The Nights are a Revival

THE NIGHTS ARE A REVIVAL

If one’s nights are spent in seeking forgiveness, with a renewal of one’s belief, in togetherness with theMessenger of Allah, upon him be peace and blessings, in remembrance and contemplation of death…

There is no escape from death.

yaqūlu l-insānu yawma-idhin ayna l-mafaru

“On that day human will say: ‘Where is the escape?’” (75:10)

There is no place to run and hide on the Day of Judgement. We are living in His dominion. When will death come, how will it come, we do not know this either.

In short, the nights are each a new revival.

Allah Almighty again provides us with an example: all animals slowly wake at dawn. Roosters are the first to rise. They begin crowing. The birds follow. And then flowers begin blooming; they begin showing their colour, their shape, and begin exuding their fragrance.

Of course, Allah Almighty warns the human being as such, by means of all these events. Of course it is not appropriate for the human being to remain sluggish.

In one of his supplications, the Messenger of Allah says:

Allahumma inni a’udhu bika min ‘adhabi l-qabr, wa min ‘adhabi-nnar,

“O Allah, I seek refuge with you from the torment of the grave, and from the torment of the Fire…”   (Bukhari, Adhan, 149)

That is to say, we will experience such a state in the grave and in the Hereafter that Allah Almighty wants for us to turn to Him with such a supplication. In other words, not forgetting the grave, not forgetting the Hereafter and not forgetting our reckoning.

Muhammed Es’ad Erbili says in one of his letters to his students:

“My son, may Allah illuminate the eye of your heart. Just as rose water is present in every point of a rose petal, may love and constant remembrance of Allah permeate every particle of your precious being, and may your constant remembrance and invocation of Allah beautify you with its beautiful fragrance.”

This is so important that, there is another resurrection on the Day of Judgement. Upon rising:

“Some faces will on that Day…” (80:38)

As declared in a Qur’anic verse:

“…Some faces will on that Day be radiant with happiness, smiling, rejoicing at good tidings. And some faces will on that Day be dust-stained; veiled in darkness.” (80:38-41)

So, the state of our inner world in this abode will come forth there, on the Day of Judgement, as a particular shape and form. [There,] we will not have the colour, shape and form that we have in this world.

We must pay attention to our every moment. Our tongue in particular. Allah gave us a tongue. Why did He do so? Our tongue needs to be a tongue of mercy. A mercy must constantly be projected from our hearts. From the vain and futile… Allah Almighty declares:

“They always turn away from and avoid whatever is vain and frivolous.” (23:3)

And so, the time of the night before dawn is a vital time for us. The heart’s being together with Allah in the sombre darkness of the night.

Allah Almighty then declares:

walayālin ʿashrin

“And ten nights.” (89:2)

Each night has a separate beauty. Great things happen during the night. The Prophet’s Ascension took place at night. Most of the revelation came during the night. Important events took place at night.

This goes to show the importance of spending one’s nights in worship. The ten nights of Dhu al-Hijjah, the ten nights of Muharram, the last ten nights of Ramadan. Allah wants for us to pay particular attention to these nights.

The next verse reads:

wal-shafʿi wal-watri

“And [by] the even and the odd.” (89:3)

Allah is One. The essence of His Being cannot be known. Everything that He has created is in pairs, or possesses similar characteristics. Only He Himself is One.

This indicates the importance of reflecting upon the infinite majesty of Allah. It is then declared:

wa-al-layli idhā yasri

“And [by] the night as it journeys on (towards an end).” (89:4)

The day ends and night begins. One needs to prepare for the night during the day. The body prepares for it, becoming weary throughout the day and preparing for sleep and the night.

But the heart, too, needs to prepare for the night. It needs to be in the company of the righteous, the truthful ones, during the day. It must not travel about in the wrong places. It must not look at the wrong things.

The night is, in a sense, an opening to death. In other words, it is as though a drill for death. You drift off into sleep and you have no knowledge or awareness of anything – where you are, nor your age, nor your family or children. It is a practice run for death. Everyone dreams differently, in accordance with their particular state. For some it is freedom from grief, and for others it is suffering.

Dawn, however, is a rising, anew. It is as though the Rising on the Day of Judgement, a scene from the Hereafter. This is why the Messenger of Allah says:

“Sleep is the brother of death.”   (Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Kitab al-Zuhd, 43)

So, [we need] to be able to take lesson from it.

Allah puts you to sleep, in the same way that you will enter [a state of] death, you will rise on the Day of Judgement.

Calling oneself to account when entering the night, saying, “What have I done for the sake of Allah today?” Everything is constantly being recorded.

Again, in the Qur’anic chapter Munafiqun, it is stated:

“And spend (in God’s cause and for the needy) out of whatever We provide for you before death comes to any of you and he says: ‘My Lord! If only You would grant me respite for a short while, so that I may give alms, and be one of the righteous!’” (63:10)

The Messenger of Allah says:

“…Even the good doer shall face death with regret…” (See Tirmidhi, Zuhd, 59) Wishing they had done more.

The Angel of Death, Azra’il, once came to the Prophet Ilyas, upon him be peace. He began trembling and was overcome with consternation.

Archangel Azra’il said:

“You are a Prophet. Do you fear death?”

“No,” he replied. “I am not afraid of death. How beautiful was the life of this world. I was fulfilling my servanthood to Allah and I had a very peaceful existence with my worship, my way of life, and my conveying the message to others. However, now I am to remain in the grave until the Resurrection and will be deprived of these rewards.”

In short, may Allah enable us to know the value of our lives.

[Then, there is] Rabi’ b. Khaytham. He says:

“I was once present by the side of a man in the throes of death. I prompted him to say, ‘There is no deity but Allah (La ilaha illallah)’.

(As one needs to quietly recite the Declaration of Faith beside one whose death is close.)

“He seemed not to hear this Declaration of Faith. It was as though he were holding a bag and calculating something with his fingers, like he was counting money, and that the state in which he died.”

The Messenger of Allah says:

“You will die as you have lived and will be resurrected as you have died.” (Munawi, Fayd al-Qadr, V:663)

Like the drops that fill this glass. However lucid are these drops, our life capital, that is the extent to which they will contribute to our deliverance. But this water was poured into a clean glass. Had it been poured into a dirty, soiled glass, even if it were pure spring water or even Zamzam, one could not drink it. The glass needs to be clean. This means that the heart has to be cleansed.

qad aflaḥa man zakkāhā

He is indeed prosperous who has grown it [his carnal soul] in purity.” (91:9)

qad aflaḥa man tazakkā

“Prosperous indeed is he who purifies himself (of sins, and of his wealth by spending from it in God’s cause and for the needy).”(87:14)

This is what Allah Almighty demands of us.

The heart is to be purified so that it can invest all acts of worship, all worldly transactions as well as the servant with spirituality. The heart above all…

hal fī dhālika qasamun lidhī ḥij’rin

Allah declares: “Is there not in that a solemn oath for one endowed with reason (to reflect upon, so that it may guide him to the truth and keep him away from evils)?”(89:5)

Then Allah, in the Qur’anic verses recited, refers to those societies who were destroyed in the past.

“Have you not considered how your Lord dealt with the (tribe of) ‘Ad?”(89:6) He declares.

alam tara: “Have you not considered how,” He says. He says, in other words, “concentrate on this matter.”

The (tribe of ) ‘Ad He says:

Allah Almighty bestowed great favours upon the tribe of ‘Ad. The Gardens of Iram and the strength given to its people, who used to hew their dwellings into stone and make pools with fountains. The more Allah gave to them, the more they went astray. “The like of which had not been created in the land,” the Qur’an declares. (See 89:8) Such degree of beauty. Those cities of Iram. They went astray as Allah gave to them. They ascribed to themselves the bounties Allah bestowed upon them. “Is there anyone more powerful than us?” they said. “Who is more powerful than us?” they said.

They used to take slaves and for sheer pleasure, as hunters do in our day, and would take them all the way to the tops of buildings off which they would throw them, to see which one would blow their slave up better. In other words, they went astray, they turned brutal. Allah Almighty sent down His punishment, destroying them with a furious storm.

Because they said to their Prophet:

“Bring the wind as a miracle, not like this, but like that,” they said, “so that we may believe in you.”

Prophet Hud, peace be upon him, also did thus. But they persisted in their rebellion. And Allah Almighty destroyed them with storms and winds.

Then came the tribe of Thamud. (89:9) This tribe did not take lesson either, did not learn from the events that took place.

“They, (they said) built unsound foundations, while we made them strong and nothing can happen to us. No power can destroy us,” they said.

And Allah Almighty destroyed them with such a sound that it decimated them – a deafening blast.

Then Allah Almighty makes known the Pharaoh’s people. (See 89:10) His armies, and how they used to tie the hands and hands and feet of the slaves to stakes and then turn mills. This is the way in which they would torment and torture them.

Allah Almighty declares:

(All of these) increased manifold disorder and corruption therein.” (89:12)

He gave them bounties and they increased their disorder and corruption. He manifests His wrath and punishment upon them.

There are similar things in other verses. The tribe of Prophet Lut. Unfortunately, just as is the case today. They acted outside the bounds of humanity and even went beyond animals. Prophet Lut, peace be upon him, warned them:

Is there not among you one right-minded man?” (See 11:78)

And they replied.

“Go, if you are pure! And leave us to our own devices!” How difficult for a Prophet – how he was backed into a corner.

O! would that I had power to resist you,” he said to them. “Or that I could lean upon some strong support!

Allah Almighty rained lava upon them, from the firmaments above.

His wife, too, was among them. This is because his wife was among the wrongdoers; she joined the transgressors.

Just think how a Prophet is subjected to such an ordeal.

The people of Prophet Shu‘ayb. They were a dishonest tribe. They used to cheat and deceive others. They were involved in black marketeering. They used to commit every kind of abominable act for the sake of profit. A scourge of punishment descended upon them also.

Let us come, now, to the present:

Do these exist in our day, or not? They do. Allah Almighty destroyed them, these tribes and peoples. But the Messenger of Allah, upon him be peace and blessings, asked Allah for three things. One of these things was for his community not to face destruction. Allah Almighty confers His grace and kindness in this way.

At this point, of course, the Day of Judgement awaits everyone. And this is the entirety of the matter; Allah makes these known to us for us to take lesson and learn from these events.

Unfortunately, in our day, immorality is ever increasing. These mobile phones… Our children are going wherever they want, to places they should not go. Life is passing by with the vain and useless. This starts from the tiniest child.

This is why the responsibility of parents has greatly increased in our age. Institutions are to be established. From daycare centres to Qur’an schools and Imam Hatip high schools, and the like. In other words, to save our generations. Otherwise, we are losing them, dear brothers. That is to say, children are becoming strangers to their parents. Blood relations are of no avail…

 

Osman Nuri Topbaş

Once again, Who’s Banning Who?

Ban salafi scholar books

Jan 2016

The Saudi Ministry of Education has ordered the ban of all scholastic books written by the Salafist cleric Salman Al-Awda and his Muslim Brotherhood affiliates, including the infamous Egyptian Salafi cleric Yousif Al-Qaradawi. According to Saudi publication “Al-Hayat”, the Ministry of Education has banned books that the regime deems to be promoting “terrorism” and misrepresenting Islamic Shari’ah Law. So far, 80 books issued by the Muslim Brotherhood have been banned by the Saudi Ministry of Education across the country; this number is likely to increase in the coming days, as the regime cracks down on the Salafi movement inside of Saudi Arabia. The Muslim Brotherhood is primarily backed by the Al-Thani regime of Qatar – they are considered a terrorist group inside of Saudi Arabia, despite the warm relations the Al-Thani and Al-Saud families share. 
[| Al-Masdar NewsHere

The Egyptian Ministry of Religious Endowments have launched a campaign to remove the books of scholars that belong to the Salafi movement from all mosques in Egypt.

