Imam Rabbani/Turpushti and dhahir mana of sifat?

[el-Turki]

As-salamu alaykum,

Ok, this is going to be complicated, since i have to translate from turkish to english and the topic is not really easy. But I’ll give it a try and inshaallah you will understand my questions and the problem itself.

Mujaddidi Alfi Thani Imam Rabbani [rahimuAllah] writes in his 193. maktubat, that Imam Fadlullah Shihabuddin Abu Abdullah bin Hasan Turpushti [rahimuAllah] has a very nice book on aqida called “al-mu’tamad fil-mu’takad” [also known as turpushti risala] that one should read to know the correct aqida of ahlu sunnah wal jamaa. Reading this, Revan and me decided to translate the turpushti risala into german from turkish for our homepage www.ahlu-sunnah.de .
So far so good. An aqidabook recommended by Imam Rabbani [rahimuAllah], what could go wrong? But then on page 24 [First Bab, sixth Fasl – Chapter name “The grades of the shifat and the mushkil and mutashabih of them” ] we read:

“…And the others [attributes] have to be given their dhahir mana and whatever wording they came with has to be taken on and they should not be given majaz mana [metaphoric meaning/tawil]. If the haqiqah of something is not completely known and parts of it are covered, than the haqiqah is not to be opened with ray and qiyas. We have to accept it with its dhahir mana. Quantity and modality are not to be applied on them.
Yad, wajh, sam’, basar [hand, face, ear, eye] belong to those attributes. The belief regarding these and similar ones has to be, that they are not organs, yani they are not parts of a body. They are of Allah [ta’alas] attributes. They have no “how” and having an “how” is not jaiz for them.”

Now, as far as we understood our aqida so far, we do NOT take theese attributes with their dhahir mana, but we pass them on with their dhahir wording and make tafwid of there meaning. But is Imam Turpushti [rahimuAllah] here not indicating the opposite, justifying the aqida of the wahabiyya of today? I mean he is not writing, “they have to be taken with their dhahir”, but “dhahir MANA”…
But then again he is writing, that they are NOT bodily organs, which again would totally contradict the dhahir mana, wouldn't it?
I hope you understand our problem und the confusion. But maybe there was a mistake when it was translated into turkish. If someone could lookup the arabic/urdu/farsi original and clarify, that would be really helpful. Or maybe we understood it wrong and you can help us understand it.


Wa alaykum salam.

[SeekerOfGuidance]

Any answers?

[Muhammed Bahauddin]

Anyone?

[seeker_ikb]

Anyone?

Assalamu 'Alaykum,

I have seen in the following link that you have provided info about Shaykh Mahmud Effendi in Istanbul.

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20790

Are you his mureed ? If so, please provide some advice on the following thread.

Any true Sufi Shaykh in Istanbul & Muslim life in Turkey?

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44601

[Musleemah]

Haven't you thought that maybe the problem is with your understanding of what is part of the dhahir meaning and what isn't?

For you, the dhahir meaning = an organ or limb
while to others, "an organ or limb" is part of the kayfiyyah, and not part of the general meaning.
It depends on the essence of the thing that your attributing the yad, or wajh to.

Naturally, the yad in living creatures are limbs, because the essence of all of them is a body composed of limbs, while when it comes to Allah Azza wa Jal, His Essence is different, it is not like the Essence of creation, so His Yad would not be like theirs. His Yad is befitting of His Essence which is not like the Essence of creation.
So "a limb" isn't part of the meaning that is affirmed, because it is from kayfiyyah.

[Abu Yunus]

Haven't you thought that maybe the problem is with your understanding of what is part of the dhahir meaning and what isn't?

For you, the dhahir meaning = an organ or limb
while to others, "an organ or limb" is part of the kayfiyyah, and not part of the general meaning.
It depends on the essence of the thing that your attributing the yad, or wajh to.

