....(takhreej ommitted).... and they (i.e Mu'tazila who narrated this hadeeth) do not accept the individually narrated tradition so how can they permit depending upon the likes of this hadeeth, if they had sense and were just? As for what they hear Allaah say, 'And Pharoah said, "O Haman! Build me a tower that I may arrive at the ways - the ways of the heavens, and I may look upon the God of Moses but verily I think him to be a liar."' (40:36-37) then this lends evidence to the fact that Moses (AS) used to say that verily my God is above the Heaven and Pharoah thought he was a liar.

And also from the proofs that Allaah is over the Throne , above the seven heavens is that the Believers in Tawheed (muwahhideen), all of them, arabs and non-arabs, when a matter concerns them, or a difficulty befalls them, they raise their faces to the heaven, and direct their raised hands to the heaven, seeking succour from Allaah, their Lord. And this is common amongst the general masses as well as the elite (khaasa)....And the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) said to the slave girl whose master wished to free her if she was a believer, so the Messenger (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) tested her asking her, 'where is Allaah?' So she pointed to the heaven. Then he asked, 'who am I?' So she said, 'you are the Messenger of Allaah'. So he said, 'set her free for she is a believer.' So it sufficed the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) from her, her raising her face to the heaven and was content with that, not requiring anything else.

And as for their seeking support in the saying of Allaah, 'their is no secret discourse of three except that he is the fourth' then this is not a proof for them according to the literal sense of this verse. Because the scholars from the companions and taabi'een from whom the explanation of the Qur'aan is taken from, said in explanation of this verse: He is over the Throne, and His Knowledge is in every place, and no one from amongst them, whose saying is depended on, differed on this. Ad-Dahhaak said about His saying, 'their is no secret discourse of three except that He is the fourth...' - 'He is over His Throne, and His Knowledge is with them, wheresoever they may be.' And it has reached me that Sufyaan ath-Thauri said something similar. Ibn Mas'ud (RA) said, 'Allaah is over the Throne, and nothing is hidden from Him of your actions'"

(Tahdheeb 7:103-105)

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

Read this with care

And it befits Allaah that he speaks only with that which the Arab understands according to the constraints of the speech (ie everyday language) from what is the correctly understood by the listener. And istawaa is known in the language and understood to be: Highness (uluww) and rising above something and establishing (at-tamkinu) and settling in it (istiqraar feehee).
Abu Ubaid said about His saying, 'the Most Merciful Istawaa upon the Throne' - 'Above ('alaa)...'

And others said, Istawaa meaning istaqarra (settling) and they seek support in His saying, 'and when he attained his full strength and was perfect (istawaa)' (28:14) i.e. completed his youth and grew settled and there was not any increase in his youth.

Ibn Abdul Barr said, and istawaa is istiqraar in highness (uluww) [i.e. He has settled in being high], and this is what Allaah informs us, 'In order that you may mount firmly (tastu) on their backs, and then may remember the favours of your Lord when you mount (istawaytum) thereon...' (43:13), and Allaah said, 'and it rested (wastawat) on Mount Judi' (11:44), and He the Exalted said, 'so when you embark (istawayta) and those with you on the ship' (23:28). [i.e. all the examples show itiwaa to mean coming to rest in an elevated position]


So did Salaf made tafweed of Istiwa saying it has no meaning ?

So it is clear that when some people say one should belive without meaning, he means wrong meanings that have tahsbeeh like saying my hand or meaning having ta'teel like saying Hands mean power.

May Allah protect us from Ilhad in His Attributes

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

One can see that Abul Hassan and his friends who have a lot of knowledge of ilmul kalam, has a lot of problem to answer the simple question

DID SALAF MADE TAFWEED OF SEEING, HEARING, KNOWLEDGE, POWER, SPEAKING ?

Did Imam Ahmad said about Allah talking to Mussa that I leave the meaning of talking to Allah, I don;t know what it means.

And how can one say Hand ut not hand of creation, Anger but not like creation

If the meaning of Hand and Anger is unknown, why do you need to sepcify that this attribute is different from that of creation ?