June 2015

EGYPT TO REMOVE BOOKS OF IBN TAYMIYYAH, IBN BAZ AND IBN UTHAYMEEN FROM ALL MOSQUES

Names of scholars whose books are to be removed or confiscated:-

– Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab
– Imam Ibn Taymiyyah
– Sheikh Ibn Baz
– Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen
– Sheikh Abu Ishaq al-Huweini
– Sheikh Mohamed Hussein Yacoub
– Sheikh Mohammed Hassan

They have already confiscated 7000 books and CDs from mosque libraries in Cairo, Alexandria and Giza. The authors of these materials include:

– Sheikh Wagdi al-Ghoneim
– Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi
– Sheikh Muhammad al-Maqsood
– Yasser al-Burhami
– Sheikh Abu Ishaq al-Huweini
– Sheikh Mohamed Hussein Yacoub
– Sheikh Mohammed Hassan

The ministry’s department is currently launching an inspection campaign on mosques and libraries in all provinces, to make sure they are free of any books and media calling for “militancy and extremism”.

Source

Iraq’s Kurdistan bans 500 Islamic books “deemed to promote violence”

May 28, 2015

Iraq’s semi-autonomous region of Kurdistan banned 500 books by 10 Muslim religious scholars deemed to promote extremism and violence, Al-Jazeera reported. Among the books are the works of the13th century Islamic scholar Ibn Taymiyyah, whose work had considerable influence in contemporary Islamic fundamentalism and Jihadism

AlJazeera’s report on the ban.

The ban also includes works of contemporary Islamic scholars like Saudi Arabia’s late Sheikh Abd-al-Aziz Bin Baz whose religious rulings and views reflected the strict Wahhabi doctrine.

As Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti and head of its council of Islamic scholars, Bin Baz had the last say on religious issues and his rulings on every aspect of daily life carried the weight of the law.

On the list of banned books are also works of the late Saudi religious scholar Muhammed Ibn al-Uthaymeen, whose views are considered definitive for many ultra-conservative Salafi Muslims.

Also banned are works of the late Sheikh Muhammad Nasreddine al-Albani, an Albanian religious scholar, considered one of the main figureheads of Salafism.

The instigator of the ban, Marivan Nakhshbandi, is an official at the Ministry of Islamic Endowments of Kurdistan.The ban, a joint decision of the ministries of culture and endowments, was enforced at the annual book fair of the regional capital, Erbil.

The fact that there was hardly any official publicity about the ban at the book fair reveals the highly sensitive nature of banning religious books in Kurdistan.

Salafis in Kurdistan object to the move to consign these religious books to the banned list.

Kamran Abd-al-Karim, a Salafi bookshop owner, sees the ban as a “negative decision that will affect Kurdistan and its people”.

The banned authors had a positive influence on youth, he said. “They stopped them joining terrorist groups like ISIS.” These authors, he added, wrote “moderate books” to fight takfir—Muslims accusing other Muslims of apostasy—a main mantra of militant groups. An example of “moderate books”, he said, is Al-Albani’s book “the sedition of takfir”..Here

Wahhabism out of place in Malaysia, says fatwa council Chief

March 1, 2015

KUALA LUMPUR: The National Fatwa Council has describedWahhabism as “out of place” in Malaysia, a week after Negeri Sembilan religious authorities prohibited the puritan Saudi Arabian-based sect of Islam.

Dr Abdul Shukor Husin, chairman of the National Fatwa Council, said Wahhabi followers were fond of declaring Muslims of other schools as apostates merely on the grounds that they did not conform to Wahhabi teachings.

Islam in Malaysia follows the Sunni tradition of the Shafi’i school and is the only form of Islam declared legal. The Shiah, Islam’s second-largest branch largely followed in Iran and Iraq, has been declared as a “deviant” form.

Last week, the mufti of Negri Sembilan had declared that the movement is haram for being against Sunni teachings. Wahhabism,the dominant form of Islam in Saudi Arabia, has been blamed for the rise of extremist Islamist groups around the world.

Dr Abdul Shukor was quoted as saying that the Wahhabi “view every practice that was not performed by Prophet Muhammad as bid’ah, a departure from Islam, not in accordance with the sunnah.”

He said it was up to each state to restrict the teachings of the Wahhabi through decrees, or fatwa.

Negeri Sembilan’s decision has been criticised by the permanent chairman of the ulama wing of PAS, Dr Hamdan Muhammad, who was quoted as saying that the state authority was hasty in issuing its decree. “We are preachers and not judges to say this is allowed and that is not. We have to be careful in deciding because it is the right of Allah,”

Sinar Harian quoted him as saying.
Wahhabi followers, also called salafis, have spread the movement’s teachings across the world since the 1970s with Saudi Arabia funding missionary efforts through books, scholarships, and building Islamic education institutions.

13 Salafi books banned in Tajikistan

July 2015

Tajikistan’s Interior Ministry uploaded Wednesday on its website the list of literature propagating ideas of the Salafi religious movement — a banned extremist sect.

On Jan. 8, 2009, Tajikistan’s Supreme Court added the movement to its list of extremist religious groups prohibited from operating in the country.

On Dec. 8, 2014, the Supreme Court formally labeled the banned Salafi group as an extremist organization. The group’s website and printed materials are also banned in the country.

The Salafi movement, which takes its name from the term salaf, “ancestors” or “early generations” in English, advocates a pure form of Islam that is said to be similar to that practiced by the earliest generations of Muslims starting with the Prophet Muhammad.

Salafis do not recognize other branches of the religion, particularly Shi’ism and Sufism.

The following is the list of banned Salafi literature:

1 Sharhu Fazli-l-Islam li Shaikhi-l-Islam Mohammad bin Abdulvahhab at-Tamin by Saleh bin Abdul-Aziz bin Mohammad Al ash-Sheikh,

2 Sharhu Lam’atu-l-Etiqadal-Hadi ila Sabili-r-Rashad li-l-Imam Muvaffaqaddin ibn Qaddoma al-Maqdisi by Muhammad bin Shalih bin Muhammad bin Utsaimin,

3 Favaqiru-l-Izab fi Mu’taqad ash-Sheikh Muhammad bin Abdulvahhab by Mohammad bin Nasir bin Osman Mumir

4 Al Juhudu-l-Hadisiya by Abdul-Aziz ibn Baz,

5 Al-Ilokatu Baina-t-Tashayuu va Tasavvuf by Falah ibn Ismail al Mandakar,

6 Sharhu Muqaddima fi Usuli-t-Tafsir li Ibn Taymiya by Musaid bin Sulayman ibn Nasir at-Tayar,

7 Al Aliu-l-Bahiyati fi Sharhi-l-Aqidati-l-Vasitaya li Ibn Taymiya by Saleh bin Abdul-Azizi bin Mohammad bin Ibrahim Al ash-Sheikh,

8 Al-Majmuatu-l-Oliya by Ibn Taymiya,

9 Kitabu-l-Iman by Abu Ubaid al-Qasim ibn Salam,

10 Fazlu Ilmi-s-Salaf ala Ilmi-Khalaf by Abdul Qasim Abdul Azim,

11 Favaidu mina-t-Tafsir by Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah bin Baz,

12 Taysiru-l-Ilah by Ubaid bin Abdullah bin Suleyman al-Jabiri,

13 Al-Usulu min Ilmi-l-Usul Risala Mukhtasara fi Usuli-lFiqh by Muhammad bin Shalih bin Muhammad bin Utsaimin. Here

Tunisia to close down Salafist-run mosques

July 2014

‘Tunisia has launched a crackdown on mosques and radio stations associated with conservative groups following a deadly attack on its soldiers near the Algeria border.

‘The prime minister has decided to close immediately all the mosques that are not under the control of the authorities, and those mosques where there were reported celebrations over the deaths of the soldiers,” the office of Prime Minister Mehdi Jomaa said in a statement on Sunday.

‘It said the government would also order the closure of radio stations, websites or television stations that publish messages from armed groups.

‘It did not give any figures for mosques included in the crackdown or name any websites or media, Reuters news agency reported.

‘The government is concerned conservative elements have been spreading a violent message at mosques not controlled by the state.

‘The government has been slowly taking back control of mosques taken over by ultra-conservative Salafist groups since the 2011 uprising.’

Ban those wahhabi Books

(Edited by ADHM)

source

Discussion with Wahhabiyyah on Ummah.com Forum – Part-2

Evil Saplings of Ummah.com Forum

Brother Abu Sulayman’s discussion with Wahhabiyyah on “Ummah.com” Forum

Thread title: New Book Release: Ahl Al-Sunna : The Ash’aris

Linkdeutscher

Wahhabi sapling Linkdeutscher said:

Oh really!? Who said alif lam meem?

aMuslimForLife  reply:

In the Quran Allah says, Alif Lam Meem.
The Quran is the Speech of Allah.
If you are asking how Allah speaks, I don’t know how Allah speaks. 

Imam Tahawi said, “The Quran is the Speech of Allah that emanated from Him without modality in its expression.” (Aqida Tahawi)

With regards to this debate between the scholars concerning Allah’s Speech, it is best to follow the way of the Salaf

Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani said concerning the Speech of Allah, “And resulting from the extreme confusion that happen in the issue (the debate concerning Allah’s Speech), the Salaf’s prohibition against indulging in it happened much. And they found it sufficient to believe that the Quran is Allah’s Speech uncreated (Al Quran kalam Allah ghayru mkhluq). And they didn’t add anything to that. It is the safest of all views. And Allah is the One sought for aid.” (Fath AL bari)

The debate between the Asharis and some of the Hanbalis on the Speech of Allah And how we should approach it.

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Alawi al Maliki al Hasani said, “An example (of facts that are lost in research) is that which takes place among the scholars in their research concerning the reality of Allah’s Speech and the major difference that revolves around this. Some say that the Speech of Allah is inner speech (kalam nafsi), and some say that His Speech is with both letter and sound. I am of the belief that both of these groups seek the reality of Divine transcendence for Allah and that both are far from idolatry in al of its forms. the issue of Speech is real and affirmed and there is no room to deny it, for denial of this contradicts Divine Perfection – this is from one angel. From another angle, Belief in His Attributes and affirmation of that which appears in the Quran is obligatory, for no one knows Allah but Allah. The view that I hold and call to is that of affirming (the Speech of Allah) without going into details of the “howness” and quiddity. So we affirm speech for Allah and say that this is speech of Allah and that He speaks Beyond that, we give no glance the falsehood of it being inner speech or not, or whether it is with sounds or letters or not. All of this is extremism that was not articulated by the one who brought tawhid the chosen one , so why should we make this addition to what he came with? Is this not the ugliest of innovations. Glory be to You (Allah), this is but a manifest slander! Indeed, the Shall speak to us on that day that we shall gather with him in front of Allah. We are calling for our discussions to always be about this reality and its likes, being far removed from delving into its quiddity, image and appearance.” (Notions that must be corrected)

Abu Sulayman said: Here

Salamun ‘alaykum,

that a book is needed in order to show that the Asha’irah are from the Ahl al-Sunnah just shows in what a weird time we’re living in. I mean so many of the A`immah of Islam were Ash’aris:Imam Al-Bayhaqi, Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni, Imam al-Ghazali, al-Qadhi ‘Iyadh, al-Qadhi Abu Bakr bin Al-‘Arabi, Imam al-Nawawi, Sultan al-‘Ulama` al-‘Izz bin ‘Abd al-Salam, etc.
The contribution of the Asha’irah regarding every Islamic science is very very huge and the best books regarding these sciences are usually written by Ash’ari scholars. And then we find ignorant people in our time who attack the Asha’irah!?! 

Abu Sulayman reply:

Wahhabi tayyiboon said:

even then it wont make asharis the only one who are ahlu sunnah!!

And when have the Asha’irah ever claimed that they’re only Sunnis upon this earth?
The Maturidis and the Fudhala` among the Hanabilah are also from the Ahl al-Sunnah.

But let one thing be very clear: The people who are printing books which are full of Tashbih (go read al-Naqdh ‘ala Bishr al-MarisiIbtal al-Ta`wilatBayan Talbis al-Jahmiyyah, etc.) are notfrom the Ahl al-Sunnah in any way or form even if they claim thousand times otherwise.

