TwelverShia.net Forum

Was Ibn Taymiyyah a Anthropomorphist?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Abu Jasim Al-Salafi

  • *
  • Total likes: 47
  • +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • May Allah guide the Shi'a to the truth
    • مدونة الحق الإسلامي
  • Religion: Sunni
Was Ibn Taymiyyah a Anthropomorphist?
« on: July 24, 2016, 06:13:47 AM »
Was Ibn Taymiyyah a anthropomorphist?

(note: Question & answer have been shortened, to read the full question & answer please see link at the bottom of article)

Q) I have read that he deviated from the correct aqeedah and was a anthropomorphist.

A)What is mentioned in the question about Shaykh al-Islam having deviated from sound ‘aqeedah and ascribed to Allaah, may He be exalted, the attributes of His creation, is an utter fabrication and a blatant lie against Shaykh al-Islam and his methodology and ‘aqeedah. Anyone who reads any of his major or minor books will realize that. Among these texts and rules which it would be too difficult to refer to all of them, let alone quote them, are his words:

The early generation of this ummah and its imams are unanimously agreed that there is nothing like unto Allaah, either in His essence or His attributes or His actions. One of the imams said: Whoever likens Allaah to His creation is a kaafir, and whoever denies that which Allaah has ascribed to Himself is a kaafir; there is nothing like unto that which Allaah has ascribed to Himself or His Messenger has ascribed to Him. End quote.

Fataawa Shaykh al-Islam (2/126).

And he (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

The comprehensive statement concerning all of this matter is that Allaah is to be described as He has described Himself or His Messenger has described Him, and as the early generation have described Him, and we are not to go beyond what the Qur’aan and hadeeth say.

Imam Ahmad (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: Allaah is not to be described except as He has described Himself or His Messenger has described Him, and one is not to go beyond the Qur’aan and hadeeth.

The approach of the salaf was to describe Allaah as He described Himself and as His Messenger described Him, without distorting or denying, and without asking how or likening Him to His creation. We know that what Allaah has ascribed to Himself is true, and there is nothing mysterious or puzzling in it, rather its meaning is to be understood as the One Who said it meant it to be understood, especially when the one who said it is more knowledgeable of what he says than all other people and the most eloquent and most able to explain what he wanted to explain, and the most fluent in explaining, defining and guiding.

In addition to all of this, there is nothing like unto Allaah, either in His holy essence or His names and attributes or actions. We believe firmly that He has a real essence and that He has real actions, and real attributes. There is nothing like unto Him, in his essence, attributes or actions. If there is anything that implies shortcomings or that He has a beginning, He is far above that in a real sense, and He is to be thought of as perfect in such a way that there is no perfection above it. He has no beginning and He cannot have been created, because there was never a time when He did not exist. For anything to be created implies that there was a time when it did not exist, and that creation would require a creator, but He has always existed from eternity.

The view of the salaf is one of moderation, neither denying the divine attributes nor likening Allaah to His creation. They do not liken the attributes of Allaah to the attributes of His creation, as they do not liken His essence to the essence of His creation. They do not deny that which He ascribes to Himself or that His Messenger ascribes to Him, which leads to denying His beautiful names and sublime attributes, and to displacing words from (their) right places (cf. al-Nisa’ 4:46) and turning away from (Fussilat 41:40) the names and signs of Allaah.

Both those who deny Allaah’s attributes and those who liken Him to His creation are guilty of both errors. Those who deny His attributes failed to understand the names and attributes of Allaah except in a manner that is befitting to created beings, so they denied these concepts and thus they have combined both errors; first of all they likened Him to His creation, then they denied His attributes as a result. That is likening the names and attributes to what may be understood from the names and attributes of His creation, then they denied the attributes that He deserves to have that are befitting to Allaah, may He be glorified and exalted.

Fataawa Shaykh al-Islam (5/26-27)

The texts of Shaykh al-Islam concerning this issue are very many, as we have indicated, but what we have quoted is sufficient, in sha Allaah.

And Allaah is the Source of strength.


Click link to read the full question & answer: http://islamqa.com/en/ref/96323/
May Allah guide the Shi'a to the truth. Ameen.