I thought Hanafee were not Zahiri, and were not talking zahir of words but looking at siaq and context.

But they can also be zahiri when it suits them.

When I say Zayd is not like the lion, how can I say that if I do not know the meaning of Zayd or lion ?

Also if the meaning is known only by Allah, then why would Allah give an description of Him only known by Him

So saying Allah created Adam with His Hands has no meaning

So Allah's kalam is not Fassh nor baleegh

Allah's informing his creation about Himself is like saying nothing.

Allahul Musta'anu to what defects you attribute ti His Speech

[Abul Hasan]

salam aleykum

One can see that Abul Hassan and his friends who have a lot of knowledge of ilmul kalam, has a lot of problem to answer the simple question

DID SALAF MADE TAFWEED OF SEEING, HEARING, KNOWLEDGE, POWER, SPEAKING ?

Did Imam Ahmad said about Allah talking to Mussa that I leave the meaning of talking to Allah, I don;t know what it means.

And how can one say Hand ut not hand of creation, Anger but not like creation

If the meaning of Hand and Anger is unknown, why do you need to sepcify that this attribute is different from that of creation ?


I thought Hanafee were not Zahiri, and were not talking zahir of words but looking at siaq and context.

But they can also be zahiri when it suits them.

When I say Zayd is not like the lion, how can I say that if I do not know the meaning of Zayd or lion ?

Also if the meaning is known only by Allah, then why would Allah give an description of Him only known by Him

So saying Allah created Adam with His Hands has no meaning

So Allah's kalam is not Fassh nor baleegh

Allah's informing his creation about Himself is like saying nothing.

Allahul Musta'anu to what defects you attribute ti His Speech

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal's words on tafweed are very clear! Only the disturbed souls of today have a problem with it - so they flip-flop and digress as usual. When we post more on Tafweed you can see that you are not a representative of the real Salafi Way, Insha'allah. The more you post the more you sound like Abu Alqama Hassan Ali Khan.

And then, why do you keep incessantly posting stuff here when it has no relevance to the issue of Tafweed al-Ma'na as affirmed clearly by Ibn Qudama and Ibn Hanbal?! Do you know what the Hafiz of the time: Zaynud-Din al-Iraqi said about ibn Abdal Barr's claims?! Or Shaykh Ibn Jahbal al-Kilabi (the one who refuted ibn Taymiyya on the issue of Jiha) said? Please post non related subjects to another thread otherwise it is a mere digression from the subject heading as per usual.


It is you who is utilising baseless Kalam to clear the likes of Imam Ahmed with your own pre-conceived notions that stem from the Abatil of ibn Taymiyya and his Way. Imam Ahmed is free of the Hashwiyya (as Imam al-Hisni, ibn Hajar al-Haytami and others showed or mentioned) just as Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq is free of the Shi'a...

Your own Imams: Ibn Ibrahim (Shaykh of Bin Baz) affirmed that ibn Qudama made clear he affirms Tafweed al-Ma'na, followed by the likes of Afifi and others... so why divert over and over again?

Anyway, i will post in another thread what you posted from Abu Rumaysah on the claims of al-Hafiz ibn Abdal Barr al-Maliki and its reply from other Ulama soon Isnha'Allah. If Ibn Abdal Barr is such a great reference for you then comment on what we posted on him saying things about Nuzul (where he also refuted Nu'aym ibn Hammad - Shaykh of Bukhari and enemy of Imam Abu Hanifa) and the Ta'wil attributed to his Imam Malik, or how about the fact that he clearly affirmed 20 Rak'ats of Taraweeh in his al-Istidhkar (where he also explained nicely the problem with the oft-quoted narration used by your folk incorrectly on 8 alleged Rak'ats in the time of Umar as in the Muwatta...)

More to follow Insha'Allah.

[abu bakr]

Brother with regards to imma ibn qudamah and your alleging that he made tafweed.