Naturally, the yad in living creatures are limbs, because the essence of all of them is a body composed of limbs, while when it comes to Allah Azza wa Jal, His Essence is different, it is not like the Essence of creation, so His Yad would not be like theirs. His Yad is befitting of His Essence which is not like the Essence of creation.
So "a limb" isn't part of the meaning that is affirmed, because it is from kayfiyyah.

So, do you say that you know the meaning of 'Wajh' (in respect to Allah), and if so, what do you say is its meaning?

May Allah reward your sincere intentions.

[el-Turki]

Haven't you thought that maybe the problem is with your understanding of what is part of the dhahir meaning and what isn't?

For you, the dhahir meaning = an organ or limb
while to others, "an organ or limb" is part of the kayfiyyah, and not part of the general meaning.
It depends on the essence of the thing that your attributing the yad, or wajh to.

Naturally, the yad in living creatures are limbs, because the essence of all of them is a body composed of limbs, while when it comes to Allah Azza wa Jal, His Essence is different, it is not like the Essence of creation, so His Yad would not be like theirs. His Yad is befitting of His Essence which is not like the Essence of creation.
So "a limb" isn't part of the meaning that is affirmed, because it is from kayfiyyah.

Selamu aleykum,

your explanation seems contradicting, just like the quote from turpushti risala i wanted to have checked by the knowledgable brothers here.
If the dhahir meaning is not a organ/limb, WHAT IS IT????

You say the dahir of yad is "hand" but it is not an organ. You give it the dhahir TRANSLATION but take its most important meaning away, which seems quite crazy.
If you know the meaning of something, you have to be able to explain it to us. If your explanation consists mere of a translation into "hand", then this not a real explanation. You just translate it into antother language, claiming that this is the intended meaning, not refering to a limb (which is not the way of the wahabis, as far as i understood, they DENY sayings like "he is not a body, not an organ etc".).

For example, if someone asks me regarding the meaning of yad for humans, i can explain that even without using the word "hand". You could show it on your own hand, give examples what you do/could do with a "yad" etc. So if you know the meaning of something, you should be able to EXPLAIN it to us.
When you say the intended meaning is "hand" but not a organ/limb, then you just replaced the word yad with hand and took its dhahir meaning away, making you effectively someone who makes tafwid of mana, without admitting it, because it would make you a jahmi according to your madhab.
In my eyes, ahlu sunnah is just more honest in its methodology. We clearly say that we make tafwid of the mana, you on the other hand, do the same, but fail to admit it, just to form an opposition, thinking you are safe of being labeled a jahmi and thinking that this is better, only because it is the opposite of what the ashaira and maturidiyya say. Just admit that basically you are making tafwid of mana, but you do not want to call like that... subhanallah.


Anyway, i feared this would lead into another discussion regarding the sifat, but that was not my intention. Please, if anyone has the original book, could you look up the quote and check with my translation? I cannot believe that noone has it, or can get a hold of this book. =)

we selam

[Musleemah]

Selamu aleykum,

your explanation seems contradicting, just like the quote from turpushti risala i wanted to have checked by the knowledgable brothers here.
If the dhahir meaning is not a organ/limb, WHAT IS IT????

wa alaykum assalam

No, "a limb" is not a defintion for yad in the Arabic language, because it does not define it, since there are other things that are also limbs in creation, such as the foot.
A defintion must include a meaning that tells you exactly what the thing defined is.
It should include a description that clearily points to the thing defined.

For example, If a person who does not know any Arabic, and has never heard of the word "yad" before, was told that "yad" is a limb, would he then know exactly what a yad is?
No,
If he was told him that it is from flesh and bone, would he then know what it is?
No.
If he was told that it is part of the body that is used to grasp things, would he then know what your talking about ?
yes.
This is a basic definition that pointed directly to the thing defined.
Now some of the other things that are part of the description of a human hand, such as it being from flesh and bones, having hair, being a limb ... etc. is part of the kayfiyyah.
These are not part of the general defintion, its kayfiyyah depends on who it is attributed to. So you can't say that it is a limb, or made of flesh and bones until you are told whom or what the hand belongs to.