Student of Comparative Religion - Refuter of allegations made against Islam by Christians and Atheists.

أبو ماريا المرزم

  • ***
  • Total likes: 15
  • +0/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • Allah grant the Rafidah their seat in Jahannam
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Was Ibn Taymiyyah a Anthropomorphist?
« Reply #1 on: July 24, 2016, 08:14:23 AM »
May Allah bless you akhi. Alhamdulilah it's nice to see fellow salafis in refuting the Rafidah
They asked how many will be with the one I hate. I said 313

Abu Jasim Al-Salafi

  • *
  • Total likes: 47
  • +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • May Allah guide the Shi'a to the truth
    • مدونة الحق الإسلامي
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Was Ibn Taymiyyah a Anthropomorphist?
« Reply #2 on: July 24, 2016, 08:24:40 AM »
May Allah bless you akhi. Alhamdulilah it's nice to see fellow salafis in refuting the Rafidah

May Allah keep us on the straight path. Ameen.
May Allah guide the Shi'a to the truth. Ameen.

Student of Comparative Religion - Refuter of allegations made against Islam by Christians and Atheists.

taha taha

Re: Was Ibn Taymiyyah a Anthropomorphist?
« Reply #3 on: July 24, 2016, 01:02:37 PM »
Related topic
Taken from Belief in Allah (Islamic Creed Series Vol. 1), pp. 368-382...
http://carryonummah.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/taken-from-belief-in-allah-islamic.html


There are a number of important principles and main points to which the scholars draw attention to, we would like to quote in brief below.


The First Principle: What is said about some Attributes applies to all other Attributes too 128


By means of this principle, the view of many groups may be refuted:


a) Those who affirm some attributes and deny others.

They affirm that Allah has life, knowledge, power, hearing, seeing, speech and a will. They regard these as true attributes. But they dispute concerning Allah's love, pleasure, anger and hatred, and regard them as metaphorical, or they interpret them as being aspects of His will, or as blessings and punishments.

It should be said to these people: there is no difference between what you affirm and what you deny; what is said concerning one of them also applies to the others. If you say that His life and knowledge are like the life and knowledge of His created beings, then you must say the same about His pleasure, love and anger.

If you say that He has life, knowledge and a will in a manner that befits Him and that do not resemble the lives, knowledge and wills of His created beings, then you must also say the same with regard to His pleasure, love and anger.

If you say that anger means that the blood in the heart is boiling with the desire for revenge, it must also be said that the will is the heart's desire to get something good or ward off something bad. If you say that this is the will of the created being, we say that this is the anger of the created being.

b) Those who affirm the Names but deny the Attributes

They say that He, is alive without life, All-Knowing without knowledge, and so on.

It should be said to these people, there is no difference between affirming His Names and affirming His Attributes. If you say that affirming life, knowledge and power implies likening Allah to His creation (tashbeeh) or thinking of Him in physical terms (tajseem) because we do not find anything that has attributes that is not physical - we say in response: the same applies to His Names, for we do not find anything that is called alive, knowledgeable or powerful, but it is physical. If this is the case, then you should deny the names of Allah too. If they say that these names befit His Perfection and Majesty, we say, the same applies to His Attributes.

c) Those who deny both the Names and the Attributes

They claim that they deny them so that they will not liken Allah to His creation. It should be said to them: you deny His knowledge and l life just as you deny that He is All-Knowing and Alive, for fear of likening Him to His created beings, but the implication of your ideas t is that you are thinking of Allah in terms of non-existence.


The Second Principle: 129 Speaking about the Attributes is like speaking about the Essence of Allah


Allah has an Essence, which does not resemble the essences of His created beings. By the same token, His attributes and actions do not resemble the essence and actions of His created beings.

Therefore, if someone affirms that Allah is a proven reality, with the attributes of perfection which are unmatched by anything else, then he should accept that His hearing, seeing and speech which are also proven to be real, do not resemble the hearing, seeing and speech of His created beings.

