Al-Naqd ‘alā Bishr al-Marīsi
al-Radd ‘alā al-Jahmiyah
وكتاباه من أجل الكتب المصنفة في السنة وأنفعها ، وينبغي لكل طالب سنة مراده الوقوف على ( ما كان ) عليه الصحابة والتابعون والأئمة أن يقرأ كتابيه ، وكان شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية رحمه الله يوصي بهذين الكتابين أشد الوصية ويعظمهما جدا ، وفيهما من تقرير التوحيد والأسماء والصفات بالعقل والنقل ما ليس في غيرهما
” His two books (Al-Naqd ‘alā Bishr al-Marīsi and al-Radd ‘alā al-Jahmiyah [two books by Uthman ibn Sa’id al-Dārimi]) are among the greatest books ever written about the sunnah [that is, belief] and the most beneficial and it behooves every student of the sunnah who desires to learn what the Companions and Followers and the imams used to believe to read his two books.
Shaikh al-Islam Ibn Taimiyah, may Allah show him mercy, used to recommend these two books in the extreme, and he used to extol it greatly.
In these two books tauheed and the names and attributes are discussed according to rational proofs and transmitted texts in a way that is not to be found in other than them.” [End of Quote]
Who wrote this Gospel which was Extremely Recommended and highly praised by Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim ?
The Gospel of al-Darimi
‘Uthman bin Sa’id al-Darimi (d. 280 AH)
al-Naqdh ‘ala Bishr al-Marisi
“God” has a physical distance to his creation [and is in the above direction of it]:
فقال: ألا ترى أنه من صعد الجبل لا يقال له إنه أقرب إلى الله.
فيقال لهذا المعارض المدعي ما لا علم له: من أنبأك أن رأس الجبل ليس بأقرب إلى الله تعالى منأسفله لأنه من آمن بأن الله فوق عرشه فوق سماواته علم يقينا أن رأس الجبل أقرب إلى الله منأسفله وأن السماء السابعة أقرب إلى عرش الله تعالى من السادسة والسادسة أقرب إليه من الخامسة ثمكذلك إلى الأرض. كذلك روى إسحاق بن إبراهيم الحنظلي عن ابن المبارك أنه قال: رأس المنارةأقرب إلى الله من أسفلها. وصدق ابن المبارك لأن كل ما كان إلى السماء أقرب كان إلى الله أقرب،وقرب الله إلى جميع خلقه أقصاهم وأدناهم واحد لا يبعد عنه شيء من خلقه وبعض الخلق أقرب منبعض على نحو ما فسرنا من أمر السموات والأرض وكذلك قرب الملائكة من الله فحملة العرشأقرب إليه من جميع الملائكة الذين في السموات والعرش أقرب إليه من السماء السابعة
“He [al-Marīsi] said: “Don’t you see that you cannot say that whoever went up on a mountain is closer to Allah.” It should be said to this objector who claims that about which he has no knowledge: Who told you that the top of the mountain is not nearer to Allah than the bottom of it? Because those who believe that Allah is above His Throne and above His skies know for certain that the top of the mountain is closer to the sky than the bottom of it and that the seventh sky is closer to the Throne of Allah than the sixth, and that the sixth is closer to it than the fifth and so on down to the earth. Similarly, Ishāq ibn Ibrahīm al-Hanzali [ibn Rahaweh (d. 238)] reported that Ibn al-Mubārak said: “The top of the minaret is closer to Allah than the bottom of it.” Ibn al-Mubārak told the truth for whatever is closer to the sky is closer to Allah.
Notwithstanding, Allah is close to all His creation the near and the far and He is not far away from anything in His creation. Yet some of His creation is closer to Him than other as we explained about the skies and the earth. Likewise, with His angels, for the bearers of the Throne are closer to Him than all the [other] angels that are in the seventh sky.”
Note: The scholar whom he cites towards the end did not say what he claimed!
