E - Istiwaa (Rise over) - 2.Proofs from the Sunnah

             Allah is Above the Throne – From the Sunnah

It is narrated from Abu Hurairah (ra) that the Messenger of Allah (SAW)said, “Two groups of angels come to you, one group in the night and one group in the day, they gather at the times of Fajr and Asr. The ones who spent the night rise to Allah and Allah asks them whilst he knows fully aware, “How did you leave my slaves.” The angels reply, “They were praying when we reached them and they were still praying when we left them.” (Humaam ibn Munabeh in ‘Saheehfah as-Saadiqah’ (p.89), Ahmad in his ‘Musnad’, Ibn Khuzaimah in ‘Kitaab at-Tawheed’ (p.78) Uthmaan Daarimee in ‘Radd Alal-Jahmiyyah’ (p.30))

Imaam adh-Dhahabee (rh) narrates from Abu Hurairah (ra), the Messenger of Allah (SAW)   said  that Allah will say, “For the reason of my might, where are the people who love each other, today I will give them the shade of my Throne. Where there is no shade apart from my shade” (Hadeeth Mutawaatir). This establishes that the Throne is in fact real, and not something ‘metaphorical.’

Abdullah bin Amr reported that the Prophet (SAW) said: “Be merciful to those on earth, so that the One above the heavens will be merciful to you” (Bukhari/Muslim).

Zaynab (ra), the wife of the Prophet (SAW)used to claim excellence over the rest of his wives by telling them, “It is only your parents who gave you in marriage to the Prophet (SAW)while it is Allah Who gave me in marriage to him from above the seven heavens” (Bukhari).

Narrated Abu Huraira, “I heard Allah’s Apostle (SAW)saying, Allah divided Mercy into one-hundred parts and He kept its ninety-nine parts with Him and sent down its one part on the earth, and because of that, its one single part, His creations are Merciful to each other, so that even the mare lifts up its hoofs away from its baby animal, lest it should trample on it” (Bukhari).

Jabir ibn Abdullah said, “The Messenger of Allah (SAW) said in his speech on the day of Arafah, ‘Did I convey (the message)?’ They said, ‘Yes.’ While raising his finger to the sky and then pointing at them, he said, ‘O my Lord, be a witness.’” [Muslim]

Abu Sa’eed said that the Messenger of Allah (SAW)said, “Do you not trust me when I am trusted by Him Who is above the heavens? Revelation comes to me day and night.” (Bukhari/Muslim)

1. Abu Musa al-Ash’ari narrated that the Messenger said (SAW)“Allah does not sleep and he ought not to. He descends the Qist (justice) and raises it up. Deeds of the night are ascended to Him before the day. His veil is Light, if He unveils it, the light of His Face will burn everything that sight reaches” (Muslim).

1. ‘Abdullah. Ibn ‘Abbas reported: A person from the Ansar who was amongst the Companions of Allah’s Messenger (SAW)reported to me: As we were sitting during the night with Allah’s Messenger (SAW)a falling star gave a dazzling light. Allah’s Messenger (SAW)said: What did you say in the pre-Islamic days when there was such a shot (of meteor)? They said: Allah and His Messenger know best (the actual position), but we, however, used to say that that very night a great man had been born and a great man had died, whereupon Allah’s Messenger (SAW) said: (These falling stars) are shot neither at the death of anyone nor on the birth of anyone. Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, issues Command when He decides to do a thing. Then (the Angels) supporting the Throne sing His glory, then sing the dwellers of heaven who are near to them until this glory of God reaches them who are in the heaven of this world. Then those who are near the supporters of the Throne ask these supporters of the Throne: What your Lord has said? And they accordingly inform them what He says. Then the dwellers of heaven seek information from them until this information reaches the heaven of the world. In this process of transmission (the jinn snatches) what he manages to overhear and he carries it to his friends. And when the Angels see the jinn they attack them with meteors. If they narrate only which they manage to snatch that is correct but they alloy it with lies and make additions to it (Muslim).

Narrated Salman al-Farsi: The Prophet (SAW) said: Your Lord is munificent and generous, and is shy to turn away empty the hands of His servant when he raises them to Him (Abu Dawud).

Mu’awiyah as-Sahmi reported: “I had some sheep which I kept between Uhud and Juwaniyyah with a slave-girl to look after them. One day, I went out to check on my sheep and discovered that a wolf had devoured one of them. Since I am just a human, (I became angry) and struck the girl. Later on, I came to the Prophet (SAW)and reported to him the incident. He terrified me with the gravity of my action. I said, ‘Messenger of Allah!’ Shall I free her (as an expiation of my sin.) He said ‘Call her over.’ When I did, he asked her, ‘Where is Allah?’ She said, ‘Above the heavens.’ Then he asked her, ‘Who am I?’ She said, ‘The Messenger of Allah (SAW)Thereupon, the Messenger of Allah (SAW) ordered me, ‘Free her. She is a believer’” (Muslim, Abu Dawud, and others).
It is important to remember that whatever the Prophet (SAW) said about the religion is the truth. Allah (swt) says in the Qur’an, Your companion has neither gone astray nor has erred. Nor does he speak of (his own) desire. It is only an Inspiration (revelation) that is inspired (revealed). (53:2-4)
The last hadith listed here is the most important. It establishes the validity and importance of not only asking the question where is Allah, but more importantly, the correct answer to it. To give any answer other than this is to oppose the Sunnah. It also shows that the Prophet (SAW)established that the girl was a ‘true believer’ based simply on her answer to these questions. This is because it establishes beyond a shadow of a doubt that her conception of tawheed was correct, and in opposition to the tawheed of the Arabs of jahiliyyah.
There is another narration of a similar hadith, except the girl was unable to speak. So when he asked her where is Allah, she pointed at the heavens, and when he asked, ‘Who am I?’ she pointed at the heavens and pointed at him, indicating you are the one sent by Him.
Lastly, there is a passage from Nudhmul Faraa’id of al-Albaanee also explaining the issue,

On the authority of Abdullah ibn ‘Amr (radi Allaahu ‘anhu), on the authority of the Prophet (sal-Allaahu ‘alayhi was-sallam) that he said, “The Most Merciful of those who give mercy is Ar-Rahmaan – Blessed and Exalted is He. Show mercy to those on earth, and the one above the heavens will show mercy to you. And ar-Rahm (the womb) is derived from Ar-Rahmaan, so whoever keeps good relations with it, Allah keeps good relations with him, and whoever cuts it off, Allah cuts him off.
Benefit:
And he said in this hadith “fee” and its meaning here is above (a’laa), just like Allah saying “Say: travel fee (upon/in/on) the land…” [6:11]. So the hadeeth is from the many evidences about Allah – the Exalted – being above (fawq) all of the creation. And “fee” is that which al-Hafidh adh-Dhahabee utilizes in his book al-’Uluww. And indeed this is what I concluded from the summarization of it near me. And I put that down in my explanation of the introduction. And I took from it ahadeeth and athaar (narrations), and I put them above the weak reports. May Allah make it easy for it to be published. And all praise is due to Allah.

E - Istiwaa (Rise over) 1.Proofs from the Quran

 

1 - And (remember) when Allâh said: “O ‘Iesa (Jesus)! I will take you and raise you to Myself and clear you [of the forged statement that ‘Iesa (Jesus) is Allâh’s son] of those who disbelieve, and I will make those who follow you superior to those who disbelieve till the Day of Resurrection. Then you will return to Me and I will judge between you in the matters in which you used to dispute.” (3:55)

 

2 - And He is the Irresistible, above (fawq) His slaves, and He is the All-Wise, Well¬Acquainted with all things. (6:18)

 

3 - They fear their Lord above them, and they do what they are commanded. (16:50)

Whosoever desires honour, power and glory then to Allâh belong all honour, power and glory. To Him ascend (all) the goodly words, and the righteous deeds exalt it, but those who plot evils, theirs will be severe torment. And the plotting of such will perish. (35:10)

 

4 - From Allâh, the Lord of the ways of ascent. The angels and the Rûh [Jibrael (Gabriel)] ascend to Him in a Day the measure whereof is fifty thousand years (70:3-4)

 

5 - Do you feel secure that He, Who is over the heaven (Allâh), will not cause the earth to sink with you, then behold it shakes (as in an earthquake)? (67:16)

 

6 - Or do you feel secure that He, Who is over the heaven (Allâh), will not send against you a violent whirlwind? Then you shall know how (terrible) has been My Warning? (67:17)

 

7 - Say (O Muhammad SAW Ruh-ul-Qudus [Jibrael (Gabriel)] has brought it (the Qur’an) down from your Lord with truth, that it may make firm and strengthen (the Faith of) those who believe and as a guidance and glad tidings to those who have submitted (to Allâh as Muslims). (16:102)

 

8 -lorify the Name of your Lord, the Most High (87:1)

 

These ayaat clearly indicate that Allah is the Creator, and we are the creation. The two are separate and distinct, and not the same.
Additionally, these ayaat show that Allah is the All-Knower of everything, and disposes of all affairs. His being over the Throne does not negate this. Notice how they say, for example, “They fear their Lord above them” and they do not say, “They fear their Lord beneath them,” or “around them,” or “inside them,” or “the One in no direction.”
It is therefore clear from the repetition of this in the Qur’an that this is an important issue. In fact, it is the message that the Prophets all came with. This is proved by the following verse,

And Fir’aun (Pharaoh) said: “O Hâmân! Build me a tower that I may arrive at the ways, “The ways of the heavens, and I may look upon the Ilâh (God) of Mûsa (Moses) but verily, I think him to be a liar.” Thus it was made fair-seeming, in Fir’aun’s (Pharaoh) eyes, the evil of his deeds, and he was hindered from the (Right) Path, and the plot of Fir’aun (Pharaoh) led to nothing but loss and destruction (for him). (40:36-37)

It is sad, that Fir’awn understood our aqeedah better than the Ash’aris and mutakallimoon.