If someone were to say: I deny that Allah rose over His Throne, for fear of likening Allah to His created beings, it should be said to him, Deny the existence and essence of Allah then, because they also imply likening Allah to His created beings. If he says, Allah exists in a unique manner, and He has a unique Essence that does not resemble the essence of His created beings, then we say: the same applies to His descending and His rising above His Throne (istiwaa).

The Third Principle: The Fact that names may be the same does not imply that the things so named are the same


We know that what Allah has told us about the milk, honey and wine in Paradise is true, that these are real things, which happen to have the same names as things that exist in this world, but they are not like them. The difference between them and their earthly counterparts is known only to Allah. The difference between the Creator and His created beings is far greater than the difference between one created thing and another. Indeed, in this world a number of things may be given the same name, but each of them has its own nature. We may say for example, the leg of a camel, the leg of a journey and the leg of a man; the leg in each of these three phrases has its own meaning.


The Fourth Principle: Allah cannot be described only in terms of negation


Allah has affirmed certain Names and Attributes for Himself, and has denied certain names and attributes for Himself.

This affirmation and denial of names and attributes is both general and specific. The general affirmation occurs in the context of general praise ascribed to Allah, as indicated in the aayaat:


All the praises and thanks be to Allah, the Lord of the 'Aalameen mankind, jinn and all that exists]. (Qur 'an 1: 2)


...And for Allah is the highest description..) (Qur 'an 16: 60)


The detailed affirmation deals with every name or attribute narrated in the Qur'an and Sunnah.

The general negation denies every fault or shortcoming that could detract from the perfection of Allah, as when He says:


...There is nothing like Him;..) (Qur 'an 42: 11)

...Do you know of any who is similar to Him? (Qur'an 19: 65)


The specific negation means declaring that Allah is far above each and every one of these faults and shortcomings. So Allah should be declared to be above having a father, a son, a partner, a wife or a rival, and above being ignorant, slumbering, sleeping, doing things for no purpose, etc.

But the Qur'anic method of negating is not to deny anything in absolute terms. So the Qur'an does not deny that Allah has any shortcomings except in the context of praising Him and mentioning His perfection. It does not deny anything absolutely as some of these groups do. 13O

Allah says:



Allah! Laa ilaaha illa Huwa [none has the right to be worshipped but He], Al-lfayyul-Qayyoom [the Ever Living, the One Who sustains and protects all that exists]. Neither slumber nor sleep overtakes Him. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. Who is he that can intercede with Him except with His Permission? He knows what happens to them [His creatures] in this world, and what will happen to them in the Hereafter. And they will never compass anything of His Knowledge except that which He wills. His Kursiy extends over the heavens and the earth, and He feels no fatigue in guarding and preserving them... (Qur'an 2: 255)

Here Allah denies that He slumbers or sleeps, but the denial of these two implies the affirmation of His life and self-sustainment.
One aspect of the perfect nature of His life is that He is not overtaken by slumber (which is the beginning of sleep) or sleep. The phrase LAnd He feels no fatigue in guarding and preserving them...' (Qur'an 2: 255) implies the perfection of His power, for the meaning is that it does not tire Him out or weigh Him down.

A similar example is the aayah:


...Not even the weight of an atom [or a small ant] or less than that or greater escapes His Knowledge in the heavens or in the earth...' (Qur'an 34: 3).

The denial that anything may escape His knowledge implies that He, the Exalted, All-Knower, knows every atom (or small ant) in the heavens and on earth.

And Allah, says:


And indeed We created the heavens and the earth and all between them in six Days and nothing of fatigue touched Us.) (Qur'an 50: 38).


Denying fatigue (which is tiredness and exhaustion) points to the completeness of His power and strength.


Allah says:


(No vision can grasp Him,...) (Qur 'an 6: 103)


- means, no vision can encompass Him. Even though He will be seen in the Hereafter, because of His greatness, no vision will encompass Him.

Similarly, each time Allah denies something, it implies a positive attribute for which Allah is to be praised.

Allah does not describe Himself in terms of absolute denial, unless it highlights a positive attribute. Thus it becomes clear that those who tend to engage in excessive denial (or what they call negation) are mistaken, because negation does not imply praise or perfection unless it implies a positive affirmation. Absolute denial is absolute nothingness, and absolute nothingness is nothing.