And this fact does not change no matter how much money and power they have and no matter how much they lie and betray in order to spread their false ideas and no matter how many ignorant and gullible people start following them.

Abu Sulayman reply:

Wahhabi ZeeshanParvez  said:

Now Ibn Taymiyyah says that those words annexed to Allah which have in them both attribute and action [الصفات الفعلية] are understood by the Salaf as a third type of category which is neither a part of those creations which are separate from Him [like House or Messenger in the above] nor are they like those attributes which are necessary eternal attributes not associated with His Will [i.e. His Knowledge, Ability, etc].

Ibn Tamiyyah (d. 728 AH) was a very controversial scholar, so I don’t get it why he is mentioned so often during these types of discussions?

ZeeshanParvez said:

He speaks when He Wills and He becomes quiet when He Wills and He does not cease to speak in the meaning that He does not cease to speak when He Wills and He becomes quiet when He Wills.

He becomes quiet? Ya Subhanallah! Did Allah ta’ala say that or are you blindly repeating what Ibn Taymiyyah and his followers claimed?

ZeeshanParvez said:

And to truly appreciate what is going on between them consider the example of the creation of the Heavens and the Earth or any other created thing for that matter. We know that these things were not created forever. There was a time when they did not exist.

I hope you know that according to Ibn Taymiyyah there is no first creation (he claimed this even though there are clear cut texts which show otherwise) and that the world (i.e. everything other than Allah ta’ala) is eternal in it’s kind according to him. (This is a modified version of the belief of the Falasifah that the world is eternal. Believing that the world is eternal is disbelief by agreement!)

ZeeshanParvez said:

There was a time when nothing existed.

It’s corret that the world came into being after it was not existent. But when nothing existed [other than Allah ta’ala] there was also no time, because time [and place] only started to exist after the world was created. If one wants to be even more accurate one should also mention that time [and place too] is not even a real existent thing, but rather an i’tibari matter (mental construct) and that both time and place do not apply to Allah ta’ala.

ZeeshanParvez said:

There was a time when nothing existed. So, when Allah created, a Sifah came to be which was not because the Heavens were not there before and this means that we have حلول الحوادث which basically means something coming into being after not being. This would mean Allah has become a place where that which does not exist comes to be.

Not a good explanation.
Hulul al-Hawadith [fil Dhat al-Ilahiyyah] is the belief that the essence of Allah ta’ala is subject to changes and transitions from one state into another. This is a wrong belief [by agreement of the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah] and one can rationally show that whatever changes from one state into another must have beginning and is therefore created.
Our Master Ibrahim – ‘alayhis salam – used the change of the sun [and the moon and the stars] from one state into another as a proof for its createdness. This story is in the Qur`an (read also what the scholars of Tafsir said regarding it).
Allah ta’ala is eternal and is not subject to changes.

ZeeshanParvez said:

To avoid this they deny الصفات الاختيارية because accepting them would mean that a Sifah is coming to be which never was.

Brother, do you even know what Ibn Taymiyyah intended when he talked about the so called Sifat al-Ikhtiyariyyah?What he intended is that Allah ta’ala changes Himself by His Will. In a book which he regarded as one of the best books ever written(and it’s filled with clear Tashbih!) it is even claimed that Allah ta’ala moves, sits and stands up!
Is it allowed to believe such things as a Muslim?

Abu Sulayman reply:

Wahhabi quark said:

So what’s the meaning of this hadith?
How can there be fifty thousand years before time even existed?

If you were able to understand that the throne and the water have also been created and that Allah ta’ala ordained all things in eternity in reality, why and how did you reach to the conclusion that time existed before the creation of anything?

This is what Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676 AH) said regarding the narration:
قوله صلى الله عليه وسلم : ( كتب الله مقادير الخلائق قبل أن يخلق السماواتوالأرض بخمسين ألف سنة وعرشه على الماء قال العلماء : المراد تحديد وقتالكتابة في اللوح المحفوظ أو غيره ، لا أصل التقدير ، فإن ذلك أزلي لا أول لهوقوله : ( وعرشه على الماء ) أي قبل خلق السماوات والأرض . والله أعلم
Source: Sharh al-Nawawi ‘ala Sahih Muslim

Originally Posted by quark

You said world. What’s that if not the heavens and the earth?

In Arabic the ‘Ulama` would simply say ‘Alam (world) while intending everthing other than Allah ta’ala. So “world” in their usage (and also how I intended it here) includes the Qalam, the throne and the water, which are these things that have been created BEFORE the heavens and the earth.

Abu Sulayman reply: Here

ZeeshanParvez said:
هذا اللفظ من إطلاقات أهل الكلام، وإليك بعض التفصيل في معناه، ومقصود أهل الكلام منه، والرد على ذلك.

If you really want to know what theevil” [Ash’ari] Mutakallimun said regarding a specific issue of belief, you should simply go and read what they said and NOT simply trust random “Salafi” books.
And likewise if you want to know Ibn Taymiyyah’s (d. 728 AH)stance regarding a specific issue, then go and read what he said.

FYI: “Salafi” Mashayikh are not good at explaining things and they love to confuse their readers, so that their readers will not understand what the real point of dispute is.

ZeeshanParvez said:

ومسألة الصفات الاختيارية، أو الفعلية، هي التي يسميها المعتزلة والأشاعرة مسألة حلول الحوادث (1) ، وأهم ما يميزها بالنسبة للمذهب الأشعري إجماع متقدمي الأشاعرة ومتأخريهم عليها، لأنها كانت الأساس الذي قام عليه المذهب الكلابي، ثم الأشعري. وهذا بخلاف الصفات الخبرية، أو العلو، فإن الخلاف فيها قائم بين المتقدمين والمتأخرين.

In order to be able to make such claims one would need to know the Madhhab of the Mutaqaddimin and the Muta`akhirin of the Asha’irah and this is something that the “Salafis” have no knowledge of.
If they really think that the Madhhab of the Mutaqaddimin regarding that which they call as Sifat Khabariyyah and regarding the issue of ‘Uluw is the same as theirs then this just shows their compound ignorance.

ZeeshanParvez said:

والصفات الاختيارية هي – كما يقول شيخ الإسلام – “الأمور التي يتصف بها الرب عز وجل، فتقوم بذاته بمشيئته وقدرته، مثل كلامه، وسمعه, وبصره، وإرادته، ومحبته، ورضاه، ورحمته، وغضبه، وسخطه، ومثل خلقه، وإحسانه، وعدلة، ومثل استوائه، ومجيئه، وإتيانه، ونزوله، ونحو ذلك من الصفات التي نطق بها الكتاب العزيز والسنة”

The issue is not about weather Allah ta’ala can be described with Rahmah, Ghadhab, Ridhah, etc., but rather that Ibn Taymiyyahbelieved that divine essence is subject to changes.

Do you understand what that means? 
I’ve already mentioned that in one of his favorite books it is even claimed that Allah ta’ala moves. Movement (Harakah) and stillness (Sukun) are from the attributes of bodies (Ajsam). What is ruling regarding the one who describes Allah ta’ala in such a way?

Abu Sulayman reply:

ZeeshanParvez said:

I was, believe it or not. It was a book written by al-Juwayni, I believe, and the way he delved into the nature of Allah, was rather disturbing. I think he was rebutting the Mu’tazilla in the book.

Go and read al-Naqdh ‘ala Bishr al-Marisi (Ibn Taymiyyah’s and Ibn Qayyim’s favorite book) and then you’ll see what disturbing is.

ZeeshanParvez said:

See when you use the rationale of Ajsaam to negate Sukun and Harakah then you have the onlooker like me wondering if the Salafis aren’t lying after all because they say that this is the very logic based upon which the Ash’aris have rejected certain Sifah of Allah and then say that this was borrowed from the philosophers.

First of all: Just because “Salafis” call something as a Sifah it does not mean that it’s a divine attribute in reality. You’ll find among them even people who claim that boredom (Malal) is divine attribute.
And even if something is a divine attribute, then it does not mean that one needs to [mis]understand it like the “Salafis” do.

Then: Being rational and logical in one’s thinking is nothing bad. The foundation of Islam is rational unlike other religions and convictions (read this: The Foundations of the Religion | Sunni Answers ). If something is rationally decisive, then rejecting it would mean to reject the true religion, because the correctness of the religion is shown through reason.

From a rational point of view it can be shown that whatever is subject to changes must have a beginning. Imagine that something moves for certain amount of time and then stops moving for a certain amount of time and then this cycle repeats itself over and over again. This means that this thing goes through moments. Is it possible for such a thing to be eternal? No, because in order to reach this very moment it would need to have passed through a infinte amount of moments/cycles and an infinite amount of moments would not come to an end, which would make it impossible to reach this moment. (That’s why the Ahl al-Sunnah say that time does not apply to Allah ta’ala.)

As for “borrowed from the philosophers”: The Asha’irah and the Falasifah were enemies (this is historical fact!) and disagreed on major issues.

One of the best refutations against the Falasifah (i.e. Tahafut al-Falasifah) was written by a Ash’ari scholar (i.e. Imam al-Ghazali (d. 505 AH), while Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH), who loved to put the Mutakallimun from the Ahl al-Sunnah together with the Falasifah,ended up agreeing with the Falasifah on major points (like accepting a modified version of the claim of the Falasifah that the universe is eternal, which is disbelief by agreement!).
And: Just because the Falasifah tried to use logical and rational arguments, this does not mean that rational arguments are in itself wrong. These types of Mughalatat are really getting on my nerves.

Abu Sulayman reply:Here

ZeeshanParvez said:

And after having read both sides [and without getting into what I personally believe] the whole problem with the Ash’ari perspective is that is that similitude right there in bold.

No offence bro, but judging from your posts you seem to be heavily influenced by what the “Salafis” say regarding Ash’aris and you still do not fully know what the Madhhab of Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) really is. I’m quite sure that there are statements which he made, which you would defintely not agree with (or at least I hope so). (FYI:According to his understanding believing that Allah ta’ala is a body is not a problem at all, but rather correct; he’s just against using the expression “Jism” in negative and positive way.)

ZeeshanParvez said:

The Ash’aris observe the creation and then draw logical conclusions that this cannot be with Allah or else it is Tajseem.

A simple question: Is Allah ta’ala similar to the creation?
According to the Qur`an al-karim the answer is definetly no. The scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah regard the Ayat concerning this issue from the Muhkamat and understand all mutashabih Ayat in their context (while “Salafis” do the exact opposite).
If this becomes known, then we can also say: Allah ta’ala is not described with meanings that apply to humans [or the creation in general].
Imam al-Tahawi (d. 321 AH) said in his famous text regarding ‘Aqidah that anyone who describes Allah ta’ala with a meaning from among the meanings that apply to humans [and the rest of creation] has disbelieved (“ومن وصف الله بمعنى من معاني البشر فقد كفر ، فمن أبصر هذا اعتبر ، وعن مثل قول الكفار انزجر ، وعلم أنه بصفاته ليس كالبشر”; Source: al-‘Aqidah al-Tahawiyyah.)

If all the above is known, then why is it wrong for the Asha’irah (and the Ahl al-Sunnah in general) to say that the meanings that apply to the creation do not apply to Allah ta’ala?

ZeeshanParvez said:

Anything which has a Jism moves in this world. The Ash’aris take this concept and say if we say Allah moves than that means He has a Jism. Since when was that applicable? Allah isn’t like anything.

If you know that Allah isn’t like anything, you shouldn’t have described Him subhanahu wa ta’ala with movement in the first place!