Detailed Discussion of Some Attributes - E - Istiwaa (Rise over)

Mujaahid reported that Istiwaa means He rose over it. There are 7 ayaat in the Quran that specifically mention Istiwaa:

1 - Indeed your Lord is Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth in Six Days, and then He Istawa (rose over) the Throne (really in a manner that suits His Majesty). He brings the night as a cover over the day, seeking it rapidly, and (He created) the sun, the moon, the stars subjected to His Command. Surely, His is the Creation and Commandment. Blessed be Allah, the Lord of the ‘Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists)! (7:54)

 

 2 - Who created the heavens and the earth and all that is between them in six Days. Then He Istawa (rose over) the Throne (in a manner that suits His Majesty). The Most Beneficent (Allah)! Ask Him (O Prophet Muhammad SAW), (concerning His Qualities, His rising over His Throne, His creations, etc.), as He is Al-Khabir (The All-Knower of everything i.e. Allah). (25:59)

 

3 - Allâh is He Who raised the heavens without any pillars that you can see. Then, He Istawâ (rose above) the Throne. He has subjected the sun and the moon (to continue going round)! Each running (its course) for a term appointed. He regulates all affairs, explaining the Ayât (proofs, signs) in detail, (so) that you may believe with certainty in the meeting with your Lord. (13:2)

 

4 - Surely, your Lord is Allâh Who created the heavens and the earth in six Days and then Istawâ (rose over) the Throne, disposing the affair of all things. No intercessor (can plead with Him) except after His Leave. That is Allâh, your Lord; so worship Him (Alone). Then, will you not remember? (10:3)

 

5 - The Most Beneficent (Allâh) Istawâ (rose over) the (Mighty) Throne. (20:5)

 

6 - Allâh it is He Who has created the heavens and the earth, and all that is between them in six Days. Then He Istawâ (rose over) the Throne. You (mankind) have none, besides Him, as a Walî (protector or helper etc.) or an intercessor. Will you not then remember (or be admonished)? (32:4)

 

7 - He it is Who created the heavens and the earth in six Days and then Istawa (rose over) the Throne (in a manner that suits His Majesty). He knows what goes into the earth and what comes forth from it, what descends from the heaven and what ascends thereto. And He is with you (by His Knowledge) wheresoever you may be. And Allah is the All-Seer of what you do. (57:4)

One need to do nothing more than look up these Ayaat and read them in context to see the true meaning of istiwaa. Some of the groups of kalam tried to claim that istiwaa actually means istawlaa (to conquer) and this is incorrect for a number of reasons. It is not the understanding of any of the first generations of Islam, and there is no evidence to suggest that it is the correct meaning. Allah also specifies thumma (then), i.e. He created the heavens and then He istiwaa over the Throne. The early scholars of Arabic language also rejected it. In fact, ibn al-’Araabee refuted it by saying that istawlaa occurs only when you have an enemy to fight.

Some of the scholars of kalam also tried to use a line of poetry to show istiwaa meant to conquer. However, this line of poetry was fabricated and was found in none of that author’s works (who by the way was a Christian poet). Also, it is incorrect methodology to ignore the explicit evidences in the Quran and Sunnah and turn to some obscure line of poetry. Lastly, poetry is used to help understand exotic words, not to distort obvious ones.

It should also be noted that the early Ash’aris actually affirmed istiwaa (e.g. Bayhaqi, Abul-Hasan, Baqilanee) and the later ones rejected it. This is yet another indication that their creed has changed over time, and is therefore incorrect.

Another argument some groups try to use to deny this Lofty Attribute of Allah is to say that istiwaa has over 15 meanings, so we do not know which one was intended. This is just like their making tafwid. This is akin to saying that the Quran is vague and we do not know what it means, the Quran may as well have just said “alpha beta chi” here and it would carry the same meaning for these groups of kalam.

Notice how vile this claim is, it destroys all spirituality of Allah’s Names and Attributes. Instead of knowing Allah is above us, He is Majestic, over His Mighty Throne, the same Throne that will shade some people on the day of judgment, from above the heavens, Allah is protecting us, from above the heavens He sent down the revelation to us, to guide us, to worship Him, and glorify Him Most High (subhaana Rabbi al-A’laa), they have stripped this from the Noble Attributes of Allah. They have destroyed this meaning and turned it into some sort of intellectual puzzle that no one can decipher, Audhubillah.

Detailed Discussion of Some Attributes D - ‘Uluww – Other Opinions - Incorrect Opinions Regarding 'Uluww

The first incorrect opinion regarding this Attribute is the saying that Allah is everywhere.

• Hulooliyyah ‘Aamah – (Hulool means to occupy a space, or be around). This is like the saying of Jahm ibn Safwan (the first to reject Allah’s ‘Uluww) that Allah is like the air, i.e. all around us.
• Hulooliyyah Khaasah – the belief that Allah is in a certain person’s surroundings, or in certain places only, e.g. idol worship.
• Ittihaadiyyah ‘Aamah – to believe that Allah is everywhere, inside of everything, and there is no existence other than Him. This is the belief of the heretical sufis.
• Ittihaadiyyah Khaasah – to believe that Allah is manifest inside a specific person, e.g. the Christian’s belief in Jesus.

Muslim groups mostly fell into the first and third of those mentioned.
The second opinion is that of the mujassimah who say Allah(swt) is enclosed in a space, or is physically sitting on the Throne. As a side note here, it must be mentioned that some English books on Aqeedah, specifically some translated works of ibn Uthaymeen (rahimahullah) have incorrectly translated his works to say “sitting on the Throne” (i.e. saying jalasa instead of istiwaa) when this is not found in the Arabic. It is a mistake in the translation, may Allah (swt) forgive us for our shortcomings.
The third deviant opinion is what is held by people of kalam (and most modern day Ash’aris) that Allah cannot be described with a direction. That is, He is neither to the left of us, the right of us, under us, over us, etc. This is in direct opposition to the way of Ahlus Sunnah because they have employed detailed negation and concise affirmation. While in the Quran it is found numerous times that Allah is above us, they claim that we should begin describing Allah by saying “He is not below us, He is not to the left, He is not…, He is not…, He is not…” and this is in clear opposition to the Quranic method.
The Ash’aris argued basically that this makes it appear Allah “needs” a Throne to sit on, that having a direction necessitates having a body, and that a being characterized by direction must ‘occupy space’ (tahayyuz) and have a directional relationship vis-a-vis other objects, thus implying a created being.
These assumptions are all based in Aristotelian logic, and contradict the rules established for Allah’s Names and Attributes. The simple response is that there is no basis for their assumptions, and the implications they assume are unfounded. We affirm what Allah says, and do not question the ‘how’. It is by delving into the ‘how’ that they made these assumptions and deviated.

C - 'Uluww (Highness of Allah) – General Overview

This has 3 connotations, Allah is highest in 1) His Control, 2) His Power, and 3) His Essence.

In reality, this is something that does not need to be proved, but because of the statements of some deviant groups on this issue, it has become necessary.

The proofs regarding this issue are too many to enumerate. This post will serve to give a brief overview of some of the proofs and their categories. Some of the ayaat are not fully quoted here, as they will be quoted in full in later articles.

First is the explicit ayaat mentioning Allah’s rising over the Throne. Also many hadith indicate that the Throne is above the heavens.

There are references also to things being “raised” (rafa’a) to Him, such as good deeds, (35:10, 4:158, 3:55). Also there are examples of good deeds being lifted up to Him with the word sa’ada.

There are also proofs showing Allah is “fis-Samaa’” and this means above (67:16-17). It should be noted that fee can also mean in, however, in this context it means above. This is also the case in the hadith of the slave-girl. One proof for this is the ayah 20:71, where Fir’awn says he will crucify the people fee date-palms. Obviously this means on them and not “in” them. Another proof for this is Allah’s saying to “travel fil-’ard (in the earth).” No one takes this to mean to be actually in the earth, but upon the earth.

Many of Allah’s Names also indicate His Transcendence, such as al-’Alee, al-A’laa, Ta’aala, al-Muta’aal, al-Qaahir, and many others showing He is above everything in His Power and Essence.

Another clear proof is the incident of al-Israa’ wa al-Mi’raaj.