"We have faith and believe in them without [saying] how [is their modality] or [interpreting their] meaning

well it is obvious that imam ibn qudamah when he said "without intepreting their meaning" he meant without tawil as asharis have interpreted the hand of allah swt meaning power. and also if you read the works of imam ibn qudamah you will know that he harshly refuted the asharis and their false concept of tawil. as tawil itself is intepreting the meaning.

also imam ibn qudamah said : ‘‘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 ’alayhi wa sallam) - without increasing, nor decreasing upon it, nor exceeding the limits, nor explaining them (i.e. like the Mu’tazilah), nor making a ta‘weel of them in a way that opposes the apparent meaning.’’ ( Dhammut-Ta‘weel (p. 11)

so it obvious that imam inn qudamah affimred and had faith in the attributes of allah swt and left the howness to allah swt. and also see his opposition to anything which opposes the apparent meaning. so it is clear that imam ibn qudamah did not make tafweedh of the sifat of allah swt.

[Abul Hasan]

Brother with regards to imma ibn qudamah and your alleging that he made tafweed.



well it is obvious that imam ibn qudamah when he said "without intepreting their meaning" he meant without tawil as asharis have interpreted the hand of allah swt meaning power. and also if you read the works of imam ibn qudamah you will know that he harshly refuted the asharis and their false concept of tawil. as tawil itself is intepreting the meaning.

also imam ibn qudamah said : ‘‘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 ’alayhi wa sallam) - without increasing, nor decreasing upon it, nor exceeding the limits, nor explaining them (i.e. like the Mu’tazilah), nor making a ta‘weel of them in a way that opposes the apparent meaning.’’ ( Dhammut-Ta‘weel (p. 11)

so it obvious that imam inn qudamah affimred and had faith in the attributes of allah swt and left the howness to allah swt. and also see his opposition to anything which opposes the apparent meaning. so it is clear that imam ibn qudamah did not make tafweedh of the sifat of allah swt.

Na'am and if you read my initial post you would have realised that I know very well that ibn Qudama was anti-Ash'ari, he was anti-Ta'wil. He Affirmed the Sifat of Allah - bila kayf wala ma'na - as he quoted his Imam: Ibn Hanbal (ra) - saying exactly that - so why are we seeing from you things which again have no relevance to the topic of Tafweed Ma'nawiyya?! Did you not read the scan i put up carefully? Are your Imams: Ibn Ibrahim (Shaykh of Bin Baz), Afifi and those who published al-Albani's book with the long footnote all wrong to you, ibn Abi Yala and Abu Taymiyyah?! That's all we need to know, let us stop this diversion from the main topic...

Now, I will post a reply to Abu Taymiyyah's points on ibn Abdal Barr (as translatd by Abu Rumaysah Refi Shafi of High Wycombe) - in a new thread Insha'Allah.

------

Abul Hasan

[Ibn_Abi_Yala]

Why do you pick out one supposedly ambiguous statement of Imam Ahmad or Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Qudamah? Then claim that it means Tafwid al-Ma'na according to your understanding? Then simply neglect all the other, mashhur opinions of Imam Ahmad and the Hanbali Muwaffaq al-Din, which oppose your concept of Tafwid al-Ma'na? And on top of that, you bring up scholars - opinionmakers you deem to be wrong in their approach in Islam - with whom you disagree more then me for example, and state what they claim to be right?

If that's your approach - then grant us, in particular mé, to deal with this fraude you spread as if it is the final truth. Are you afraid I will insult you if we discuss together this? I pledge I will follow your guidelines in our future talk - if you let me to argue my case, which I deem to be correct, Insha'Allah, then we may clear out this misunderstanding.

But if you still run away from confrontation - afraid to be caught as a fraud - then I will continue to follow up part of your [many] mistakes and deliberate spread of misunderstandings and lies - some of which have already been exposed.

[Abul Hasan]

Why do you pick out one supposedly ambiguous statement of Imam Ahmad or Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Qudamah? Then claim that it means Tafwid al-Ma'na according to your understanding? Then simply neglect all the other, mashhur opinions of Imam Ahmad and the Hanbali Muwaffaq al-Din, which oppose your concept of Tafwid al-Ma'na? And on top of that, you bring up scholars - opinionmakers you deem to be wrong in their approach in Islam - with whom you disagree more then me for example, and state what they claim to be right?