Movement does necessitate Huduth and Tajsim no matter whether you acknowledge this or not.
And FYI: If you don’t believe in this Lazim based upon “Lazim al-Madhhab laysa bi Madhab”, then let it be known to you that Ibn Taymiyyah would agree that it nessitates Tajsim (but he obviously would disagree regarding Huduth). But according to Ibn Taymiyyah Tajsim is no problem, infact he argues that that everything that subsists in itself – no matter whether it’s wajib (i.e. the Creator) or mumkin (i.e. the creaiton) in its existance – must necessarily be described with the meaning that we intend by the word Jism (body = 3-dimensional object). According to him it’s NECASSARY for Allah’s existance that He’s spatially confined (mutahayyiz) and he also argues that one is able to physically point (Isharah hissiyyah) at the right [side] of God separately from the left just like one is able to point at the northern side of the sun separately from the southern side (this is clear-cut Tajsim and does not need any further discussion!). You can find all of these [and more] in his Bayan Talbis al-Jahmiyyah.

ZeeshanParvez said:

If we accept that He said that He moves from one place to another why does the concept of a Jism hold for Him? Just because we see that in this world if something moves it has a Jism?

Who gave you the right to claim that Allah ta’ala moves from one place to another, while Allah ta’ala did not say that, rather He revealed in his noble book that there is nothing like unto Him.
Allah ta’ala is High Exalted above being contained by a place or being described with movement or with any other meaning from among the meaning that applies to the creation.

ZeeshanParvez said:

And the whole issue is that the movement of the Ash’aris started off from debates with the Mu’tazilla. To combat their ‘logical’ arguments, the Imaams of the Ash’aris had to come up with logical answers. A Being who creates that which has no model or form, gives life to the dead, makes Jesus (peace be upon him) enter this world without a father, etc., you want to say that if one attributes anything to Him which would result in a Jism if we were to attribute that same thing to something in this world makes no sense at all.
Based on this logic, I guess you would agree that since 1+1 = 2, Allah cannot make it equal 3 or 4 if He Wills? He is bound, right?

Let me tell you one thing: If you want to reject things that are rationally decisive (and in some cases even self-evident), then you’re opening for yourself a very dangerous door. Through opening this door all types of Kufriyyat and Shirkiyyat (like for example believing that Allah ta’ala has a son, or believing in the existance of many Gods or even the rejection of God’s existance altogether) can be justified.

If you reject the God-given reason, then based upon what exactly do you know that the mountains are created? And from where do you know that the sun, the moon and the stars are created?
If you say that the mountains, the sun, the moon and the stars have a form/shape, a mass/weight, limits and change their state and that all of this makes it necessary that someone has given them these specifications and therefore they must be created (and this is true without any doubt), then let it be known to you that the “Salafis” print books where Allah ta’ala is described with all of these attributes. What is other than Tashbih and opening the door to atheism, disbelief and apostasy? We ask Allah ta’ala for well-being.

Abu Sulayman said:

Originally Posted by Abu Sulayman

A simple question: Is Allah ta’ala similar to the creation?
According to the Qur`an al-karim the answer is definetly no. The scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah regard the Ayat concerning this issue from the Muhkamat and understand all mutashabih Ayat in their context (while “Salafis” do the exact opposite).
If this becomes known, then we can also say: Allah ta’ala is not described with meanings that apply to humans [or the creation in general].
Imam al-Tahawi (d. 321 AH) said in his famous text regarding ‘Aqidah that anyone who describes Allah ta’ala with a meaning from among the meanings that apply to humans [and the rest of creation] has disbelieved (“ومن وصف الله بمعنى من معاني البشر فقد كفر ، فمن أبصر هذا اعتبر ، وعن مثل قول الكفار انزجر ، وعلم أنه بصفاته ليس كالبشر”; Source: al-‘Aqidah al-Tahawiyyah.)

If all the above is known, then why is it wrong for the Asha’irah (and the Ahl al-Sunnah in general) to say that the meanings that apply to the creation do not apply to Allah ta’ala?

Imam al-Bayhaqi (d. 458 AH) said:

ثُمَّ يَعْلَمُ أَنَّ صَانِعَ الْعَالَمِ لَا يُشْبِهُ شَيْئًا مِنَ الْعَالَمِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَوْ أَشْبَهَ شيْئًا مِنَ الْمُحْدَثَاتِبِجِهَةٍ مِنَ الْجِهَاتِ لَأَشْبَهَهُ فِي الْحُدُوثِ مِنْ تِلْكَ الْجِهَةِ، وَمُحَالٌ أَنْ يَكُونَ الْقَدِيمُمُحْدَثًا، أَوْ يَكُونَ قَدِيمًا مِنْ جِهَةٍ حَدِيثًا مِنْ جِهَةٍ؛ وَلِأَنَّهُ يَسْتَحِيلُ أَنْ يَكُونَ الْفَاعِلُيَفْعَلُ مِثْلَهُ، كَالشَّاتِمِ لَا يَكُونُ شَتْمًا وَقَدْ فَعَلَ الشَّتْمَ، وَالْكَاذِبُ لَا يَكُونُ كَذِبًا وَقَدْ فَعَلَالْكَذِبَ؛ وَلِأَنَّهُ يَسْتَحِيلُ أَنْ يَكُونَ شَيْئَانِ مِثْلَيْنِ يَفْعَلُ أَحَدُهُمَا صَاحِبَهُ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَيْسَ أَحَدُالْمِثْلَيْنِ بِأَنْ يَفْعَلَ صَاحِبَهُ أَوْلَى مِنَ الْآخَرِ، وَإِذَا كَانَ كَذَلِكَ لَمْ يَكُنْ لِأَحَدِهِمَا عَلَىالْآخَرِ مَزِيَّةٌ يَسْتَحِقُّ لِأَجْلِهَا أَنْ يَكُونَ مُحْدِثًا لَهُ؛ لِأَنَّ هَذَا حُكْمُ الْمِثْلَيْنِ فِيمَا تَمَاثَلَا فِيهِ،وَإِذَا كَانَ كَذَلِكَ اسْتَحَالَ أَنْ يَكُونَ الْبَارِي سُبْحَانَهُ مُشْبِهًا لِلْأَشْيَاءِ، فهُوَ كَمَا وَصَفَنفْسَهُ {لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ} [الشورى: 11] ، وَقَالَ: {قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُأَحَدٌ، اللَّهُ الصَّمَدُ لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ وَلَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ كُفُوًا أَحَدٌ} [الإخلاص: 1]حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو عَبْدِاللَّهِ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْحَافِظُ، أنا أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَعْقُوبَ الْحَافِظُ، وَأَبُو جَعْفَرٍمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ صَالِحِ بْنِ هَانِئٍ، قَالَا: ثنا الْحُسَيْنُ بْنُ الْفَضْلِ، ثنا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ سَابِقٍ، ثنا أَبُوجَعْفَرٍ الرَّازِيُّ، عَنِ الرَّبِيعِ بْنِ أَنَسٍ، عَنْ أَبِي الْعَالِيَةِ، عَنْ أُبَيِّ بْنِ كَعْبٍ، أَنَّالْمُشْرِكِينَ، قَالُوا: يَا مُحَمَّدُ، انْسُبْ لَنَا رَبَّكَ، فَأَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى {قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌاللَّهُ الصَّمَدُ} [الإخلاص: 2] ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَيْسَ شَيْءٌ يُولَدُ إِلَّا سَيَمُوتُ، وَلَيْسَ شَيْءٌ يَمُوتُإِلَا سَيُوَرَّثُ، وَإِنَّ اللَّهَ تَبَارَكَ لَا يَمُوتُ وَلَا يُوَرَّثُ، {وَلَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ كُفُوًا أَحَدٌ} [الإخلاص: 4] ، لَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ شَبِيهٌ وَلَا عِدْلٌ {لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ} [الشورى: 11]
أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو زَكَرِيَّا يَحْيَى بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، أنا أَبُو الْحَسَنِ الطَّرَائِفِيُّ، ثنا عُثْمَانُ بْنُ سَعِيدٍ،ثنا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ صَالِحٍ، عَنْ مُعَاوِيَةَ بْنِ صَالِحٍ، عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ أَبِي طَلْحَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِعَبَّاسٍ، فِي قَوْلِهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ: {وَلِلَّهِ الْمَثَلُ الْأَعْلَى} [النحل: 60] ، قَالَ: يَقُولُ: لَيْسَكَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ، وَفِي قَوْلِهِ: {هَلْ تَعْلَمُ لَهُ سَمِيًّا} [مريم: 65] ، يَقُولُ: هَلْ تَعْلَمُ لِلرَّبِّ مَثَلًاأَوْ شَبِيهًا؟

Moreover, it is known that the Creator of creation does not resemble anything of the creation, because if He resembled any originated thing in any way, He would resemble it in origination from that aspect, and it is impossible for the beginningless to be temporal, or beginningless from one angle and temporal from another; and because it is impossible for a Doer to do the like of Himself, like an abuser is not abuse although he carried out abuse and a liar will not be a lie when he carried out a lie; and because it is impossible that two things being the same, one of them performs its counterpart, because one of two equals is not more likely than the other to have performed its counterpart, and when it is so, neither of them has a distinction over the other by which it is entitled to be the originator of it since that is the law of two equal entities in that which they are equal. When it is so, it is impossible for the Maker (Glorious is He) to be similar to things. Thus, He is as He described Himself: “Naught is as His likeness; and He is the Hearer, the Seer.” (42:11) and He said: “Say: He is Allah, the One, Allah, the Independent. He begets not nor was He begotten. And there is none comparable unto Him.” (112:1-4)

Abū ‘Abd Allāh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allāh al-Hāfiz: Abū ‘Abd Allāh Muhammad ibn Ya‘qūb al-Hāfiz and Abū Ja‘far Muhammad ibn Sālih ibn Hāni’ said: al-Husayn ibn al-Fadl narrated to us: Muhammad ibn Sābiq narrated to us: Abū Jafar al-Rāzī narrated to us from al-Rabī ibn Anas from Abu l-‘Āliyah from Ubayy ibn Ka‘b that the idolaters said: “O Muhammad! Tell us the lineage of your Lord.” Thus, Allāh (Blessed and Exalted is He) said: “Say: He is Allah, the One, Allah, the Independent!” (16:60). [Ubayy said:] “Because nothing is born except it will die, and nothing dies except it will be inherited, and indeed Allāh (Glorious and Exalted is He) will not die nor will He be inherited”. “And there is none comparable unto Him”: “He has no likeness or equal, ‘Naught is as His likeness’”[6]

Abū Zakariyyā Yahyā ibn Ibrāhīm reported to us: Abu l-Hasan al-Tarā‘ifī reported to us: ‘Uthmān ibn Sa‘īd narrated to us: ‘Abd Allāh ibn Sālih narrated to us from Mu‘āwiyah ibn Sālih from ‘Alī ibn Abī Talhah from Ibn ‘Abbas about His (Great and Glorious is He) saying: “Allāh’s is the highest similitude” (16:65), he said: “Nothing is as His likeness,” and about His saying, “Do you know of one that can be named along with Him?” (19:65), he said: “Do you know of an equal or likeness of the Lord?””
Source: al-I’tiqad wal Hidayah ila Sabil al-Rashad (translation taken from here: Imām al-Bayhaqī on Evidence for the Existence of the Creator)

Abu Sulayman reply:

ZeeshanParvez said:

Heck, this has been going on in the past. Subki began accusing Al-Dhahabi, in his Tabaqaat, (I believe it was) that he was leaving the Aqeedah of the Ahl Al-Sunnah and leaning toward the Hanbali Aqeedah.

Imam Taj al-Din al-Subki (d. 771 AH) (the son of Imam Taqi al-Din al-Subki (d. 756 AH) did indeed critisize his Shaykh the Hafidh Shams al-Din al-Dhahabi (d. 748 AH).

Al-Dhahabi was a student of Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) and was influenced by him [to a certain degree]. (From his writings it seems however that later on he was rather ashamed of being connected withIbn Taymiyyah, because Ibn Taymiyyah loved to cause one problem after the other and loved to defend his abnormal views and to act as if he only knew right from wrong. He also explicitly said in one of his books that he disagrees with Ibn Taymiyyah in Asli and Far’i issues.)