The scholars of the early generations also said there is ijmaa’ (scholarly consensus) on this issue. Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal also argued this point from a logical perspective by saying, “Either Allah created us in Him, or outside Him. If it was inside then this is a statement of kufr. If outside, then Allah would choose best the direction for Him to be – i.e. being above the creation.” (rough translation).

The most undeniable proof, however, may be that of the fitrah. It is ingrained in us to look up, or to point up, to raise our hands up to Allah in supplication. Allah created us upon this pure fitrah, and even non-Muslims point up when referring to Allah.

Detailed Discussion of Some Attributes - B - The issue of the Quran being created

This is a subset of the issue of Allah’s Kalam. That is because the Quran is the Speech of Allah, it is uncreated. The Mu’tazilah and Ash’aris have deviated in their understanding of the Qur’an. The end result of the beliefs of both of these groups is that either the Quran is created outright, or that the Quran we have is a created expression of what Allah(swt) said ‘internally’.

This issue is important, firstly because it is necessary for us to have the correct understanding of Allah(swt), it is part of our Tawheed, and secondly because these claims basically make the Quran null and void. If one says the Quran is created, or is not the Speech of Allah, then it destroys its relevancy and perfection. Since we know only Allah is of the utmost perfection, and His Attributes are perfect, then if the Quran is created, it must have some deficiency in it. The Kalam of Allah is what we know everything by, and to believe as the Ash’aris believe is to make the Quran no longer Divine.

The Caliph Ma’mun of the Abbasids had adopted the belief that the Qur’an was created. Bishr al-Mirisi and ibn Abee Du’aad (one of the followers of Jahm ibn Safwan) convinced him to make it the theology of the state at the time. Many scholars were executed over this issue and some said that it was created in order to save their lives. It was due to the famous trial of Imam Ahmed that it is pretty much universally accepted by the masses of the Muslims that the Quran is the uncreated Speech of Allah. The Ash’aris came approximately 100 years after the time of Imam Ahmed, when it was accepted that the Quran is Allah’s Speech, and this explains their somewhat confusing stance on the issue. They could not adopt the view of the Mu’tazilah since it was now openly rejected, but at the same time, they were trying to reconcile with their principles of philosophy they held to.

Amr ibn Deenar (d. 126AH) stated, “I have met the Companions of the Prophet(saw), and those that came after them for seventy years, all of them said, ‘Allah is the Creator, and everything besides Him is created, and the Qur’an is the kalam of Allah, from Him it came, and to Him it will return.” The narrations like this are mutawatir and come from the Imams of the first generations of Islam.

The first person to claim that the Quran was created was none other than Ja’d bin Dirham.

Most of the proofs for the Quran being the speech of Allah was mentioned in the previous post. One extremely obvious proof though, that I did not post there was the first 3 ayaat of Surat ar-Rahman,

Ar-Rahmaan. He taught (you) the Quran. He created man. [55:1-3]

What more needs to be said other than the fact that Allah(swt) Himself made the distinction?

Though this issue seems old, and we might wonder what significance it has for us, it should be noted that even modern day ‘progressive Muslims’ use this exact argument to justify re-interpreting the Quran. And this is exactly what Imam Ahmed feared, and why he stood firm during his trial, rahimahullah.

Detailed Discussion of Some Attributes A - Kalam (Speech)

Ahlus Sunnah

Ahlus Sunnah affirms Allah’s Kalam. He speaks whenever He wills, His Speech is heard, He speaks with words and letters, and His speech is eternal and uncreated.

And Allah spoke directly (kallama) to Musa [4:164]

And,

And when he came to it (the fire), he was called by name: “O Musa (Moses)! Verily! I am your Lord! So take off your shoes, you are in the sacred valley, Tuwa. And I have chosen you. So listen to that which is inspired to you.” [20:11-13]



And,

And when Musa (Moses) came at the time and place appointed by Us, and his Lord spoke (kallamahu) to him, he said: “O my Lord! Show me (Yourself), that I may look upon You.” Allah said: “You cannot see Me… [7:143]

And,

And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words (kalam) of Allah [9:6]



Mu’tazilah

The Mu’tazilah said His Speech is heard but it is created. About the ayaat mentioned here, they say Musa heard Allah but he heard a created speech. One way of refuting this is that if the kalam of Allah was created, that would mean that one of Allah’s Attributes had a beginning, yet Allah’s Attributes do not change with time,

He is the First (there is nothing before Him), and He is the Last (there is nothing after Him) [57:3]

Ash’aris

The Ash’aris say that Allah is continually speaking (instead of speaking when He wishes) with an internal speech that cannot be heard, has no language, and is without words/letters. It is, according to them, an internal speech of the mind.

As discussed before, they fell into saying this out of a fear of committing tashbih (anthropomorphism).The Ash’aris said basically that if His Speech is heard, then it must automatically mean sound exists, and this implies a vocal cord, tongue, lips, etc. So because they could not view the Attribute in the middle path of Ahlus Sunnah (confirming the Attribute but leaving the ‘how’ to Allah) they fell into one extreme by trying to avoid the other. This also led them to say that the Quran is the uncreated internal speech of Allah, and what we have is simply an expression of it.

It is easy to notice that they delved into a lot of concepts that are unfounded in the Quran and Sunnah. What is ironic, is that the Ash’aris accuse Ahlus Sunnah of delving too much into the Names and Attributes of Allah when we are the ones who affirm the texts and do not go beyond that!

Imam Ahmed refuted the claim of the Ash’aris by saying, “As for their claim that sound can only occur from a combination of the throat, lips, and tongue, then did not Allah say to the heavens and earth “‘Come willingly or unwillingly!’ They both said, ‘We come, willingly!’” (41:12). And did not Allah say, “And We subjected the mountains and the birds to glorify Our praises, along with Dawood” (21:79). Do these people presume that they (i.e. the mountains, heaven, earth) glorified with a throat, lips, and tongues?! And how about when a disbeliever’s limbs will testify against him….Nay, rather Allah will make them to speak, as He wishes, without any throat lips or tongues!”

If what the Ash’aris say is true, then what did Musa hear in Tuwa? Also, do they consider muted speech to be praiseworthy? One who is mute is not like one who speaks, so to deny Speech from Allah, or interpret it as they do is an extremely dangerous and blasphemous position to take. It implies that the Creator is mute, while Allah is in fact free from all attributes of imperfection

.
Also, if the Quran is an internal speech and what we have is an expression, and His speech is without words/letters, then what do they say about the ayaat that the Quran is in a clear Arabic language?

Disputing with the Language of the Sacred Texts - H - A Reply to Those Who Deny the Punishment in the Grave

A Reply to Those Who Deny Punishment in the Grave

By Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Saalih al-’Uthaymeen

Information related to the Religion (Al-khabar), is categorized in accordance to the manner in which it has reached us. There are two categories:

[1]: al-Mutawaatir (recurrent): that which has been narrated from one group to another. Convention dictates: it is impossible that they would act in collusion upon a lie, from he beginning of the chain of narration to the end.

[2]: al-Aahaad (singular): all narrations excluding those classified as recurrent. Some individuals from the people of kalaam, for instance the:

The Mu’tazilah and whoever followed them from later generations, for example Shaykh Muhammad Abduh, Mahmood Shaltoot, Ahmad Shalbee, ’Abdul-Kareem ’Uthmaan, amongst others. In addition to the Usooliyyeen: Ascribed to the opinion that the khabarul-waahid cannot be used as a means of founding matters of ’aqeedah, rather only definite evidence can be used to establish matters of ’aqeedah, comprising of either a verse or a prophetic tradition. [1] The assertion above concerning the impermisibility of establishing matters of ’aqeedah upon singular traditions is inadmissible. For indeed, if the authenticity of a hadeeth is established, it being transmitted by a trustworthy chain of narrators, and has arrived to us in a correct manner, then eemaan (faith) upon it is indeed obligatory, in addition to the affirmation of it. Irrespective of whether it is khabarul-aahaad or mutawaatir. It imports upon the individual an obligation to maintain the indisputable knowledge concerning it. This is the creed of the scholars of our pious predecessors, established upon the Command of Allaah the Most High to the believers, by his statement:

‘‘It is not for a Believer, man or woman, when Allaah and his Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision.’’ [Sooratul-Ahzaab 33:36]



His statement, the Most High:

‘‘Obey Allaah and His Messenger.’’ [Soorah Aali-’Imraan 3:32]

Ibn Hajar (d.852H) – rahimahullaah – said:

‘‘The implementation of the singular tradition, by the companions and the Taabi’een without repudiation is ubiquitously circulated and known, for it dictates that they unanimously accepted it.’’ [2]

Ibn Abil-’Izz al-Hanafee (d.729H) – rahimahullaah – mentioned:

‘‘The Ummah has received the khabarul-waahid with acceptance, by implementation of it, and attestation to it. It does denote indisputable knowledge amongst the vast majority of the Ummah. It is one category of al-mutawaatir. There did not exist any variance of opinion amongst the Salaf concerning this matter.’’ [3]

A man questioned Imaam ash-Shaafi’ee concerning a matter. He responded, ‘‘The Messenger of Allaah decreed such and such.’’ The questioner said to ash-Shaafi’ee, ‘What do you say?’ He said, ‘Praise be to Allaah, do you see me attending the church? Do you see the belt of the Christians around my waist? I say to you: The Messenger of Allaah decreed such and such and you respond: what do you say?’’ [4]

Ash-Shaafi’ee (d.204H) – rahimahullaah – also mentioned:

‘‘When I narrate an authentic tradition from the messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) and do not accept it, I would have testified to you that my intelligence has disappeared.’’ [5]

Hence, he did not differentiate between the khabarul-waahid and the khabarul-mutawaatir. Further more, he did not distinguish between narrations concerning to ’aqeedah and those pertaining to a matter of action. Indeed the determining factor was founded upon the authenticity of the tradition.