Most of the innovators who deny in absolute terms say: "Allah does not speak, He does not see, He is not high above the universe." Some of them go to extremes and say: "He is neither within the universe nor outside it; He is neither separate from it nor joined to it," and other such nonsense which makes Allah as if He is nothing - Exalted and Glorified be He.


The Fifth Principle: Words which may be true or false


The attributes narrated in the Qur'an and Sunnah are true, and we are obliged to believe in them, even if we do not understand their meaning.

But the things that people say about Allah, not narrated in the Qur'an or Sunnah, and which people dispute about - we neither affirm them nor deny them until we know what the person saying them means.

For example, it may be said to the one who denies that Allah has direction, "What do you mean by direction? If you mean that Allah is within the physical confines of the heaven, and that the heaven contains Him, then it is not permissible for us to say that Allah is in a certain direction. But if you mean that Allah is above His creation and above the heavens, then this is true."


The Sixth Principle: Denial of Attributes caused primarily by anthropomorphic beliefs (Tashbeeh)


The principle is explained by Shaykh Muhammad al-Ameen ash Shanqeeti (may Allah have mercy on him), who pointed out that the origin of this problem was the fact that hearts are contaminated with the filth of tashbeeh. So when a person whose heart is thus contaminated with the filth of tashbeeh hears of one of the attributes of perfection by which Allah praises Himself, such as His descent to the first heaven during the last third of the night, or His rising over His throne, or His coming on the Day of Resurrection, and other attributes of Majesty and perfection, the first thing that crosses his mind is that this attribute resembles an attribute of created beings. So his heart is contaminated with the filth of tashbeeh, and he does not estimate Allah with an estimation due to Him or venerate Allah as He should be venerated, because the first thing that crosses his mind is that the attribute of the Creator resembles the attribute of His created beings. So first of all his heart is contaminated with the filth of tashbeeh, and this evil tashbeeh leads him to deny the attribute of the Creator on the basis that it resembles the attributes of His created beings. So he starts with tashbeeh (anthropomorphism) and ends up with ta'teel (denying the divine attributes altogether), but from the beginning to the end he is insulting the Lord of the Worlds, denying His attributes by claiming that these attributes do not befit Him.

The Shaykh mentioned a principle of usool upon which the scholars are unanimously agreed. It was not permissible for the Prophet to delay teaching anything once it was needed, especially in the case of 'aqeedah (creed - matters of belief). If we were to go along with their false argument, that the apparent meaning of the aayaat is kufr (disbelief), we should note that the Prophet did not interpret istiwaa as meaning controlling or any of these other interpretations.

Had these aayaat meant what these interpretations say, the Prophet would have hastened to explain that, because it was not permitted for him to delay explaining things when needed.

The Shaykh explained that what the Muslim is obliged to do, when he hears of an attribute which the Creator of the heavens and the earth ascribed to Himself, or which His Messenger attributed to Him, is to fill his heart with glorification of Allah and be certain that this attribute has reached the utmost in perfection, majesty, honour and highness, in such a manner as to cut off any possible thoughts of tashbeeh (anthropomorphism) or resemblance between this attribute and the attributes of His creation. Thus (the believer's) heart glorifies Allah and declares Him to be far above such resemblance, uncontaminated with the filth of tashbeeh. Thus his heart will be receptive to faith and belief in the attributes of Allah with which He is to be praised and with which His Prophet praised Him, as Allah says:



(... There is nothing like Him and He is tile All-Hearer,
the All-Seer ({Qur an 42:11) 1


The worst thing is not to glorify Allah, when the first thing that crosses a person's mind is that the attribute of the Creator resembles the attributes of the created being, so that this poor soul is forced to deny the attribute of the Creator on the grounds of this false claim.


The Seventh Principle: The Aayaat (Verses) which speak of the Divine Attributes are not ambiguous


Shaykh Ash-Shanqeeti stated that many people describe the aayaat, which speak of the divine attributes as being ambiguous aayaat (mutashaabih). In one way this is a mistake, and in another way it could be acceptable, as Imam Maalik ibn Anas said: "Istiwaa is not unknown, how is not understandable, asking about it is bid 'ah and believing in it is obligatory."

