Hafiz ibn Abdal Barr on Istiwa and those who rejected or refuted his claim(s) [Archive] - sunniforum.com - a resource for the propagation of authentic Islamic teachings

View Full Version : Hafiz ibn Abdal Barr on Istiwa and those who rejected or refuted his claim(s)

Abul Hasan

28-05-2005, 03:17 PM

:salam:

As for what Abu Taymiyyah posted here:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?p=56429#post56429

Regarding Al-Imam al-Hafiz ibn Abdal Barr (rahimahullah) the former Zahiri (literalist) who became the chief Maliki Muhaddith in his age. Abu Taymiyyah quoted his source: Abu Rumaysah quoting a passage from ibn Abdal Barr’s: al-Tamheed. The relevant portion that is controversial, needing clarification, and a rebuttal not from my pen but from some of the best of the Ulama will be mentioned below.

Ultimately, where is the clear Qur’anic Ayat or Sahih Hadith to say that the meaning of Istiwa alal Arsh is Istiqrar (settling) alone? Same applies with affirming Aynayn for Allah ta’ala. Can they quote the Ibana attributed to Imam al-Ash'ari these days and show us what he had to say about Istiqrar, or how about other Imams - like the Maliki: Ibn Battal, the Shafi'i Imams: al-Bayhaqi or ibn Hajar al Asqalani)...?!

How strange these folk are: They advise and warn against Taqleed in fiqh but indulge in it themselves especially in matters of Aqeeda – which is far more serious. To add that, these people who claim to be on the Haqq, on the path of al-Salaf us Salih – hold onto the more rejected and aberrant stances from some Ulama on occasions – this is what is called Shadh/Shudhudh. To the extent they will take precedence of the sayings of X,Y or Z in the absence of any clear nass when it suits their desires! May Allah guide them. Amin.

Talking about ibn Abdal Barr, I said earlier:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4030&page=3&pp=10&highlight=abdal+barr

the narration about Imam Malik making Ta'wil of Nuzul as in the Siyar of al-Dhahabi - it is indeed a very weak chain. It has a supporting chain in Ibn Abdal Barr's Tamhid (7/143)...., BUT - again it has a narrator known as Jami ibn Siwada - who I noticed was weakened by al-Daraqutni - as Ibn Hajar mentioned in Lisan al-Mizan.

BUT! Imam ibn Abdal Barr, after narrating the variant narration from Imam Malik - agreed in the validity of this narration's Ta'wil - and he did not weaken the chain or its text as he related it in al-Tamhid.

He said: "It is possible that the matter be as Malik said, and Allah knows best."

From memory, I recall, that al-Hafiz ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari also mentioned that Ta'wil and Tafwid have both been transmitted from Imam Malik, and Imam al-Nawawi also gave an ascription to Malik making Ta'wil in his Sharh on Sahih Muslim. Hence, there is a strong possibility as Ibn Abdal Barr said that Malik did make Ta'wil here!

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

Anyway, Abu Taymiyyah took this from his colleague Abu Rumaysah, who said as was posted here http://www.spubs.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=AQD05&articleID=AQD050002&pfriend=

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)

Let me start by saying: What is this reference: Tahdheeb 7:103-105 ?! I know of no work by al-Hafiz ibn Abdal Barr by that name, but I am convinced it should be: al-Tamheed li-ma fil Muwatta min al Ma’ani wal Asanid. So will these people correct this reference or clarify what this book: Tahdheeb is?

Secondly, Imam Ibn Abdal Barr was refuted by his fellow Maliki Muhaddith: Qadi Abu Bakr ibn al Arabi indirectly and namelessly. It also appears that ibn Abdal Barr was at odds with other Maliki’s like the Hafiz: Abul Walid al-Baji. Later, the Shafi’i Mufti of Damascus: Ibn Jahbal al-Kilabi (I will post what he said in radd to ibn Taymiyya later Insha’Allah) and after him the Imam who some declared as a Mujaddid and Hafiz of his Age in Hadith, namely: Zaynud-Din al-Iraqi, and others replied to Ibn Abdal Barr’s claim(s).

All this is found in the attached PDF file bi-Idhnillah ta’ala; so please read it carefully, especially what is highlighted in colour by a brother who put the file together (Shukran). For more on Ibn Abdal Barr, his works and claims against him see:

http://www.sunnah.org/history/Scholars/ibn_abd_al_barr.htm

The PDF file (in about 8 pages) provides more analysis in reply to what Abu Rumaysah and Co spread in the name of Imam ibn Abdal Barr – to establish their Aqeeda!

Wassalam

Abul Hasan

Abul Hasan

30-05-2005, 12:17 PM

:salam:

Just to add a little further point on Istiqrar (settling) as being the meaning of Istiwa - as affirmed by the likes of ibn Taymiyya, ibn Qayyim and most of todays pseduo-Salafiyya; a few weeks ago I said in my reply to AR Qadri and Ibn Abi Yala (see the 28 page article on this forum):

-------------------------------------------------------------------
As may be seen above, Dr GF Haddad also referred the reader to an appendix on Istiwa. I noticed that the piece he was referring to is also found on the internet as will be quoted below. This piece also serves to show how the real Sunni Ulama understand Istiwa in comparison to the likes of the Asaghir who make taqleed of the likes of ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (as in his deviant poem known as Qasida al-Nuniyya) that one of the meanings for Istiwa is that Allah literally settled (Istiqrar alal Arsh) on the Throne! La-hawla wala quwwata illa billahil ali-al-Azim! Let the Asaghir prove from the Qur’an and the Sahih Sunna that Istiqrar applies to Allah’s Istiwa without fumbling excuses and claims that this is the position of X, Y or Z, using the same principles that they claim to follow. These people lack basic Usul in order to determine what constitutes a valid position and hence their manhaj is not consistent with the Imams of the Salaf.

Dr GF Haddad’s article on Istiwa:

Istiwa' is a Divine Act

(Concerning: Qur'an 7:54; 13:2; 20:5; 25:59; 32:4)

"Istiwa' is one of the Attributes of acts (min sifat al-af`al) according to the majority of the explanations." - Al-Qurtubi.1

"The establishment of His Throne in the heaven is known, and His Throne in the earth is the hearts of the People of Pure Monotheism (ahl al-tawhid). He said: {and eight will uphold the Throne of their Lord that day, above them} (69:17), and [concerning] the throne of the hearts: {We carry them on the land and the sea} (17:70). As for the throne of the heaven: the Merciful established Himself over it (`alayhi istawa); and as for the throne of the hearts: the Merciful conquered it (`alayhi istawla). The throne of the heaven is the direction of the supplication of creatures, while the throne of the heart is the locus of the gaze of the Real - Most High -. Therefore, there is a huge difference between this throne and that!" - Al-Qushayri.2

"We believe that {the Merciful established Himself over the Throne} (20:5), and we do not know the reality of the meaning of this nor what is meant by it (la na`lamu haqiqata mi`na dhalika wa al-murada bihi), while we do believe that {There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him} (42:11) and that He is exalted far above the most elevated of created things. That is the way of the Salaf or at least their vast majority, and it is the safest because one is not required to probe into such matters." - Al-Nawawi.3

Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Ash`ari said: "The establishment of Allah - Most High - on the Throne is an action He has created named istiwa' and related to the Throne, just as He has created an action named ityan (coming) related to a certain people; and this implies neither descent nor movement."4 Al-Bayhaqi confirms this: "Abu al-Hasan `Ali al-Ash`ari said that Allah - Most High - effected an act in relation to the Throne, and He called that act istiwa', just as He effected other acts in relation to other objects, and He called those acts `sustenance' (rizq), `favor' (ni`ma), or other of His acts."5 This is also the interpretation of Ibn Hazm (d. 456) - although a vehement enemy of Ash`aris - who explains istiwa' as "an act pertaining to the Throne".6

Abu al-Fadl al-Tamimi mentioned that two positions were reported from Imam Ahmad concerning istiwa': One group narrated that he considered it "of the Attributes of act" (min sifat al-fi`l), another, "of the Attributes of the Essence" (min sifat al-dhat)."7 Ibn Battal mentions that Ahl al-Sunna hold either one of these two positions: "Those that interpreted istawa as `He exalted Himself' (`ala) consider istiwa an Attribute of the Essence, while those who interpreted it otherwise consider it an Attribute of act."8

Al-Tamimi further related that Ahmad said:

[Istiwa']: It means height/exaltation (`uluw) and elevation (irtifa`). Allah - Most High - is ever exalted (`ali) and elevated (rafi`) without beginning, before He created the Throne. He is above everything (huwa fawqa kulli shay'), and He is exalted over everything (huwa al-`ali `ala kulli shay'). He only specified the Throne because of its particular significance which makes it different from everything else, as the Throne is the best of all things and the most elevated of them. Allah - Most High - therefore praised Himself by saying that He {established Himself over the Throne}, that is, He exalted Himself over it (`alayhi `ala). It is impermissible to say that He established Himself with a contact or a meeting with it. Exalted is Allah above that! Allah is not subject to change, substitution, nor limits, whether before or after the creation of the Throne.9

The Maliki scholar Ibn Abi Jamra (d. 695) said something similar in his commentary on the hadith "Allah wrote a Book before He created creation, saying: Verily My mercy precedeth My wrath; and it is written with Him above the Throne":

It may be said from the fact that the Book is mentioned as being "above the Throne" that the divine wisdom has decreed for the Throne to carry whatever Allah wishes of the record of His judgment, power, and the absolute unseen known of Him alone, in order to signify the exclusivity of His encompassing knowledge regarding these matters. This makes the Throne one of the greatest signs of the exclusivity of His knowledge of the Unseen. This could explain the verse of istiwa' as referring to whatever Allah wills of His power, which is the Book He has placed above His Throne."10

Sufyan al-Thawri (d. 161) interpreted istiwa' in the verse {The Merciful established Himself over the Throne} (20:5) as "a command concerning the Throne" (amrun fi al-`arsh), as related by Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni and quoted by al-Yafi`i in the latter's book Marham al-`Ilal al-Mu`dila fi Daf` al-Shubah wa al-Radd `ala al-Mu`tazila ("Book of the Resolution of Difficult Problems for the Removal of Doubts and the Refutation of the Mu`tazila"):

The understanding of istiwa' as the turning of Allah - Most High - to a particular command concerning the Throne is not far-fetched, and this is the ta'wil of Imam Sufyan al-Thawri, who took as corroborating evidence for it the verse: {Then turned He (thumma istawa) to the heaven when it was smoke} (41:11), meaning: "He proceeded to it" (qasada ilayha).11
Al-Tabari said, in his commentary on the verse {Then turned He (thumma istawa) to the heaven, and fashioned it as seven heavens} (2:29):
The meaning of istiwa' in this verse is height (`uluw) and elevation... but if one claims that this means displacement for Allah, tell him: He is high and elevated over the heaven with the height of sovereignty and power, not the height of displacement and movement to and fro.

The above position is exactly that of the Ash`ari school, as shown by Abu Bakr ibn al-`Arabi's and Ibn Hajar's numerous comments to that effect12 directed against those who attribute altitude to Allah in their interpretation of His `uluw such as Ibn Taymiyya. The latter stated: "The Creator, Glorified and Exalted is He, is above the world and His being above is literal, not in the sense of dignity or rank."13 This doctrine was comprehensively refuted by Ibn Jahbal al-Kilabi (d. 733) in his Radd `ala Man Qala bi al-Jiha ("Refutation of Ibn Taymiyya Who Attributes A Direction to Allah - Most High -")14 and Shaykh Yusuf al-Nabahani (1265-1350) in his Raf` al-Ishtibah fi Istihala al-Jiha `ala Allah ("The Removal of Doubt Concerning the Impossibility of Direction for Allah").15

Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597) in the introduction of his Daf` Shubah al-Tashbih said of the anthropomorphists: "They are not content to say: `Attribute of act' (sifatu fi`l) until they end up saying: `Attribute of the Essence' (sifatu dhat)." Ibn Hazm also said: "If the establishment on the Throne is eternal without beginning, then the Throne is eternal without beginning, and this is disbelief."16

Al-Bayhaqi quotes one of the companions of al-Ash`ari, Abu al-Hasan `Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Mahdi al-Tabari (d. ~380) as saying in his book Ta'wil al-Ahadith al-Mushkalat al-Waridat fi al-Sifat ("Interpretation of the Problematic Narrations Pertaining to the Attributes"): "Allah is in the heaven above everything and established (mustawin) over His Throne in the sense that He is exalted or elevated (`alin) above it, and the sense of istiwa' is self-elevation (i`tila')."17 This is the most widespread interpretation (ta'wil) of the issue among the Salaf: al-Baghawi said that the meaning of the verse {The Merciful established Himself over the Throne} (20:5) according to Ibn `Abbas and most of the commentators of Qur'an is "He elevated Himself" (irtafa`a).18 This is the interpretation quoted by al-Bukhari in his Sahih from the senior Tabi`i Rufay` ibn Mahran Abu al-`Aliya (d. 90). Al-Bukhari also cites from Mujahid (d. 102) the interpretation "to rise above" or "exalt Himself above" (`ala). Ibn Battal declares the latter to be the true position and the saying of Ahl al-Sunna because Allah described Himself as "the Sublimely Exalted" -- {al-`Ali} (2:255) and said: {exalted be He (ta`ala) over all that they ascribe as partners (unto Him)!} (23:92).19

In complete opposition to the above Ibn Taymiyya said in his Fatawa: "The establishment of Allah over the Throne is real, and the servant's establishment over the ship is real" (lillahi ta`ala istiwa'un `ala `arshihi haqiqatan wa li al-`abdi istiwa'un `ala al-fulki haqiqatan).20 "Allah is with us in reality, and He is above His Throne in reality (Allahu ma`ana haqiqatan wa huwa fawqa al-`arshi haqiqatan).. . . Allah is with His creation in reality and He is above His Throne in reality (Allahu ma`a khalqihi haqiqatan wa huwa fawqa al-`arshi haqiqatan)."21

Another interpretation commonly used by later Ash`aris for istiwa' is that of istila' and qahr, respectively "establishing dominion" and "subduing." Ibn `Abd al-Salam said:

His establishment (istiwa') over the Throne is a metaphor for establishing dominion (istila') over His kingdom and disposing of it, as the poet said:
qad istawa Bishrun `ala al-`Iraq min ghayri sayfin wa damin muhraq
Bishr established mastery over Iraq without sword and without shedding blood.22

It is a metaphor of similitude with kings, who dispose of the affairs of their kingdoms while sitting among the dynastic princes. The throne may also express rank, as in `Umar's - Allah be well-pleased with him - saying:23 "My throne would have toppled if I had not found a merciful Lord."24

Ibn Battal and Abu Mansur al-Baghdadi attribute the interpretation as istila' chiefly to the Mu`tazila. Ibn Hajar said:

The Mu`tazila said its meaning is "establishing dominion through subjugation and overpowering" (al-istila' bi al-qahr wa al-ghalaba), citing as a proof the saying of the poet:

Bishr established mastery over Iraq without sword and without shedding blood.

The anthropomorphists (al-jismiyya) said: "Its meaning is settledness (al-istiqrar)." 25 Some of Ahl al-Sunna said: "Its meaning is He elevated Himself (irtafa`a)" while others of them said: "Its meaning is He rose above (`ala)," and others of them said: "Its meaning is sovereignty (al-mulk) and power (al-qudra)."26

The latter Sunni interpretation is evidently similar to that of istila' and qahr. However, because the Mu`tazila claimed that the divine Attributes were originated in time rather than uncreated and beginningless, their interpretation was rejected by the scholars of Ahl al-Sunna. Ibn Battal said: "The Mu`tazila position is null and void, for Allah is qahir, ghalib, and mustawli without beginning."27 Ibn Battal is referring to the Ash`ari position whereby the Attributes of acts such as creation, although connected with created objects, are without beginning in relation to Allah.28 To those who object to istawla on the grounds that it necessarily supposed prior opposition,29 Ibn Hajar similarly remarked that that assumption is discarded by the verse: {Allah was (kana) ever Knower, Wise} (4:17), which the scholars explained to mean "He is ever Knower and Wise."30

Thus Dawud al-Zahiri's objection that istila' necessitates a wresting from an adversary31 is not absolute among Ahl al-Sunna. The Ash`ari grammarian al-Raghib al-Asfahani (d. 402) said that istawa `ala has the meaning of istawla `ala ("He overcame") and cited the verse of istiwa (20:5) as an example of this meaning: "It means that everything is alike in relation to him in such manner that no one thing is nearer to Him than another thing, since He is not like the bodies that abide in one place exclusively of another place."32 In this sense, both the Mu`tazili position of origination for the Attributes and the literalist requirement of conquest-after-struggle are dismissed, and istawla can be safely admitted among the interpretations of Ahl al-Sunna. As Ibn Battal alluded, "establishing dominion and sovereignty," "subduing," and "conquering" no more suppose prior opposition in the face of the Creator than do His Attributes of "All-Victorious" (Zahir) "All-Compelling" (Qahhar), "Prevailer" (Ghalib), or "Omnipotent" (Qahir) presuppose resistance or power on anyone's part. This is confirmed by the verses: {He is the Omnipotent (al-qahir) over His slaves} (6:18, 6:61) and {Allah prevails (ghalib) in His purpose} (12:21). Al-Raghib said: "It means that everything is alike in relation to him" and he did not say: "became alike."