ZeeshanParvez  said:

I do not see what good reading the book you have mentioned will do but since I have so much time on my hands guess I will read it.
Interestingbook.jpg

I’ve a better idea (it will take less time and will have much more benefit) since you understand Arabic: Read this thread and insha`Allah you’ll understand the difference between the Madhhab of the Ahl al-Sunnah and that of Ibn Taymiyyh:

الصفات الإلهية بين أهل التنزيه وأهل التشبيه 

ZeeshanParvez  said;

I mean if he is going to say all that about him

He didn’t say these things out of nowhere. I’ve read some of the things that he mentioned in quite an explicit way in Ibn Taymiyyah’s Bayan Talbis al-Jahmiyyah.
(Before looking into Bayan Talbis al-Jahmiyyah I used to respect Ibn Taymiyyah.)

ZeeshanParvez said:

I mean if he is going to say all that about him he may well have said the same about Mujaahid the great Taabi’ Mufassir who held the same opinion. And if I am not mistaken Imaam Al-Tabari defended the opinion by saying that it was not wrong. So, why single out two men. Let’s go back and shoot all the people.

Imam al-Tabari (d. 310 AH) did not held the same view as Imam Mujahid (d. 104 AH) regarding this issue, but you’re right that Imam al-Tabari did defend him regarding it. Please consider this statement ofImam al-Qurtubi (d. 671 AH) in his Tafsir regarding the Ayah 17:79:

قلت: ذكر هذا في باب ٱبنُ شهاب في حديث التنزيل. وروي عن مجاهد أيضاً في هذه الآيةقال: يُجلسه على العرش. وهذا تأويل غير مستحيل؛ لأن الله تعالى كان قبل خلقه الأشياءكلَّها والعرشَ قائماً بذاته، ثم خلق الأشياء من غير حاجة إليها، بل إظهاراً لقدرته وحكمته،وليُعرف وجوده وتوحيده وكمال قدرته وعلمه بكل أفعاله المحكمة، وخلق لنفسه عرشاًاستوى عليه كما شاء من غير أن صار له مماساً، أو كان العرش له مكاناً.
قيل: هو الآن على الصفة التي كان عليها من قبل أن يخلق المكان والزمان؛ فعلى هذاالقول سواء في الجواز أقعد محمد على العرش أو على الأرض؛ لأن استواء الله تعالىعلى العرش ليس بمعنى الانتقال والزوال وتحويل الأحوال من القيام والقعود والحال التيتشغل العرش، بل هو مستو على عرشه كما أخبر عن نفسه بلا كَيْفٍ. وليس إقعاده محمداًعلى العرش موجباً له صفة الربوبية أو مُخرجاً له عن صفة العبودية، بل هو رفع لمحلهوتشريف له على خلقه. وأما قوله في الإخبار: «معه» فهو بمنزلة قوله:
إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ عِندَ رَبِّكَ }
[
الأعراف: 206]،
رَبِّ ٱبْنِ لِي عِندَكَ بَيْتاً فِي ٱلْجَنَّةِ }
[
التحريم: 11]،
وَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَمَعَ ٱلْمُحْسِنِينَ }
[
العنكبوت: 69] ونحو ذلك. كل ذلك عائد إلى الرتبة والمنزلة والحُظْوة والدرجةالرفيعة، لا إلى المكان.

– end of the qoute –

Based upon the above we can say that Imam Mujahid does not necessarily intend Tashbih by that statement.
If you ask us now why we do not have the same Husn al-Dhann for Ibn Taymiyyah, then the simple answer is: Because we know what he wrote in his Bayan Talbis al-Jahmiyyah.

By the way: When Imam al-Tabari left this world – rahimahullah – the Hanabilah of Baghdad (they were quite idiotic people; not all Hanabilah were like that of course) didn’t allow him to be buried in public and accused him of Rafdh and Ilhad (atheism) (which is a typical accusation of the Mushabbihah from among the Hanabilah against people who disagree with them). The Imam was buried inside his house because of this.
These people are the Salaf of the “Salafis” (and not the Sahabat al-karim nor the Tabi’in!). (The same Hanabilah also believed in things like God wearing golden sandals! Congratulations to “Salafis” for having such forefathers!)

ZeeshanParvez said:

Anyway, I know all these things are getting on your nerves, but hey look at it this way – the rivalry between you Ash’aris and the Hanbalis is not a new one. It has remained unsolved and I do not think it is going to be solved any time soon.

You’re right that there has been a rivalry between the Ash’aris and many Hanbalis. 


But you should consider this:

The Hanabilah had the least followers historically from among the 4 Madhahib and only a part of them were Mushabbihah.

Disagreeing with Ash’aris does not turn the Sunnis from among the Hanabilah into non-Sunnis, because there are legitimate Ijtihadi difference between scholars regarding some detailed issues of belief (which are simply Dhanni issues).
Ibn Taymiyyah did not just disagree with the Asha’irah concerning belief, he even rejected Tafwidh (which both the Asha’irah and the Hanabilah regard as the Madhhab of the Salaf al-salih).

According to Salih bin ‘Abd al-‘Aziz Al al-Shaykh (one of the Mashayikh of the “Salafiyyah”) most of the Hanbali Shuyukh of Ibn Taymiyyah were upon Tafwidh.

(Edited by ADHM)

Don’t forget to also read:  Here

source

Discussion with Wahhabiyyah on Ummah.com Forum – Part-1

Evil Saplings of Ummah.com Forum

Brother Abu Sulayman said on “Ummah.com” Forum:

Quote:

“on a general note (not just regarding this thread, but regarding many threads that have been opened in the last time): It’s unfortunate that this forum allows immature, overzealous and ignorant youngsters [who have been influenced by a certain deviant group that is responsible for a lot of division, hatred and even killing in this Ummah] to destroy one thread after the other and to make it impossible to discuss any issue in a respectful and academic way. It would be nice if these people would change their ways and would realize that their constant insulting, mocking and attacking of others is wrong.”


Brother Abu Sulayman is right in what he has experienced on this Forum

This is another wahhabi (salafi/ahlehadith/deobandi) platform called: “Ummah.com” main goal  is to misguide young Muslims!

The wahhabi fanatics and the Admin/Mods who post on this Forum are NOT interested in finding out the Truth… ?

Most  laymen  blindly  Google these (salafi fatwas) on line and say Q&A imam sheikh said so.

why? because they believe that they are the “chosen ones” from Mecca with the only “Truth” and the rest of the Muslim Ummah is misguided Mushrik upon Bidah/Shirk!
Wahhabiyyah will  by Hook or by Crook  shove down their deviant aqidah down every young Muslims throat so that they are unable to taste its deadly poisonous  teachings of  ibn abdul wahab najdi (d.1206AH) and make them also believe  without a shadow of doubt that their “prophet” Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728AH) got his god given right to sit on the Throne! and most of the scholars praised him for that!

Dude, we are Not interested in what you are saying !

Here is a Prime Example when discussing with wahhabiyyah

Thread title:  The Ashari and The Maturidi: The Aqida Schools of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah

Here

aMuslimForLife posted:
Shaykh al-Islam Ahmad ibn Hajar al-Haytami (d. 974/1567; R. A.)
Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Haytami defined the Sunni Muslims as follows in his book Fath al-jawad: “A Mubtadi (innovator) is the person who does not have the faith (Aqeedah) conveyed unanimously by the Ahl as-Sunnah. This unanimity was transmitted by the two great Imam’s Abu’l Hasan al-Ashari (d.324/936; Rahimahullah) and Abu Mansur al- Maturidi (d.333/944; Rahimahullah) and the scholars who followed their path.”
Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Haytami also said in his book al- Fatawa al-Hadithiyya (pg. 205): “Man of bid’ah means one whose beliefs are different from the Ahl as-Sunnah faith. The Ahl as- Sunnah faith, is the faith of Abu’l Hasan al-Ashari, Abu Mansur al- Maturidi and those who followed them. One who brings forth something which is not approved by Islam becomes a man of bid’ah.”

Imam Abdullah ibn Alawi al-Haddad (d. 1132 AH; Rahimahullah),
Imam al-Haddad stated in The Book of Assistance (pg. 40): “You must correct and protect your beliefs and conform to the pattern of the party of salvation, who are those known from among the other Islamic factions as the “People of the Sunnah and Jama’ah” (Ahl as- Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah). They are those who firmly adhere to the way of the Messenger of Allah (Sall Allahu alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallim), and of his Companions (may Allah be pleased with them all). If you look with a sound understanding into those passages relating to the sciences of faith in the Book (Qur’an), the Sunnah, and the saying of the virtuous predecessors, whether they be Companions or followers, you will know for certain that the truth is with the party called the Ashari (NB-the Maturidi’s are also upon the truth), named after the Shaykh Abu’l Hasan al-Ashari, may Allah have mercy on him, who systematized the foundations of the creed of the people of the truth, and recorded its earliest versions, these being the beliefs with the Companions and the best among the followers agreed upon.”

Imam Ahmad Shihab ad-Din al Qalyubi (d.1069/1659; R. A.)
Imam al-Qalyubi wrote on the fourth volume of his marginalia to the book Kanz ar-raghibin: “One who departs from what Abu’l Hasan al-Ashari and Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (Allah’s mercy be upon them) reported is not a Sunni. These two Imam’s followed the footprints of Rasulullah (Peace be upon him) and his Sahaba (may Allah be pleased with them all).”

Sultan al Ulama, Imam Ibn Abdus Salam said, “Agreement has formed in subscribing to al Ashari’s doctrine among the Shafis, the Malikis, the Hanafis and the nobility of the Hanbalis.”

The Maliki Imam Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Musa al Mayurqi said, Ahlus Sunnah among the Malikis, the Shafis, and the majority of the Hanafis speak with the tongue of Abu Hasan al Ashari and argue by their arguments.

Ibn Subki said, “We do not know any Malikis except they are Asharis.”

In all fairness, there are some exception such as Ibn Abd Al Barr andAbu Umar al Talamnaki. As for Ibn Abu Zayd, he belonged to theAshari school which he took from Abu Bakr ibn Abd al Muminwho studied with Ibn Mujahid who was the student of Imam Ashari.Ibn Abi Zays said, “Al Ashari is a man famous for refuting the people of innovations, the Qadariyya and the Jahmiyyah and he held fast to the Sunan.”

aMuslimForLife Reply:

Wahhabi (Abu Jarir ) said: Akhi the Athari is more correct.

The Athari creed is the essence of the Ashari and Maturidi. The best expression of the Athari creed as understood by the Ashari and Maturidi is Aqida Tahawi.

Imam al Subki (d771), the great Shafi scholar, noted that theHanafis, Shafis, Malikis and Hanbalis are one in creed, he said,

“All of them follow the opinion of the Prophetic Way and the Majority of the scholars (Ahl al Sunnah wa al jama’ah). They worship Allah in accordance with the creed of Abu al Hasan al Ashari. None of them deviates from it, save the riffraffs among the Hanafis and Shafis who adopted the rationalist creed and those among the Hanbalis who opted for anthropomorphism. However, Allah protected the Malikis from such things, for we have never seen a Maliki except that he was Ashari in creed. In summation, the creed of Al Ashari is what is contained in the Creed of Imam Abu Jafar al Tahawi, which the scholars of the various legal scholars have endorsed and are content with as a creed…. So say to those fanatics among the sects, “Take heed, leave your fanaticism, abandon your heresies, and defend the religion of Islam.”

There are variant expression of the Athari approach in creed. 

The true Athari Aqida of the Salafus Saleh:

Aqida Tahawi by Imam Tahawi,

This is the Aqida that the Asharis and Maturidis engaged in Ilm Kalam to defend this creed. The were Shafis and Hanafis who defected to the Mutazilah so there was a need to utilize Ilm Kalam.

The Anthropomorphic Athari Aqida: 
as propagated by some of the later Hanbalis.

Aqida Wasatiyyah by Ibn Taymiyyah who like the Asharis and Maturidis engaged in Ilm Kalam to defend this anthropomorphic Athari creed.
Aqida

So don’t pretend as if there is one Athari creed.

Because the Anthropomorphic Athari Creed is NOT more correct.