Imaam Ahmad (d.241H) – rahimahullaah – stated:

‘‘We affirm and accept every matter that has arrived from the Prophet (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) by means of a sound chain of authorities. If we did not affirm or accept that which the Messenger came with, by means of repudiation and opposition to it, we would have opposed the command of Allaah.

Allaah the Most High stated:

‘‘Whatever the Messenger gives you, take it, whatever he prohibits you from, abstain from it.’’ [Sooratul-Hashr 59:7]’’ [6]

Accordingly, Imaam Ahmad did not stipulate any conditions for acceptance save the authenticity of the tradition.

Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728H) – rahimahullaah – stated:

‘‘If an action of Sunnah is established, all the Muslims are in agreement upon the obligation to adhere to it.’’ [7]

Ibnul-Qayyim mentioned in his refutation of those who reject the proof of the khabarul- waahid, ‘‘From amongst the proofs: The Companions’ conveyance of traditions amongst themselves. For they asserted authoritatively that which an individual narrated from the Prophet (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam). No individual amongst them responded to the one who informed him of a tradition from the Messenger of Allaah with the statement: your information is founded upon the khabarul-waahid, this does not constitute knowledge until it is founded upon a mutawaatir tradition. If one of the Companions narrated a tradition to another from the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) pertaining to Sifaat (attributes), it would be received with acceptance. Furthermore, the recipient would believe in that attribute categorically and with absolute certainty. Similarly they believed in the vision of the Lord, His Speech, His Call upon the Day of Judgment to His servants wit a voice that will be heard in the distance as it shall be heard nearby. His descent every night to the lower heaven, His Laughter, His Delight, His Act of Grasping the heavens and placing them upon a Finger from the Fingers of His Hand, in addition to the affirmation of His Foot. Whosoever heard these ahaadeeth from those who narrated them from the messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) or his companions, believed in the authenticity of their content by virtue of having heard them from the just and the truthful, and they entertained no doubt therein. It is perhaps conceivable to assume that they sought affirmation in some traditions pertaining to rules and regulations. However, despite that, no individual from amongst them sought the confirmation of the narrations pertaining to the Attributes at all. Rather they were amongst the foremost of the people in the acceptance and affirmation of them, authoritatively asserting their content, and establishing the Attributes upon them. They did so from what was communicated to them by means of these ahaadeeth from the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam). Whosoever has the closest acquaintance with the Sunnah and consideration towards it is aware of that matter. For if the position was not manifestly clear concerning this matter, we would certainly have cited in excess of on hundred examples of clarification.

Hence, this practice of disaffirming knowledge founded upon the ahaadeeth of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) which they are dependant upon, was punctured by the consensus of the companions. This is a matter, which is known by necessity. In addition to the consensus of the Taabi’een and the consensus of the Imaams of Islaam. However they are in agreement with the Mu’tazilah, the Jahmiyyah, the Raafidah, and the Khawaarij who violated this sanctity. Groups amongst the Usooliyyeen and the fuqahaa‘ (jurists) followed them. Otherwise, they are not aware of a single individual amongst the Salaf – from the Imaams of the Salaf – who followed that opinion. Rather the Imaams explicitly declared their opposition to their statement. From amongst those who ascribed to the opinion that the khabarul-waahid constitutes knowledge: Maalik, ash-Shaafi’ee, the companions of Aboo Haneefah, Daawood Ibn ’Alee and his companions, for example Muhammad Ibn Hazm.’’ [8]

From amongst the reasons, which are propounded by those who reject the legal validity of the khabarul-waahid by reason of doubt, is the notion that the khabarul-waahid constitutes uncertainty and suspicion. They intend by means of their allegation the ‘preponderant uncertainty’ to infer the probability of ’alaa waahid (the individual narrator) erring, or the presence of negligence, or forgetfulness. However they allege: by a unanimous resolution, it is obligatory to implement those rules and regulations, which are founded upon the ‘preponderant uncertainty’. Never the less they assert that it is impermissible to employ them for the purpose of matters relating to ’aqeedah. [9] They derive the evidence for this principle from the aayaat, which prohibit the following of uncertainty and suspicion (dthann). For example, His statement, the Most High:

‘‘While they have no knowledge therein. They follow nothing but dthann, and indeed dthann is no substitute for the truth.’’ [Sooratun-Najm 53:28]

The response to this doubt is that their allegation founded upon this verse and those similar to it is rejected. For dthann here is not the ‘preponderant uncertainty’, which they mean. Rather it is doubt, falsehood, conjecture and guesswork. Verily it is stated in an-Nihaayah and al-Lisaan, and other books of language: dthann: A doubt propounded to you in a certain matter, hence you scrutinize it and deliver a verdict upon it.

Ibn Katheer mentioned in his tafseer (explanation) of the following verse:

‘‘But they have no knowledge concerning it.’’ [Sooratun-Najm 53:28]

Meaning that they the unbelievers do not have correct knowledge to authenticate that which they say. Rather it is lies, falsehood, fabrication and heinous unbelief:

‘‘They follow nothing but dthann, and indeed dthann is no substitute for the truth.’’ [Sooratun-Najm 53:28]

Meaning, it has no weight at all, it can never establish it self upon the platform of truth. It is indeed established in the Saheeh that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) stated, ‘‘Beware of dthann. For indeed dthann (suspicion) is the most false type of speech.’’[10]

Accordingly, doubt and falsehood is deemed dthann, in a matter which Allaah the Most High dispraised and censured the Polytheists for pursuing. This assertion is corroborated by His statement, the Most High:

‘‘They follow nothing but dthann, they do nothing but utter falsehood.’’ [Sooratul-An’aam 6:116]

Accordingly, if falsehood and conjecture is dthann (the preponderant uncertainty which they allege), it is indeed impermissible to implement them in matters of rules and regulations, for these matters are not to be founded upon doubt and conjecture. [11] In relation to that which was propounded, concerning the existence of negligence or forgetfulness by the narrator. This is rebutted with that which has been stipulated in the khabarul-waahid from the premise that each narrator is sound and trustworthy. Hence, if the tradition is deemed authentic, there can be no sphere to imagine an error being committed by the narrator. In addition, by convention, a trustworthy and sound narrator is neither to be considered negligent, nor an individual who uttered a lie. Accordingly, there is no scope in which to reject his information by reason of the possibility of rationale and intellect negating that which is established by convention. Evidences to support the acceptance of the khabarul-waahid, in view of the fact that the inherent fallacy in their assertion, it is impermissible to establish matters of ’aqeedah upon the khabarul-waahid has been clarified. The various evidences which obligate the necessity of implementing them in these matters are numerous in number. They are present in both the Qur‘aan and the Sunnah. From amongst them:

[1]: ‘‘It is not proper for the believers to go out and fight all together. Of every troop amongst them, only a party should go forth, so that those who are left behind may receive instruction in religious matters. There after they may warn their people when they return to them, so they may be ware of evil.’’ [Sooratut-Tawbah 9:122]

This aayah exhorts the believers to study the Religion. A group: which is dispatched may include one individual or more. Imaam al-Bukhaaree (d.265H) – rahimahullaah – said, ‘‘A single man may be deemed a group, in accordance with His statement:

‘‘If two groups from amongst the believers start to fight, then make peace between them both.’’ [Sooratul-Hujuraat 49:9]’’ [12]

Hence, if two individuals start to fight, they are to be included in the meaning of this aayah. Accordingly, if what is communicated by a single individual, in matters pertaining to the Religion, is to be accepted, this indicates that his information is a proof. In addition, studying the religion incorporates matters of rules and beliefs. No, rather the study of beliefs is more important then the study of rules and regulations.