Ibn al-Jawzi mentions another reason for permitting this interpretation: "Whoever interprets {and He is with you} (57:4) as meaning `He is with you in knowledge,' permits his opponent to interpret istiwa' as `subduing' (al-qahr)."33

As for the linguistic precedent of the meaning istawla for istawa, it is provided by the poet al-Akhtal (d. <110) who said: "Bishr established mastery over (istawa `ala) Iraq without sword and without shedding blood." Some "Salafis" reject this linguistic proof on the ground that al-Akhtal was a second-century Christian. This shows ignorance of agreed-upon criteria for the probative force of Arabic poetry in the Shari`a, which extends at least to the year 150 and applies regardless of creed.

Dr. Muhammad Sa`id Ramadan al-Buti said:

The consensus in place regarding these texts is the refraining from applying to them any meaning which establishes a sameness or likeness between Allah and His creatures, and the refraining from divesting their established lexical tenor.

The obligatory way to proceed is either to explain these words according to their external meanings which conform with divine Transcendence above any like or partner, and this includes not explaining them as bodily appendages and other corporeal imagery. Therefore it will be said, for example: He has established Himself over the Throne as He has said, with an establishment which befits His Majesty and Oneness; and He has a Hand as He has said, which befits His Divinity and Majesty; etc.
Or they can be explained figuratively according to the correct rules of language and in conformity with the customs of speech in their historical context. For example: the establishment is the establishment of dominion (istila') and that of authority (tasallut); the hand of Allah is His strength in His saying: {The hand of Allah is over their hand} (48:10) and His generosity in His saying: {Nay, both His hands are spread wide, and He bestows as He wills} (5:64).34

As for the interpretation of istiwa' as sitting (julus), it is asserted in the book attributed to `Abd Allah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal under the title Kitab al-Sunna (p. 5, 71): "Is establishment (istiwa') other than by sitting (julus)?" "Allah - Most High - sits on the kursi and there remains only four spans vacant." Al-Khallal in his own Kitab al-Sunna (p. 215-216) states that whoever denies that "Allah sits on the kursi and there remains only four spans vacant" is an unbeliever. `Uthman al-Darimi went so far as to say in his Naqd al-Jahmiyya: "If He so willed, He could have settled on the back of a gnat and it would have carried Him thanks to His power and the favor of His lordship, not to mention the magnificient Throne."35

Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al-Qayyim endorsed these views.36 Al-Kawthari wrote in his Maqalat: "Whoever imagines that our Lord sits on the kursi and leaves space at His side for His Prophet to sit, he has followed the Christians who believe that `Isa (was raised to heaven and sat next to his Father - Allah is elevated above the partnership they ascribe to Him!"37

Al-Munawi quotes the following conclusion on the verse of the Throne upon the water:

Al-Tunisi said that the verse {And His Throne was upon the water} (11:7) contains a clear proof that direction is impossible for Allah - Most High - because the Throne settled (istaqarra) upon the water, therefore, since natural custom was broken by the settlement of that huge mass (jirm) - the largest of all masses - upon the water, contrary to the habitual fact that such a mass - or, rather, much less than it! - does not usually settle upon the water: it becomes known with certitude that istiwa' over it is not an istiwa' of settledness nor fixity.38

The above proof is similar to the proof derived from Imam Malik's statement: "The establishment is known, the `how' is inconceivable, and to ask about it is an innovation!"39 Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki pointed out that the inconceivability of the modality of istiwa' proved that it precluded the meaning of sitting.40

In his Qur'anic commentary entitled Lata'if al-Isharat ("The Subtle Signs"), Imam Abu al-Qasim al-Qushayri (d. 465) - together with Imam al-Haramayn Ibn al-Juwayni and al-Khatib al-Baghdadi the main figure in the fourth generation-layer of al-Ash`ari's students - sums up the position of Ahl al-Sunna concerning istiwa':

{He established Himself over the Throne} (7:54; 13:2; 20:5; 25:59; 32:4), however, the One without beginning has no limit (al-qadim laysa lahu hadd). He "established Himself over the Throne," however, it is impermissible to attribute to Him proximity with His Essence nor remoteness. He "established Himself over the Throne," however, the Throne would be the most needful of all things to an iota of connection (al-wisal) [with Him] if it were only alive! But it is a lifeless solid, and when did solids ever possess volition? He "established Himself over the Throne," however, He is the Everlasting Sovereign (al-Samad) without rival, the Unique without limit.41

And Allah Almighty is Most Knowing and Most Wise. May Allah Almighty bless and greet our master Muhammad, his Family, and his Companions!

NOTES

1In his Tafsir (18:281).
2In Lata'if al-Isharat (4:118).
3Al-Nawawi, al-Majmu` Sharh al-Muhadhdhab (1:25).
4As cited in `Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi, Usul al-Din (p. 113).
5Al-Bayhaqi, al-Asma' wa al-Sifat (2:308).
6In his al-Fisal fi al-Milal (2:125).
7Ibn Abi Ya`la, Tabaqat al-Hanabila (2:296).
8In Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 13:406).
9Ibn Abi Ya`la, Tabaqat al-Hanabila (2:296-297).
10Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari, Tawhid ch. 22 (1959 ed. 13:414; 1989 ed. 13:508 #7422).
11In al-Yafi`i, Marham al-`Ilal (p. 245) and Abu al-Ma`ali Ibn al-Juwayni, al-Irshad (p. 59-60).
12Respectively in `Arida al-Ahwadhi (2:234-237) and Fath al-Bari (3:37-38, 6:136 [Jihad], also Tawhid ch. 23 last par.).
13In al-Ta'sis al-Radd `ala Asas al-Taqdis (= Talbis al-Jahmiyya 1:111).
14Its text is quoted in full in Ibn al-Subki's Tabaqat (9:35-91) and its translation is forthcoming insha Allah.
15Reproduced in full in al-Nabahani's Shawahid al-Haqq (p. 210-240).
16In al-Fisal (2:124).
17In al-Bayhaqi, al-Asma' wa al-Sifat (al-Hashidi ed. 2:308).
18As reported by Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 13:409f.), book of Tawhid, chapter 22.
19Ibid.
20Ibn Taymiyya, Majmu` al-Fatawa, Vol. 5 entitled al-Asma' wa al-Sifat (5:199).
21Op. cit. (5:103).
22Cf. Mukhtar al-Sihah (p. 136).
23Narrated as a dream seen after `Umar's death. See the following under the entry `arsh: Lisan al-`Arab, Ibn al-Athir's al-Nihaya, al-Raghib's Mufradat Alfaz al-Qur'an, al-Basa'ir (4:24), and `Umda al-Huffaz.
24Ibn `Abd al-Salam, al-Ishara ila al-Ijaz (p. 104-112).
25The explanation of istawa as istaqarra in the verse {Then He established Himself over the Throne} (32:4) is actually reported from al-Kalbi and Muqatil by al-Baghawi - in his commentary entitled Ma`alim al-Tanzil (al-Manar ed. 3:488) - who adds that the philologist Abu `Ubayda [Ma`mar ibn al-Muthanna al-Taymi (d. ~210)] said "He mounted" (sa`ida). Pickthall followed the latter in his translation of the verse as {Then He mounted the Throne}. It is a foundational position of the "Salafis" as stated by Imam Muhammad Abu Zahra: "The `Salafis' and Ibn Taymiyya assert that settledness takes place over the Throne.... Ibn Taymiyya strenuously asserts that Allah descends, and can be above (fawq) and below (taht) `without how'.... and that the school of the Salaf is the affirmation of everything that the Qur'an stated concerning aboveness (fawqiyya), belowness (tahtiyya), and establishment over the Throne." Abu Zahra, al-Madhahib al-Islamiyya (p. 320-322).
26Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 13:409).
27In Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 13:409f.).
28See Ibn Khafif's `Aqida ßß15-19.
29Cf. Ibn al-A`rabi in al-Dhahabi's Mukhtasar al-`Uluw (p. 195 #241) and Dawud al-Zahiri - both of whom are quoted by Ibn Hajar in his discussion in Fath al-Bari - and Ibn `Abd al-Barr in his discussion of the hadith of descent in al-Tamhid: "The meaning of istawla in the language is `to overcome,' and Allah Almighty does not need to overcome anyone."
30In Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 13:409f.).
31In Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 13:409f.).
32In al-Zabidi, Taj al-`Arus, entry s-w-y.
33In Daf` Shubah al-Tashbih (1998 al-Kawthari repr. p. 23).
34Al-Buti, al-Salafiyya (p. 132-133). For "Hands" = kindness, mercy, generosity, etc. see al-Qari, Mirqat al-Mafatih (1892 ed. 2:137, 1994 ed. 3:302) and al-Nawawi, Sharh Sahih Muslim, hadith "Then He stretches out both hands, saying: `Who shall loan One Who is neither indigent nor inequitable?'" This phrase concludes the hadith of descent in one of Muslim's narrations.
35`Uthman al-Darimi, Naqd al-Jahmiyya (p. 75).
36Cf. the latter's Bada'i` al-Fawa'id (1900 ed. 4:39-40, 1994 ed. 2:328-329).
37Al-Kawthari, Maqalat (p. 358).
38In al-Munawi, Fayd al-Qadir, under the entry for the hadith: "Allah inscribed the destinies of all created things before creating the heavens and the earth by fifty thousand years, while His Throne stood upon the water." Narrated from `Abd Allah ibn `Amr ibn al-`As by al-Tirmidhi (hasan sahih gharib) and Ahmad; also by Muslim with the following wording: "Allah inscribed (kataba) the destinies of all created things before creating the heavens and the earth by fifty thousand years, while His Throne stood upon the water (wa `arshuhu `ala al-ma')."
39The sound versions of Imam Malik's famous response to the man who asked about istiwa' are as follows: [1] "The `how' of it is inconceivable; the `establishment' part of it is not unknown; belief in it is obligatory; asking about it is an innovation; and I believe that you are a man of innovation." Narrated from Ja`far ibn `Abd Allah by al-Dhahabi, Siyar (7:415). [2] "{The Merciful established Himself over the Throne} just as He described Himself. One cannot ask `how.' `How' does not apply to Him. And you are an evil man, a man of innovation. Take him out!" Narrated from Ibn Wahb by al-Bayhaqi with a sound chain in al-Asma' wa al-Sifat (2:304-305 #866), al-Dhahabi in the Siyar (7:416), and Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 13:406-407; 1989 ed. 13:501). [3] "The establishment is not unknown; the "how" is inconceivable; belief in it is obligatory; asking about it is an innovation; and I do not think that you are anything but an innovator." Narrated from Yahya ibn Yahya al-Tamimi and Malik's shaykh Rabi`a ibn Abi `Abd al-Rahman by al-Bayhaqi with a sound chain in al-Asma' wa al-Sifat (2:305-306 #867) and by Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani in al-Jami` fi al-Sunan (p. 123). Note that the wording that says: "The `how'
is unknown" (al-kayfu majhul) is also narrated from Rabi`a by al-Bayhaqi in al-Asma' wa al-Sifat (2:306 #868) with a sound chain, but is an aberrant narration (riwaya shadhdha). Yet it is the preferred wording of Ibn Taymiyya in Dar' Ta`arud al-`Aql wa al-Naql (1:278) and Majmu`a al-Fatawa (17:373) as he infers from it support for his positions.
40In al-Sayf al-Saqil (p. 128).
41Al-Qushayri, Lata'if (5:139).
-----------------------------------------------------

More on Istiqrar may follow Insha'Allah below as a question for the beguiled Hashwiyyatul-Asr. NOTE - some Hashwiyya took offence of my negative stance on Uthman al-Darimi mentioned above. We affirm that the man was Thiqa in Hadith, but what we disdain is his personal aqeeda, so this is why we say he promoted the Way of the Mushabbiha in some of his creedal statements on the Sifat of Allah. I wish to know from his defenders how they explain this portion ascribed to him (and repeated by his later disemminator: ibn Taymiyya): "If He so willed, He could have settled on the back of a gnat and it would have carried Him thanks to His power and the favor of His lordship, not to mention the magnificient Throne." . How do they explain al-Khallal's view on seating and the one who denied it is a Disbeliever?!

Let them explain it in another thread by scans and in its full context if they care...

Wassalam

Abul Hasan

Abul Hasan

30-05-2005, 01:47 PM

Continuing on Istiqrar...

In my 28 page radd on AR Qadri/ibn Abi Yala found here:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5051&highlight=abdas+salam

I also quoted the following as an earlier clarification on the allegation that Istiqrar is the so called meaning of Istiwa alal Arsh. The following was a clarification of what Imam ibn Abdas Salam said in his personal aqeeda, known as the Mulha fi I'tiqad Ahl al-Haqq:

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

قال الشيخ عز الدين بن عبد السلام رحمه الله ورضي عنه وعنّا به الحمد لله ذي العزة والجلال والقدرة والكمال والإنعام والإفضال الواحد الأحد الفردُ الصمد الذي لم يلد ولم يولد ولم يكن له كفوا أحد ليس بجسم مصوَّر ولا جوهرٍ محدودٍ مقدر ولا يشبه شيئا ولا يشبهه شيءٌ ولا تحيط به الجهات ولا تكتنفه الأرضون ولا السموات كان قبل أن كوَّن المكان ودبَّر الزمان وهو الآن على ما عليه كان خلَق الخلق وأعمالهم وقدّر أرزاقهم وآجالهم فكلُّ نعمة منه فهي فضلٌ وكلّ نقمة منه فهي عدلٌ (لا يُسئَلُ عمَّا يَفْعَلُ وَهُمْ يُسئَلُونَ ) استوى على العرش المجيد على الوجه الذي قاله وبالمعنى الذي أراده استواء منزها عن المماسَّة والاستقرار والتمكُّن والحلول والانتقال فتعالى الله الكبير المتعال عما يقوله أهل الغي والضلال بل لا يحمله العرشُ بل العرشُ وحملَتُه محمولون بلطف قدرته مقهورون في قبضته أحاط بكلِّ شيءٍ عِلما وأحصى كلَّ شيء عددا مطّلِعٌ على هواجس الضمائر وحركات الخواطر حيٌّ مريدٌ سميعٌ بصيرٌ عليمٌ قديرٌ متكلم بكلامٍ قديم أزليٍّ ليس بحرفٍ ولا صوت ولا يُتصوَّر في كلامه أن ينقلب مِداداً في الألواح والأوراق شكلا ترمُقه العيون والأحداق كما زعم أهل الحشو والنِّفاق بل الكتابة من أفعال العباد ولا يُتصوَّر في أفعالهم أن تكون قديمة ويجب احترامها لدلالتها على كلامه كما يجب احترام أسمائه لدلالتها على ذاته وحُقَّ لما دلَّ عليه وانتسب إليه أن يُعتقد عظمته وترعى حرمته ولذلك يجب احترام الكعبة والأنبياء والعُباد والصُّلحاء

GF Haddad translated most of the above as follows with editing (highlighting and emphasis is mine):

In the Name of Allah, the All-Beneficent, the Most Merciful. All praise belongs to Allah the Owner of power and majesty, infinite might and perfection, favor and munificence, the One, and One Alone, Unique, Everlasting, Who neither begets nor is begotten, and unto Whom nothing compares.

What Allah Is Not

He is not a body endowed with form. He is not a substance confined by boundary or measurement. He resembles nothing and nothing resembles Him. Directions and sides do not encompass Him. Neither the earths nor the heavens contain Him.