Likewise, it may be said about Allah's descent (to the first heaven during the last third of the night): The descent is not unknown, how is not understandable, asking about it is bid 'ah and believing in it is obligatory. The same applies to all the attributes, because these attributes are known to the Arabs, but in the case of the Creator of the heavens and the earth, they are too perfect, too majestic and too great to resemble any of the attributes of the created beings. Just as the essence of the Creator is real, so too the created beings have their essences, but the essence of the Creator is too perfect and too great to resemble the essences of His creatures in any way.


The Eighth Principle: The Apparent meaning of the Attributes does not imply Tashbeeh so there is no need to find a different interpretation


The guideline in the field of usool is that if a word has only one possible meaning, then it is called nass (a statement), such as the aayah (verse),


...Making ten days in all..) (Qur'an 2: 196).


If there are two or more possible meanings, then one of the two possibilities is more apparent than the other, or both are equally apparent.

If both are equally possible then it is called mujmal (general, not specific). An example would be the phrase 'adaa al-lasoos al-baarihah 'ala 'ayn Zayd (yesterday the thieves attacked the 'ayn of Zayd). The word 'ayn' could mean the eye of Zayd, which they blinded; or it may mean his spring, which they dammed; or it may mean his gold and silver, which they stole. This is an example of mujmal (general meaning). The ruling concerning mujmal words or phrases is that we should refrain from interpreting it in a particular way unless there is evidence to specify what is meant.

But if the text is clear and unambiguous, then we should follow it and not turn away from it unless there is proof that it has been abrogated.

If one of the two possible meanings is more apparent, this is called Az-Zaahir (the apparent), and its counterpart is called muhtamal marjooh (unlikely, possibility). The apparent meaning is the one which should be followed, unless there is evidence to divert us from it. For example, if you say 'ra 'aytu asadan,' the apparent meaning is a savage animal (I saw a lion), but it may refer to a courageous man.

So when we read the aayaat which speak of the attributes of Allah, such as ...The Hand of Allah is over their hands...(Qur 'an 48: 10) and other similar aayaat, is the first thing that strikes our minds that this aayah is likening the attributes of Allah to His creation, so that we have to interpret it in order to divert the word away from its apparent meaning? Or is the apparent meaning that comes to mind when we read it that the Lord of the heavens is above resembling His creation in any of His attributes so we accept this aayah in that context, declaring Him to be above any such resemblance? The answer to that is that the first thing which should come to the Muslim's mind when he hears of any of the attributes of the Lord of the heavens and the earth is that Allah is completely above any resemblance to His creation.

The correct understanding is to accept the apparent meanings of these aayaat (verses), which is to think of the Lord of the heavens and the earth as being far above any resemblance to His creation in any of His attributes. Can any rational person deny that the first thing that crosses the sound mind is that the Creator differs from His creation in His essence and in all His attributes? No, by Allah, no one will dispute this except those who are arrogant.


The Ninth Principle: The Reality of Ta 'weel 131


The word ta'weel which has tempted people and led thousands of this ummah astray could mean three things:

I) It could mean the way the things develop and end up. This is the meaning in the aayaat such as the following:



...That is better and more suitable for final determination [ta 'weelan].) (Qur 'an 4: 59)



...Even before the elucidation [ta'weel] thereof has reached them..) (Qur'an 10: 39)


- Abdullah Yusuf 'Ali's translation, i.e., the way things ultimately turn out.



...On the Day the event is finally fulfilled [ta'weel], those who neglected it before...) (Qur 'an 7: 53)


2) Ta'weel may mean tafseer (interpretation). This is a well-known usage, such as Ibn Jareer's comment: the opinion on the ta'weel
(interpretation) of the aayah (verse) is such and such...

3) In the terminology of usool, ta'weel means: interpreting a word in a way other than the apparent meaning which first springs to mind, on the basis of evidence.