If that's your approach - then grant us, in particular mé, to deal with this fraude you spread as if it is the final truth. Are you afraid I will insult you if we discuss together this? I pledge I will follow your guidelines in our future talk - if you let me to argue my case, which I deem to be correct, Insha'Allah, then we may clear out this misunderstanding.

But if you still run away from confrontation - afraid to be caught as a fraud - then I will continue to follow up part of your [many] mistakes and deliberate spread of misunderstandings and lies - some of which have already been exposed.


Do as you please - as long as it is the truth and not fraud. All we aim to do is to show that Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal affirmed Tafweed al-Ma'na, as did Ibn Qudama, as did Imam al-Suyuti - (who said it was the way of the majority of Ahl al Sunna from the Salaf and Ahlul Hadith) - who was quoted saying this by the Hanbali: al-Karmi, as did al-Dhahabi, al-Juwayni and the language used by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani.

I have no time to debate here but just to put out what I have of quotes in general. If i refute then I hope to with quotes in the main. So you may take your blame game onto Muhammad ibn Ibrahim - who is said to have been a "Hanbali", to Afifi, to the Western printers of al-Albani's books with its notes... Go and confront them if you don't want to be accused of "running" away....

And who appointed you to watch over me? Tell us why you don't ask your colleagues like AR Qadri why they admire al-Ghumari? And the lie of Z. Ali against me and GF Haddad?! The stench of bias is overwhelming from your folk.


If you have Aqawil al-Thiqat (as AR Qadri seems to have) of al-Karmi the Hanbali - then let us know what he mentioned on p. 65 from al-Suyuti and p. 120 from himself on Tafweed. May be you can scan it here for us to see...

Just answer us once and for all before we show it one day: Will you now answer those 3 questions?! Who is running away?! Let the reader decide.

Subhanallah

[Ibn_Abi_Yala]

Those three questions are not the point as you know. You are not my father or teacher or ruler so that I have to respond to your questions. You know that quite well.

As for those questions - if you can tell me which works you've seen, read or studied, and from whom you listened and learned something on those three questions and its answers then we can know on what level your talkning. It would be very refreshing for both of us if we discuss that directly [live or through modern ways such as internet, phone etc.]

The issue what we begun with was on the Ibanah, al-Ash'ari and the Issue of Eyes. You should not leave this topic - as I've said elsewhere - before finishing it. So to claim I'm running from those three questions is not fair to say; what would you say if I pose now 6 questions and come the following week back on this, would you find it reasonable to answer any of them?! Of course not.

Abul Hasan.. listen carefully:

I'm nor your watchman because of some personal conflict - I don't know you! I feel rather obligated to clear away some misguidance which has been spread either deliberately or not by your pen. Since you are very bold - and I remember that you begun harsh against me and called this over yourself the day you answered me with: "Oh you who speak loud!" etc - in the first place, do not try to fend me off. I'm stilling watching what happens - and if I deem it important to answer it I will do so.

I say again: contact me. You may also e-mail me and then we will can have e-mail exchanges about our differences, without letting others indluging in this. I let you to choose what you want to do.

[samrqandi]

assalaamu^alaikum

I havent read the arabic to this statement and allah truely knows how authentic this saying since its qouted from the mukhtasar al uluw which has problems with it, but abu rumaysah cites it in his article, however the statement seems to promote tafweed al-ma3na and tafweed al-kayfiyyah[just to add i will put in bold what muhammad ibn al-hasan says and the brackets are added by abu rumaysah with his translation of the passage]:

Muhammad bin al-Hasan ash-Shaybaanee said "the Legal Jurists, from the east to the west, have all agreed to have faith in the Qur'aan and the Ahaadeeth that have come via trustworthy narrators from the Messenger of Allaah (SAW) concerning the Attributes WITHOUT EXPLANATION [meaning the explanation of the Jahmiyyah who innovated explanations of the Attributes in opposition to that which the Sahaabah and the Taabi'een were upon in affirming them, as stated by ibn Taymiyyah in 'al-Hamawiyyah' (pg. 115)] and WITHOUT DESCRIPTION and WITHOUT TASHBEEH. So whosoever explains anything from them has left that which the Prophet (SAW) was upon and has split off from the Jamaa'ah (for they did not deny or explain, rather they believed in what was in the Book and Sunnah and then remained silent, so the one who says the saying of Jahm has split off from the Jamaa'ah) because he described Him with descriptions that are empty." ['Mukhtasar al-Uluw' (no. 165), and the addition in brackets is from al-Laalikaa'ee.]