His Preternity (Beginninglessness)

He was before He brought place and time into existence, and He is now as He ever was. (1)

His Acts

He created creatures as well as their actions. He decreed the extent of their sustenance and the term of their lives. Every benefit from Him is from His favor, and every punishment is from His justice. He will not be questioned as to what He does, but they will be questioned. (21:23)

He established Himself over the glorious Throne in the way that He says and the meaning He intends, “established” in a manner transcending contact (mumâssa), settledness (istiqrâr), fixity (tamakkun), indwelling (hulûl), or movement (intiqâl). (2)

Exalted is Allah the Greatest, the Most High, far above the claims of the people of error and misguidance! Never can the Throne carry Him, rather the Throne and the Throne-Bearers are carried up by the subtlety of His infinite might, and all are powerless (maqhûrûn) in His grasp. (3)

----------------------------------------
Footnotes for the above:

(1)- Cf. hadith of the Prophet : kâna allâhu wa lâ shay’a ma‘ahu / ghayruhu / qablahu – “Allah existed and nothing existed together with Him / other than Him / before Him.” Narrated from Burayda by al-Hakim in al-Mustadrak (2:341), who declared it sound (sahîh) – al-Dhahabi concurred – and from ‘Imran ibn Husayn by Bukhari, Ibn Hibban with two sound chains in his Sahih (14:7 #6140, 14:11 #6142), and Ibn Abi Shayba in his Musannaf. See Appendix, “Allah is now as He ever was.”

(2) See the appendix entitled “Istiwâ’ is a Divine Act” in our translation of Bayhaqi’s al-Asma’ wa al-Sifat, published separately. Note that the “Salafis” deny most of the above: “ The ‘Salafis’ and Ibn Taymiyya assert that settledness takes place over the Throne…. Ibn Taymiyya strenuously asserts that Allah descends, and can be above (fawq) and below (taht) ‘without how’…. and that the school of the Salaf is the affirmation of everything that the Qur’an stated concerning aboveness (fawqiyya), belowness (tahtiyya), and establishment over the Throne.” Abu Zahra, al-Madhahib al-Islamiyya (p. 320-322). Ibn Rushd in Sharh al-‘Utbiyya stated that Malik’s position is: “The Throne is not Allah’s location of settledness (mawdi‘ istiqrâr Allâh).” As quoted in Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 7:124 #3592).

(3) “We assert that Allah established Himself over the throne without His need (hâja) nor settlement (istiqrâr) upon it, for He it is Who preserves the Throne and other than it without needing any of them.” Abu Hanifa, Wasiyya al-Imam al-A‘zam ila Abi ‘Amr ‘Uthman al-Batti (p. 10). “Allah established Himself over the Throne in the sense that He said and the meaning that He wills, with an establishment that transcends touch, settlement, location, immanence, and displacement. The Throne does not carry him, rather the Throne and its carriers are carried by the subtleness of His power, subdued under His grip.” Al-Ash‘ari, al-Ibana ‘an Usul al-Diyana, Mahmud ed. (p. 21); Sabbagh ed. (p. 35), as translated in Shaykh Hisham Kabbani’s Islamic Beliefs and Doctrine According to Ahl al-Sunna (p. 169). “The carrier of the Throne and of its carriers is in reality Allah Himself.” Abu Sulayman al-Khattabi (d. 386) as quoted in Bayhaqi, al-Asma’ wa al-Sifat (al-Hashidi ed. 2:279-280).

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

If one considers carefully what was said above one may deduce the following conclusions:

1) Ibn Abdas Salam rejected Istiqrar as the intended meaning for Istiwa

2) Ibn Rushd al-Maliki claimed it was rejected by Imam Malik's words - as the Hafiz al-Waqt ibn Hajar al-Asqalani mentioned in Fath al-Bari

3) Imam Abu Hanifa has been ascribed with rejecting Istiqrar (so take note O you who claim to have the same aqeeda as Imam Abu Hanifa)

4) In some of the manuscripts of the Ibana attributed to Imam al-Ash'ari today - this Imam has been said to have rejected Istiqrar - so let the reader question those who claim that the Ibana has never been tampered with in any shape or form and why this paragraph exists in some Ibana manuscripts - in rejection of Istiqrar

----------

There are other Imams who rejected Istiqrar as time may show Insha'Allah. Let the Hashwiyya note that they claim to be "Salafi" - but eminent one's from the Salaf like: Imam Malik, Imam Abu Hanifa, and if we count Imam al-Ash'ari as well (as he was alive before the end of the 3rd century), as well as later Ulama like Ibn Abdas Salam - are all on record as rejecting Istiqrar.

Once again, these Hashwi folk make taqleed of stray opinions (Shudhudh), and promote the rejected view of al-Hafiz ibn Abdal Barr al-Maliki (ex-Zahiri) - who was refuted by his fellow Maliki aqeeda specialists (as we mentioned: ibn al-Arabi and Abul Walid al-Baji), then by Ibn Jahbal a-Shafi'i followed by Zaynud-Din al-Iraqi...

If the Hashwiyya are so fond of Ibn Abdal Barr - let them quote what he said about Nuzul bi-dhatihi - and his radd on Nuaym ibn Hammad - the enemy of Imam Abu Hanifa. This Nuaym was a Shaykh to al-Bukhari also... Or may be they can tell us how Ibn Abdal Barr refuted the "proofs" for 8 Rak'ats of Taraweeh - as many of the Hashwiyya can not admit the acceptance of 20 Rak’ats by the Jumhur al-Salaf wal Khalaf - and compose refutations against it here and there!

Those who follow our replies should talk a bit about the incredible lack of credibility their own folk possess and disseminate in order to bolster their own feeble aqeeda, and hence beguile the real Salafi-Sunni across the internet! Stay with us and we will show more Insha'Allah!

Wassalam

Abul Hasan

Abul Hasan

30-05-2005, 03:38 PM

Some quotes (we may update and add more as time allows Insha'Allah) on negating Istiqrar:

al-Hafiz ibn Hajar al Asqalani said in his magnum opus, Fath al-Bari:

قوله (وقال مجاهد استوى: علا على العرش) وصله الفريابي عن ورقاء عن ابن أبي نجيح عنه قال ابن بطال اختلف الناس في الاستواء المذكور هنا فقالت المعتزلة معناه الاستيلاء بالقهر والغلبة واحتجوا بقول الشاعر: قد استوى بشر على العراق من غير ودم مهراق وقالت الجسمية معناه الاستقرار

Part of this quote from Ibn Hajar on the authority of Ibn Battal al-Maliki was translated by Dr Haddad as:

The Mu`tazila said its meaning is "establishing dominion through subjugation and overpowering" (al-istila' bi al-qahr wa al-ghalaba), citing as a proof the saying of the poet:

Bishr established mastery over Iraq without sword and without shedding blood.

The anthropomorphists (al-jismiyya) said: "Its meaning is settledness (al-istiqrar)."

Ibn Hajar also quoted Ibn Rushd saying this based on Imam Malik:

قال أبو الوليد بن رشد في " شرح العتبية " إنما نهى مالك لئلا يسبق إلى وهم الجاهل أن العرش إذا تحرك يتحرك الله بحركته كما يقع للجالس منا على كرسيه، وليس العرش بموضع استقرار الله، تبارك الله وتنزه عن مشابهة خلقه.

The Mujaddid and Hafiz al-Hadith: Jalalud-Din al-Suyuti (d. 911 AH) said in al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Qur'an (2/8-9):

ذكر ما وقفت عليه من تأويل الآية المذكورة على طريقة أهل السنة من ذلك صفة الاستواء وحاصل ما رأيت فيها سبعة أجوبة‏.‏

أحدها‏:‏ حكى مقاتل والكلبي عن ابن عباس أن استوى بمعنى استقر وهذا إن صح يحتاج إلى تأويل فإن الاستقرار يشعر بالتجسيم‏‏

Shaykh Shuayb al-Arna'ut in his editing of Aqawil al-Thiqat of al-Karmi (p. 123, fn. 1) dismissed the authenticity of these reports referred to by Imam al-Suyuti (ra), as did Imam al-Bayhaqi (see below).

In his beneficial Radd on al-Albani and others from the Hashwiyya, Shaykh ibn Khalifa al-Azhari in the late 1970's wrote the book: Hadhihi Aqeedatus Salaf wal Khalaf fi-Dhat Allahu ta'ala wa Sifatuhu wa af'aluhu wal Jawab al-Sahih. On p. 33 he quoted the Shafi'i Mufassir al-Qur'an: Khatib al-Shirbini (d. 977 AH) as saying this (and also rejecting Istiqrar and mentioning also the fact that Istiwa is from the Mutashabihat):

الإمام الخطيب الشربيني والاستواء

ذكر الخطيب في تفسيره عند قوله تعالى: {ثُمَّ اسْتَوَى عَلَى الْعَرْشِ}. قال: استوى أمره، وقال أهل السنة: الاستواء على العرش صفة اللَّه بلا كيف يجب الإِيمان به، ونكل فيه العلم إِلى اللَّه تعالى. والمعنى: "إِن اللَّه سبحانه وتعالى استوى على العرش على الوجه الذي تمناهُ، منزه عن الاستقرار والتمكّن".
ورُوي عن سفيان الثوري، والأوزاعي، والليث بن سعد وغيرهم من علماء السنة في هذه الآيات التي جاءت بها الصفات المتشابهة "أمّروها كما جاءت". "واجماع السلف منعقدٌ على أن لا يزيدوا على قراءة الآية". أهـ.

Imam al-Bayhaqi on Istiwa and rejection of Istiqrar, in his al-I'tiqad:

الِاعْتِقَادُ لِلْبَيْهَقِيِّ >> بَابُ الْقَوْلِ فِي الِاسْتِوَاءِ >>
" يَنْزِلُ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ كُلَّ لَيْلَةٍ إِلَى سَمَاءِ الدُّنْيَا حِينَ

56 أخبرنا علي بن محمد بن عبد الله بن بشران ، ثنا أحمد بن سلمان ، قال : قرئ على سليمان بن الأشعث ، وأخبرنا أبو علي الروذباري ، أنا أبو بكر بن داسة ، ثنا أبو داود ، ثنا القعنبي ، عن مالك ، عن ابن شهاب ، عن أبي سلمة بن عبد الرحمن ، وعن أبي عبد الله الأغر ، عن أبي هريرة ، رضي الله عنه ، أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : " ينزل الله عز وجل كل ليلة إلى سماء الدنيا حين يبقى ثلث الليل الآخر فيقول : من يدعوني فأستجيب له ، من يسألني فأعطيه ، من يستغفرني فأغفر له " قال رحمه الله : وهذا حديث صحيح رواه جماعة من الصحابة عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ، وأصحاب الحديث فيما ورد به الكتاب والسنة من أمثال هذا ، ولم يتكلم أحد من الصحابة والتابعين في تأويله ، ثم إنهم على قسمين : منهم من قبله وآمن به ولم يؤوله ووكل علمه إلى الله ونفى الكيفية والتشبيه عنه . ومنهم من قبله وآمن به وحمله على وجه يصح استعماله في اللغة ولا يناقض التوحيد . وقد ذكرنا هاتين الطريقتين في كتاب الأسماء والصفات في المسائل التي تكلموا فيها من هذا الباب ، وفي الجملة يجب أن يعلم أن استواء الله سبحانه وتعالى ليس باستواء اعتدال عن اعوجاج ولا استقرار في مكان ، ولا مماسة لشيء من خلقه ، لكنه مستو على عرشه كما أخبر بلا كيف بلا أين ، بائن من جميع خلقه ، وأن إتيانه ليس بإتيان من مكان إلى مكان ، وأن مجيئه ليس بحركة ، وأن نزوله ليس بنقلة ، وأن نفسه ليس بجسم ، وأن وجهه ليس بصورة ، وأن يده ليست بجارحة ، وأن عينه ليست بحدقة ، وإنما هذه أوصاف جاء بها التوقيف ، فقلنا بها ونفينا عنها التكييف ، فقد قال : ليس كمثله شيء ، وقال : ولم يكن له كفوا أحد ، وقال : هل تعلم له سميا *

The view of Qadi Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi has been mentioned in the above attachment, i add here the portion in rejection of Istiwa meaning Istiqrar from his Sharh on al-Jami al-Tirmidhi:

Istiwâ’ in the Arabic language has fifteen meanings both literal and figurative. Some of these meanings are suitable for Allah and the meaning of the verse (20:4) is derived from them. The other meanings are not accepted under any circumstances. For example, if it is taken to mean being fixed in a place (tamakkun), settling (istiqrâr), connecting (ittisâl), or being bounded (muhâdhât): then none of these are suitable for the Creator  and no-one should try to find His likeness in His creation.

One may refrain from explaining the verse, as Malik and others have said: “Istiwâ’ is known” – he means: its lexical sense– “and its modality is unknown” (wa al-kayfu majhûl) – that is: the modality of whatever is suitable for Allah among the senses of istiwâ’: therefore who can specify such modality? – “and asking about it is innovation” – because, as we have just made clear, probing this matter is looking for dubious matters and that is asking for fitna.

Hence, from what the Imam of Muslims Malik has said, we can conclude that the istiwâ’ is known; that what is suitable for Allah is left unspecified; and that He is declared transcendent above what is impossible for Him. As for specifying what is not suitable for Him, it is not permissible for you, since you have completed the declaration of oneness and belief by negating likeness for Allah and by negating whatever it is absurd to believe concerning Him. There is no need for anything beyond that, and we have already explained this in detail.

Imam al-Munawi was quoted here (http://www.sunnah.org/aqida/istiwa_divine_act.htm) as saying in his Fayd al-Qadir:

Al-Tunisi said that the verse “And His Throne was upon the water” (11:7) contains a clear proof that direction is impossible for Allah - Most High - because the Throne settled (istaqarra) upon the water, therefore, since natural custom was broken by the settlement of that huge mass (jirm) - the largest of all masses - upon the water, contrary to the habitual fact that such a mass - or, rather, much less than it! - does not usually settle upon the water: it becomes known with certitude that istiwa’ over it is not an istiwa’ of settledness nor fixity

Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni was quoted here (http://www.sunnah.org/aqida/aqida1.doc) as follows:

Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni (d. 478) said in his al-Irshad as quoted by al-Yafi`i in the latter's book Kitab marham al-`ilal al-mu`dila:

"Care must be taken to show the vulgar anthropomorphists (hashwiyya) the verses upon which they do practice ta'wil so that when they invoke as proof of their belief in Allah's "settling" (istiqrar) the external meaning of "The Merciful is established on the Throne" (20:4), ask them for the meaning of "And He is with you wheresoever you are" (57:4)..."

Note: Kitab al-Irshad was an earlier work by al-Juwayni and his final aqeeda is found in his Risala al-Nizamiyya - a work which affirms Tafweed al-Ma'na (as quoted in portion from al-Juwayni by al-Hafiz ibn Hajar, al-Dhahabi and others)

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

NOW: Where do the Hashwiyya get "proof" to establish their belief that Istiwa means: Istiqrar (settling on the Arsh for Allah)?!

Answer: I know of know sahih and marfu narration from Allah's Messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) or a single Sahabi affirming that Istiwa means: Istiqrar alone! The Hashwiyya/Mushabbiha try to quote the baseless claims of the likes of al-Kalbi and Muqatil to establish this fundamental point of aqeeda. May be we will mention who was Muqatil a little later Insha'Allah. The problem with al-Kalbi is mentioned by al-Bayhaqi below.