So the defintion of a yad when speaking about Allah Azza wa Jal would be: an attribute of the Essence that He grasps, folds ...etc. (which are actions that Allah attributed to His Hands)

Anyone reading that defintion would automatically think of the hand, and not another attribute.

You say the dahir of yad is "hand" but it is not an organ. You give it the dhahir TRANSLATION but take its most important meaning away, which seems quite crazy.

That is part of its kayfiyyah, the detailed meaning of it, not the basic general meaning of yad.
It being a limb or organ is because of the essence of humans and animals which are bodies composed of limbs, Allah made their hands that fit their essence (limbs).
While His hands are befitting of His Majesty.

give examples what you do/could do with a "yad" etc.

That is correct, many (not necessarly all) parts of the body can be defined by its actions or duties alone, one of them is the hand, as I have explained above.

When you say the intended meaning is "hand" but not a organ/limb,

It is like me saying that something has a hand that is not flesh or bones (i.e. a robot), it not being flesh or bones does not negate it being a hand, it is still a hand but it is made of metal because the body of the robot is made of metal.

Now as I said before, the reason why many can't comprehend a hand that is not a limb is because all living creatures that we know of and have seen have hands that are limbs, and we are not able to imagine or comprehend something that we haven't seen, nor seen something like it.

If we quit comparing Allah's -Azza wa Jal- hand with that of creation, we wouldn't be having this problem. Hands of creation are limbs because it befits them, while Allah's hands are befitting of His Majesty not like that of creation.

then you just replaced the word yad with hand and took its dhahir meaning away, making you effectively someone who makes tafwid of mana, without admitting it

That is incorrect, as I explained above, the basic defintion of a yad does not include limb, but includes things that Allah attributed to His hands, which are part of the defintion of a real hand, not a majazi one.

That is why "a limb" wasn't mentioned as part of the definition of "yad" in the earliest Arabic dictionaries available to us, nor some of the later famous ones.

[Zhulfiqar]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

His Yad is befitting of His Essence which is not like the Essence of creation.

Do you believe that Yad is a part of the Essence ? This is the only meaning I could derive from the above statement.

So the defintion of a yad when speaking about Allah Azza wa Jal would be: an attribute of the Essence that He grasps, folds ...etc. (which are actions that Allah attributed to His Hands)

You only defined the actions but not the attribute itself, so why don't you go straight to the point and explain us the meaning of Yad ?

Like you said;

If he was told that it is part of the body that is used to grasp things, would he then know what your talking about ?

So if the person heard only the part 'grasping things' he wouldn't know what Hand is but if he heard that it was also a 'part of the body' then he would exactly know what a Hand is.

In this case you only defined what Allah's Yad does but not what Allah's Yad is ? Why don't you explain us what Yad is ? Do you have one ?

I'll hope you won't disappoint us and repeat the same nonsense over again.

[Musleemah]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Do you believe that Yad is a part of the Essence ? This is the only meaning I could derive from the above statement.

I believe that Yad is an attribute of Allah's Essence.

You only defined the actions but not the attribute itself, so why don't you go straight to the point and explain us the meaning of Yad ?

No, I didn't only mention actions, I said: "an attribute of the Essence " then mention the actions done by it, which clearly points to which attribute I am speaking about.
Not like you saying that it means "a limb".

Now if that definition I posted does not clearify what one is speaking about, then tell me what other thing can that meaning fit, a foot? the eyes? the hair? something else?


Like you said;

In this case you only defined what Allah's Yad does but not what Allah's Yad is ? Why don't you explain us what Yad is ? Do you have one ?

Wrong, I already said what it is, it is "an Attribute of the Essence " then mentioned the actions that distinguish it from other attributes of Essence.