[2]: ‘‘O you who believe! If a wicked person comes to you with news, ascertain the truth.’’ [Sooratul-Hujuraat 49:6]

This aayah is indicative of the principle that the acceptance of information from a trustworthy individual ought to be absolute and authoritative. It is not necessary to verify that information. For that individual is not deemed to be a faasiq (wicked, mischievous individual). If the information conveyed did not constitute knowledge, the command to verify the truth would have been absolute until the information conveyed assumed the status of knowledge. [13]

[3]: ‘‘O you who Believe! Obey Allaah and obey the messenger, and those entrusted with authority amongst you. If you differ in any matter amongst yourselves, refer it to Allaah and His Messenger.’’ [Sooratun-Nisaa‘ 4:59]

Ibnul-Qayyim – rahimahullaah – said:

‘‘All the Muslims by unanimous resolution are in agreement that the act of referring to the messenger is an act of returning to him during his lifetime, and referral to the Sunnah after his death. Hence, if those traditions which are mutawaatir or aahaad do not constitute knowledge and certainty, there can be no provision for referral back to Him in this manner.’’[14]

In relation to evidences from the Sunnah: they are plentiful in number. I shall restrict myself to quote a few from amongst them:

[1]: The Prophet (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) used to send his messengers to various kings, one after another, similarly his governors were dispatched to different countries. The people sought instruction from them in all matters pertaining to regulations, both in action and in belief. He sent Aboo ’Ubaydah ’Aamir Ibnul-Jarraah (radiyallaahu ’anhu) to the people of Najraan. [15] He sent Mu’aadh ibn Jabal (radiyallaahu ’anhu) to the people of Yemen. [16] He sent Dihyah al-Kalbee (radiyallaahu ’anhu) with the Book to ’Adtheem Basrah. [17] In addition to other Companions.

[2]: It has been narrated by al-Bukhaaree, from ’Abdullaah Ibn ’Umar (radiyallaahu ’anhu), who said, ‘‘We were amongst the people of Qooba’ during the dawn prayer, when a messenger came arrived with an aayah. He said: Indeed an aayah from the Qur‘aan has been revealed to the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) during the night. He has commanded us to turn his face towards the direction of the Ka’bah, so turn your faces towards it. Their faces at that time were turned towards the direction of the Shaam. They therefore turned their faces towards the Ka’bah.’’ [18] It cannot be said: this is a ruling concerning action, for the implementation of this ruling is founded upon the authenticity of this information.

[3]: From ’Umar (radiyallaahu ’anhu), ‘‘There was a man from amongst the Ansaar, if he was absent from the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam), and I witnessed the Prophetic instruction, I would come to the man and would inform him of that which I heard from the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam). If I was absent form the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) and he witnessed the Prophetic instruction, he would come to me and inform me of that which he heard from the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam).’’ [19] Hence, this as the state of affairs amongst the Companions. It indicates that one companion was content with the information of one individual in matters pertaining to his religion. Irrespective of whether the matter concerned action or belief.

[4]: From ’Abdullaah Ibn Mas’ood (radiyallaahu ’anhu), who said: I heard the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) say, ‘‘May Allaah illuminate the face of the one who heard a hadeeth from me, and then memorized it in order that he may communicate it to others. For perhaps the informant will be more learned then the one who heard it initially.’’ [20] Similarly, this precept is not restricted to those traditions concerning actions only, excluding other matters. Rather it is general in meaning, applicable to traditions concerning action, and rulings linked to belief. If eemaan in that which is established to be authentic from him (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) in matters of belief, related by means of the khabarul-waahid is not obligatory, why was this command from the Prophet (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) relating to the conveyance of his traditions general in meaning. Rather the Messenger (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) would indeed have clarified that this principle is restricted to traditions linked to action, excluding others.

Accordingly, the statement that aahaad traditions do not establish principles of belief is an innovated statement, unprecedented, and devoid of any foundation in the Religion. Not one individual from amongst the Pious Predecessors (Salafus-Saalih) communicated this statement. Nor has it been transmitted by any individual from amongst them. Rather they did not entertain such a thought. If categorical proof was found indicating that aahaad ahaadeeth can not be employed to establish ’aqeedah, indeed the companions would have been conversant of it. Furthermore, they would have publicly declared such a matter. Similarly, those who proceeded them from amongst the Pious Predecessors would have communicated it. In addition, this innovated statement comprises of an ’aqeedah necessitating the rebuttal of hundreds of authentic ahaadeeth, established form the Prophet (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam). [21] Hence those who do not accept the Khabar al Waahid in matters of Aqeedah are obligate to reject matters of belief which are established by means of the singular tradition, from amongst them:

[1]: The superiority of our Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) over the remainder of the Prophets and Messengers.

[2]: His intercession upon the Day of Congregation.

[3]: His intercession for those who perpetrated the major sins from amongst His Ummah.

[4]: All his miracles excluding the Qur‘aan.

[5]: How creation was inaugurated, the description of the Angels and the jinn, and the descriptions of Paradise and Hell, excluding that mentioned in the Qur‘aan.

[6]: The questions of Munkar and Nakeer.

[7]: The compression and expansion of the grave upon the dead.

[8]: as-Siraat (the bridge of), al-Hawd (the pond), al-Meezaan (the balance, complete with two scales).

[9]: The belief that Allaah has decreed the happiness (destined for the paradise) or the misery (destined for the hellfire) for each individual, in addition to his sustenance, his death, during his presence in his mother’s stomach.

[10]: The unique characteristics of the Prophet (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam), collected by as- Suyootee in his book al-Khasaa‘isul-Kubraa. For example: His admittance in the Paradise during his lifetime, his vision of the inhabitants, and that which has been prepared for the Muttaqeen (the God fearing) therein. In addition to the acceptance of Islaam of his companions from amongst the jinn.

[11]: The absolute certainty that the ten who were given the glad tidings of Paradise are amongst the people of Paradise.

[12]: The finite residence of those who perpetrated the major sins in the Fire.

[13]: Eemaan in all that has been authentically narrated in the ahaadeeth pertaining to the description of the Day of Judgement, the Gathering, the Resurrection, excluding that which has been mentioned in the Qur‘aan.

[14]: Eemaan in the sum total of the Signs of the Hour. For example the appearance of the Mahdee, the descent of ’Eesaa (’alayhis-salaam), the emergence of Dajjaal, the appearance of the beast, the rising of the sun from the west and others.

Furthermore, not all the evidences employed to establish these points of ’aqeedah are authentic by means of the khabarul-waahid, which is the point of view asserted by them. For their relative proofs are not contained in aahaad ahaadeeth, rather amongst them are those precepts evidenced by virtue of mutawaatir ahaadeeth. Never the less, these rejectionists have little knowledge in relation to the proof of the khabarul-aahaad. It has caused them to reject all these points of belief. In addition to other precepts of ’aqeedah, which have arrived by means of authentic ahaadeeth. [22]

Footnotes:

[1] Sharhul-Kawkabil Muneer fee Usoolil-Fiqh (p. 350-356) of al-’Allaamah Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Ibn ’Abdul-’Azeez al-Hanbalee

[2] Fathul Baaree (13/234)

[3] Sharhul-’Aqeedatit-Tahaawiyyah (p. 399-400)

[4] Mukhtasar Sawaa’iqul-Mursalah ’alal-Jahmiyyah wal-Mu’attilah (2/350) of Ibnul-Qayyim

[5] Mukhtasar Sawaa’iq (350/2)

[6] Ittihaaful-Jamaa’ah (1/4)

[7] Majmoo’ul-Fataawaa (19/80)

[8] Mukhtasar Sawaa’iq (2/361-362)

[9] Wujoobul-Akhadh bi Hadeethil Aahaad fil-’Aqeedah war-Radd ’alaa Shubhil- Mukhaalifeen (p. 6-7) Muhammad Naasirud-Deen al-Albaanee

[10] Related by Muslim (no. 4646), and refer to Tafseer Ibn Katheer (7/434)

[11] al-’Aqeedah fillaah of ’Umar Sulaymaan al-’Ashqar (p. 48-49)

[12] Saheehul-Bukhaaree (13/231)

[13] Wujoobul-Akhadh bi Hadeethil Aahaad fil-’Aqeedah war-Radd ’alaa Shubhil- Mukhaalifeen (p. 7)

[14] Mukhtasar Sawaa‘iqul-Mursalah ’alal-Jahmiyyah wal-Mu’attilah (2/352)

[15] Related by al-Bukhaaree (13/232)

[16] Related by al-Bukhaaree (13/261)

[17] Related by al-Bukhaaree (13/241)

[18] Related by al-Bukhaaree (13/232)

[19] Related by al-Bukhaaree (13/232)

[20] Saheeh: Related by Ahmad (6/96), and Shaykh Ahmad Shaakir authenticated it and said it had been narrated through two authentic chains of narration from Imaam Ahmad.

[21] Wujoobul-Akhadh bi Hadeethil Aahaad fil-’Aqeedah war-Radd ’alaa Shubhil- Mukhaalifeen (p. 53)

[22] Wujoobul-Akhadh bi Hadeethil Aahaad fil-’Aqeedah war-Radd ’alaa Shubhil- Mukhaalifeen (p. 36-39)

Disputing with the Language of the Sacred Texts - G- Hadith Ahad and Hadith Mutawatir`

Mutawaatir: That which has been narrated by a number of people in every level of the chain such that it is impossible for all of them to make a mistake or error. Ahad is the opposite in that it contains less than 4 narrators at any given level of the isnaad. Mutawatir has more than 4 at each level. (Please note that the exact number has been differed over, but this is what I have come across in my own personal study)

The people of kalam made a distinction in that they would only accept hadith mutawatir in matters of creed (aqeedah). The following are some proofs showing that this is a faulty position.