So, Imam al-Bayhaqi the Ash'ari, Shafi'i Hafiz of Hadith and Aqeeda Master mentioned this narration utilised by the Hashwiyya and falsely ascribed back to Hadrat ibn Abbas (ra) - the Mufassir al-A'zam amongst the Sahaba in his Kitab al-Asma wal Sifat:

الْأَسْمَاءُ وَالصِّفَاتُ لِلْبَيْهَقِيِّ >> بَابُ مَا جَاءَ فِي قَوْلِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ >>
اسْتَقَرَّ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ ، وَيُقَالُ امْتَلَأَ بِهِ ، وَيُقَالُ : قَائِمٌ

840 فأما ما أخبرنا أبو عبد الرحمن محمد بن عبد الرحمن بن محمد بن محبور الدهان ، أنا الحسين بن محمد بن هارون ، أنا أحمد بن محمد بن محمد بن نصر اللباد ، ثنا يوسف بن بلال ، عن محمد بن مروان عن الكلبي ، عن أبي صالح ، عن ابن عباس ، رضي الله عنهما في قوله : ثم استوى على العرش يقول : استقر على العرش ، ويقال امتلأ به ، ويقال : قائم على العرش ، وهو السرير " *

Let us see how Imam al-Bayhaqi skilfully rejected this narration and refuted the claim that Istiwa means: Istiqrar from the same book:

الْأَسْمَاءُ وَالصِّفَاتُ لِلْبَيْهَقِيِّ >> بَابُ مَا جَاءَ فِي قَوْلِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ >>
اسْتَوَى عِنْدَهُ الْخَلَائِقُ ، الْقَرِيبُ وَالْبَعِيدُ ، وَصَارُوا عِنْدَهُ سَوَاءً "

841 وبهذا الإسناد في موضع آخر عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما في قوله ثم استوى على العرش يقول : استوى عنده الخلائق ، القريب والبعيد ، وصاروا عنده سواء " ويقال : استوى استقر على السرير . ويقال : امتلأ به . فهذه الرواية منكرة ، وإنما أضاف في الموضع الثاني القول الأول إلى ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما دون ما بعده ، وفيه أيضا ركاكة ، ومثله لا يليق بقول ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما ، إذا كان الاستواء بمعنى استواء الخلائق عنده ، فإيش المعنى في قوله : على العرش ؟ وكأنه مع سائر الأقاويل فيها من جهة من دونه ، وقد قال في موضع آخر بهذا الإسناد استوى على العرش يقول : استقر أمره على السرير ، ورد الاستقرار إلى الأمر ، وأبو صالح هذا والكلبي ومحمد بن مروان كلهم متروك عند أهل العلم بالحديث ، لا يحتجون بشيء من رواياتهم لكثرة المناكير فيها ، وظهور الكذب منهم في رواياتهم . أخبرنا أبو سعد أحمد بن محمد الماليني ، أنا أبو أحمد عبد الله بن عدي الحافظ ، ثنا محمد بن يوسف بن عاصم البخاري ، ثنا عبد الله بن محمد الزهري ، ثنا سفيان ، عن محمد بن قيس ، عن حبيب بن أبي ثابت ، قال : كنا نسميه دروغ زن ، يعني أبا صالح مولى أم هانئ . وأخبرنا أبو عبد الله الحافظ ، أنا أبو بكر الحفيد ، ثنا هارون بن عبد الصمد ، ثنا علي بن المديني ، قال : سمعت يحيى بن سعيد القطان ، يحدث عن سفيان ، قال : قال الكلبي : قال لي أبو صالح : كل ما حدثتك كذب أخبرنا أبو سعد الماليني ، ثنا أبو أحمد بن عدي ، ثنا أحمد بن حفص ، ثنا أبو حفص الفلاس ، ثنا أبو عاصم ، عن سفيان ، عن الكلبي ، قال : قال لي أبو صالح : " انظر كل شيء رويت عني عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما ، فلا تروه " . قال : وأخبرنا أبو أحمد قال : سمعت عبدان يقول : سمعت زيد بن الحريش يقول : سمعت أبا معاوية يقول : قلنا للكلبي : " بين لنا ما سمعت من أبي صالح وما هو قولك ، فإذا الأمر عنده قليل " . قال : وأخبرنا أبو أحمد ، ثنا الجنيدي ، ثنا البخاري قال : محمد بن السائب أبو النضر الكلبي الكوفي تركه يحيى بن سعيد وعبد الرحمن بن مهدي أخبرنا أبو عبد الله الحافظ ، قال : سمعت أبا العباس محمد بن يعقوب يقول : سمعت العباس بن محمد ، يقول : سمعت يحيى بن معين ، يقول : الكلبي ليس بشيء أخبرنا أبو سهل أحمد بن محمد بن إبراهيم بن مهران المزكي ، ثنا أبو الحسين محمد بن أحمد بن حامد العطار ، أخبرني أبو عبد الله الراوساني ، قال : سمعت محمد بن إسماعيل البخاري ، يقول : محمد بن مروان الكوفي صاحب الكلبي سكتوا عنه ، لا يكتب حديثه البتة قلت : وكيف يجوز أن يكون مثل هذه الأقاويل صحيحة عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما ، ثم لا يرويها ولا يعرفها أحد من أصحابه الثقات الأثبات ، مع شدة الحاجة إلى معرفتها ، وما تفرد به الكلبي وأمثاله يوجب الحد ، والحد يوجب الحدث لحاجة الحد إلى حاد خصه به ، والباري قديم لم يزل

Now:

The Hashwiyyatul Asr are fond of quoting Imam al-Dhahabi when it suits them! I say: Al-Dhahabi is a double edged sword for you! You quote him when it suits you and ignore or hide his statements when it refuted you. As for us, we know al-Dhahabi went via some phases after the days his Master: ibn Taymiyya departed this world. I have already mentioned that al-Dhahabi had no problem with Tafweed al-Ma'nawiyya (quote to come later Insha'Allah), he had no problem with Ziyara to the blessed Qabr of Allah's Nabi (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), his Nasiha to ibn Taymiyya was seen by Imam al-Sakhawi (who never rejected its authenticity from al-Dhahabi, especially since both he and his Shaykh Ibn Hajar - took Hadith from al-Dhahabi's own son: Abu Hurayra, so they could have easily verified its authenticity)..

I add now: Al-Dhahabi also declared Sahih the narration which establishes Ta'wil of the Saaq as narrated and authenticated by al-Hakim (but weakened by the distorter: Amr Abdal Munim Salim from Egypt, and conveyed on by AR Qadri via taqleed, and NOTE: Ibn Hajar declared this very narration: Hasan, also quoted by al-Karmi the Hanbali in his Aqawil, and Shaykh Shu’ayb al-Arna'ut knew all this and never questioned the authenticity given to it by these named Imams. Alhamdulillah!). Al-Dhahabi also rejected the concept of Istiwa "bi-Dhatihi" - in his Kitab al-Uluw and his later Siyar a'lam an-Nubala - but the Hashwiyya usually hide all this!

Now, we challenge them: If this is your Imam and was really on the way of Ibn Taymiyya till the end of his days: Produce for us if you care scans from his Kitab al-Uluw and tell us all here or at ahwa.org - what he said about: ISTIQRAR - under the notes to: Abu Ahmad al-Qassab (p. 259 of the Mukhtasar edn by al-Albani) and under: al-Baghawi (p. 280 of the Mukhtasar edition again)!

The Hashwiyya talk about credibility and accuse us of lies, mock us with titles like "neo-Jahmi", "Kullabi-Asharites", claim that I post under names like "Salafist/Abu Adam Sadiq/Karim Abdullah", "run away" from debates and so on... with baseless and puerile "proofs" - Then they have no fear in establishing aqeeda with speculative evidences or misunderstandings, not to mention weak and even fabricated narrations (as their Imam: ibn Qayyim attempted to do in his al-Ijtima al-Juyush al-Islamiyya). Insha'Allah, as long as I have a little time and good health I will respond if need be and show the distortions of those who accuse us.. I am not going to waste too much time on puerile debates if there is no fa'ida and no Ilm al-Naafi derived for the sincere readers.

Let us also say to the Hashwiyya: Do not quote just X,Y and Z on your attempts to affirm Istiqrar for Allah's Istiwa if you lack a credible reference from the Kitab wal-Sunna or a sahih sanad back to a Sahabi or major Aimma from the Salaf - if you really claim to be SALAFI.

Lâ hawla wala quwwata illa billahil aliul-Azim.

Wassalam

Abul Hasan

Abul Hasan

30-05-2005, 07:01 PM

The Hashwiyya/Mushabbiha try to quote the baseless claims of the likes of al-Kalbi and Maqatil to establish this fundamental point of aqeeda. May be we will mention who was Maqatil a little later Insha'Allah. The problem with al-Kalbi is mentioned by al-Bayhaqi below.

:salam:

As i said above about Muqatil, let us provide a little insight into this man that the Hashwiyya quote to establish their point in belief on Istiwa - that it allegedly means Istiqrar.

Shaykh Nuh Keller, whom the Hashwiyya declared a "Jahmi" with their vile distortions and answered here in some extent (see the posts from Br. Faqir here under the Ta'wil of the Sahaba thread), mentioned a little about this man: Maqatil here (http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/masudq5.htm) more than 10 years ago in these words from the Hafiz discussed earlier: Shamsud-Din al-Dhahabi who quoted our Imam: Abu Hanifa's verdict, as follows:

It was Imam Abu Hanifa (d. 150/767) who first noted, "Two depraved opinions have reached us from East, those of Jahm [ibn Safwan] (d. 128/745), the nullifier of the divine attributes, and those of Muqatil [ibn Sulayman al-Balkhi (d. c.a. 150/767)], the likener of Allah to His creation" (Dhahabi, Siyar a‘lam al-nubala’ [Beirut: Mu’assasa al-Risala, 1401/1984], 7.202).

I looked to see the words of al-Dhahabi further in the Siyar and he mentioned as follows about Muqatil:

سِيَرُ أَعْلاَمِ النُّبَلاَءِ، - للإمام الذَّهبي
المُجَلَّدُ السَّابِعُ >> [تابع: الطَّبَقَةُ السَّادِسَةُ مِنَ التَّابِعِيْنَ] >> 79 - مُقَاتِلُ بنُ سُلَيْمَانَ البَلْخِيُّ، أَبُو الحَسَنِ

كَبِيْرُ المُفَسِّرِيْنَ، أَبُو الحَسَنِ مُقَاتِلُ بنُ سُلَيْمَانَ البَلْخِيُّ.
يَرْوِي - عَلَى ضَعْفِهِ البَيِّنِ - عَنْ: مُجَاهِدٍ، وَالضَّحَّاكِ، وَابْنِ بُرَيْدَةَ، وَعَطَاءِ، وَابْنِ سِيْرِيْنَ، وَعَمْرِو بنِ شُعَيْبٍ، وَشُرَحْبِيْلَ بنِ سَعْدٍ، وَالمَقْبُرِيِّ، وَالزُّهْرِيِّ، وَعِدَّةٍ.
وَعَنْهُ: سَعْدُ بنُ الصَّلْتِ، وَبَقِيَّةُ، وَعَبْدُ الرَّزَّاقِ، وَحَرَمِيُّ بنُ عُمَارَةَ، وَشَبَابَةُ، وَالوَلِيْدُ بنُ مَزْيَدٍ، وَخَلْقٌ، آخِرُهُم: عَلِيُّ بنُ الجَعْدِ.
قَالَ ابْنُ المُبَارَكِ - وَأَحْسَنَ -: مَا أَحْسَنَ تَفْسِيْرَهُ لَوْ كَانَ ثِقَةً!
قِيْلَ: إِنَّ المَنْصُوْرَ أَلَحَّ عَلَيْهِ ذُبَابٌ، فَطَلَبَ مُقَاتِلاً، فَسَأَلَهُ: لِمَ خَلَقَ اللهُ الذُّبَابَ؟
قَالَ: لِيُذِلَّ بِهِ الجَبَّارِيْنَ. (7/202)
قَالَ ابْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ: قُلْتُ لِمُقَاتِلٍ: زَعَمُوا أَنَّك لَمْ تَسْمَعْ مِنَ الضَّحَّاكِ.
قَالَ: كَانَ يُغْلِقُ عَلَيَّ وَعَلَيْهِ بَابٌ، فَقُلْتُ فِي نَفْسِي: أَجَلْ، بَابُ المَدِيْنَةِ.
وَقِيْلَ: إِنَّهُ قَالَ: سَلُونِي عَمَّا دُوْنَ العَرْشِ.
فَقَالُوا: أَيْنَ أَمعَاءُ النَّملَةِ؟
فَسَكَتَ.
وَسَأَلُوْهُ: لَمَّا حَجَّ آدَمُ، مَنْ حَلَقَ رَأْسَهُ؟ فَقَالَ: لاَ أَدْرِي.
قَالَ وَكِيْعٌ: كَانَ كَذَّاباً.
وَعَنْ أَبِي حَنِيْفَةَ، قَالَ: أَتَانَا مِنَ المَشْرِقِ رَأْيَان خَبِيْثَانِ: جَهْمٌ مُعَطِّلٌ، وَمُقَاتِلٌ مُشَبِّهِ.
مَاتَ مُقَاتِلٌ: سَنَةَ نَيِّفٍ وَخَمْسِيْنَ وَمائَةٍ.
قَالَ البُخَارِيُّ: مُقَاتِلٌ لاَ شَيْءَ البَتَّةَ.
قُلْتُ: أَجْمَعُوا عَلَى تَرْكِهِ. (7/203)

Al-Dhahabi mentioned above that Ibn al-Mubarak had declared him to be Thiqa, but those who had negative and heavy Jarh on him include: Waki ibn al-Jarrah (an associate of Abu Hanifa's and ibn al Mubarak's) declared him a Liar, and al-Bukhari's negative comments (see below also). Al-Dhahabi also gave his own verdict that: "There is agreement in abandoning him." (Meaning his narrations)...

More than this was mentioned by al-Dhahabi in his Mizan al-I'tidal (no. 8741) as follows (where another similar negative statement from Imam Abu Hanifa was mentioned):

- مقاتل بن سليمان البلخى المفسر ، أبو الحسن . روى عن مجاهد ، والضحاك ، وابن بريدة . وعنه حرمى بن عمارة ، وعلى بن الجعد ، وخلق . قال ابن المبارك : ما أحسن تفسيره لو كان ثقة . وعن مقاتل بن حيان - وهو صدوق - قال : ما وجدت علم مقاتل بن سليمان إلا كالبحر . وقال الشافعي : الناس عيال في التفسير على مقاتل . وقال أبو حنيفة : أفرط جهم في نفى التشبيه ، حتى قال : إنه تعالى ليس بشئ . وأفرط مقاتل - يعنى في الاثبات ( 2 ) - حتى جعله مثل خلقه . وقال وكيع : كان كذابا . وقال البخاري : قال سفيان بن عيينة : سمعت مقاتلا يقول : إن لم يخرج الدجال في سنة خمسين ومائة فاعلموا أنى كذاب . وقال العباس بن مصعب في تاريخ مرو : كان مقاتل لا يضبط الاسناد ، وكان يقص في الجامع بمرو ، فقدم جهم فجلس إلى مقاتل ، فوقعت العصبية بينهما ، فوضع كل واحد منهما على الآخر كتابا ينقض عليه . وقال النسائي : كان مقاتل يكذب . وقال ابن عيينة : قلت لمقاتل : إن ناسا يزعمون أنك لم تلق الضحاك . فقال : سبحان الله ! لقد كنت آتيه مع أبى ، ولقد كان يغلق على وعليه باب واحد . وقال البخاري : سكتوا عنه . وروى عباس ، عن يحيى ، قال : ليس حديثه بشئ ( 3 ) . * ( هامش ) * ( 1 ) ل : جميع . ( 2 ) ه* : في معنى الاثبات . والمثبت في س ، ن ، والتهذيب . ( 3 ) نقل المؤلف في هذا المؤلف في ترجمة محمد بن سعيد المصلوب عن النسائي أن مقاتلا يضع الحديث ( هامش س ) . ( * ) وقال الجوزجانى : كان دجالا جسورا ، سمعت أبا اليمان يقول : قدم ههنا فأسند ظهره إلى القبلة ، وقال . سلونى عما دون العرش ، وحدثت أنه قال مثلها ( 1 ) بمكة ، فقام إليه رجل ، فقال . أخبرني عن النملة أين أمعاؤها ؟ فسكت . المخاربى ، عن مقاتل بن دوال دوز ، وهذا لقب ( 2 ) له ، عن شرحبيل بن سعد ، عن جابر - أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : من قرأ القرآن كانت له عند الله دعوة مجابة إن شاء عجلها وإن شاء ادخرها له في الآخرة ( 3 ) . بقية ، عن مقاتل بن سليمان ، حدثنى أبو الزبير ، وشرحبيل بن سعد ، عن جابر - مرفوعا : يبعث العالم والعابد ، فيقال للعابد : ادخل الجنة . ويقال للعالم : اثبت حتى تشفع للناس بما أحسنت أدبهم . أنبأني جماعة عن عين الشمس الثقفية ( 4 ) ، أخبرنا محمد ابن أبى ذر - سنة ست وعشرين وخمسمائة ، أخبرنا أبو طاهر عبدالرحيم ، أخبرنا عبدالله بن محمد القباب ، أخبرنا أحمد بن الحسن بن هارون الاشعري ، حدثنا على بن محمد القادسى بعكبرا سنة ست وخمسين ومائتين ، حدثنا محمد بن حماد ، عن مقاتل بن سليمان ، عن الضحاك ، عن ابن عباس ، قال : إذا كان يوم القيامة ينادى مناد : أين حبيب الله ؟ فيتخطى صفوف الملائكة حتى يصير إلى العرش ، حتى يجلسه معه على العرش ، حتى يمس وكبته . فهذا لعله وضعه أحد هؤلاء أصحاب مقاتل أو القادسى . أبو حيوة الحمصى ، أخبرنا مقاتل ، عن نافع ، عن ابن عمر ، عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم - أنه نهى عن الرهن في السلم ، ومن ارتهن في دين مضمون . * ( هامش ) * ( 1 ) س : قام بمثلها . والمثبت في ن أيضا . ( 2 ) انظر هامش 1 من صفحة 172 من هذا الجزء . ( 3 ) هذا الحديث تقدم في ترجمة مقاتل بن دوال دوز ، رواه عنه المحاربي بالسند المذكور هنا . وهذا يعضد أن الاول هو ابن حيان وقد ذكر ذلك المؤلف قولا . فلا ينبغى أن يذكر ذلك في ترجمة هذا ابن سليمان ( هامش س ) . وفي التقريب : دوال دوز هو مقاتل بن سليمان . ( 4 ) في ن : الفقيه . والمثبت في س . ( * ) أبو حيوة ، أخبرنا مقاتل ، عن عمرو بن شعيب ، عن أبيه ، عن جده - مرفوعا : من نام جالسا فلا وضوء عليه . قال ابن عدى : ولمقاتل غير ما ذكرت حديث صالح ، وعامة حديثه لا ( 1 ) يتابع عليه . على أن كثيرا من الناس الثقات المعروفين حدث عنه . وله كتاب الخمسمائة التى يرويها عنه أبو نصير منصور بن عبدالحميد الباوردى . وفيه حديث كثير . وهو مع ضعفه يكتب حديثه . وقال ابن حبان : كان يأخذ من اليهود والنصارى من علم القرآن الذى يوافق كتبهم ، وكان يشبه الرب بالمخلوقات ، وكان يكذب في الحديث . وقال أبو معاذ الفضل بن خالد المروزى : سمعت خارجة بن مصعب يقول : لم أستحل دم يهودى ، ولو وجدت مقاتل بن سليمان خلوة لشققت بطنه . قال وكيع : مات مقاتل بن سليمان سنة خمسين ومائة . وقيل بعد ذلك

Muqatil was accused of lying, even called a Dajjal, though a few had good statements on him - such a man's Tafsir is not acceptable to us unless it is corroborated by authentic narrations from those in his age and before him. Astonishingly though it may seem or sound, the Hashwiyya still had little shame in quoting the likes of Muqatil the Mushabbih to affirm Istiqrar for Allah's Istiwa. May Allah guide them. Amin.