Imam al Izz Ibn Abdus Salam said, “The gross anthropomorphist(al Hashwiyya) who liken Allah to creation (al mushabbiha) are of two types:
the first make no attempt to hide their anthroporphism, “And they think that they have something to stand upon. NO indeed! They are but liars.” (58:18)
The second type camouflage themselves with the school of the Salaf, hoping thereby to gain something from ill gotten property, if only scraps to take with them. “They make a show of piety before people, While going around looking for cash.” Allah says, “They wish to gain your confidence with that of their people.” (4:91)

Two types of anthropomorphist:

Al Mujassimah (Pure Anthropomorphist)

Al Hashwiyya (Crypto AnthropomorphistThis represents themodern Salafi sect. Their anthropomorphism is hidden it is more subtle, not so easy to detect. And then they (the Salafis) try to camouflage themselves with the school of the Salaf, saying,the Salafus Saleh took the Hand of Allah upon its apparent or literal meaning, yet are unable to present a single quote from the Salafus Saleh stating such.

For example, they say that the Hands of Allah are to be take upon its apparent meaning (ala dhahiri). Linguistically there are two ways that one can do this.

1) One has to know the true nature of Allah in order to determine which meaning of hand in the arabic language relates to Allah, this is impossible, no one knows.

2) or liken Allah to something you can relate to in creation.

These verses and hadiths related to Allah are considered the unclear and ambiguous verses and hadiths.

If we knew what was apparent, it wouldn’t be among the ambiguous verses. It is because we don’t know, that we have to remain silent concerning its meaning.

Let’s take for example:

“O Prophet! say to those who are captives in your hands:” (8:70)

Are hands to be taken literal or metaphorically? What is apparent is that it refers to the metaphorical meaning, ie power, control, possession etc, but it does NOT refer to the literal meaning, ie the limb, the body part, part etc. because we know certain things about the Prophet, . One he is a man, a human being. So we know the true nature and reality of what is a man. It is impossible that the captives would be in the literal hands of the Prophet, .

You take that same verse and change the words to this,

“O Jibriel! say to those who are captives in your hands:”

Are hands to be taken literal or metaphorically? If one is honest, we don’t know, why because, we don’t know the true nature and reality of an angel. It could be literal or metaphorically. So what is apparent isn’t clear, this would be ambiguous. If we liken angels to men, what is apparent is that we would say it is metaphorical.

So with Allah, we cannot really determine what is apparent when dealing with those verses and hadith, because we don’t know the true nature and reality of Allah.

This why tafwid is the safest position with regard to Allah, because Allah says, Say: The things that my Lord has indeed forbidden are….and saying things about Allah of which you have no knowledge. (7:33)

Tafwid is to affirm the wording of the text, that it is true from Allah and His Messenger and remain silent concerning the meaning.

aMuslimForLife Reply:

Wahhabi ( Abdalla94′)  said: ‘Pass them on without asking how’ is what the Salaf would say. You’re telling me we have no understanding of the meaning so why would the salaf say ‘without asking how’?

‘Pass them on without asking how’

Transmits the text without delving into how the verse or hadith is understood.

This is based on the hadith.

نَضَّرَ اللَّهُ امْرَأً سَمِعَ مِنَّا شَيْئًا فَبَلَّغَهُ كَمَا سَمِعَ فَرُبَّ مُبَلَّغٍ أَوْعَى مِنْ سَامِعٍ

The Messenger of Allah said, “May Allah make radiant someone who hears something from us, and then conveys it as he heard it (Quran and Hadith), for it might be that someone who it is conveyed to understands better than the one who heard (it first). (Sahih-Tirmidhi 2657)

In this hadith is the proof for tafwid and tawil, as understood by the Asharis and Maturidis.

This hadith proves that not every Quranic verse and hadith was intended to be understood by every single companions.

Let’s take one of these hadiths.

Abu Hurairah reports that the Messenger of Allah said: “Our LordDescends to the lowest heaven during the last third of the night,inquiring: `Who will call on Me so that I may respond to him? Who is asking something of Me so I may give it to him? Who is asking for My forgiveness so I may forgive him?”[ Bukhari and Muslim.]

The point of the hadith isn’t how Allah descends (literally or metaphorically), the point of hadith is to get Muslims to pray tahajjah.

Two facts about the Makkan phase:

1) The Prophet taught tawhid for 13 years during the Makkan phase. (And I don’t believe he was explaining the meaning of the Hand, Face, and Eyes of Allah during that time as you don’t find any of the companions explaining these narrations)

2) Tahajjah was obligatory during the Makkan phase.

I’m taught that the Tawhid that the Prophet was teaching was Experiential Tawhid (Tawhid Dhawqiduring the Makkan phase as expressed in the Hadith the Awilya.

The Prophet(s) said:

Allah Most High says: “He who is hostile to a friend of Mine I declare war against. My slave approaches Me with nothing more beloved to Me than what I have made obligatory upon him, and My slave keeps drawing nearer to Me with voluntary works until I love him. And when I love him, I am his hearing with which he hears, his sight with which he sees, his hand with which he seizes, and his foot with which he walks. If he asks me, I will surely give to him, and if he seeks refuge in Me, I will surely protect him” (Fath al-Bari, 11.340–41, hadith 6502);

Imam Malik said, “Knowledge does not consist in narrating much. Knowledge is but a light which Allah places in the heart.”

For the Prophet said, “He for whom Allâh desires great good, He grants him (superlative) understanding in the Religion (yufaqqihhu/yufqihhu fî al-dîn). I only distribute (ie The Quran and Sunnah) and it is Allâh Who gives (ie understanding). That group shall remain in charge of the Order of Allâh, unharmed by those who oppose them, until the coming of the Order of Allâh. (Bukhari)

I am not saying none of the companions understood it, but this understanding was not convey in the normative way, but rather, the Prophet and his companions transmitted the knowledge of how to receive these understandings from Allah.

This is why tafwid is emphasized, it is Allah who gives understanding.

“He grants wisdom to whom He pleases, and whoever is granted wisdom has indeed been granted abundant good; and none would take heed except those endowed with understanding.” (2:269)

Wahhabi Prime Example:

Linkdeutscher

This following evil sapling (shame on his mother) is the end product of the Evil Wahhabi/Salafi  called Linkdeutscher with many different tongues that even his mother is ashamed to speak to him,  he said:

How to expose a Jahmi in 3 seconds: Who said Alif Laam Meem?

Originally Posted by Linkdeutscher said:
الاستواء معلوم والكيف مجهول والايمان به واجب والسؤال عنه بدعة

“Al-Istiwaa is known, and how is unknown,to have eemaan in it is obligatory and to question it is an innovation”

aMuslimForLife  Reply:

It is my understanding this particular narration is not authentic, if authentic, these would be my concerns.
Istiwa is known meaning its wording known to be in the Quran and Sunnah, how it is understood is unknown.
Salafis understand the statement of Imam Malik to mean, The meaning of istiwa is known.
If this is true why did the Salafus Saleh differ on what istiwa meant?

Ibn Qayyim summarised these four explanations in his Nooniyyahsaying, “And they (Ahl us-Sunnah) have four explanations for it (istiwaa)…” and then he mentioned, “and they are istaqarra, ‘alaa, irtafa’a about which there is no dispute, and likewise sa’uda is the fourth. Aboo ‘Ubaydah of Shaybaan has chosen this in his explanation. [21]

Of these four what meaning did the Prophet (s) teach his companions?

Imam Malik on Istiwa

A man asked Imam Malik (d. 179): “How did Allah make istiwa’ on the throne?” Imam Malik inclined his head and was silent until the sweat of fever covered his brow, then he looked up and said: “Istiwa’ is notunknown (ghayru majhul), the modality of it is inconceivable in the mind (al-kayfu minhu ghayru ma`qul); but belief in it is obligatory, and inquiring about it is a heretical innovation. You are an innovator.” And he gave orders for him to be taken out.

My Thoughts:

My methodologically challenged brothers have used this quote from Imam Malik to justify taking the unclear verses related to Allah upon it’s literal meaning (dhahir). As an Ashari, we are concerned about following the Salafus Saleh, and we regard Imam Malik’s statement and followable, however we don’t understand it in the same way that the Salafis understand Imam Malik’s statement.

Imam Malik did not say istiwa is to be taken upon the literal meaning.Nowhere in any of the quotes that I read from Imam Malik, did he sayto take istiwa upon its literal meaning.

He merely said, “Istiwa is not unknown.” The way the Asharis understand this is that, Istiwa is not unknown, for it is in the Quran. For example, If you would have said to Imam Malik, “Allahu Qadim”, Imam Malik would have said,” Qadim is unknown,” meaning this wording is not known in the Quran or hadiths. Thus Imam Malik was making tafwid.

That is how we understand that statement from Imam Malik.
“Istiwaa is not unknown” and “Istiwaa is known” are not the same, while the Salafis read it as the same.

(end of post by aMuslimForLife  )

—————–
*Note:  (To say that the istiwa of ALLAAH is without a how is therefore the correct way to follow Imam Malik as he said ‘The how is inconceivable’. It is not the same as saying ‘ we do not know how‘ . Imam Malik never said that.

There are several narrations of this event. However the one presented here is the most reliable one, as it is narrated from different people in the SAME way, and in different books. This version is authentic.

Imam Malik never said al-istiwa ma’lum wa l-kayf majhul . He never said ‘the istiwa is known and its manner/how  is unknown’. Those who claim that he did say that do not have the beginning of a chain of narration for it. Rather he said ‘the how is notconceivable’, i.e. : there is no ‘how’, no manner to it.)
————–

—————

START OF

Abu Sulayman Response:

Wahhabi ( Bismil) said: why suddenly so many Aqeedah threads ?

Unfortunately many people here do not realise in what a danger they’re getting themselves when they start speaking about the divine attributes without knowledge.


Reading a few words on islamqa or other “Salafi” websitesdoes not mean that one has attained any real knowledge. These websites are full of inaccurate and wrong informations. 

The laymen here who are constantly attacking classical positions (like Tafwidh) do not even know the Madhhab of their own Mashayikh, let alone that of those whom they regard as their opponents.

Let them think about the 7th Ayah in Surat Al ‘Imran ask themselves who the people are whom Allah ta’ala describes as { those in whose hearts is perversity }?! Let them also read what Imam al-Qurtubi (d. 671 AH) said in the explanation of the mentioned Ayah: Imam al-Qurtubi on 3:7 – The Followers of the Allegorical Verses

Wahhabi(tayyiboon) said: still you are not the only ones who are Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah

No one said that.

Wahhabi (Deeni Akh) said: And why do ash’aris think that those who don’t do ta’weel of the sifaat of Allah do tajseem? they are two opposite extremes. Every Ash’ari I spoke to automatically thought I’m from the mujassimah just because I disagreed with ta’weel.

This shows that you’ve no idea what the Asha’irah say and what not. There are scholars from the Ahl al-Sunnah who regard Ta`wil as allowed, while other scholars (also from the Ahl al-Sunnah) disagreed (but all of them agree regarding the correctness of Tafwidh).
The issue of Ta`wil is just an Ijtihadi difference.
The problem is that the Mujassimah (i.e. Karramiyyah and a group from among the Hanabilah) believe that God has physical attributes and is subject to changes. Do you believe that too?

Originally Posted by Deeni Akh said: Everyone take a look, a really balanced and clear answer from Islamqa:

Balanced? Brother, can you tell me why you’re blindly trusting these types of websites? On the website you’re qouting you will find a Fatwa where it’s claimed that there is some similarity between the divine attributes and that of the creation. Do you know what the ruling upon such statement is according to classical scholars?