Proofs

Allah (swt) says,

And it is not (proper) for the believers to go out to fight (Jihad) all together. Of every troop of them, a party (nafara) only should go forth, that they (who are left behind) may get instructions in (Islamic) religion, and that they may warn their people when they return to them, so that they may beware (of evil). [9:122]


Shafi’ee, Bukhari and many others said that nafara can refer to one person, or a small group.
Allah (swt) also said,

O you who believe! If a rebellious evil person comes to you with a news, verify it, lest you harm people in ignorance, and afterwards you become regretful to what you have done. [49:6]

So by this token, if a trustworthy person comes, then there is no need to verify.

The belief of not taking khabar al-ahaad led Amr bin Ubayd (a Mu’tazili) to say in regards to the hadith of qadr, “If ibn Mas’ood said it, I would call him a liar. If the Prophet(s) said it, I would reject it. If Allah said it, I would say that You did not create us for this” (a’udhubillah).


The Prophet(s) also normally sent just one person to teach people, for example Mus’ab ibn ‘Umayr to Medinah. They did not reject and ask for a mutawaatir group of people. Imam Shafi’ee also quoted the following hadith as a proof for khabarul waahid in his book ar-Risaala,

The Prophet(s) said, “May Allah brighten the face of a person who heard my speech, and then memorized it and understood it, and passed it on to others.” [Tirmidhi]

The action of the direction of the qibla changing from Jerusalem to Mecca is also a proof, as only one caller was sent out to the different Masjid announcing it and everyone accepted the command.

The early scholars also had many statements regarding this issue.

Certain Knowledge

People who deny khabar al-ahaad in matters of aqeedah argue that it does not constitute certain knowledge, and therefore cannot be acted upon. Certain knowldge and acting on knowledge are 2 different things that should not be confused. So for example, if a trustworthy person comes and says it is raining and to take an umbrella, you will act on it even though you might not be a full 100% sure of it. But you will still act on it since the person is trustworthy. If 10 people come into the room soaking wet and tell you its raining, then its ‘certain knowledge’. So whether or not khabar al-wahid gives certain knowledge or not is irrelevant in regards to acting on it.

Ibn Taymiyyah argued that khabar wahid can be certain knowledge depending on the situation, for example a distressed person saying that his father died. Also, he said that the hadith found in Bukhari and Muslim constitute certain knowledge since the ummah has agreed on them.

Miscellaneous Issues

The most important point, perhaps, is that this differentiation was unkown to the Sahabah and early generations. It was made by the latter scholars. There is also no precise demarcation between what is mutawatir vs. ahad. According to one opinion, it is to have at least 10 people in each level. As-Suyuti tried to compile the hadith fitting this condition and only came up with ~110. This shows that making this distinction basically leaves us with no religion.

Lastly, the same people who use this distinction due so out of their principles of logic and philosophy and clearly reject mutawatir narrations when it goes against their ‘philosophy’. An example of this is the hadith of nuzool which will be covered later in great detail and is a mutawatir narration mentioned by 39 Sahabah.

Disputing with the Language of the Sacred Texts - F - Affirming the Lucid and Clear Language of the Divine Texts

Simply affirming the fact that the Quran is clear is enough to refute the previous concepts discussed. It was revealed in a clear language such that the scholar and bedouin both can recite and understand it. While the scholar will obviously be able to extract much more benefit and wisdom from it, that benefit and wisdom will never contradict the basic meaning that even the bedouin would understand.

The Quran has been characterized as a maw’idha (admonishment/instruction), shifaa’ (healing), and hudaa (guidance).

O mankind, there has to come to you instruction from your Lord and healing for what is in the breasts and guidance and mercy for the believers. [10:57]

This ayah is in contrast to the peoplep of kalam who call the Quran a book of majaz. The Quran is a book of guidance, not a book of tricks and puzzling meanings.



Haa Meem. By the Book that makes things clear [43:1-2]


It is also a book sent in a clear Arabic language so that people may have taqwa.



And thus We have sent it down as a Quran in Arabic, and have explained therein in detail the warnings, in order that they may fear Allah, or that it may cause them to have a lesson from it (or to have the honour for believing and acting on its teachings). [20:113]


If the Quran was as the people of kalam claim, how could we have taqwa of Allah?

These ayaat lead to the command to ponder over the Quran, the greatest message of which is tawheed

,

And We have indeed made the Quran easy to understand and remember, then is there any that will remember (or receive admonition)? [54:17]


And,

(This is) a Book (the Quran) which We have sent down to you, full of blessings that they may ponder over its Verses, and that men of understanding may remember. [38:29]


Allah (swt) criticized those people who did not ponder over it, who did not understand it, but only listened or read

,

Do they not then think deeply in the Quran, or are their hearts locked up (from understanding it)? [47:24]



This is in sharp contrast to the people of kalam, the people of tafwid, and ta’wil, those who read without understanding,

Or do you think that most of them hear or understand? They are only like cattle; nay, they are even farther astray from the Path. (i.e. even worst than cattle). [25:44]


They are like the mushrikoon who have a barrier between themselves and the Quran,



And when you recite the Qur’an, We put between you and those who do not believe in the Hereafter a concealed partition. [17:45]


It is also a characteristic of the munafiqoon (hypocrites)


And among them, [O Mu?ammad], are those who listen to you, until when they depart from you, they say to those who were given knowledge, “What has he said just now?” Those are the ones of whom Allah has sealed over their hearts and who have followed their [own] desires. [47:16]


Those who make tafwid are basically accusing the Sahabah of this when they say that the way of the salaf was to not understand what was said!

Disputing with the Language of the Sacred Texts - E - Tafwid and its dangers

Tafwid literally means to relegate, or to entrust someone with something. It is found in the ayah, “…my affair I commit (ufawwidu) to Allah…” (40:44).

For the scholars of kalam it means to relegate the meanings of the Attributes of Allah without explaining them or discussing them. This was unknown to the early scholars and doesn’t seem to have appeared until the time of al-Shahrastani, Ghazali, and Razi (d. 547, 505, and 612AH respectively).

They made tafwid because of the false conviction that the Attributes could not be understood in a literal manner or it would lead to anthropomorphism, and the realization that the early scholars of Islam had never been exposed to the Aristotelian logic and cosmology upon which they based this conviction.
This led them to say that the earlier generations had no knowledge of the Sifaat and that they were “too pious and holy” to understand them, and thus made tafwid, whereas the ‘refined’ and ’sophisticated’ scholars of kalam came to make it more academic.

To make tafwid is to basically say the Attributes of Allah are like random letters, i.e. when Allah says He has a “yadd” (hand) He may as well just have said “Alif Laam Meem” because we don’t know what it means and we ‘relegate’ it to Allah. This is in direct contradiction to what Imam Maalik said, that isitiwaa is KNOWN but the kayf (how) is unknown. When one makes tafwid he says the meaning is also unknown. And this is what is meant by the copious narrations from the early scholars which all basically say in regards to the narrations of Allah’s Attributes, “pass them on as they have come, we believe in them, and narrate them, without any kayf.”

If Imam Maalik’s narration was in support of tafwid he would have never said istiwaa is known and the kayf is unknown. He wouldn’t need to specify the kayf if the meaning was also unknown (as is the case in tafwid).

Ibn Taymiyyah said in al-’Aql wan-Naql,

“As for tafweed, then it is known that Allah orders us to reflect over the Quran and encourages us to understand it and use our intellects, so then how can it be possible that we are expected to turn away from its understanding, to turn away from knowing anything about it? ….

And it is known that this is an insult to the Quran and to the Prophets, since Allah sent down the Quran and informed us that he made it as guidance and clarification for the people, and He ordered the Messenger to convey it clearly and to clarify to the people what has been sent down to them. He also ordered the people to reflect over the Quran and understand it. Having said all of this, then the most virtuous of what is in it is what He informed us of regarding His Attributes. To say that the meanings are not known and cannot be understood or reflected over, and that the Messenger (saw) did not clarify to the people what was sent down to them, nor did he convey it clearly, this would allow any infidel or innovator to say that the truth of the affair is what he knows from his own opinion or intellect, as the texts could not contradict that since they are all similarly problematic in that they cannot be understood by anyone, and thus, no one can use them as evidences! This kind of speech would mean the absence of any possible guidance and clarification from the prophets…[and that] they did not know what they were saying themselves… All of this shows clearly that the position of the people of tafweed, that believe they are following the Sunnah and the Salaf (Pious Predecessors), is from the most evil statements of the people of innovation and ilhaad.”

From the dangers of tafwid is first impugning Allah’s Wisdom. This is because they say Allah actually meant something else, i.e. He is speaking in a language everyone understann’t mean what He said. This casts doubts upon the Quran because if it speaks metaphorically about Allah, then what about everything else in it?

Tafwid is also a form of pure ta’til (negation or denial) because it strips Allah(swt) of all of His Attributes.