Wassalam

Abul Hasan

AbuTaymiyah

02-06-2005, 03:32 PM

Abul Hasan

02-06-2005, 07:22 PM

salam aleykum

Al-Bukhari also cites from Mujahid (d. 102) the interpretation "to rise above"

Abul Hassan, you say Salaf did Tafweed, is interprating Istiwa to mean "Rise Above" tafweed ?

As for GF haddad, I do not think he is trustworthy in his quotes, one can see what he said on Shaykh Ihsan about his quote to Qadhee khan and kufr of the one who makes nikah and takes Allah and his Messenger as witness.

You can see GF Haddad's claim, and Qadhee khan. and the trustworthy ness of GF Haddad.

Also did Imam Qurtubee affirmed that Salaf belived in Jihah or not ?

As for all this long articles, with some quotes without isnad, I hope Ibn Abi Yala will answer it.

Wa alaikum salam,

Let us stay with the topic at hand and not side track. You posted a piece from Abu Rumaysah from al-Hafiz ibn Abdal Barr. In doing so you must have held the same view as Ibn Abdal Barr on Istiqrar. Hence, in answering this i posted quotes from Aimma like: Ibn al-Arabi, Ibn Jahbal al-Kilabi and Hafiz al-Iraqi in refuting the aberrant stance of Imam ibn Abdal Barr.

Then i proceeded to show what the Aimma had to say in rejection of the meaning of Istiwa to be Istiqrar as your Imams like: ibn Taymiyya, ibn Qayyim, ibn Uthaymin et al believed that Istiwa meant: Istiqrar. I asked where is the proof from the righteous Salaf that Istiwa means Istiqrar - and i showed what was said about the likes of Muqatil who promoted this view with no dalil from him to back up his view.

Within this thread we mentioned that there are various opinions in connection to explaining what Istiwa is - and this is where GF Haddad's quotes came in. The fact that you have a problem with him is not a way to reject all of his claims. If you think he is incorrect in quotes then correct him. If you think he lied - then show us why and how. No scholar is free of error i am sure you will have to admit, but I haven't seen any examples from you to show on this topic of Istiwa and Istiqrar any mis-contextual quotes, distortions etc so far.

As for us, we mention again what Imam al-Nawawi declared from here (http://www.livingislam.org/n/tawil_e.html)

"The most well-known of the school of the theologians (mutakallimin) says that the divine attributes are interpreted figuratively according to what befits them. Others say that they are not interpreted but that one refrains from speaking concerning their meaning, and defers its actual knowledge (yuwakkilu `ilmaha) to Allah, all the while holding the belief that Allah is transcendent above all things and that the attributes of the created are negated concerning Him, so that it said, for example: We believe that the Merciful is established over the Throne, and we do not know the reality of the meaning of this nor what is meant by it (la na`lamu haqiqata mi`na dhalika wa al-murada bihi), while we do believe that "There is nothing like Him whatsoever" (42:11) and that He is exalted far above the most elevated of created things. That is the way of the Salaf or at least their vast majority, and it is the safest because one is not required to probe into such matters. Therefore, if he believes in Allah's transcendence there is no need for him to probe this nor to think about what is neither obligatory nor even needed to know. However, 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."(2)

As for Tafweed and the Salaf, i have said before that the Salaf made Tafweed of the Kayfiyya of the Sifat and Tafweed of the Ma'nawiyya (meaning). This is what i say was the way of Ibn Qudama also - and you know very well that your scholars like: Muhammad ibn Ibrahim - the teacher of Bin Baz and highest Mufti in his land said the same about ibn Qudama and Tafweed, as did Afifi - so why digress? Why not refute them plain and simply? The scan i put up under the Ibn Qudama thread is very, very clear -and we did not put it out - but your brethren from "Salafiyya" did!

The same applies to quotes in any book from those who discussed the Sifat. If they said none knows the How of it - then it means they affirm Tafweed al-Kayfiyya, and if they said words to the effect that none knows the Ma'na - then we understand from this that they affirmed: Tafweed al-Ma'nawiyya.

Every single quote must be looked at on its own merits on this issue. Do not try to explain away a quote by using other quotes when it is unconnected – because it is a mere fudge to clear someone like ibn Qudama of the fact that he made tafweed of the Ma’na – I don’t need to keep repeating this fact. Suddenly, we get fumbling excuses from your folk – because it is too embarrassing a fact to handle for the little followers of your Kibar al-Ulama. Do you and your friends know something about the whole of ibn Qudama’s Luma or Dhamm al Ta’wil better than the likes of Afifi, ibn Ibrahim and the person who put that long note in al-Albani’s book?! Is your Arabic better than them in understanding?

I apply the same stance on the way al-Karmi discussed the Sifat in his Aqawil al-Thiqat – often he starts by mentioning an attribute by declaring it to be from the Mutashabihat (see the few scans I posted under the ibn Qudama thread) and he also quoted some Imams saying the Sifat are from the Mutashabihat. But, your folk at spubs.com - in their attack on Nuh Keller said:

“As for the Jahmee's innovation that the aayaat mentioning the Sifaat (Attributes of Allaah) are among the mutashaabihaat (ambiguous, unclear verses, whose meaning is known only to Allaah) - then sufficient for him are the following narrations from the Salaf: ….”

After misunderstanding some quotes they presented, they (Burbank and Rafiq) also said:

Therefore, the meaning is known and it is not from the mutashaabihaat as the Jahmee has claimed. And this is the same with all the Attributes, their meanings in the language are known, but how they are is not known.

Will these people say the same about al-Karmi and those he quoted saying the Sifat are from the Mutashabihat?! Same was said by al-Suyuti in his al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Qur’an (see the scan in the Ibn Qudama thread) and al-Karmi quoted al-Sha’bi the Tabi’i saying that Istiwa is from the Mutashabihat of the Qur’an – so look at how these folk (Burbank/Rafiq) are at odds with even the major Imam from the Tabi’in: Imam al-Sha’bi – one of the first teachers of Imam Abu Hanifa. Let those who have Aqawil al-Thiqat highlight the word Mutashabihat on every occasion and how it is linked with the word Ma’na and not just Kayfiyya - back to Allah if they are truthful. Let them also translate it into English if they are that confident in their stance.

This is why I quoted Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal affirming exactly what we said and confirm to be the real Salafi way: Bila Kayf wala Ma'na (as was ascribed to him by the likes of Hanbal ibn Ishaq directly from ibn Hanbal, then conveyed by: al-Khallal, ibn Batta, Abu Ya'la and ibn Qudama). We never said that the Sifat have no meaning at all - but we say that if there is no clear cut evidence from the Kitab wal Sunna at least on what the meaning may be - then we relegate the actual meaning back to Allah alone - and this is what is to us Tafweed al-Ma'na.

This is what we understand from the words of ibn Hanbal, and later Ulama like: al-Nawawi, ibn Hajar, al-Suyuti etc who are in line with us on this understanding - and today i see your Ulama making ta'an on these Huffaz of Hadith. Who from your folk today is a Hafiz of Hadith to take on these Aimma whose fame is far and wide via more than 5+ long centuries of history?!

I also affirm that at times the Salaf did make Ta'wil of the Sifat. Correct me if i am wrong - but you and the claimants to the Salaf today - say this: The Salaf never did Ta'wil and there is no Sahih narration to prove this according to your Ulama, and that your fold believes that the Ma'na of the Sifat is known but the How of it is unknown.

Listen carefully; my line of argumentation is what was deduced by al-Hafiz ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his Fath al-Bari and Imam al-Nawawi in his Sharh on Sahih Muslim. Do you say like some of your major Ulama of this time - that these 2 Imams made mistakes on the commentary to evidences linked to the Sifat of Allah?! We know for a fact that some of your major Ulama endorsed attacks on Imam ibn Hajar - and i will show this if Allah gives me life and strength. We also know for a fact that Mashur Salman (a student of al-Albani's) attempted to refute Imam al-Nawawi and some of those he quotes in his Sharh (like: Qadi Iyad). As for al-Qurtubi - why bring him in to this when we are talking about the post of ibn Abdal Barr. If you can then please quote the whole of what al-Qurtubi said in its full context from his Tafsir and elsewhere in another thread.

The long and short of it is this: Do you still affirm that Istiwa means: Istiqrar? If so - then bring a single sahih narration from the Salaf at least. I also asked for people from your way to show us what al-Dhahabi said on Istiqrar. Fact is also: One of your folk: Falih al-Harbi recently said that Imam al-Dhahabi is not from Ahlus-Sunna!

There is no need to make this into a slanging match - just try to answer the Imams who refuted Ibn Abdal Barr if you can.

You say that GF Haddad is unreliable then how do you answer the charge that he showed that verily it is your folk who are far more unreliable and distort things. If you look here – you can see what I am talking about:

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

and in that link you will see some things about Imam al-Qurtubi also! If you disagree with his claims then do show the world why.

And Allahu a’lam
-----------

Abul Hasan

athari

04-06-2005, 06:33 PM

Ultimately, where is the clear Qur’anic Ayat or Sahih Hadith to say that the meaning of Istiwa alal Arsh is Istiqrar (settling) alone? Same applies with affirming Aynayn for Allah ta’ala. Can they quote the Ibana attributed to Imam al-Ash'ari these days and show us what he had to say about Istiqrar, or how about other Imams - like the Maliki: Ibn Battal, the Shafi'i Imams: al-Bayhaqi or ibn Hajar al Asqalani)...?!

.....
<snip>
......
Just to add a little further point on Istiqrar (settling) as being the meaning of Istiwa - as affirmed by the likes of ibn Taymiyya, ibn Qayyim and most of todays pseduo-Salafiyya; a few weeks ago I said in my reply to AR Qadri and Ibn Abi Yala (see the 28 page article on this forum):

-------------------------------------------------------------------
As may be seen above, Dr GF Haddad also referred the reader to an appendix on Istiwa. I noticed that the piece he was referring to is also found on the internet as will be quoted below. This piece also serves to show how the real Sunni Ulama understand Istiwa in comparison to the likes of the Asaghir who make taqleed of the likes of ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (as in his deviant poem known as Qasida al-Nuniyya) that one of the meanings for Istiwa is that Allah literally settled (Istiqrar alal Arsh) on the Throne! La-hawla wala quwwata illa billahil ali-al-Azim! Let the Asaghir prove from the Qur’an and the Sahih Sunna that Istiqrar applies to Allah’s Istiwa without fumbling excuses and claims that this is the position of X, Y or Z, using the same principles that they claim to follow. These people lack basic Usul in order to determine what constitutes a valid position and hence their manhaj is not consistent with the Imams of the Salaf.

Forget Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Qayyim. I want to see how bold is Abul Hasan. Can he declare Ibn Qutaybah - the one who held that Istawa means Istiqrar to be anthropomorphist. Come on Abul Hasan, be fair. Tell us if Ibn Qutaybah is anthropomorphist or not for remember this great scholar refuted JAHMIS and MUSHABBIHA HASHWIYYA MUJASSIMA. He is just one from the Salaf us Salih I will be quoting. More quotes straight from Salaf us Salih on this subject and we will see if anyone is bold enough to declare them anthropomorphist.

Let us see who is the bold one to declare Ibn Qutaybah as deviant. Let us not forget that Zahid al-Kawthari al-Hanafi edited the book which I will quote from.

وقالوا في قوله ( الرحمن على العرش استوى ) انه استولى وليس يعرف في اللغة استويت على الدار أي استوليت عليها وانما استوى في هذا المكان : استقر كما قال الله تعالى ( فإذا استويت أنت ومن معك على الفلك ) اي استقررت وقد يقول الرجل لصاحبه إذا راه مستوفزا (( استو )) يريد (( استقرار))ـــاخ
Ibn Qutaybah in al-Ikhtilaaf fil Lafdh wal RADD ALA JAHMIYYA WAL MUSHABBIHA - page 20

Same has been said by him in his other superb work known as Tawil Mukhtalif al-Hadith page 248 under the topic Hadith in tashbih....

"

May be Abul Hasan doesn't know who Ibn Qutaibah is: He is: Abu Muhammad Abdullah bin Muslim bin Qutaiybah al-Deenori who was born in 213 AH and passed away in 276 AH. So he is definetly from the righteous Salaf us Salih. He narrated from great scholars of Hadith. some of them included Ishaq ibn Rahawayah, Muhammad bin Ziyad bin Ubaidullah al-Ziyadi, Ziyad bin Yahya, Abu Hatim etc..

Khatib al-Baghdadi said: He is trustworthy and erudite [Tarikh baghdad 170/10)

Ibn Qutaiybah who refuted Jahmis and Anthropomorphists said: Whoever likened Allah to his creation then he has committed kufr and whoever rejected what Allah affirms for Himself then he has committed kufr and whatever Allah affirms Himself or His prophet is not Tashbih (anthropomorphism)....

His teacher, Ishaq bin Rahawayah said, "indeed Allaah has described Himself in His Book with Attributes from which the creation is left in no need to describe Him with other than what He described Himself with. From amongst them, ‘Allah will Come to them in the shades of clouds’ and His saying, ‘And you see the angels around the Throne, hymning the praises of their Lord’" [Dhahabi in arbaeen fee SifaatiAllah #144]

Ali ibn al-Madini - one of the great scholars from salaf us salih - said: "When someone says so and so is an anthropomorphist, we come to know that he is a Jahmi." [Reported by Abul Qasim Lalikaee in Sharh Usool Itiqaad #306 ]

Abu Hatim al-Razi said:
"A sign of people of innovation is their battling against the people of narrations"
[Sharh Usool al-Itiqaad Ahl as-Sunnah of al-Lalika'i]

Abu Hatim al-Razi - one of the great scholars from salaf us salih - said: "A sign of the Jahmiyyah is that they call Ahlus-Sunnah anthropomorphists." [see the same book above]

Abu Hanifa Numan ibn Thabit (d. 150 AH) said: "Adhere to the Athaar (narrations) and the Tareeqah (way) of the Salaf (Pious Predecessors) and beware of newly invented matters, for all of it is innovation." [Reported by Suyuti in his book Sawn al-Mantaq Wal-Kalaam, p. 32.]