“God” has a place (Makan):
وأما قولك إن الله لم يصف نفسه أنه في موضع دون موضع، فإن كنت أيها المعارض ممن يقرأ كتابالله ويفهم شيئا من العربية علمت أنك كاذب على الله في دعواك لأنه وصف أنه في موضع دونموضع ومكان دون مكان ذكر أنه فوق العرش والعرش فوق السموات وقد عرف ذلك كثير من النساءوالصبيان فكيف من الرجال
“As for your statement that Allah has not described himself with being in one location (Mawdhi’) without another one: If you, o opponent, are from those who read the book of Allah and understand a little bit of Arabic, then you would’ve known that you’re lying about Allah with your claim, because He has [indeed] described Himself with being in one location without another location and in one place (Makan) without another place. He mentioned that He’s above the throne, and the throne is above the heavens and this is something that many of the women and children know, so what about the men?” [End of Quote]
لأنا قد أينا له مكانا واحدا، أعلى مكان وأطهر مكان وأشرف مكان على عرشه العظيم المقدسالمجيد فوق السماء السابعة العليا حيث ليس معه هناك إنس ولا جان
“Because we’ve given Him one place (Makan), the most high, most pure and most noble place upon his great, holy and glorious throne, above the seventh heaven where there is no human or Jinn with him.” [End of Quote]
There are many such passages where “God” is explicitly described with having a place. The above two quotes however should be enough.
“God” has limits:
وادعى المعارض أيضا أنه ليس لله حد ولا غاية ولا نهاية وهذا هو الأصل الذي بنى عليه جهم جميعضلالاته واشتق منها أغلوطاته وهي كلمة لم يبلغنا أنه سبق جهما إليها أحد من العالمين. فقال له قائلممن يحاوره: قد علمت مرادك بها أيها الأعجمي وتعني أن الله لا شيء، لأن الخلق كلهم علموا أنهليس شيء يقع عليه اسم الشيء إلا وله حد وغاية وصفة وأن لا شيء ليس له حد ولا غاية ولا صفة،فالشيء أبدا موصوف لا محالة ولا شيء يوصف بلا حد ولا غاية، وقولك لا حد له يعني أنه لا شيء.
قال أبو سعيد: والله تعالى له حد لا يعلمه أحد غيره ولا يجوز لأحد أن يتوهم لحده غاية في نفسهولكن يؤمن بالحد ويكل علم ذلك إلى الله ولمكانه أيضا حد وهو على عرشه فوق سماواته؛ فهذانحدان اثنان
“The opponent also claimed that Allah does not possess a Hadd (limit), Ghayah (restriction), or Nihayah (end). He said: And this is the basis upon which Jahm (ibn Safwan) built his misguidance and derived all of his errors. It has not reached us that anyone besides Jahm in the world preceded him with it. Someone who was discussing this with him (Jahm) said to him: I have come to know your intent oh non-Arab. You intend that Allah is nothing, because all of the creation have known that there is nothing that is called a “thing” except that it has a Hadd (limit), a Ghayah (restriction) and an attribute, and that what has no limit, restriction or attribute is nothingness.
So that which is a “thing” must necessarily be described with attributes. Nothingness is described with no limit or restriction. Your statement: He has no limit means that He is nothing.”
Abu Sa’id (al-Darimi) states:
“Allah Ta’ala has a limit that no one knows but Him and it is not allowed for anyone to imagine a limit to His limit in himself, however, he is to believe in the limit and relegate the knowledge of that to Allah. His place (Makan) also has a limit and He is upon His ‘Arsh above the seven heavens- so these are two limits.”” [End of Quote]
Note: This statement is in direct opposition to what we find in the‘Aqidah al-Tahawiyyah, which has been accepted by the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah in general.