According to the scholars of usool, interpreting a word in a way other than the apparent meaning which first springs to mind is done in three cases:

a) It is interpreted in a way other than the apparent meaning which first springs to mind on the basis of saheeh (sound) evidence from the Qur'an or Sunnah. This kind of ta'weel or interpretation is correct and is acceptable; there is no dispute about it. Examples of this kind include the hadith narrated from the Prophet:


"The neighbor has more right to proximity." 132


The apparent meaning of this hadith is that the neighbor has the right of pre-emption (concerning decisions on or sales of neighboring property etc.).

But if we interpret this as referring specifically to a neighbor whose property is contiguous, this is following a meaning that is not immediately apparent. But the saheeh hadith narrated by Jaabir, "When boundaries are being drawn up and routes are taking shape, there is no right of pre-emption," 133 proves that what is meant by the neighbor who has more right to proximity is specifically the neighbor whose property is contiguous. This kind of interpreting a word in a way other than the apparent meaning which first springs to mind on the basis of clear evidence from the Qur'an and Sunnah is called ta'weel saheeh (correct interpretation) or ta'weel qareeb (acceptable interpretation).

b) A word is interpreted in a way other than the apparent meaning which first springs to mind because of something which the scholar believes to be evidence, but in fact it is not an evidence. This is called ta'weel ba'eed (far-fetched interpretation), or sometimes it is called faasid (corrupt).

An example of this is Abu Haneefah's interpretation of the word 'woman' in the hadith of the Prophet:

"Any woman who gets married without the permission of her guardian, her marriage is invalid." 134

His interpretation of this as referring specifically to a slave woman who had a written contract of emancipation, is ta'weel ba'eed (a farfetched interpretation), because the particle ayy in the word ayyumaa (any) is general in meaning; the suffix maa emphasizes the fact that this phrase (ayyumaa imra 'atin - any woman) is general in meaning, referring to any woman whatsoever. Interpreting this as referring to a specific case (the slave woman who has a written contract of emancipation) is interpreting it in a way other than the apparent meaning which first springs to mind, without any evidence for doing so.

c) With regard to interpreting words or phrases in a way other than the apparent meaning which first springs to mind, without any evidence, this is not called ta 'weel; in scholarly terminology it is called la'ib (playing), because it involves playing with the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger. An example of this is the way in which the extreme Rawaafid (shi'as) interpret the aayah, ...Verily, Allah commands you that you slaughter a cow..) (Qur 'an 2: 67). They said, (this refers to) 'Aa'ishah.

This kind of (mis)interpretation also includes interpreting the aayaat (verses) which speak of the attributes of Allah, distorting them from their apparent meanings to unlikely meanings for which Allah has not revealed any authority, such as when they interpret istawaa (rise above) as meaning istawlaa (possess, take control). This cannot be included under the heading of ta'weel, because there is no evidence for this at all. In the terminology of the scholars of usool, it is called la'ib (playing), because it is playing with the Book of Allah with no evidence and no basis. This kind of interpretation (which is misinterpretation) is not permissible, because it is an assault against the words of the Lord of the Worlds. The basic principle which was known to the scholars among the salaf(pious predecessors), is that it is not permissible to change the meaning of anything in the Book of Allah or the Sunnah of His Messenger from the apparent meaning which first springs to mind, unless there is evidence which must be referred to.


128 Majmoo' al-Fataawa Shaykh ai-Islam, 3/17.
129 Majmoo' al-Fataawa Shaykh ai-Islam, 3/25.
130 E.g., Al-Jahamiyah al-MaMah. See Majmoo' al-Fataawa, 3/39.
131 I have written a paper on this topic entitled: At-Ta 'weel khutooratuhu wa athaaruhu (Interpretation: its dangers and effects).
132 Ahmad, Nasaee and Ibn Maajah (Muntaqa al-Akhbaar, Pp. 492, hadith no.
3177).
133 Bukhari, Abu Dawood, Tirmidhi and Ahmad (Muntaqa al-Akhbaar, Pp. 492).
134 Abu Dawood, Tirmidhi, Ibn Maajah and Ahmad (Muntaqa al-Akhbaar, 539, hadith no. 3452).
« Last Edit: July 24, 2016, 01:12:59 PM by taha taha »

taha taha

Re: Was Ibn Taymiyyah a Anthropomorphist?
« Reply #4 on: July 24, 2016, 01:11:12 PM »
As for Shaykh Ash-Shanqeeti 

Imaam Muhammad Al-Ameen Ash-Shaqeetee (rahimahullaah) said: Indeed I came from the land of Shanqeet (to Saudi Arabia) and with me was a treasure which is rarely found with anyone, and that is Al-Qanaa’ah (i.e. contentment). Had I desired status I would have acquainted myself with the paths to it, but I do not prefer the worldly (treasures) over the afterlife. I do not give knowledge in order to obtain the worldly goals.