Abu Uthman al-Sabuni (d. 449 AH) stated - about the distinguishing signs of Ahl ul-Bid'ah: "...naming them [i.e. Ahl us-Sunnah] with Hashawiyyah (Worthless People), Jahalah (the Ignorant), Dhaahiriyyah (Literalists) and Mushabbihah (Anthropomorphists)..."
and he also said: "The signs of people of innovation are clear and obvious. The most apparent of their signs is their severe enmity fro those who carry the reports of the Prophet."
[Aqeedat us-Salaf wa Ashaabul Hadeeth]

Malik ibn Anas said: "Al-istawa ma'loom wal kayf majh-hool" = "The istiwa is KNOWN, and HOW is unknown"

is this tafwid mana or tafwid kayfiyya. I will leave that for Abul Hasan to answer. Don't forget Abul Hasan, can you please declare IBN QUTAIYBAH to be from anthropomorphist because he said Istiqrar. Please abul Hasan no diversion. I know that you like to play hide and seek and divert from the topic and you always come up with new excuses like my shaykh said blah blah and you will escape for discussion or you will come up with another excuse like they don't know ilm an-nafi blah blah blah...
See Abul Hasan, what is the relation with the topic of Ghumaris with Ibn Taymiyya and AR Qadri and other million things. It was not related but you seem to enjoy when you cut-and-paste Dr. GF Haddad material and flood the forum with his posts. I really don't like your spam but what can we do about it. You are a scholar of this forum. You may do as you like. Inshallah i will post my last reply to the Ghumari post and if I feel that you stopped spam by flooding this forum with GF Haddad posts and repeating same old posts i will continue. on the sideline, weren't these arguments that which you post were posted on AHYA forum by Ahmed ibn Muhammad, Muhammad Imran, Abu Abdul Haleem and many other nicks. I don't know but they sure use your arguments. I hope you are not related to them in anyway. I know you denied any link with Karim Abdullah and Salafist in the past. But better if you also deny any link with them too. Also, please tell us more about yourself before you ask about me.

faqir

05-06-2005, 12:32 AM

:salam:

The sad thing mr. "athari", is that you don't read. You just reply in knee-jerk fashion. If you actually bothered reading what Sidi Abul Hasan has posted above you would have 1) understood the statement of Imam Malik RH and what is authentically narrated from him [far is he RH from what the Salafi sect would like to ascribe to this great Imam] and 2) understood the correct interpretation of istiwa according to the majority of Sunni Ulema and their take on those who may have mistakenly understood it in the manner you describe. Needless to say there is no need of repeating what has already been mentioned - go back and use your "two eyes" and let us pray that what one would hope can be found in between does not reject the truth ;)

Unfortunately, the Salafis always like to dwell on the mistakes of a tiny minority from the past [perhaps such as those of Imam Ibn Qutaybah RH (if your quote is indeed correct)] - you too are welcome to do so but please do note what the Ulema have said [see above] about those who hold your aberrant position :). By the way my Hanafi brother, is this not the same Imam Ibn Qutaybah RH you quote from who was apparently known to have launched a scathing attack on our Imam Abu Hanifah RH in his "Ta'weel Mukhtalif al-Hadeeth"? [may Allah swt forgive any misunderstandings he may have had]. Please correct me if I am wrong. JazakAllah khair.

Wasalam

Abul Hasan

07-06-2005, 01:52 PM

Assalamu alaikum

Bismillah

Once again the claimants to “Salafiyya/Athariyya” come on this forum and barrage it with their famous divertory tactics, by failing to answer what was posted to date on this issue of Istiqrar! Subhanallah. I am not going to waste my time on things unconnected to the topic at hand if I can help it, unless there is an urgent need to do so with relevancy. I have already typed up over 5000 words in less than 24 hours for this majhûl “Athari” and his Way in the past, and I am sure he may just continue to mock us and digress further. Wallahu a’lam.

One only needs to read the impudent and arrogant style of his rhetorically linked outbursts that he thinks are questions in need of sincere answers! He came on with pre-conceived bias, and is now trying to dictate to me what to do, and trying to incite me to fall for the traps that he thinks he has set for us in the few posts he dropped here in a pejorative and diminutive way!

As for the other non-issues he is talking about - then he can find many of the answers by reading my other posts very carefully.

So he said what is related to this topic directly by snipping a little quote from ibn Qutayba:

وقالوا في قوله ( الرحمن على العرش استوى ) انه استولى وليس يعرف في اللغة استويت على الدار أي استوليت عليها وانما استوى في هذا المكان : استقر كما قال الله تعالى ( فإذا استويت أنت ومن معك على الفلك ) اي استقررت وقد يقول الرجل لصاحبه إذا راه مستوفزا (( استو )) يريد (( استقرار))ـــاخ
Ibn Qutaybah in al-Ikhtilaaf fil Lafdh wal RADD ALA JAHMIYYA WAL MUSHABBIHA - page 20

Same has been said by him in his other superb work known as Tawil Mukhtalif al-Hadith page 248 under the topic Hadith in tashbih....

"

Then, he in his lamentable tadlis and diversion from all the quotes we presented, and the facts from those major Imams who rejected Istiqrar, said:

May be Abul Hasan doesn't know who Ibn Qutaibah is: He is: Abu Muhammad Abdullah bin Muslim bin Qutaiybah al-Deenori who was born in 213 AH and passed away in 276 AH. So he is definetly from the righteous Salaf us Salih. He narrated from great scholars of Hadith. some of them included Ishaq ibn Rahawayah, Muhammad bin Ziyad bin Ubaidullah al-Ziyadi, Ziyad bin Yahya, Abu Hatim etc..

Khatib al-Baghdadi said: He is trustworthy and erudite [Tarikh baghdad 170/10)

Ibn Qutaiybah who refuted Jahmis and Anthropomorphists said: Whoever likened Allah to his creation then he has committed kufr and whoever rejected what Allah affirms for Himself then he has committed kufr and whatever Allah affirms Himself or His prophet is not Tashbih (anthropomorphism)....

Alhamdulillah, let us look into this matter. There is no doubt I know who ibn Qutayba is and if he was an avid reader of GF Haddad’s works he would have realized that I may have read this article on ibn Qutayba, here:

http://www.sunnah.org/history/Scholars/ibn_qutayba.htm

The Majhul “Athari” also said about the quote he gave from Ibn Qutayba’s book that:

Let us not forget that Zahid al-Kawthari al-Hanafi edited the book which I will quote from.

Let me say at the outset that I do not have that book on the Ikhtilaf fil-Lafdh, but as he said it was edited by al-Kawthari - who the “Athariyya” despise – despite him being a friend to Shaykh Muhammad Raghib al-Tabbakh al-Ash’ari al-Hanafi – who gave an Ijaza to al-Albani! Both, al-Kawthari and al-Tabbakh praised each other as I said elsewhere.

Since he brought up the name of al-Kawthari – I wish to know if the Majhul has got this book, or is it a snip from someone else’s quotes and claims?! May I ask him if he saw any note by al-Kawthari from what was quoted from Ibn Qutayba or not?! If so, what did he say and did you leave out his notes to this point or not?! Why do I ask you may say?!

Because, despite me not having this book by Ibn Qutayba as edited by al-Kawthari, I noticed in the book I mentioned in an earlier post above in refutation of Istiqrar etc, known as:

Hadhihi Aqeedatus Salaf wal Khalaf, by Shaykh Ibn Khalifa al-Azhari, that this Shaykh said in refuting the view of ibn Qutayba, by mentioning the very book that this majhûl quoted from ibn Qutayba (as edited by al-Kawthari) – the following kalam with quotes from al-Kawthari in refutation of ibn Qutayba:

ذكر ابن قتيبة في كتابه [الاختلاف في اللفظ، والرد على الجهمية والمشبهة] في قولهم: "الرحمنُ على العَرشِ استْوى". إِنه استقرّ كما قال تعالى: {فَإِذَا اسْتَوَيْتَ أَنْتَ وَمَنْ مَعَكَ عَلَى الْفُلْكِ}. أي: "استقررت". أهـ.

أي: يريد الرجل أن يقول مشافهة إِن اللَّه استقر على العرش. ومن أجل هذا قال محمد الكوثري فيه: "تفسير الاستواء بالاستقرار، تشبيه قبيح قحٌ يقول به من يستمد من كتب أهل الكتاب من الإِخبارييّن. وجميع السلف على إِيراد هذه الآية كما جاءت من غير تفسير ولا تأويل، ولذا فإِن ابن قتيبة، حاد عن طريق السلف وانتهج طريق المشَبّهة". أهـ.

So the above quote from al-Kawthari is a clear cut radd on ibn Qutayba’s view, which is one of his mistakes – just like other mistakes that he made and were known to some of the Muhaddithin like: al-Bayhaqi and later: al-Maziri, al-Nawawi, Qurtubi, Zaynud-Din al-Iraqi, Ibn Hajar and others – as will be clarified below Insha’Allah.

Now, this Majhul “Athari” claims to be a Hanafi, so he quoted our Imam Abu Hanifa as saying:

Abu Hanifa Numan ibn Thabit (d. 150 AH) said: "Adhere to the Athaar (narrations) and the Tareeqah (way) of the Salaf (Pious Predecessors) and beware of newly invented matters, for all of it is innovation." [Reported by Suyuti in his book Sawn al-Mantaq Wal-Kalaam, p. 32.]

If these be the words of Imam Abu Hanifa O majhûl – why do you quote this then ignore the position ascribed to our Imam Abu Hanifa on this very topic of Istiqrar?!

Now let the reader see the games and deception this majhûl plays! He quotes what is irrelevant to the discussion from the Imam al-A’zam, then forgets to mention that it was mentioned much earlier on, that this is what has been ascribed to the very Imam this majhûl claims to belong to in the Furu of the Deen, I mean: The Hanafi Madhhab:

“We assert that Allah established Himself over the throne without His need (hâja) nor settlement (istiqrâr) upon it, for He it is Who preserves the Throne and other than it without needing any of them.” Abu Hanifa, Wasiyya al-Imam al-A‘zam ila Abi ‘Amr ‘Uthman al-Batti (p. 10).

Or is it a fact that this Majhul believes that Imam Abu Hanifa was incorrect, or may be he thinks like his “Athari” brethren today that Imam Abu Hanifa is Da’eef in Hadith?! Or is it to him and his way that Imam Abu Hanifa was not truly a “Salafi”?!

So look at the double dealing of this Majhul! Can he be a Hanafi in fiqh let alone agree with the Imam of the Madhhab he claims to belong to in fiqh - when clearly and arrogantly he ignored this position that I have never seen any Hanafi Imam or layman reject from Imam Abu Hanifa (on Istiqrar) until this majhûl in his Ta’assub in holding onto the Shadh positions of certain scholars came onto the scene recently with?!

Just this point is enough to show how astray he is from the Haqq and he is really a Muqallid of the pseudo-Salafi Shudhudh! It seems he is not interested in what is the mu’tamad qawl of the major Ulama like that ascribed to Imam Abu Hanifa, as well as Imam Malik, and even Imam Abul Hasan al-Ash’ari if you accept the addition in certain manuscripts where this Imam rejected Istiqrar.

So let us quote the latter 2 Imams to show the reader how this majhûl is a follower of his desires rather than looking to see what is the most strongest and true Salafi position on this view on Istiqrar:

Ibn Rushd in Sharh al-‘Utbiyya stated that Malik’s position is: “The Throne is not Allah’s location of settledness (mawdi‘ istiqrâr Allâh).” As quoted in Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 7:124 #3592).

And:

“Allah established Himself over the Throne in the sense that He said and the meaning that He wills, with an establishment that transcends touch, settlement, location, immanence, and displacement. The Throne does not carry him, rather the Throne and its carriers are carried by the subtleness of His power, subdued under His grip.” Al-Ash‘ari, al-Ibana ‘an Usul al-Diyana, Mahmud ed. (p. 21); Sabbagh ed. (p. 35)..

Let me quote again what I said in the initial post O Muslim:

Ultimately, where is the clear Qur’anic Ayat or Sahih Hadith to say that the meaning of Istiwa alal Arsh is Istiqrar (settling) alone? Same applies with affirming Aynayn for Allah ta’ala. Can they quote the Ibana attributed to Imam al-Ash'ari these days and show us what he had to say about Istiqrar, or how about other Imams - like the Maliki: Ibn Battal, the Shafi'i Imams: al-Bayhaqi or ibn Hajar al Asqalani)...?!

How strange these folk are: They advise and warn against Taqleed in fiqh but indulge in it themselves especially in matters of Aqeeda – which is far more serious. To add that, these people who claim to be on the Haqq, on the path of al-Salaf us Salih – hold onto the more rejected and aberrant stances from some Ulama on occasions – this is what is called Shadh/Shudhudh. To the extent they will take precedence of the sayings of X,Y or Z in the absence of any clear nass when it suits their desires! May Allah guide them. Amin.

Now, this majhûl has failed to bring what I asked for and still searches out the shadh views of certain Ulama! May Allah guide them.

Let us mention a little about aberrant positions in aqeeda or even fiqh a little.

A few weeks ago I said:

The problem here seems to be that the likes of ibn Abi Yala fail to acknowledge that even amongst the Salaf there were points connected to aqeeda that some of the pious Salaf held which were not taken as part and parcel of aqeeda by the majority in their time. Example: The majority believe in the Ru’ya of Allah bila Kayf in the Hereafter, but Abu Salih al-Samman (student of Abu Hurayra) and Mujahid ibn Jabr (the student of ibn Abbas in Tafsir) made Ta’wil on this, where as Ikrima the student of ibn Abbas (ra) rejected it outright as Imam ibn Hajar verified below:

فتح الباري، شرح صحيح البخاري، - للإمام ابن حجر العسقلاني

باب قَوْلِ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى وُجُوهٌ يَوْمَئِذٍ نَاضِرَةٌ إِلَى رَبِّهَا نَاظِرَةٌ
الشرح: قوله (باب قول الله تعالى وجوه يومئذ ناضرة إلى ربها ناظرة) كأنه يشير إلى ما أخرجه عبد بن حميد والترمذي والطبري وغيرهم وصححه الحاكم من طريق يؤثر بن أبي فاختة " عن ابن عمر عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال إن أدنى أهل الجنة منزلة لمن ينظر في ملكه ألف سنة، وإن أفضلهم منزلة لمن ينظر في وجه ربه عز وجل في كل يوم مرتين " قال: ثم تلا (وجوه يومئذ ناضرة) قال بالبياض والصفاء (إلى ربها ناظرة) قال تنظر كل يوم في وجه الله، لفظه الطبري من طريق مصعب بن المقدام عن إسرائيل عن ثوير، وأخرجه عبد عن شبابة عن إسرائيل ولفظه: لمن ينظر إلى جنانه وأزواجه وخدمه ونعيمه وسرره مسيرة ألف سنة، وأكرمهم على الله تعالى من ينظر إلى وجهه غدوة وعشية، وكذا أخرجه الترمذي عن عبد.
وقال غريب، رواه غير واحد عن إسرائيل مرفوعا، ورواه عبد الملك بن أبجر عن ثوير عن ابن عمر موقوفا، ورواه الثوري عن ثوير عن مجاهد عن ابن عمر موقوفا أيضا، قال: ولا نعلم أحدا ذكر فيه مجاهدا غير الثوري بالعنعنة.
قلت: أخرجه ابن مردويه من أربعة طرق عن إسرائيل عن ثوير قال " سمعت ابن عمر " ومن طريق عبد الملك بن أبجر عن ثوير مرفوعا.
وقال الحاكم بعد تخريجه ثوير لم ينقم عليه إلا التشيع.
قلت: لا أعلم أحدا صرح بتوثيقه، بل أطبقوا على تضعيفه.
وقال ابن عدي: الضعف على أحاديثه بين وأقوى ما رأيت فيه قول أحمد بن حنبل فيه، وفي ليث بن أبي سليم ويزيد بن أبي زيد: ما أقرب بعضهم من بعض.
وأخرج الطبري من طريق أبي الصهباء موقوفا نحو حديث ابن عمر.
وأخرج بسند صحيح إلى يزيد النحوي عن عكرمة في هذه الآية قال " تنظر إلى ربها نظرا " وأخرج عن البخاري عن آدم عن مبارك عن الحسن قال " تنظر إلى الخالق وحق لها أن تنظر " وأخرج عبد بن حميد عن إبراهيم بن الحكم بن أبان عن أبيه عن عكرمة: انظروا ماذا أعطى الله عبده من النور في عينه من النظر إلى وجه ربه الكريم عيانا - يعني في الجنة - ثم قال: لو جعل نور جميع الخلق في عيني عبد ثم كشف عن الشمس ستر واحد ودونها سبعون سترا ما قدر على أن ينظر إليها، ونور الشمس جزء من سبعين جزءا من نور الكرسي، ونور الكرسي جزء من سبعين جزءا من نور العرش، ونور العرش جزء من سبعين جزءا من نور الستر، وإبراهيم فيه ضعف، وقد أخرج عبد بن حميد عن عكرمة من وجه آخر إنكار الرؤية، ويمكن الجمع بالحمل على غير أهل الجنة.وأخرج بسند صحيح عن مجاهد: ناظرة تنظر الثواب، وعن أبي صالح نحوه، وأورد الطبري الاختلاف فقال الأول عندي بالصواب ما ذكرناه عن الحسن البصري وعكرمة وهو ثبوت الرؤية لموافقته الأحاديث الصحيحة، وبالغ ابن عبد البر في رد الذي نقل عن مجاهد وقال هو شذوذ، وقد تمسك به بعض المعتزلة وتمسكوا أيضا بقوله صلى الله عليه وسلم في حديث سؤال جبريل عن الإسلام والإيمان والإحسان، وفيه " أن تعبد الله كأنك تراه، فإن لم تكن تراه فإنه يراك " قال بعضهم فيه إشارة إلى انتفاء الرؤية، وتعقب بأن المنفي فيه رؤيته في الدنيا لأن العبادة خاصة بها، فلو قال قائل إن فيه إشارة إلى جواز الرؤية في الآخرة لما أبعد، وزعمت طائفة من المتكلمين كالسالمية من أهل البصرة أن في الخبر دليلا على أن الكفار يرون الله في القيامة من عموم اللقاء والخطاب

Note the word Shudhudh, for it applies to other situations that contradict the soundest positions no matter which Imam said it after the Sahaba (radiallahu anhum ajam’in). So will you declare these Imams from the Salaf to be from Jahmiyya?