“God” moves, sits and stands:
لأن الحي القيوم يفعل ما يشاء ويتحرك إذا شاء ويهبط ويرتفع إذا شاء ويقبض ويبسط ويقومويجلس إذا شاء، لأن أمارة ما بين الحي والميت التحرك: كل حي متحرك لا محالة وكل ميت غيرمتحرك لا محالة
“Because the Living the Sustainer does as He wills: He moves as He wills, and He descends and ascends as He wills, and He extends [His hand] as He wills and stands and sits as He wills, for the criterion that distinguishes the living from the dead is movement: every live thing moves of necessity and every dead thing does not move of necessity.” [End of Quote]
When “God” sits upon the Kursi there remains a space of four fingers on it:
إن كرسيه وسع السماوات والأرض وإنه ليقعد عليه فما يفضل منه إلا قدر أربع أصابع ومد أصابعهوإن له أطيطا كأطيط الرحل الجديد إذا ركبه من يثقله
““Verily, His chair can hold the skies and the earth, and verily He sits down on it and there is no space left over in it except the space of four fingers,” and he extended his four fingers. “And [the chair] makes a sound like that of a new saddle when someone sits on it with his weight.”” [End of Quote]
Note: This is part of a narration that he cites as a proof against his opponent.
When “God” sits on the throne it makes a sound, because of his weight:
وروى المعارض أيضا عن الشعبي أنه قد ملأ العرش حتى إن له أطيطا كأطيط الرحل. ثم فسر قولالشعبي أنه قد ملأه آلاء ونعما حتى إن له أطيطا … فيقال لهذا المعارض: … ويلك فإن لم يكن علىالعرش بزعمك إلا آلاؤه ونعماؤه وأمره فما بال العرش يتأطط من الآلاء والنعماء؟ لكأنها عندكأعكام الحجارة والصخور والحديد فيتأطط منها العرش ثقلا، إنما الآلاء طبائع أو صنائع ليس لهاثقل ولا أجسام يتأطط منها العرش
“The opponent has also reported from al-Sha’bi [who said] that He (Allah) has filled the throne and that [the throne] makes a sound like the sound of a saddle [when someone sits on it]. Then he interpretated the statement of al-Sha’bi [by saying], that [the throne] was filled by the grace and favor [of Allah]….
It is said to this opponent: … Woe to you! If there is nothing on the throne – in your claim – other than the grace and favor [of Allah] and His command, then is it that the throne is making a sound from the grace and favor? It is as if [they are like] stones and iron to you, so that the throne makes a sound because of their weight.
Favors are traits and deeds which have no weight (Thiql) and they’re not bodies which could cause the throne to make a sound.” [End of Quote]
Note: The statement that is ascribed to the Tabi’i is a lie against him as was mentioned by Imam Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597 AH) in his “Daf’ Shubah al-Tashbih”.
“God” has touched Adam, peace be upon him, while creating him with his hands:
فيقال لهذا المريسي الجاهل بالله وبآياته: فهل علمت شيئا مما خلق الله ولي خلق ذلك غيره حتى خصآدم من بينهم أنه ولى خلقه من غير مسيس بيده، فسمّه؟ وإلا فمن ادعى أن الله لم يل خلق شيء صغيرأو كبير فقد كفر. غير أنه ولي خلق الأشياء بأمره وقوله وإرادته وولي خلق آدم بيده مسيسا: لم يخلقذا روح بيديه غيره فلذلك خصه وفضله وشرف بذلك ذكره، لولا ذلك ما كانت له فضيلة من ذلك علىشيء من خلقه إذ خلقهم بغير مسيس في دعواك
[End of Quote]
“God” may rest/sit upon the back of a mosquito:
إن الله أعظم من كل شيء وأكبر من كل خلق ولم يحتمله العرش عظما ولا قوة، ولا حملة العرشاحتملوه بقوتهم ولا استقلوا بعرشه بشدة أسرهم ولكنهم حملوه بقدرته ومشيئته وإرادته وتأييده لولاذلك ما أطاقوا حمله. وقد بلغنا أنهم حين حملوا العرش وفوقه الجبار في عزته وبهائه ضعفوا عنحمله واستكانوا وجثوا على ركبهم حتى لقنوا لا حول ولا قوة إلا بالله فاستقلوا به بقدرة الله وإرادتهلولا ذلك ما استقل به العرش ولا الحملة ولا السموات والأرض ولا من فيهن ولو قد شاء لاستقر علىظهر بعوضة فاستقلت به بقدرته ولطف ربوبيته فكيف على عرش عظيم أكبر من السموات السبعوالأرضين السبع وكيف ينكر أيها النفاج أن عرشه يقله والعرش أكبر من السموات السبع والأرضينالسبع ولو كان العرش في السموات والأرضين ما وسعته ولكنه فوق السماء السابعة.