Originally Posted by Deeni Akh said: The Ash’aris are a sect that is named after Imam Abu’l-Hasan al-Ash’ari (may Allaah have mercy on him). Al-Ash’ari passed through three stages – as mentioned by Ibn Taymiyah in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 4/72 – which may be summed up as follows: a Mu’tazili stage; then following Ibn Kilaab; then following Ahl al-Sunnah, chiefly Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Al-Ash’ari clearly stated his final position in his three books: Risaalah ila Ahl al-Thaghr, Maqaalaat al-Islaamiyyeen, and al-Ibaanah. Whoever follows al-Ash’ari at this stage is in accordance with Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah in most issues. Whoever follows his path at the second stage is going against al-Ash’ari himself, and is going against Ahl al-Sunnah in many issues.

This is pure misinformations that every “Salafi” loves to repret again and again.
I’ve some questions for you: What is the position of Imam Abul Hasan al-Ash’ari (d. 324 AH) in his Maqalat al-Islamiyyin regarding the claim that Allah ta’ala has physical attributes and is subject to changes? Does he agree with these [Kufri] claims or does he regard it as the Madhhab of the Mushabbihah and Mujassimah? Have you ever looked into the book?

Originally Posted by Deeni Akh said: Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said in al-Fataawa, 3/338:

That’s the same Ibn ‘Uthaymin who denied Mumathalah (which is good), but affirmed Mushabahah (!!!) (which is Kufr!) between the divine attributes and the attributes of the creation in an explicit manner more than once. May Allah ta’ala protect us from following such people.

Abu Sulayman said Here

I’ve a quesion for those who are acting as if they know the exact interpretation of those Ayat which the classical scholars have regarded to be from the Mutashabihat:

What is the meaning of Wajh when it’s used for Allah ta’ala? (I don’t want a translation, but rather the meaning. Just act as if the one asking you only understands Arabic.)

(And if you don’t know the answer, then why are you claiming to know the meaning?)

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Linkdeutscher asked: What is the linguistic meaning of wajh? I mean the Arabic definition.

I thought you know the meaning? Aren’t you constantly attacking people, because they’re relegating the knowledge regarding the Mutashabihat to Allah ta’ala while being sure that there is nothing unto like Him (and this is the Madhhab of the majority of the Salaf al-salih)?

So what is the meaning that you’re ascribing to Allah ta’ala? And what is the ruling for speaking about Allah ta’ala without knowledge?

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Linkdeutscher said: Because I asked a question it means I don’t know the meaning?

Can you just answer it?

I’m the one who asked a question, while you’re the one who acts as if he knows the meaning of YadWajh and ‘Ayn regarding Allah ta’ala. If you know the meaning – as you claim – then let us hear it from you?

And by the way: Are you seriously trying to apply the linguistic definitions that apply to the creation upon Allah ta’ala?

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Linkdeutscher said: No I am just asking you an innocent question but you keep acting all weird for some reason…

Aren’t you able to look it up for yourself?
You acted as if you know the meaning and now I’m waiting to hear the meaning from you.
(You may not know it, but the people whom you blindly follow believe that Wajh, Yad and ‘Ayn are A’yan (entities) which can be pointed at physically and are nonseperable Ajza` (parts) of God. High Exalted is Allah above what the oppressors claim.)

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Linkdeutscher said: Blindly follow? I used to believe Allah is everywhere, so I’m not a blind follower of anyone.

Believing that Allah ta’ala is literally everywhere is disbelief and the same can be said regarding the belief that God is a 3-dimensional object. If you say that you don’t believe that, then alhamdulillah, but know that Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) and your Mashayikh do believe that and if you would’ve read their works or at least looked into some of their works regarding creed you would know this much.
And now again: What is the meaning of Wajh, ‘Ayn and Yad regarding Allah ta’ala? Why are you not answering?

——————————–

Thread Page 2:Here

———————————-

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Linkdeutscher said: I asked you first. Do you actually believe Allah has an actual ‘existence’, or is He just like a concept in your head? Like a number?

Aren’t you ashamed of yourself to ask a fellow Muslim such a question?

But anyways: Of course Allah’s existance is actual. In fact his existance is necessary, while ours is only possible.

And now you’ll have to answer my question: What is the meaning of Yad, Wajh and ‘Ayn regarding Allah ta’ala? If we look Yad up in the dictionary we’ll see that it’s literal meaning is Jarihah (limb)? Are you ascribing Jawarih (limbs) to Allah ta’ala? Is Allah ta’ala a 3-dimensional object according to you?

Or do you simply believe that Yad is Sifah (attribute) from among the Sifat and NOT a Juz` (part; no matter whether it separable in reality or not) nor a Jarihah (limb)?
(This would be one of the 3 acceptable views that the scholars held, but this is quite obviously not the position of your Mashayikh.)

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Wahhabi ( Abu ‘Abdullaah) said: Do Asharis ascribe emotions to Allah? What does it mean when Allah is pleased or Allah is angry? Tajseeeeem! Grrrrrrrrrr!!!

When the Sahabat al-kiram – radhiallahu ‘anhum ajma’in – heard that Allah ta’ala loves the God-fearing, they tried their best to be from among them.

But for you people it seems every Ayah has been sent down only in order to argue with other Muslims and to call them all sorts of names.

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Abu ‘Abdullaah said: Do you ascribe emotions to Allah?

Did Allah ta’ala say that he loves the God-fearing so that you can argue with me or in order for us to try to be from among the God-fearing?

And no it’s not allowed to ascribe emotions to Allah and if you claim that love is an emotion, then the answer is: This is correct regarding us, but who told you that when Allah ta’ala says that he loves the God-fearing an emotion – as we know it – is meant?
What is understood from such Ayat is that doing specific acts and being in a speficic way (in this case: being from the God-fearing) is rewardable in the Akhirah and NOT that a change happens in the divine essence.
I mean we know that Allah ta’ala is Eternal and that the creation and their actions (which are both created by Him without any partners) can not change Him.

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Wahhabi (Umm Uthmaan) said: Can you give us some examples. I want to understand where u are coming from in sha Allah..

Yes, of course:

What I mean by physical attributes are tangible attributes which can be pointed at physically and which are mumtad fil jihat (spread in the directions) or to make it simple: a 3-dimesional thing.
When Ibn ‘Uthaymin for example speaks about two real eyes* regarding Allah ta’ala he intends two physical entities, which are not like our eyes (i.e. they’re not from the same material, nor have they the same size or form), but they have some sort of similarities (i.e. both are used in order to see and both of them are 3-dimensional things). Believing this is obvious Tashbih and against Islamic belief.
(*Here the qoute: “مذهب أهل السنة والجماعة أن لله عينين، اثنتين، ينظر بهما حقيقة على الوجه اللائق به. وهما من الصفات الذاتية الثابتة بالكتاب، والسنة… فهما عينان حقيقيتان لا تشبهان أعين المخلوقين”; Source: Majmu’ Fatawa wa Rasa`il Ibn ‘Uthaymin)

What I mean by being subject to changes is going from one state into another. An example would be movement. Both movement and stillness is impossible regarding Allah ta’ala.

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Deeni Akh said: Whats the misinformation presented by Islamqa?

Their claim that Imam al-Ash’ari (d. 324 AH) went through 3 stages. “Salafis” often like to act as if Imam al-Ash’ari (d. 324 AH) and the Mutaqqadimun from among the Ash’aris agree with them regarding that which they call as Sifat Khabariyyah (i.e. Wajh, Yad, ‘Ayn) and regarding the issue of ‘Uluw, but that is quite obviously not the case.
As for the Sifat al-Khabariyyah: Imam al-Ash’ari accepted them as Ma’ani (i.e. meanings that subsists in the divine essence), while Ibn Taymiyyah [and the “Salafi” Mashayikh] accept it as A’yan (i.e. [physical] entities) and this is something that Ibn Taymiyyah acknowledged with his own tongue.
As for the issue of ‘Uluw: Imam al-Ash’ari believed in the absolute Highness of Allah ta’ala, while Ibn Taymiyyah believes in a physical highness with Jihah (direction) and Tahayyuz (spatial confinement).

Deeni Akh said: and kindly provide proof of shaykh ibn uthaymeens (RA) statement that is accused of supporting mushaabaha.

Here he claims that the Qur`an negates Tamthil, but not Tashbih:

والتعبير بنفي التمثيل أحسن من التعبير بنفي التشبيه ، لوجوه ثلاثة :
أحدهما : أن التمثيل هو الذي جاء به القرآن وهو منفي مطلقا ، بخلاف التشبيه ، فلم يأت القرآن بنفيه .
الثاني : أن نفي التشبيه على الإطلاق لا يصح ، لأن كل موجودين فلا بد أن يكون بينهما قدر مشترك يشتبهان فيه ويتميز كل واحد بما يختص به ، ف : (الحياة) مثلا وصف ثابت في الخالق والمخلوق ، فبينهما قدر مشترك ، لكن حياة الخالق تليق به وحياة المخلوق به .
الثالث : إن الناس اختلفوا في مسمى التشبيه ، حتى جعل بعضهم إثبات الصفات التي أثبتها الله لنفسه تشبيه
Source: Majmu’ Fatawa wa Rasa`il Ibn ‘Uthaymin

And here he explicitly says that there is some sort of similiarity (i.e. between the attributes of the Creator and that of the creation):
فإذا قلت: ما هي الصورة التي تكون لله ويكون أدم عليها؟
قلنا: إن الله عز وجل له وجه وله عين وله يد وله رجل عز وجل، لكن لا يلزم من أن تكون هذه الأشياء مماثلة للإنسان، فهناك شيء من الشبه لكنه ليس على سبيل المماثلة، كما أن الزمرة الأولى من أهل الجنة فيها شبه من القمر لكن بدون مماثلة
Source: Majmu’ Fatawa wa Rasa`il Ibn ‘Uthaymin

This is clear-cut Tashbih without the need for any further discussion.

And this is what he said in one of his lectures:
نقولُ مثلاً ( وجه الله ) ولم نقل وجه وأطلقنا ، فوجه الله يكون لائقاً بذاته ، كما لو قلت وجه الفرس ووجه القِـط الـهِر؛ هل تفهم من قولك وجه الفرس أنه مثل وجه الهر أبداً
– end of the qoute –

Notice how he mentions the face of animals (!!!) while speaking about the divine attributes and from this qoute it’s again clear that he only rejects Mumathalah (just look at his weird question at the end!), but not Mushabahah.

And one could qoute much more, but this should be enough.

Deeni Akh said: I haven’t read the book by shaykh abul hasan al ash’ari (RA) but if you can provide me a link or some reference, I will look it up i.a.

The book Maqalat al-Islamiyyin (click at the name) is regarding the different groups and sects that existed in his time. In it Imam al-Ash’ari mentions what the different groups believed.

Read this thread here, were some interesting parts are qouted: إبطال التجسيم في كتاب [مقالات الإسلاميِّين

What’s also interesting (but not mentioned in the thread) is the definition of makhluq (created) and muhdath (new) (they’re used as synonms) that he mentions. (One may not understand why I’m mentioning this, but some very important issues are connected with this understanding.)

Deeni Akh said: [MENTION=122148]Regarding your pop quiz, Wajh linguistically means the face of something, could be a human, a book, etc.

I specifically said “regarding Allah ta’ala” and I didn’t ask for a translation.
And: A literal face cannot be meant, because it’s 3-dimensional part of something and Allah ta’ala is exalted above being described with a meaning from among the meanings that apply to the creation (see what is mentioned in the famous and accepted al-‘Aqidah al-Tahawiyyah).

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Abu ‘Abdullaah said: Correct. If the claim is that both are ‘Sunni, why the barrage of aggressive refutations?

That is not the claim.
tayyiboon acts as if someone said “only Ash’aris are from the Ahl al-Sunnah”, but that is not the case.
Even though it’s true that most classical Sunni scholars were Ash’aris, but you’ll also find non-Ash’ari Sunnis from among the classical scholars.

But as for “Salafis” – or to be more precise the Mashayikh of the “Salafis” – they’re innovators (Mubtadi’ah). They’ve mixed the false ideas and mistakes of different controversial persons and have added their own shallowness to it and have formed a new Madhhab, which is causing division and hatred everywhere. Just some hours from where I live there are groups killing eachother and killing innocent people and this all because of the hateful ideas of the “Salafiyyah” (with ALL their subsects, no matter whether it’s Madkhali, J!hadi, etc,) [and because of the hateful idead of the Shi’ah al-Imamiyyah].