Another example is over the superiority of Uthman over Ali (ra). Some Ulama like: Sufyan a-Thawri held that it should be Ali (ra) over Uthman ibn Affan (ra). Again, these are Shudhudh that the Jumhur do not take as part of aqeeda.

Al-Dhahabi said in the Siyar (7/241):

قَالَ: قَدْ كَانَ سُفْيَانُ رَأْساً فِي الزُّهدِ، وَالتَّأَلُّهِ، وَالخَوْفِ، رَأْساً فِي الحِفْظِ، رَأْساً فِي مَعْرِفَةِ الآثَارِ، رَأْساً فِي الفِقْهِ، لاَ يَخَافُ فِي اللهِ لَوْمَةَ لاَئِمٍ مِنْ أَئِمَّةِ الدِّيْنِ، وَاغْتُفِرَ لَهُ غَيْرُ مَسْأَلَةٍ اجْتَهَدَ فِيْهَا، وَفِيْهِ تَشَيُّعٌ يَسِيْرٌ، كَانَ يُثَلِّثُ بِعَلِيٍّ، وَهُوَ عَلَى مَذْهَبِ بَلَدِهِ أَيْضاً فِي النَّبِيذِ.

Or how about the weak narrations going back to Mujahid ibn Jabr which attempt to affirm that Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) will be literally seated on the Arsh! The narrations are all weak, and mainly come via Layth ibn Abi Sulaym (da’eef in the main)…

Hence, even if this Majhul “Athari” could bring more quotes – is it really the Mu’tamad and Rajih position of the Salaf and where is the proof for it rather than quoting misunderstood nusus?!

Since he brought the name of Ibn Qutayba as some one who affirmed Istiqrar, and this is related to the topic – this is all that deserves a reply on for now. I have already asked this Majhul that if he is sincere then he can arrange to talk to me in private – rather than coming on here and crying in frustration about topics that have no relevance or link to me (like: The Ghumari’s, Ahbash, al-Haqqani, al-Kabbani etc) – he can go and ask them and their associates if he wants direct answers!

If he wants to know more about Tafweed he can read my earlier and impending posts! If he wants to know how Imam Malik dealt with the Sifat as an example, then he should have looked at this and tried to see what he finds right or wrong with the views of Imam Malik, as quoted right here:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6248

If he wishes to know who used the terms like Hashwi etc he can check the Tabyin of Imam ibn Asakir (as it seems his colleague: Ibn Abi Yala has some form of respect for it – or does he not?!). Or may be he can tell us who was the first known Imam and Amir al-Mu’minin fil Hadith to use that term Hashwi?! This is not the topic at hand, so we will not digress too much.

He can look here for a bit and may be we can bring in more quotes in another thread (see: http://www.sunnah.org/aqida/alashaira5.htm) – but I doubt if he will take any notice of it – because he is full of pre-conceived hatred and bias for the compiler of such articles!

Since he has so much hatred for that writer let them not forget what one of their men said more than 10 years ago, in order to cause people to ignore criticism of one of their main men. Let us quote what they preached in the past and ignore to follow on with their hypocrisy when it comes to those they hate:

Ibn al-Mubaarak (RA), said, "if the good qualities of a person (greatly) outweigh his bad qualities, then his bad qualities are not mentioned, and if his bad qualities (greatly) outweigh his good qualities, then his good qualities are not mentioned." 'Siyar' (8/532)

adh-Dhahabee says in 'as-Siyar' (16/285), "completeness is very rare, so a scholar is praised for the may virtues he has, so good qualities are not buried due to a single failing."

Ash-Sha`bee said, "if you were right ninety-nine time and erred once, they would seize the single error and forget the ninety-nine...." 'Hilyah al-Awliyaah' of Abu Nu`aym (4/320-321)

Let us look at the status of Ibn Qutayba in Hadith and what was said in Jarh or Ta’dil of him:

Al-Hafiz ibn Hajar in his Lisan al-Mizan (3/357-359, no. 1449) mentioned the following about ibn Qutayba:

عبد الله بن مسلم بن قتيبة أبو محمد صاحب التصانيف صدوق قليل الرواية روى عن إسحاق بن راهويه وجماعة قال الخطيب كان ثقة دينا فاضلا وقال الحاكم اجتمعت الأمة على أن القتيبي كذاب قلت هذه مجازفة قبيحة وكلام من لم يخف الله ورأيت في مرآة الزمان أن الدارقطني قال كان بن قتيبة يميل إلى التشبيه منحرف عن العترة وكلامه يدل عليه وقال البيهقي كان يرى رأي الكرامية وقال بن المنادى مات في جرب سنة ست وسبعين ومائيتن من هريسة بلعها سخنة فأهلكته وبقية كلامه أنه لما أكل الهريسة أصابته حرارة فصاح صيحة شديدة ثم أغمى عليه إلى وقت صلاة الظهر ثم اضطرب ساعة ثم هدأ ثم لم يزل يتشهد إلى السحر ثم مات وذلك أول ليلة من رجب وقال بن نصر الوابلي قال محمد بن عبد الله الحافظ كان بن قتيبة يتعاطى التقدم في العلوم ولم يرضه أهل علم منها وإنما الإمام المقبول عند الكل أبو عبيد قلت ذيل بن قتيبة على أبي عبيد في غريب الحديث ذيلا يزيد على حجمه وعمل عليه كتابا فيه اعتراضات ورد على أبي عبيد فانتصر محمد بن نصر المروزي لأبي عبيد ورد على بن قتيبة وقال الخطيب روى عنه ابنه أحمد وعبد الله بن عبد الرحمن السكري وعبد الله بن جعفر بن درستويه وآخرون وله من التصانيف غريب القرآن غريب الحديث مشكل القرآن مشكل الحديث أدب الكاتب عيون الأخبار المعارف وغير ذلك وقال في المتفق شهرته ظاهرة في العلم ومحله من الأدب لا يحقر وقال مسلمة بن قاسم كان لغويا كثير التأليف عالما بالتصنيف صدوقا من أهل السنة يقال كان يذهب إلى قول إسحاق بن راهويه وسمعت محمد بن زكريا بن عبد الأعلى يقول كان بن قتيبة يذهب إلى مذهب مالك وقال نفطويه كان إذا خلا في بيته وعمل شيئا جوده وما أعلمه حكى شيئا في اللغة إلا صدق فيه وقال بن حزم كان ثقة في دينه وعلمه وقال النديم كان صادقا فيما يرويه عالما باللغة والنحو وكتبه مرغوب فيها وذكر من كتبه نحوا من ستين كتابا وذكر المسعودي في المروج أن بن قتيبة استمد في كتبه من أبي حنيفة الدنيوري وقال إمام الحرمين بن قتيبة هجام ولوج فيما لا يحسنه كأنه يريد كلامه في الكلام وقال السلفي كان بن قتيبة من الثقات وأهل السنة ولكن الحاكم بضده من أجل المذهب وفسر الصلاح العلائي كلام السلفي أنه أراد بالمذهب ما نقل عن البيهقي أنه كان كراميا وما نقل عن الدارقطني مما تقدم قال العلائي وهذا لا يصح عنه وليس في كلامه ما يدل عليه ولكنه جار على طريقة أهل الحديث في عدم التأويل قلت والذي يظهر لي أن مراد السلفي بالمذهب النصب فإن في بن قتيبة انحرافا عن أهل البيت والحاكم على ضد من ذلك وإلا فاعتقادهما معا فيما يتعلق بالصفات واحد وسمعت شيخي العراقي يقول كان بن قتيبة كثير الغلط وقال الأزهري في مقدمة كتابه تهذيب اللغة وأما بن قتيبة فإنه ألف كتابا في مشكل القرآن وغريبه وفي غريب الحديث والنوادر وغير ذلك ورد على أبي عبيد حروفا في غريب الحديث إلى أن قال وما رأيت أحدا يدفعه عن الصدق فيما يرويه عن أبي حاتم السجستاني والدباسي وأبي سعيد الضرير وأما ما يستند فإنه ربما ترك وهو كثير الحدس والقول بالظن فيما لا يحسنه ولا يعرفه ورأيت أبا بكر بن الأنباري ينسبه إلى الغباوة وقلة المعرفة ويزري به

There are mixed opinions on ibn Qutayba as mentioned above, ranging from praise and declaring him trustworthy in Hadith as Khatib al-Baghdadi, ibn Hazm, al-Silafi etc are on record as saying, then we have the other extreme from their closest contemporaries in time: al-Hakim who claimed there is agreement that ibn Qutayba is a liar, then his student al-Bayhaqi went to the level of saying that ibn Qutayba had the views of the Karramiyya (extreme anthropomorphists), while al-Daraqutni was ascribed as saying that Ibn Qutayba had leanings to the Shi’a (though some denied this report being the case with Ibn Qutayba) and so on.

Crucially: The majhûl “Athari” only mentioned what suited him from the likes of the Ash’ari: Khatib al-Baghdadi, and left out the negative things said about Ibn Qutayba! Why is this O majhûl claimant to the “Athar”?!

The crucial thing for us to note is that despite mixed ratings on ibn Qutayba’s credibility, and that he is most probably Saduq in Hadith, he had a number of mistakes!

Indeed, Ibn Hajar said that he heard his Shaykh: Hafiz al-Iraqi state that Ibn Qutayba had many mistakes. May be in Hadith and may be in the understanding of certain narrations in his books like Ta’wil Mukhtalif al-Hadith.

The name of Hafiz al-Iraqi should be re-iterated in this discussion, since we have already mentioned his view on those who attribute Istiqrar to Allah’s Istiwa. Hafiz al-Iraqi was known as the Muhaddith of his age and he is more reliable and unblemished in his deen and Ilm of Hadith - than the accusations levelled against ibn Qutayba.

Since the Majhul “Athari” failed to acknowledge the verdicts of the likes of Qadi ibn al Arabi, al-Bayhaqi, Ibn Jahbal, al-Iraqi, al-Juwayni, that attributed to Imam Abu Hanifa and Imam Malik, Imam al-Ash’ari (according to some manuscripts), as well as what ibn Hajar quoted from ibn Battal on this issue – one wonders why he failed to bring a solid proof from the Kitab wal Sunna that Istiwa means Istiqrar alone?!

Ibn Qutayba was also shown to have mistakes in his interpretations of narrations linked to the understanding of the Sifat of Allah. Hence, it is apt to demonstrate to him an example or two of how he was shown to have been mistaken in his understanding of a narration on the “Sura” and other things.

Ibn Hajar al Asqalani mentioned how Imam al-Maziri demonstrated a mistake of ibn Qutayba’s connected to a Hadith that the Mushabbiha misinterpret for their own ends under the following section of his Fath al-Bari:

فتح الباري، شرح صحيح البخاري، - للإمام ابن حجر العسقلاني
المجلد الخامس >> كِتَاب الْعِتْقِ >> باب إِذَا ضَرَبَ الْعَبْدَ فَلْيَجْتَنِبْ الْوَجْهَ

قلت: الزيادة أخرجها ابن أبي عاصم في " السنة " والطبراني من حديث ابن عمر بإسناد رجاله ثقات وأخرجها ابن أبي عاصم أيضا من طريق أبي يونس عن أبي هريرة بلفظ يرد التأويل الأول قال: " من قاتل فليجتنب الوجه فإن صورة وجه الإنسان على صورة وجه الرحمن " فتعين إجراء ما في ذلك على ما تقرر بين أهل السنة من إمراره كما جاء من غير اعتقاد تشبيه، أو من تأويله على ما يليق بالرحمن جل جلاله، وسيأتي في أول كتاب الاستئذان من طريق همام عن أبي هريرة رفعه: خلق الله آدم على صورته الحديث، وزعم بعضهم أن الضمير يعود على آدم أي على صفته أي خلقه موصوفا بالعلم الذي فضل به الحيوان وهذا محتمل، وقد قال المازري: غلط ابن قتيبة فأجرى هذا الحديث على ظاهره وقال: صورة لا كالصور انتهى.

Abul Hasan

07-06-2005, 02:41 PM

CONTINUED...

The same was said before Ibn Hajar’s time by Imam al-Nawawi in his Sharh on Sahih Muslim about al-Maziri saying Ibn Qutayba made a mistake in his understanding of a certain narration connected to the Sifat type narrations. Here is a good discussion on how the Imam discussed the Ahadith on the Sifat below:

صحيح مسلم بشرح النووي، - للإمام محي الدين بن شرف النووي.
الجزء السادس عشر >> كتاب البر والصلة والآداب >> -78- باب النهي عن ضرب الوجه

1- حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللهِ بْنُ مَسْلَمَةَ بْنِ قَعْنَبٍ، حَدَّثَنَا الْمُغِيرَةُ -يَعْنِي: الْحِزَامِيَّ- عَنْ أَبِي الزِّنَادِ، عَنِ الأَعْرَجِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ:
قَالَ رَسُولَ اللهِ -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ-: "إِذَا قَاتَلَ أَحَدُكُمْ أَخَاهُ، فَلْيَجْتَنِبِ الْوَجْهَ".
2- حَدَّثَنَاه عَمْرٌو النَّاقِدُ، وزُهَيْرُ بْنُ حَرْبٍ، قَالاَ: حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ بْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي الزِّنَادِ، بِهَذَا الإِسْنَادِ.
وَقَالَ: "إِذَا ضَرَبَ أَحَدُكُمْ".
3- حَدَّثَنَا شَيْبَانُ بْنُ فَرُّوخَ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو عَوَانَةَ، عَنْ سُهَيْلٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ:
عَنِ النَّبِيَّ -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ- قَالَ: "إِذَا قَاتَلَ أَحَدُكُمْ أَخَاهُ، فَلْيَتَّقِ الْوَجْهَ".
4- حَدَّثَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللهِ بْنُ مُعَاذٍ الْعَنْبَرِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبِي، حَدَّثَنَا شُعْبَةُ، عَنْ قَتَادَةَ، سَمِعَ أَبَا أَيُّوبَ يُحَدِّثُ عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ:
قَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ-: "إِذَا قَاتَلَ أَحَدَكُمْ أَخَاهُ، فَلاَ يَلْطِمَنَّ الْوَجْهَ".
5- حَدَّثَنَا نَصْرُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ الْجَهْضَمِيُّ، حَدَّثَنِي أَبِي، حَدَّثَنَا الْمُثَنَّى، ح، وَحَدَّثَنِي مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ حَاتِمٍ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ مَهْدِيَ، عَنِ الْمُثَنَّى بْنِ سَعِيدٍ، عَنْ قَتَادَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي أَيُّوبَ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ:
قَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ- وَفِي حَدِيثِ ابْنِ حَاتِمٍ:
عَنِ النَّبِيَّ -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ- قَالَ: "إِذَا قَاتَلَ أَحَدُكُمْ أَخَاهُ، فَلْيَجْتَنِبِ الْوَجْهَ، فَإِنَّ اللهَ خَلَقَ آدَمَ عَلَىَ صُورَتِهِ"
-----------------------------------------
قوله -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ-: (إِذَا قَاتَلَ أَحَدُكُمْ أَخَاهُ، فَلْيَجْتَنِبِ).
وفي رواية: (إِذَا ضَرَبَ أَحَدُكُمْ).
وفي رواية: (لاَ يَلْطِمَنَّ الْوَجْهَ).
وفي رواية: (إِذَا قَاتَلَ أَحَدُكُمْ أَخَاهُ، فَلْيَجْتَنِبِ الْوَجْهَ، فَإِنَّ اللهَ خَلَقَ آدَمَ عَلَىَ صُورَتِهِ).
قال العلماء: هذا تصريح بالنهي عن ضرب الوجه لأنه لطيف يجمع المحاسن، وأعضاؤه نفيسة لطيفة وأكثر الإدراك بها، فقد يبطلها ضرب الوجه، وقد ينقصها، وقد يشوه الوجه، والشين فيه فاحش لأنه بارز ظاهر لا يمكن ستره، ومتى ضربه لا يسلم من شين غالباً، ويدخل في النهي إذا ضرب زوجته، أو ولده، أو عبده ضرب تأديب فليجتنب الوجه.
وأما قوله -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ-: (إِنَّ اللهَ خَلَقَ آدَمَ عَلَىَ صُورَتِهِ) فهو من أحاديث الصفات، وقد سبق في كتاب الإيمان بيان حكمها واضحاً ومبسوطاً، وأن من العلماء من يمسك عن تأويلها ويقول: نؤمن بأنها حق وأن ظاهرها غير مراد، ولها معنى يليق بها، وهذا مذهب جمهور السلف وهو أحوط وأسلم. (ج/ص: 16/166)
6- حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى، حَدَّثَنِي عَبْدُ الصَّمَدِ، حَدَّثَنَا همَّامٌ، حَدَّثَنَا قَتَادَةُ، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ مَالِكٍ الْمَرَاغِيِّ -وَهُو: أَبُو أَيُّوبَ- عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ:
أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللهِ -صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ- قَالَ: "إِذَا قَاتَلَ أَحَدُكُمْ أَخَاهُ، فَلْيَجْتَنِبِ الْوَجْهِ".
-----------------------------------------
والثاني: أنها تتأول على حسب ما يليق بتنزيه الله تعالى وأنه ليس كمثله شيء.
قال المازري: هذا الحديث بهذا اللفظ ثابت، ورواه بعضهم أن الله خلق آدم على صورة الرحمن، وليس بثابت عند أهل الحديث، وكأن من نقله رواه بالمعنى الذي وقع له، وغلط في ذلك.
قال المازري: وقد غلط ابن قتيبة في هذا الحديث فأجراه على ظاهره، وقال لله تعالى صورة لا كالصور، وهذا الذي قاله ظاهر الفساد لأن الصورة تفيد التركيب وكل مركب محدث، والله تعالى ليس بمحدث فليس هو مركباً فليس مصوراً.
قال: وهذا كقول المجسمة جسم لا كالأجسام لما رأوا أهل السنة يقولون: الباري سبحانه وتعالى شيء لا كالأشياء، طردوا الاستعمال فقالوا: جسم لا كالأجسام، والفرق أن لفظ شيء لا يفيد الحدوث ولا يتضمن ما يقتضيه.