I am not talking about ta'weel since thats not my intent, any mistakes are from me and may allah guide us all to the striaght path ameen.

wassalaam

[Abul Hasan]

:salam:

Can those who reject Tafweed al-Ma'na explain to us if the following is Tafweed al-Ma'na or not:

Abu Sulayman al-Khattabi (d. 388 AH) in his Sharh on Sunan Abu Dawud, known a Ma'alim al-Sunan is ascribed as saying:


"..and we believe in its apparent sense, and we don't venture about its hidden meaning, and it is from the unclear expressions.. and the unclear expressions necessiate belief in them and knowledge of their apparent meaning, and leaving the inner meaning to Allah"

Wassalam

Abul Hasan

NB - The one who calls himself "Father of Dust" - he claims to be an avid reader of Fath al-Bari, so i wish he looked at the Muqaddima to it: Hadi al-Sari and mention to his colleagues what al-Hafiz said about Istiwa and Tafweed... Once he can dig this up (and other quotes from al-Hafiz) he should post it here or wherever we can see who plays hide and seek with the Kalam of al-Hafiz ibn Hajar. Insha'Allah, quotes from the Huffaz and Imams are being prepared.. bear with me with a little patience O Sunni's who emailed me.

[Abul Hasan]

:salam:

In answer to an email asking for proof that Tafweed al-Ma'na was mentioned by another Hanbali Shaykh known as: Zaynud-Din Mari'i ibn Yusuf al-Karmi (d. 1033 AH). The following are scans from his book known as: Aqawil al-Thiqat:

Scan 1: Imam al-Suyuti saying that the Ayats on the Sifat of Allah are from the Mutashabihat: ambiguous verses - unlike the Hashwiyya/Mushabbiha who think they know the exact meaning - as found on p. 65, as well as him saying very clearly that the majority of Ahlus-Sunna from them the Salaf and the Ahlul Hadith have faith in such Ayats by making Tafweed of the Ma'na:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v281/abulhasan/karmiquotingSuyutionTafweed.jpg

Scan 2 and 3 is a quote from the Maliki Mufassir: al-Qurtubi as follows:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v281/abulhasan/KarmionTafweed_p117.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v281/abulhasan/KarmionTafweed_p118.jpg


Scan 4 is a point on Istiwa being from the Mutashabihat and read the underlined bit carefully from al-Karmi's words:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v281/abulhasan/KarmionTafweed_p120.jpg

Scan 5: The famous Tabi'i: Imam al-Sha'bi is mentioned as declaring that Istiwa is from the Mutashabih of the Qur'an and see what he said about the ma'na of it (meaning):

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v281/abulhasan/KarmionTafweed_p121.jpg

Insha'Allah, this should suffice for now until i release more quotes in a new thread some other time - bi-idhnillahi ta'ala.


Wassalam

Abul Hasan

[AbuTaymiyah]

salam aleykum

also imam ibn qudamah said : ‘‘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 ’alayhi wa sallam) - without increasing, nor decreasing upon it, nor exceeding the limits, nor explaining them (i.e. like the Mu’tazilah), nor making a ta‘weel of them in a way that opposes the apparent meaning.’’ ( Dhammut-Ta‘weel (p. 11)

What is the meaning of "nor making a ta‘weel of them in a way that opposes the apparent meaning"

So is clearly shows that Salaf had eman in apparent meaning.

Some said to take Sifat on Dhahir and on Haqiqah.

So they did not say the meaning of Sifat is left to Allah, we do not know it.

Also Abul HAssan does not annswer : Did Salaf made tafweed of Speking, Seeing, Hearing ?