فكيف تنكر هذا وأنت تزعم أن الله في الأرض وفي جميع أمكنتها والأرض دون العرش في العظمةوالسعة فكيف تقله الأرض في دعواك ولا يقله العرش الذي أعظم منها وأوسع؟
“Verily, Allah is greater than all things and bigger than all creation, and the throne is not carrying Him by [its] glory and strength, nor are the carriers of the throne carrying it by their strength, nor could they bear His throne; but they carried it by His power. It has reached us that when they carried the throne, and above it was the Almighty, in His glory and His splendor, they became weak from carrying it, and they became lowly, and knelt down on their knees, until they were taught to read: ‘There is no power, nor might, except with Allah.’ Then, they bore it by the power of Allah and His will. And if it were not for that, the throne would not be able to bear Him (i.e. Allah), nor the carriers [of the throne], nor the heavens, nor the earth, nor those in them.
Had He willed, He would have settled on the back of a mosquito, so it would bear Him, by His power and the subtlety of His Lordship. Thus, what of the great throne, that is bigger than the heavens and the earth? And how do you deny, O vain one, that His throne bears Him, when the throne is bigger than the seven heavens and the seven earths? And had the throne been in the heavens and the earth, they would not have contained it, but it is above the seventh heaven. So how can you deny this, when you claim that Allah is in the earth in all its places, yet the earth is less than the throne in greatness and vastness. So how is it that the earth bears Him according to your claim, but the throne which is greater and more vast than it does not?” [End of Quote]
Disbelief remains disbelief in an absolute way no matter who utters it.
And the book “al-Naqdh ‘ala Bishr al-Marisi” is a book of Kufrand Tashbih.
If ‘Uthman bin Sa’id al-Darimi (d. 280 AH) has written it, then he’s guilty of Tashbih and if not, then not. So the matter here is not a person, but rather whether it is allowed for a Muslim to believe in the things that is written in the above mentioned book.
Here is a link where one can read the book in Arabic: Here
Just because the Mu’attilah went to one extreme it does not justify to go to the other extreme.
The above describitions are in no way from the attributes of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala or from the belief of the people of Islam regarding the Bari subhanahu wa ta’ala.
These describitions are from the beliefs of the pagans regarding their imaginary “Gods“.
My intention was not to attack ‘Uthman bin Sa’id al-Darimi (d. 280 AH), because we don’t know with certainty whether the book “al-Naqdh ‘ala Bishr al-Marisi” – in the form that is available to us today – was indeed written by him or not. That’s why I said that my comment is not regarding his person, but rather regarding the content of the book that is attributed to him.
My intention was to present some of the deviant statements from the book, so that the readers are careful with taking knowledge from people who’re recommending this book.
As for your question what classical scholars said regarding ‘Uthman bin Sa’id al-Darimi:
They praised him, because he was a good Hadith scholar.
But let me ask you one thing:
Did these scholars read “al-Naqdh ‘ala Bishr al-Marisi” ?
Let’s not forget that this book was teached nowhere (because it’s a worthless book) and it’s copies where also not available except to very very few people.