Notice how it’s almost impossible to make any respectful and academic discussion with people who are influenced too much by this group.

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Wahhabi ( Umm Uthmaan) said: jazaak Allahu khayr So how do you understand the ayat where Allah describes Himself? And how do you understand this ayah الرحمن على العرش استوى and Allahs nuzul every night to the lowest heaven?

The classical scholars have regarded the Ayat were the Istiwa` ‘ala al-‘Arsh is mentioned or the Hadith were the Nuzul is mentioned to be from among the Mutashabihat (i.e. they’re ambiguous in their meaning).

Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala says:

{ هُوَ ٱلَّذِيۤ أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ ٱلْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُّحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ ٱلْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ في قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ٱبْتِغَاءَ ٱلْفِتْنَةِ وَٱبْتِغَاءَ تَأْوِيلِهِ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلاَّ ٱللَّهُ وَٱلرَّاسِخُونَ فِي ٱلْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلاَّ أُوْلُواْ ٱلأَلْبَابِ }

{ He it is Who hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture wherein are clear revelations – they are the substance of the Book – and others (which are) allegorical. But those in whose hearts is doubt pursue, forsooth, that which is allegorical seeking (to cause) dissension by seeking to explain it. None knoweth its explanation save Allah. And those who are of sound instruction say: We believe therein; the whole is from our Lord; but only men of understanding really heed. } [3:7]

Based upon this Ayah the classical scholars said that those verses or narrations which are ambigous in their meaning need to be understood in the context of those verses which are clear (and not the other way around). 
In the case of the divine attributes there are Ayat which are from the Muhkamat (i.e. they are clear in their meaning) like for example Allah’s statement: { لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ }
{ There is nothing whatever like unto Him }[42:11]

That is why all scholars from the Ahl al-Sunnah agreed that Allah ta’ala is exalted above any likeness or similarity to his creation (and this also clear from a rational point of view).

If we implement this now on the Istiwa` and Nuzul it means that Istiwa` can not mean literal sitting (Julus) or resting (Istiqrar) on the throne nor a transition (Intiqal) from one state to another when it’s used regarding Allah ta’ala. Likewise Nuzul can not mean movement (Harakah) from a higher place to a lower place when it’s used regarding Allah ta’ala.

After this agreement the scholars had different ways to approach these types of Ayat and Ahadith, with the main two ways being:

– Tafwidh: Which means to believe in these text (without adding something to it nor subtracting from it) and relegating the exact interpretation to Allah ta’ala while being sure that there is nothing unto like Him. This is the way of the majority of the early generations of the Muslims and the safest way.
– Ta `wil: Which is to mention a possible interpretation which is in line with the context and the Arabic language. This is the way of many classical scholars (like Imam al-Harayman al-Juwayni (d. 478 AH) for example).

There is a third approach regarding Ayat were descriptions like Yad or Wajh are mentioned regarding Allah ta’ala:
– Ithbat with Tanzih: That is to accept these descriptions as meanings (Ma’ani) that subsist in the divine essence (i.e. just like one accepts knowledge (‘Ilm) or power (Qurdrah) as divine attributes), while being sure that limbs (Jawarih) or parts (Ajza`) are not meant. Imam al-Sanusi (d. 895 AH) has mentioned that this was the approach of Imam al-Ash’ari (d. 324 AH).

Now the question that remains is: Which approch should we as laymen choose?:
The last two approaches both require Ijtihad, so one should simply adhere to Tafwidh, because that is the safest way. Even the scholars from the other approaches have said that Tafwidh is correct and the safest approach. Wallahu a’lam.

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Umm Uthmaan said: Jazaak Allahu khayr for taking the time to explain it to me. I hope I’ve understood you correctly. So the way you understand ‘istawa and nuzul is through tafwidh. You believe in the ayat but you don’t actually believe that Allah descends to the lowest heaven and that Allah is above the throne? Because to you, that will mean to compare Allah to His creation? So is Allah fawq al3arsh according to your beliefs? Sorry I’m just a bit confused

That which is obligatory regarding these types of Ayat and Ahadith is to have Iman in them and that’s it. Allah ta’ala has not obliged us to know the exact interpretation. (We should also not forget that it’s not possible for us to understand the reality of Allah’s essence and his attributes.)

Now to answer your question: I don’t believe that Allah ta’ala literally descends to the lowest heaven. And nowhere in the authentic texts has this been ever mentioned, rather it would go against the Muhakamat to believe this. It’s true that Nuzul has been mentioned, but this word has a context. The point of the Hadith is for us to understand that the last third of the night is a special time and that supplications are more likely to be accepted in that time.

Believing that Allah ta’ala literally descends would mean that one believes that Allah ta’ala is spatially confined in a place and that He ta’ala moves from that place to a lower placer and also that He becomes part of the creation (because the lowest heaven is obviously from the creation). Believing this would be wrong by agreement.

As for Allah ta’ala being above the throne: This statement can be meant in a correct way, which is that Allah ta’ala is beyond the creation and completely different from it. As for the wrong meaning: That is to believe that Allah ta’ala is a 3-dimensional object sitting on the throne and being limited by it from below. This would be again wrong by agreement.

I would also recomment you to read the following articles:

– Istawā according to the Salaf and the Khalaf by Imām `Alī al-Qārī(d. 1014 AH)
– What is Meant When We Say Allah is Above What He Created by Imam Ibn Furak al-Shafi’i (d. 406 AH)

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Umm Uthmaan said: So do you understand it symbolically or?

Sister, I doubt that you yourself believe in a literal descent. Do you understand what a literal descent is?

Umm Uthmaan said: Some people believe that it is Allahs rahma that descends.

These people were major scholars, who were masters of the Arabic language and had memorized the Qur`an al-karim and knew thousands of Ahadith and have made huge contributions to Islamic sciences.

Umm Uthmaan said: Do you agree?

I’m in no position to agree or to disagree. It’s a possible interpretation, but I personally adhere to Tafwidh.
Why don’t we look at how classical scholars understood this Hadith?:

Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676 AH) said the following in the context of the Hadith were Nuzul has been mentioned:
هذا الحديث من أحاديث الصفات ، وفيه مذهبان مشهوران للعلماء سبق إيضاحهما في كتاب الإيمان ومختصرهما أن أحدهما وهو مذهب جمهور السلف وبعض المتكلمين : أنه يؤمن بأنها حق على ما يليق بالله تعالى ، وأن ظاهرها المتعارف في حقنا غير مراد ، ولا يتكلم فيتأويلها مع اعتقاد تنزيه الله تعالى عن صفات المخلوق ، وعن الانتقال والحركات وسائر سمات الخلق .
والثاني : مذهب أكثر المتكلمين وجماعات من السلف وهو محكي هنا عن مالك والأوزاعي : أنها تتأول على ما يليق بها بحسب مواطنها . فعلى هذا تأولوا هذا الحديث تأويلين أحدهما : تأويل مالك بن أنس وغيره معناه : تنزل رحمته وأمره وملائكته كما يقال : فعل السلطانكذا إذا فعله أتباعه بأمره . والثاني : أنه على الاستعارة ، ومعناه : الإقبال على الداعين بالإجابة واللطف .

“This hadith is from the narrations of the Sifat (of Allah), and regarding it there are two well known ways among the scholars, which has been already clarified inKitab al-Iman and the its summary is [as follows]:
The first, and it is the madhhab of the majority of the Salaf and some of the Mutakallimin (scholars of kalam) that it is to believe in their [i.e. the attribute’s] reality according to what befits Allāh ta’ala, and that the literal meaning that we commonly apply to ourselves is not what is meant, and that one does not speak regarding its interpretation while holding the belief that Allah ta’alā is free from the attributes of the created, and from translocation, and movement, and the rest of the attributes of created beings.
The second is the madhdhab of the majority of the Mutakallimīn, and a group from amongst the Salaf, and it is what is reported from Mālik and al-Awzā’ī that they are interpreted figuratively but only according to their appropriate contextual meanings. On this basis there are two interpretations (ta’wils). The first is the ta’wil of Imam Mālik ibn Anas and other than he, that its meaning is the descent of His mercy and decree and His angels. [as is said regarding the Sultan …] and the Second interpretation is that it is an Isti’arah (metaphor) to signifiy turning to (iqbal) to those who supplicate to Him with fulfillment by answering [the du’aa] and showing lutf (kindness, generosity) [to those beseeching Him].”
Source: Sharh al-Nawawi ‘ala Sahih Muslim (and translation taken from HERE; I edited it a little bit)

Umm Uthmaan said: We believe in what Allah says about Himself. We don’t have to logically understand it.

Did Allah ta’ala say anything about a literal descent?
As for “logically understand it”: It’s not possible to understand the reality of Allah’s essence and attributes, but this does not mean that we start believing irrational things as the Christians or polytheists believe.

Umm Uthmaan said: Allah says He descends to the lowest heaven. Khalas.

Rasulullah – sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam – did not speak English, but rather Arabic. His words had a specific context: Statements have to be understood in light of the context and in light of the creed that Rasulullah – ‘alayhil salatu wal salam – teached us. Why forget all of that?

I mean there is Ayah where Allah ta’ala says: { نَسُواْ ٱللَّهَ فَنَسِيَهُمْ } ({ They forget Allah, so He hath forgotten them. }) [9:67]. Does this now mean that Allah ta’ala literally forgets? Of course not. And the same can be said regarding the Hadith al-Nuzul.

Umm Uthmaan said: Allahu A’lam how He descends and Allah does not expect us to understand it (we can’t because laysa kamithlihi shay). We should just accept it.

Sister, you’re just repeating the words of others without understanding what they intend. Modality does not even apply to Allah ta’ala. What you should say instead is that we don’t know the reality of the divine attributes.

Umm Uthmaan said: No muslim believe in that..

It’s true that no Muslim with correct understanding believes in that.

But there have been groups/sects who have believed such things.
Ibn Karram (d. 255 AH) (the leader of the Karramiyyah) for example believed that God is literally in the above direction. He believed that God is something spread out in the directions and that he has a limit from the side of the throne and no limits from the other sides. Al-Qadhi Abu Ya’la (d. 458 AH) (a Hanbali scholar who had fallen into Tashbih) believed that too. Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) (another Hanbali scholar who also had fallen into Tashbih) went even further and claimed that God has even more limits and argued that nothing could exist (including God!) while subsisting in itself except that it is spatially confined.

If you look into the books that the “Salafis” print you wil find so many false statements in this context, which is why I told you not to repeat their words. I’m quite sure that you’re not on their creed.

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Abu ‘Abdullaah said: Last time I engaged, the answer was that ‘I don’t get it’. Internet Asharis seem to be little more than copy/paste bots – whilst not doing taqleed of course – LOL!

It doesn’t seem that you’re interested in a fruitful discussion, which is why you’re getting no answers. Don’t expect that people will respond to you while you’re displaying this childish behaviour and are only interested in making fun of others.

Abu Sulayman Reply:

Abu ‘Abdullaah said: On the contrary, it is you who is not interested in a discussion.

Well, I specifically spoke about a fruitful discussion and not the type of “discussion” (making fun of each other like little children!) that you and some others here are interested in.

We both know that you expect me to answer your questions, while you won’t answer if I were to ask you (or did you forget my question in the beginning, which not a sinlge one of those who claim to know the meaning of the Mutashabihat could answer?).

Abu ‘Abdullaah said: The question: What does love mean when you say Allah loves?

If Allah ta’ala loves something it means he’s pleased with it and this goes back to the attribute of Iradah (will). (In this case: Allah’s will to reward those who do a specific action or are in a specific way).

If you believe that it’s some sort of emotional change that happens to the divine essence caused by a creation, then this is wrong and the reason for this has been already mentioned in one of the posts,

more comments Here

Also don’t forget to read:

Discussion with Wahhabiyyah on Ummah.com Forum – Part-2

source

Up ↑