It also necessitates saying that the Prophet(saw) did not know the meanings and fell short in delivering the message. Did he not know? Did the Sahaba just ignore them? If he (saw) did not know, the people of tafwid essentially claim to know more then him(saw), and if he knew but did not say, then they accuse him (saw) of not conveying the message.

It is extremely disrespectful to the early generations of Muslim, especially the Sahabah. They were there when the Quran was being revealed, and if the issue was unclear, they would have asked. By accusing them of having a “blank mind” on the issue (as the people who make tafwid do) then it would mean that they did not care about Allah(swt)!

The methodology of tafwid is in clear contradiction to all the principles established regarding how to approach the sacred texts.

Aqeedah 102 - Disputing with the Language of the Sacred Texts - D - Explanation of the Use of Majaz (Metaphors) in the Quran – Haitham Hamdan

We need to differentiate between two things:

1) Metaphoric words (Majaaz).
2) Metaphoric sentences (Not Majaaz).

Metaphoric Sentences:

For example, when we say: “Zaid is a fox”, we do not mean: Zaid is an actual fox, the animal. From the context we understand that we are only giving a metaphor of how cunning Zaid is.

This is a metaphoric sentence. This exists in the Quran in abundance. For example:

“And, out of kindness, lower to them (your parents) the wing of humility …”.

Obviously, humility does not have a wing to lower. But from the context we understand: be kind to your parents, etc.

This is not Majaaz. It is not the point of dispute between people of Sunnah and people of Bid’ah.

Metaphoric words (Majaaz):

Again, when we say: “Zaid is a fox”, notice that the word fox does not mean anything other than: fox; the animal. The word fox does not mean cunning in itself. The entire sentence means: Zaid is cunning. But the word fox still means: fox; the animal.

In the example of: “lower the wing of humility”, we see that the word “wing” does not mean anything other than the well known wing, (as in a bird’s wing).

What people of Bid’ah say is that the words themselves have an apparent meaning, and a different hidden meaning (Majazy meaning). This is to help them in saying things such as “Yad” means: ability, self … etc.

Ahlus-Sunnah disagrees; words can only have one meaning dictated by the context.

Wallhu A’lam.

(From Multaqa Ahl al-Hadeeth)

Disputing with the Language of the Sacred Texts - C - Problem of ta’wil (and majazi and haqiqi)

To say we need to make ta’wil implies tat Allah spoke incorrectly regarding the most noble matter. Also when one does ta’wil it opens the door to doing the same thing to other ayaat. There is no evidence to indicate we should make ta’wil or make it only in regards to Allah’s Attributes, as groups of kalam have done. In fact, it is what causes some people like the Agakhanis to make Hajj into a metaphor of just seeing Agakhan with the naked eye!

An example of ta’wil also is people who come and try to claim that istiwaa has 15 meanings and only Allah knows which one it really is. This is refuted by the athar of Imam Maalik (refer here).

Also related to this is the issue of majaz. Some later scholars made a categorization (that was later propagated heavily by the Mu’tazilah) of majaaz (metaphorical) and haqiqi (literal). This was a categorization unknown to early scholars and rejected by some later ones as well, such as ibn Taymiyyah and ibn al-Qayyim. No famous scholar of the Arabic language ever mentioned it either.

One thing to note about ibn Taymiyyah’s opinion is that he contextualized things to show the primary meaning. For example, if someone says “Abdullah was a lion on the battlefield” it is automatically known that this means bravery and not a physical reincarnation of a lion. Thus, ibn Taymiyyah would argue, this is in fact the haqiqi meaning even though technically it may be a ‘metaphor’.

The importance of this, is that groups of kalam would claim the Attributes of Allah were majazi. This is problematic for quite a few reasons. First is that they verses are taken to be haqiqi unless there is evidence indicating otherwise. It is quite inappropriate to claim that the ayaat revealed by Allah establishing the fundamental concepts of tawheed are all somehow metaphorical and detached from their apparent meanings.

If someone wants to interpret them differently, then they must bring proof showing the validity of the interpretation. Also, when one combines all the ayaat and narrations regarding the Attributes, etc. it becomes clear that the haqiqi meaning was intended. A good example of this is looking at all the narrations of the ‘Arsh (i.e. the hadith indicating there are Angels holding it, that it was above water, etc.).

If someone makes the fundamentals like tawheed open to metaphorical interpretation, what then about things like fiqh?

Even if majaz was true, it must still rest upon something that is known, and not unknown. For example, when you say so and so was a lion on the battlefield, it is known what is being referred to. But there can never be an analogy for Allah’s Attributes, and this is what the people who make ta’wil will fall into.
One of the ways majaz is defined is something that can be negated. For example, you can say Abdullah wasn’t a lion, but he was brave.

There is no clear way to differentiate haqiqi and majazi when it comes to the unseen when this methodology is employed. If Allah’s Attributes can be made metaphorical, then what about Jannah? Is it metaphorical as well? Unfortunately, some people even claimed later that Jannah is simply a state of mind.

Finally, all the early scholars of Islam were of the opinion that Allah’s Attributes are understood at face value, and are affirmed as Allah Himself affirmed them, but that they do not resemble at all the attributes of the creation.

Ibn Abdul-Barr (d. 463AH), a famous Maliki scholar, said that there is ijmaa (unanimous consensus) on this issue,

The Ahlus Sunnah have unanimously agreed in affirming those Attributes (of Allah) that are found in the Quran or Sunnah, and believing in them as haqiqi, not as majazi, except that they do not explain the ‘howness’ (kayfiyyah) of these Attributes, nor do they limit them to a particular manner. As for the people of innovations, from the Jahmiyyah, and the Mu’tazilah, and the Khawarij, then they deny these Attributes, and they do not understand them in a haqiqi manner…” [Majmoo’ al-Fatawa v. 5 p. 198]

In summary, the people of kalam approached the Quran with preconceived notions, and tried to twist the ayaat to fit those notions.

This also relates back to the muhkam and mutashabih, in that we affirm the meaning, and this is muhkam, but the ‘howness’ of the Attributes is mutashabih.

Disputing with the Language of the Sacred Texts -B - Tafseer of Muhkam and Mutashabih

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “It is He Who has sent down to you (Muhammad) the Book (this Qur’aan). In it are Verses that are entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book [and those are the Verses of Al-Ahkaam (commandments), Al-Faraa'id (obligatory duties) and Al-Hudood (laws for the punishment of thieves, adulterers)]; and others not entirely clear. So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking Al-Fitnah (polytheism and trials), and seeking for its hidden meanings, but none knows its hidden meanings save Allaah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord.” And none receive admonition except men of understanding”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:7]

What is meant is that the Qur’aan contains verses that are entirely clear and verses that are not entirely clear. The entirely clear verses (muhkam) are those which are clear and concerning which there is no confusion; this applies to most of the verses of the Qur’aan. These verses are the “foundations of the Book”. As for the verses which are not entirely clear (mutashaabih) these are verses which may not be clear to some people, in exclusion to others. The scholars know them but the ignorant do not, and there are some which only Allaah knows.

Those who follow the truth refer the verses which are not entirely clear to the verses which are entirely clear, whereas those who follow deviation follow the verses which are not entirely clear, and they use the verses which are not entirely clear to contradict the verses which are entirely clear, for the purpose of creating confusion, distorting and misleading.

Ibn Katheer(may Allah have mercy on him) said in his Tafser(2/6) : Allah tells us that in the Qu'raan there are verses which are entirely clear, which are the foundation of the Book,ie., they are clear in meaning, with no confusion for anyone; and there are other verses which are not entirely clear as to what they mean for many or some people. The one who refers that which is unclear to him to that which is clear, and uses the clear verses to understand what is not clear to him, will be guided. But the one who does the opposite will be misguided. Hence Allaah says: “It is He Who has sent down to you (Muhammad) the Book (this Qur’aan). In it are Verses that are entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book” i.e., they are the root to which reference should be made in the event of confusion; “and others not entirely clear” i.e., they could be interpreted in accordance with those that are entirely clear or they could be interpreted in some other way, based on the wording and the way they are written, not according to the meaning.

“So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation”, i.e., misguidance, and ignoring the truth in favour of falsehood, “they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof” i.e., they interpret that which is not entirely clear in such a way that allows them to distort it to suit their corrupt aims, because the wording could be interpreted in the way they want. But in the case of the verses which are entirely clear, they have no chance of doing that, so that is clear proof against them. Hence Allaah says: “seeking Al-Fitnah (polytheism and trials)” i.e., to misguide their followers and give them the impression that they are using evidence from the Qur’aan to support their bid’ah (innovation). This is evidence against them, not for them. It is similar to when the Christians argue that the Qur’aan says that ‘Eesa (Jesus) is a Spirit from God and His Word that He bestowed upon Maryam (Mary), but they ignore the verses in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“He [‘Eesa (Jesus)] was not more than a slave. We granted Our Favour to him …”

[al-Zukhruf 43:59]

“Verily, the likeness of ‘Eesa (Jesus) before Allaah is the likeness of Adam. He created him from dust, then (He) said to him: ‘Be!’ – and he was”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:59]

– and other clear verses which unambiguously show that he was one of the creatures created by Allaah, and a slave of Allaah, and one of the Messengers of Allaah.