Imam Tirmidhi mentionned Seeing, Hearing in same way as Hand and Qadam.

So if Salaf made tafweed on Hand and Qadam, they should have also done this on Seeing Hearing.

Allah Sees everything, Allahg knows best what ity means.

Allah listened to the one who complained about her Husband

We do not know meaning of Sami'a.


As long as Abul Hassan doers not answer this, then we cannot speak about Ibn Abdil Barr, taraweeh and other, because there is no progression, but digressions.

As for someone's identity, is this relevant to the topic, and is telling identity a condition to post on this forum ?

Abul Hassan is stuck on the issue whether Salafg made tafweed on Seeing and Hearung.

You can see help from your sunni friends, having minor differeneces, GF Haddad.

[Abul Hasan]

salam aleykum

also imam ibn qudamah said : ‘‘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 ’alayhi wa sallam) - without increasing, nor decreasing upon it, nor exceeding the limits, nor explaining them (i.e. like the Mu’tazilah), nor making a ta‘weel of them in a way that opposes the apparent meaning.’’ ( Dhammut-Ta‘weel (p. 11)

What is the meaning of "nor making a ta‘weel of them in a way that opposes the apparent meaning"

So is clearly shows that Salaf had eman in apparent meaning.

Some said to take Sifat on Dhahir and on Haqiqah.

So they did not say the meaning of Sifat is left to Allah, we do not know it.

Also Abul HAssan does not annswer : Did Salaf made tafweed of Speking, Seeing, Hearing ?

Imam Tirmidhi mentionned Seeing, Hearing in same way as Hand and Qadam.

So if Salaf made tafweed on Hand and Qadam, they should have also done this on Seeing Hearing.

Allah Sees everything, Allahg knows best what ity means.

Allah listened to the one who complained about her Husband

We do not know meaning of Sami'a.


As long as Abul Hassan doers not answer this, then we cannot speak about Ibn Abdil Barr, taraweeh and other, because there is no progression, but digressions.

As for someone's identity, is this relevant to the topic, and is telling identity a condition to post on this forum ?

Abul Hassan is stuck on the issue whether Salafg made tafweed on Seeing and Hearung.

You can see help from your sunni friends, having minor differeneces, GF Haddad.


See what i have said on the thread on ibn Abdal Barr today. This topic is about ibn Qudama, so please answer if this is acceptable or not to you if one were to say this about the Sifat:



وَنَحْنُ نُؤْمِنُ بِالْأَحَادِيثِ فِي هَذَا وَنُقِرُّهَا ، وَنُمِرُّهَا كَمَا جَاءَتْ بِلَا كَيْفٍ ، وَلَا مَعْنًى إِلَّا عَلَى مَا وَصَفَ بِهِ نَفْسَهُ تَعَالَى ، نَسْأَلُ اللَّهَ السَّلَامَةَ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَةِ

A simple yes or no will do, if no then explain what is wrong with this arabic statement.

Also read what was posted earlier on Imam al-Nawawi being attacked by your folk today and what was posted from the Maturidi Imam: al-Pazdawi.
-------------

Abul Hasan

[Abul Hasan]

A larger scan will be in a post below Insha'allah


The larger scan:


http://www.w6w.net/upload/19-06-2005/w6w_20050619111309c26e5901.jpg

[samrqandi]

Assalaamu^alaikum

Abu taymiya asks many questions, but doesnt answer any questions that are asked, you need to sort out your own principles before stating that this discussion isnt getting anywhere. Since Brother Abul Hasan has shown that many scholars practised tafweed al-ma3na, but you never showed an answer to it but rather side tracked it with other questions!

To further carry on what we do know about the issue of hearing and seeing as i said before:

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

Also if we look at majority of the aqeeda books you will find the scholars talking about hearing and seeing and when coming to the wajh, yadd, ayn, its tafweed thats the general principle. You can refer to aqeeda tahawiyyah, fiqh ul-akhbar, aqeeda nasafi etc

An example from fiqh ul akhbar, imam abu hanifa states:
-5 أما الذاتية فالحياة والقدرة والعلم والكلام والسمع والبصر والارادة , وأما الفعلية فالتخليق والترزيق و الانشاء
والابداع والصنع وغير ذلك من صفات الفعل . 5.
As for the attributes relating to Him, they are: Life, Power, Knowledge, kalam, Hearing, Sight, and Will. As for those relating to His actions, they are: Creating, Sustenance, Originating, Making, Fashioning, and other attributes of actions.