Among the scholars who praised him was Imam Taj al-Din al-Subki (d. 771 AH). I don’t think I need to say what he would say regarding the beliefs that have been already mentioned.1
And another scholar who praised him was Imam ‘Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi (d. 429 AH). He was of the opinion that only some Ahkam of Islam apply to sects like the Rafidhah, Mu’tazilah, Khawarij, Mujassimah and others, but that one is not allowed to pray behind them or marry from them and that they’re disbelievers and in the hellfire in the hereafter.
He made Takfir upon the Karramiyyah because of their saying thatAllah ta’ala is subject to changes and their belief that Allah ta’ala is limited from the side of the throne (both are beliefs that are present in “al-Naqdh ‘ala Bishr al-Marisi”).
Conclusion: Praising al-Darimi does not mean that one has read “al-Naqdh ‘ala Bishr al-Marisi” or that one supports the beliefs that are in it.
( posted by Abu Sulayman on IA forum)
Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki (D. 756AH) on ibn Taymiyya and hisfollowers being from the deviant Hashwiyya sect, and that they were aminority fringe group who would teach their beliefs in secret
“As for the Hashwiyya, they are a despicable and ignorant lot who claim to belong to the school of (Imam) Ahmad (ibn Hanbal)… They have corrupted the creed of a few isolated Shafi’is, especially some of the Hadith scholars among them who are lacking in reason… They were held in utmost contempt, and then towards the end of the seventh century (AH) a man appeared who was diligent, intelligent and well-read and did not find a Shaykh to guide him, and he is of their creed and is brazen and dedicated to teaching his ideas… He said that non-eternal attributes can subsist in Allah, and that Allah is ever-acting, and that an infinite chain of events is not impossible either in the past or the future. He split the ranks and cast doubts on the creed of the Muslims and incited dissension amongst them. He did not confine himself to creedal matters of theology, but transgressed the bounds and said that travelling to visit the tomb of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) is a sin… The scholars agreed to imprison him for a long time, and the Sultan imprisoned him… and he died in prison. Then some of his followers started to promulgate his ideas and teach them to people in secret while keeping quiet in public, and great harm came from this.”
[al-Zabidi, Ithaf al-Sada al-Muttaqin, 2:11. al-Zabidi is quoting from al-Subki’s al-Sayf al-Saqil fi al-Radd ‘ala ibn Zafil, see al-Rasa-il al-Subkiyya, 84-85]
Imam Taqi al-Din al-Hisni al-Shafi’i (d.829AH) mentions some points regarding Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (d.795AH) and some of his negative views concerning ibn Taymiyya:
al-Shaykh Zayn al-Din ibn Rajab al-Hanbali was from among those who firmly believed in ibn Taymiyya’s kufr (disbelief), and had (authored) refutations against him. He would say at the top of his voice during some gatherings:
“al-Subki is excused – meaning in regards to his takfir”.
[al-Hisni, Daf’ Shubah man Shabbaha wa Tamarrad, ed. Dar al-Mustafa, pg. 535]
وكان الشيخ زين الدين بن رجب الحنبلي ممن يعتقد كفر ابن تيمية وله عليه الرد. وكان يقول بأعلىصوته في بعض المجالس: معذور (173/أ) السبكي – يعني في تكفيره ]).
في ب: معذور السبكي في تكفيره
دفع شبه من شبه وتمرد، دار المصطفى، ص. ٥٣٥
1. Scholars’ firmness in condemning those who have raised such confusions has traditionally been very uncompromising, and this is no doubt the reason that a number of the Imams of the Shafi’i school, among them Taqi al-Din Subki, Ibn Hajar Haytami and al-Izz ibn Jama’a, gave formal legal opinions (fatawa) that ibn Taymiya was misguided and misguiding in tenents of faith, and warned people from accepting his theories.
Edited by ADHM
The Sources of Ibn Taymiyyah’s Ideas!
Bedrock of Wahhabi/Salafi Aqeedah
Examples Of Blatant Anthropomorphism
From The Works Of Famous Hashawiyah the Imam of
Ibn Taymiyyah and his disciple Ibn al-Qayyim