وأما جسم وصورة فيتضمنان التأليف والتركيب وذلك دليل الحدوث، قال: العجب من ابن قتيبة في قوله: صورة لا كالصور مع أن ظاهر الحديث على رأيه يقتضي خلق آدم على صورته فالصورتان على رأيه سواء، فإذا قال لا كالصور تناقض قوله.

ويقال له أيضاً: إن أردت بقولك صورة لا كالصور، أنه ليس بمؤلف ولا مركب، فليس بصورة حقيقة وليست اللفظة على ظاهرها، وحينئذ يكون موافقاً على افتقاره إلى التأويل.
واختلف العلماء في تأويله فقالت طائفة: الضمير في صورته عائد على الأخ المضروب، وهذا ظاهر رواية مسلم.
وقالت طائفة: يعود إلى آدم، وفيه ضعف.
وقالت طائفة: يعود إلى الله تعالى، ويكون المراد إضافة تشريف واختصاص كقوله تعالى: {نَاقَةَ اللهِ} [الشمس: 13] وكما يقال في الكعبة: بيت الله ونظائره، والله أعلم.
قوله: (حَدَّثَنَا قَتَادَةُ، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ مَالِكٍ الْمَرَاغِيِّ -وَهُو: أَبُو أَيُّوبَ- عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ) الْمَرَاغِيِّ بفتح الميم وبالغين المعجمة منسوب إلى المراغة بطن من الأزد لا إلى البلد المعروفة بالمراغة من بلاد العجم، وهذا الذي ذكرناه من ضبطه، وأنه منتسب إلى بطن من الأزد هو الصحيح المشهور، ولم يذكر الجمهور غيره. (ج/ص: 16/167)
وذكر ابن جرير الطبري أنه منسوب إلى موضع بناحية عمان.
وذكر الحافظ عبد الغني المقدسي أنه المراغي بضم الميم ولعله تصحيف من الناسخ، والمشهور الفتح وهو الذي صرح به أبو علي الغساني الجياني والقاضي في (المشارق) والسمعاني في (الأنساب)، وخلائق وهو المعروف في الرواية وكتب الحديث، قال السمعاني.
وقيل: إنه بكسر الميم قال والمشهور الفتح، والله أعلم.

The Hanbali: al-Karmi (d. 1033 AH) also quoted Imam al-Nawawi’s discussion on this narration without mentioning the source work in his Aqawil al-Thiqat (p. 167-168), and he also mentioned what al-Maziri said in that book (probably from Imam al Nawawi as the editor: Shaykh Shu’ayb identified it to be found in the Sharh to Sahih Muslim) regarding ibn Qutayba’s mistake in misunderstanding a narration linked to the Sifat.

While we are on this issue of al-Maziri saying that Ibn Qutayba made a mistake on his interpretation of the Sura Hadith, let me bring to the readers attention of how a pseudo-Salafi from Saudi by the name of Sulayman ibn Nasir al-Alwan in his radd known as: al-Kashhaf an dalalat al-Saqqaf attempted to show a mistake of one of their favourites in Aqeeda, namely the Shafi’i Imam: Ibn Khuzayma and his Ta’wil of the “Sura” narration. This is what al-Alwan said:

وأما تأويل ابن خزيمة-رحمه الله تعالى- لحديث ((خلق الله آدم على صورته)) فإنه خلاف الحق ، وهو معدود من أخطائه، والله يعفو عنه ، ولا يجوز لنا التشبث بأخطاء العلماء وزلاتهم ، فإن تتبع زلات العلماء من هوادم الإسلام.

So look to these words O “Athari” – and see how one of your people criticised Ibn Khuzayma for making Ta’wil of the “Sura” narration and take note that the mistakes of the Ulama are not permissible to be affirmed in such matters as al-Alwan indicated! So, will these people apply such an example to mistakes on other points connected to Aqeeda, especially if it is a shadh view which contradicts the views of other major Ulama’s findings?! Will he even admit that Ibn Khuzayma apparently made Ta’wil as al-Alwan claimed?!

The above quote is on the parent site of this majhûl “Athari” known as ahwa.org to us, so he should read what the boggy man they may have created to distract attention and create lies against me by the screen name: “Salafist” and his post known as:

SAQQAF UNVEILED - By Shaykh Sulayman al-Alwan, dated: Tue Feb 22, 2005 2:43 pm

had to say when quoting this statement from al-Alwan in critique of Ibn Khuzayma!

Another example of a quote attributing a mistake to Ibn Qutayba was mentioned by Imam al-Qurtubi in his Tafsir as follows:

الجامع لأحكام القرآن، - للإمام القرطبي
الجزء 9 من الطبعة >> سورة الرعد >> الآيتان: 12 - 13 {هو الذي يريكم البرق خوفا وطمعا وينشئ السحاب الثقال، ويسبح الرعد بحمده والملائكة من خيفته ويرسل الصواعق فيصيب بها من يشاء وهم يجادلون في الله وهو شديد المحال}.

قوله تعالى: "وهم يجادلون في الله" يعني جدال اليهودي حين سأل عن الله تعالى: من أي شيء هو؟ قاله مجاهد. وقال ابن جريج: جدال أربد فيما همَّ به من قتل النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم. ويجوز أن يكون، "وهم يجادلون في الله" حالا، ويجوز أن يكون منقطعا. وروى أنس (أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بعث إلى عظيم من المشركين يدعوه إلى الله عز وجل، فقال لرسول الله: أخبرني عن إلهك هذا؟ أهو من فضة أم من ذهب أم من نحاس؟ فاستعظم ذلك فرجع إليه فأعلمه فقال: ارجع إليه فادعه فرجع إليه وقد أصابته صاعقة، وعاد إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وقد نزل: "وهم يجادلون في الله".
"وهو شديد المحال" قال ابن الأعرابي: "المحال" المكر، والمكر من الله عز وجل التدبير بالحق. النحاس: المكر من الله إيصال المكروه إلى من يستحقه من حيث لا يشعر. وروى ابن اليزيدي عن أبي زيد "وهو شديد المحال" أي النقمة. وقال الأزهري: "المحال" أي القوة والشدة. والمحل: الشدة الميم أصلية، وما حلت فلانا محالا أي قاويته حتى يتبين أينا أشد. وقال أبو عبيد: "المحال" العقوبة والمكروه. وقال ابن عرفة: "المحال" الجدال يقال: ما حل عن أمره أي جادل. وقال القتيبي: أي شديد الكيد وأصله من الحيلة، جعل ميمه كميم المكان وأصله من الكون، ثم يقال: تمكنت. وقال الأزهري: غلط ابن قتيبة أن الميم فيه زائدة بل هي أصلية، وإذا رأيت الحرف على مثال فعال أوله ميم مكسورة فهي أصلية مثل: مهاد وملاك ومراس، وغير ذلك من الحروف. ومفعل إذا كانت من بنات الثلاثة فإنه يجيء بإظهار الواو مثل: مزود ومحول ومحور، وغيرها من الحروف وقال: وقرأ الأعرج - "وهو شديد الْمَحَال" بفتح الميم وجاء تفسيره على هذه القراءة عن ابن عباس أنه الحول، ذكر هذا كله أبو عبيد الهروي، إلا ما ذكرناه أولا عن ابن الأعرابي

Continuing:

Dr Haddad mentioned this about ibn Qutayba:

Of the scholars of h.adīth who collect narrations without pausing to understand what they write Ibn Qutayba says: “Some have called them the H.ashwiyya” – a term that literally means “crammers” and is traditionally used for anthropomorphists…

This phrase alluding to the Hashwiyya was mentioned by ibn Qutayba in his Ta’wil Mukhtalif al-Hadith as follows in between a discussion:

وقد لقبوهم بالحشوية والنابتة والمجبرة وربما قالوا الجبرية وسموهم الغثاء والغثر وهذه كلها أنباز

Also, GF Haddad said:

He also refutes the enemies of Ahl al-Sunna who used rational arguments in order to disauthenticate the h.adīth or divest it of any real meaning in the manner of modern-day opponents of the Sunna both inside and outside the Muslim Community. For example, he explains the mention of the “baring of the shank” (sāq) in the Qur’ān and Sunna as a metonymy for the travails in which one hitches up one’s lower garments, baring one’s legs, due to their intensity

So what will the majhûl “Athari” now say about ibn Qutayba and his sayings on the Hashwiyya and his example of Ta’wil of the “Saaq”?!

Since the majhûl brought the name of al-Kawthari into this let us see what he said further on Istiqrar in his notes to the Sayf al-Saqil (a radd on Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya) of Imam Taqiud-Din al-Subki. In footnote no. 54 he said about Ibn Qutayba and others making Ta’wil of the Saaq to be al-Shidda:

وفي القرآن يوم يكشف عن ساق )القلم: 42( بدون ضمير، وذلك استعارة عن الشدة كما ذكره الفرَّاء وابن قتيبة وابن الجوزي.

So, this is an example of ibn Qutayba demonstrating Ta’wil of the “Saaq/Shin” as GF Haddad also showed (see above). So, will the Hashwiyya call Ibn Qutayba a Jahmi for this, or will they say he is mistaken, just as he was on the point on Istiqrar?!

ِ p. 35, fn. 22:

وليس بين المعتزلة فضلاً عن الأشاعرة من ينفي أن الله سبحانه عالم قدير سميع بصير.. إلى آخر تلك الصفات الواردة في الكتاب والسنة المشهورة، حتى يصح رميهم بجحد الصفات, وجل الإله سبحانه من أن يكون له مكانٌ يحويه، فلا يقال: إن السماء ظرفٌ له ولا إن العرش مستقر ذاته، فأين في كتاب الله مثل ذلك أو تفسير الاستواء بالاستقرار ؟! إنما هو قول مقاتل بن سليمان شيخ المجسمة وقول الكلبي الزائغ.

On p. 59, fn. 43 he said:

كون ذاته جل جلاله فوق إحدى السماوات فوقية مكانية وفوق كل مكان فوقية مكانية مثل ما سبق في الزيغ، وأين في القرآن ما يوهم ذلك ؟ على أن القول الأخير موافقة منه لمن يقول: إن ذاته جل شأنه بكل مكان وكفى هذا تهاتراً، وإن كان يريد الاستواء الاستقرار تبعاً لمقاتل بن سليمان شيخ المجسمة فقد استعجمت عليه الآية الكريمة وتباعد عن بلاغتها أيما تباعد.

On p. 114, fn. 96 he said:

فيا ترى ماذا يريد من كون العرش قبل القلم فإن كان أراد أن يجعل لله عرشاً يستقر عليه أزلا إما بقدم العرش قدما نوعيا، كما روى الدواني عن ابن تيمية أو قدما شخصياً لورود (أول ما خلق الله القلم) فحاشاه أن يستقر على عرش استقرار تمكن حادثاً كان العرش أو غير حادث. تعالى عن هذا وذاك.

Footnote no: 134 is an apt note as it shows Ibn Taymiyya’s view on Istiqrar:

ونحن معاشر أهل الحق لا نبالي بعداء مثله من المبطلين ولا تزال تطن في آذان رواد الحقائق شواذ ابن تيمية السخيفة باطلاعهم عليها في مؤلفاته نفسه وفيما رواه ثقات أهل العلم عنه وكلماته فيما رد به على الرازي في المجلد رقم 25 من الكواكب الدراري بظاهرية دمشق حيث قال: "لو شاء لاستقر على ظهر بعوضة فاستقلت به بقدرته فكيف على عرش عظيم" آية من آيات خرقه وحمقه، فليصادق من شاء من الخرقي مثله على عدائه لأهل الحق.

The following challenge was put to these people a few days ago:

I add now: Al-Dhahabi also declared Sahih the narration which establishes Ta'wil of the Saaq as narrated and authenticated by al-Hakim (but weakened by the distorter: Amr Abdal Munim Salim from Egypt, and conveyed on by AR Qadri via taqleed, and NOTE: Ibn Hajar declared this very narration: Hasan, also quoted by al-Karmi the Hanbali in his Aqawil, and Shaykh Shu’ayb al-Arna'ut knew all this and never questioned the authenticity given to it by these named Imams. Alhamdulillah!). Al-Dhahabi also rejected the concept of Istiwa "bi-Dhatihi" - in his Kitab al-Uluw and his later Siyar a'lam an-Nubala - but the Hashwiyya usually hide all this!

Now, we challenge them: If this is your Imam and was really on the way of Ibn Taymiyya till the end of his days: Produce for us if you care scans from his Kitab al-Uluw and tell us all here or at ahwa.org - what he said about: ISTIQRAR - under the notes to: Abu Ahmad al-Qassab (p. 259 of the Mukhtasar edn by al-Albani) and under: al-Baghawi (p. 280 of the Mukhtasar edition again)!

Now, since they have not had the simple courage to respond, especially as I know for sure at least one of them has a copy of the full edition of al-Dhahabi’s Kitab al-Uluw, let us see what they either knew not or knew but decided to hide or ignore of its reality!

Let me finish for now by quoting the kalam of the “Muhaddith al-Asr” of the pseudo-Salafiyya of the age, Nasir al-Albani (d. 1999). In his introduction to the Mukhtasar edition of al-Dhahabi’s Kitab al-Uluw, this is what he said:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v281/abulhasan/Mukhtasaral_Uluw_p16_Albani_Istiqrar.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v281/abulhasan/Mukhtasaral_Uluw_p17_Istiqrar.jpg

Let his Muqallids take note of what he said and see how he appears to be at odds with members of his own school in pseudo-Salafism in this age who affirmed Istiqrar (like: Ibn Uthaymin)!

And Allahu a’lam

Wassalam

Abul Hasan

Shaykhs-Pir Sahib

07-06-2005, 05:47 PM

sidi abul hasan

can you come to my place and teach me aqida?!! (serious)

or why not do a short course on maturidi and ashari aqida.... this is great stuff

Shaykhs-Pir Sahib

07-06-2005, 05:48 PM

...May Allah reward you for defending the aqida of ahl al-sunna and freeing the ulama from accusations - amin

faqir

27-06-2005, 05:41 PM

:salam:

Fascinating stuff Sidi Abul Hasan!

JazakAllahu khair for sharing this with us.

pjm

17-07-2005, 10:08 AM

Assalamu Alaikum,

Can someone provide evidence to prove that Imam Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim did hold the opinion that Istiwa mean Istiqrar?.

Thank You.