And the words “and seeking for its hidden meanings” mean, they distort it as they wish.

End quote.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

Allaah, may He be blessed and exalted, has divided the Holy Qur’aan into two categories: the verses which are entirely clear and those which are not entirely clear. What is meant by those which are entirely clear is that the meaning is clear and obvious to everyone, like the heavens and earth, stars, mountains, trees, animals and so on. This is entirely clear because there is no ambiguity in its meaning. The verses which are not entirely clear are those of which the meaning is ambiguous or unknown to most people, and is known only to those who are well-versed in knowledge, such as some verses which are general in meaning and do not give details, but they are explained in detail in the Sunnah. An example is the verse in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And perform As-Salaah [prayer]”

[al-Baqarah 2:43]

.

How prayer is to be performed is not known from this verse; all that is known from it is that it is obligatory to perform prayer. But how that is to be done is known from other evidence. The wisdom behind the fact that the Qur’aan was revealed with verses of these two types is that this is a test, because those in whose hearts is deviation will follow that which is not entirely clear and will thus remain confused. But those who are well-versed in knowledge believe in all of it, both that which is not entirely clear and that which is entirely clear; they know that it is from Allaah and that there is no contradiction in it. An example of verses that are not entirely clear are the verses in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“There will then be (left) no Fitnah (excuses or statements or arguments) for them but to say: ‘By Allaah, our Lord, we were not those who joined others in worship with Allaah’”

[al-An'aam 6:23].

“On that day those who disbelieved and disobeyed the Messenger (Muhammad) will wish that they were buried in the earth, but they will never be able to hide a single fact from Allaah”

[al-Nisa' 4:42]

Someone may come along and say that they contradict one another. How can they say “By Allaah, our Lord, we were not those who joined others in worship with Allaah”, then it is said of them that “they will never be able to hide a single fact from Allaah”? They quote the verses against one another in order to confuse people. But those who are well-versed in knowledge say: It is all from Allaah and there is no contradiction in the words of Allaah. They said: The Day of Resurrection will be as long as fifty thousand years, and things will change throughout that Day. The first verse is applicable to one stage and the second verse is applicable to another.

End quote from Fataawa Noor ‘ala al-Darb.

And he also said: As for the people of misguidance and deviance, they followed the verses which are not entirely clear and made them a cause to create doubt and suspicion, so they were misguided and misguided others. They imagined, on the basis of verses that are not entirely clear, something that is not befitting to Allaah or His Book or His Messenger.

An example of the first is the verses in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “Verily, We give life to the dead” [Yaa-Seen 36:12] and “Verily, We, it is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur’aan) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption)” [al-Hijr 15:9] – and other verses in which Allaah attributes something to Himself using the plural pronoun (We). The Christians followed that which is not entirely clear and claimed a plurality of gods, saying that Allaah is the third of three, and they ignored that which is entirely clear and indicates that Allaah is One.

But those who are well-versed in knowledge interpreted the plural pronoun as being in terms of respect for the numerous attributes of Allaah and their greatness. They referred the verses that are not entirely clear to that which is entirely clear (interpretation of the meaning): “And your Ilaah (God) is One Ilaah (God – Allaah), Laa Ilaaha illa Huwa (there is none who has the right to be worshipped but He)” [al-Baqarah 2:163]. So they say to the Christians: The claim you make is because of the confusion that you have, so Allaah has deemed you to be kaafirs (disbelievers) and has rejected your claim when you said that. Listen to the verse in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “Surely, disbelievers are those who said: “Allaah is the third of the three (in a Trinity).” But there is no Ilaah (god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilaah (God -Allaah)” [al-Maa'idah 5:73] i.e., they disbelieved when they said that God is the third of three.

An example of the second is the verses in which Allaah says to His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) (interpretation of the meaning):

“Verily, you (O Muhammad) guide not whom you like”

[al-Qasas 28:56].

And

“And verily, you (O Muhammad) are indeed guiding (mankind) to the Straight Path (i.e. Allaah’s religion of Islamic Monotheism)”

[al-Shoora 42:52].

In these two verses there is an imagined contradiction, so the one who has deviation in his heart may think that they contradict one another, because in the first verse there is a negation and in the second there is an affirmation. So he thinks that there is a contradiction in the Qur’aan.

But those who are well-versed in knowledge say that there is no contradiction between these two verses, because what is meant by guidance in the first verse is guidance by means of divine help or inspiration, which no one has control over except Allaah alone; neither the Messenger nor anyone else has any power over that. And what is meant by guidance in the second verse is guidance on the basis of evidence and proof, which may come from Allaah or from others, so it may come from the Messengers and their heirs, meaning the sincere scholars.

End quote from Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (4/186).

These are all examples of relative ambiguity which some people may not be able to understand, but those who are well-versed in knowledge understand it. As for the verses which are not entirely clear and which no one knows except Allaah, these have to do with matters such as the essence and nature of Allaah’s attributes, or the essence of what is with Allaah of the delight of the people of Paradise and the torment for those who disobey Him. All of that is known to no one except Allaah.

Secondly:

Whoever is confused about any of the verses which are not entirely clear should try to understand it in the light of that which is entirely clear, if he is a scholar who is able to use evidence in order to reach conclusions. Otherwise he should ask the scholars, as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“So ask of those who know the Scripture, if you know not”

[al-Nahl 16:43].

Whatever the case, let him say (interpretation of the meaning): “We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:7].

Some of the heretics and deviants, in the past and in modern times, tried to seek out everything in the Qur’aan and Sunnah that is not entirely clear (al-mutashaabih), for the purpose of creating confusion and doubt.. But the scholars rose to this challenge and wrote beneficial books which refute these doubts. An example of that is the book which was written by Ibn Qutaybah (may Allaah have mercy on him), entitled Ta’weel Mukhtalif al-Hadeeth; and the book by Shaykh al-Ameen al-Shanqeeti (may Allaah have mercy on him) entitled Daf’ Eehaam al-Idtiraab ‘an Aayi’l-Kitaab.

Praise be to Allaah, there is no contradiction between the verses of the Qur’aan, or between the Sunnah and the Qur’aan, because it is all from Allaah, and Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Do they not then consider the Qur’aan carefully? Had it been from other than Allaah, they would surely, have found therein many a contradiction”

[al-Nisa' 4:82].

We ask Allaah to guide us and you and to grant us all beneficial knowledge and enable us all to do righteous deeds.

And Allaah knows best.

(Islam Q&A)

Disputing with the Language of the Sacred Texts - A - The issue of mutashabih

It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise (muhkam) – they are the foundation of the Book – clearand others not as clear (mutashabih). As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation (ta’wil) except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, “We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord.” And no one will be reminded except those of understanding. [3:7]

Muhkam linguistically means to prevent or obstruct. In context of the ayaat of Quran it means an ayah clear in meaning, and not open to interpretation. An example of this is the verses pertaining to inheritance. They are explicit.

Mutashabih means to resemble or be similar to. In this context it is verses that can have more than one meaning and thus be misinterpreted if misunderstood. It does not, however, mean allegorical as some translations say.

All scholars of the Quran have stated that the mutashabih verses must be understood in light of the muhkam ones.

Allah (swt) divides the Quran into 2 categories. People with a disease in their hearts will be able to misinterpret the mutashabih ayaat.

An example of this is the Qadiyanis who claim that there is a prophet after Rasoolullah(saw) by twisting the ayah,

And for every Ummah (a community or a nation), there is a Messenger [10:47]

The response to this is to look at this ayah in terms of the muhkam ayaat in this regard, for example,

Muhammad (SAW) is not the father of any man among you, but he is the Messenger of Allah and the last (end) of the Prophets [33:40]

The main point to remember is that the mutashabih ayaat are not neglected, rather, they are understood in light of the muhkam ones. The common error of all groups of kalam was to claim that all the Attributes of Allah were mutashabih.

This led to what is known as ta’wil. Linguistically it has 3 meanings, 2 of which are used by the Quran and classical Arabic grammarians, and one added by later scholars of kalam.
Interpretation (tafseer)
Actualization
To strip a word of its primary meaning, and understand it in light of a secondary, or even unknown, meaning. This meaning was unknown to early scholars.

The ayah (3:7) can be read in 2 ways. The first is to stop here, “…and no one knows its ta’wil except for Allah. And those grounded in knowledge say….” This is how ibn Mas’ood and Ubay bin Ka’b would recite it. The second is to read it, “…and no one knows its ta’wil except for Allah and those grounded in knowledge. [They] say….” and this was the recitation of ibn Abbas.

The recitation of ibn Abbas goes back to interpretation (tafseer) and the reading of ibn Mas’ood is of actualization. One of the proofs of this is ibn Abbas saying that I am of the people of knowledge and know the ta’wil.

Since the groups of kalam claim that Allah’s Attributes are mutashabih they claim that we must make ta’wil of them. So for example they will say the Hand of Allah means His Power.