However when coming to the issue of wajh, yadd etc he states:
-28 وله يد ووجه ونفس آما ذآره الله تعالى في القرآن , فما ذآره الله تعالى في القرآن من ذآر الوجه واليد والنفس
فهو صفات له بلا آيف .
7
28- He added to Himself meanings of Yad (literal meaning is a Hand), Wajh (literal meaning is Face), and Nafs (literal meaning is Self); as Allah Ta’ala mentioned in the Qur’an. Hence, what Allah Ta’ala mentioned about the Yad, Wajh, and Nafs, are meanings He added to Himself, without a “how” (modality).
-29 ولايقال : إن يده قدرته أو نعمته , لأن فيه إبطال الصفة ] وهذا رد على من أراد تحديد معنى اليد وتفسيرها على
أنها القدرة أو النعمة حصراً , والإمام يشير إلى أن الآية التي ورد فيها ذآراليد هي من الآيات المتشابهة التي لايعلم
حقيقتها وآنهها إلا الله , وسبيل النجاة في ذلك هو تفويض المعنى مطلقاً إلى الله مع تنزيهه جل وعلا عن مشابهة
المخلوقات فلايقال يدٌ حقيقيةٌ ولاجارحة ومن قال بأنها عضو من آل أو جزء من جسم مرآب أو جارحة فقد آفر ,
ولايقال آيف [. وهو قول أهل القدر والاعتزال .
29- It should not be said that His Yad definitively means His power or His bounty (exclusively), because such a definitive (and exclusive) interpretation may negate the meaning (Allah willed). This is the method of the (Qadariyyah) and the Mu'tazilah.
-30 ولكن يده صفته بلا آيف . 30-

Rather, His Yad is a meaning He added to Himself without a “how” [modality], (as there cannot be a how, because it is not similar to the creation, not limbs, organs, parts,...etc., a modality, for or shape can only be applied to the creation and attributes of the creation).

yahya ninawi comments on this:

The Ayat of the Qur’an are classified as per Surat Al-Imran, ayah 7, into two types; Ayat Mutashabihaat and Ayat Muhkamaat. Linguistically, The Muhkamat verses are those who linguistically and intellectually cannot accept but one meaning, such as : قل هو الله أحد which can only mean that Allah is One. The other verses, Ayat Mutashabihaat, are those ayat who linguistically and intellectually may accept more than one meaning. An example would be ( (يد الله فوق أيديهم which means if translated literally: the hand of Allah is above their hands; yet attributing Allah with limbs or organs leads to blasphemy, hence, Al-imam Abu Hanifah (r.a) mentioned his way and the way of the pious predecessors in understanding such “Mutashabihaat” words, which is believing in such verses and submitting their entire meaning to Allah [Tafweedh]. Furthermore, Imam Abu Hanifah, warned from assigning a specific meaning to such verses, even if those meanings are facilitated linguistically and do not contradict the attributes of Perfection of Allah Ta’ala. One thing must be emphasized though, namely one must have no doubt that those kinds of verses do not intend to assign a limb, organ, or any attribute of any creation in any aspect. Attributing such things to Allah Ta’ala, leads to blasphemy.

[al-Hanbali]

I have no intention of airing my own views here or engage in this discussion, however I have a sincere question that I would hope brother Abul Hasan or anyone else can answer.

If we speak of Tafwid according to the Ash'ari tradition, then what is intended is Tafwid of the Kayf, as well as the Ma'na.

So when some one does Tafwid of the Ma'na he is saying that the meaning is known only to Allah correct?

So if that is the case, what does one do? Do we make Ta'wil of the Sifat, such as the Hand saying that it means Allah's power or Ni'mah, or do we do Tafwid of the Ma'na. Are both considered correct?