Imaam Muhammad Bin Saaleh Al-Uthaymeen (rahimahullaah) said: This is a statement from Shaikh Ash-Shanqeetee and those similar to him among the people of knowledge, for indeed they (rahimahumullaah) do not desire to ascribe piety to themselves, rather they want to benefit the people and that the people follow their example and this path, because we know that this is their situation and that of the scholars, for they do not want to ascribe themselves to piety through that(i.e. dissemination of knowledge), rather they are the furthest people from that.

[Source: Sharh Hilyati Taalibil Ilm’ page 43]

taha taha

Re: Was Ibn Taymiyyah a Anthropomorphist?
« Reply #5 on: July 24, 2016, 05:53:00 PM »
By: Shaikh Muhammad Nâsir ad-Dîn al-Albânî

The Second Doubt: Area
The reply to it is what Ibn Taimiyyah said on pg. 45 of at-Tadmuriyyah:

An existent thing [that is] not Allah could be meant by [the word] ‘area’. Thus it is created like if I meant the Throne itself, or the heavens itself by [the word] ‘area’. What is non-existent [that is] not Allah, exalted is He, could [also] be meant by it,[1] like if I meant what is above the universe by [the word] ‘area’. It is known that the [legislative] text does not contain affirmation of the word ‘area’, like it contains affirmation of exaltedness,[2] levelness,[3] transcendence and ascension to Him, and similar to that. Nor [does it contain] its negation. And surely, it is known that nothing exists except the Creator and the created. The Creator is unlike the created. Nothing from His essence is in His creation and nothing from His creation is in His essence.


So it is said to whoever negated [the word ‘area’], “By ‘area’, do you mean that it is an existing created thing? For Allah is not inside the created things. Or by ‘area’, do you mean what is beyond the universe? For there is no doubt that Allah is above the universe. Similarly it is said to the one who said Allah is in an area, do you mean by that that Allah is above the universe or do you mean by it that Allah is inside something from the created things? For if you meant the first, then it is true. And if you meant the second, then it is false.


From it, he clarifies that the word ‘area’ is not found in the Book or the Sunnah. Accordingly, its affirmation and its negation are not appropriate, because in both affirmation and negation is what preceded of danger; and if opening room for the opposer to attribute what the embracers of the exaltedness do not speak of to them were all that were in the affirming of [the word] ‘area’, it would be sufficient.

Negating [the word] ‘area’ [mistakenly] thinking that affirming exaltedness for Allah necessitates the affirmation of [the word] ‘area’ is similarly inappropriate, because there are numerous dangers in that. From them is negating the conclusive evidences for affirming exaltedness for Him, exalted is He; and from them is negating the believers’ seeing of their Lord, mighty and sublime is He, on the Day of Standing; the Mu’tazilah and the Shî’ah were explicit in negating it. In his Minhâj, Ibn al-Mutahhir ash-Shî’î justified the mentioned negation with his statement, “because He is not in an area”! As for the Ashâ’irah (or according to [what is] most correct, their later ones) who affirmed the Sighting[4] then contradicted it when they said, “Surely He will be seen, [but] not in an area,” (they mean the exaltedness!), in Minhâj as-Sunnah (2/252), Shaikh of Islam said,

The general masses from people, from the affirmers and the negators of the Sighting say, “Surely the statement of these [ones (i.e., the Asha’irah)] is known to be corrupt by necessity of the intellect, like their statement regarding the Speech. Due to this, Abū ‘Abdillah ar-Râzî mentioned that none of the groups of the Muslims say their statement in the issue of the Speech and the Sighting.

Then he took to refuting the negators from the Mu’tazilah and the Shî’ah with solid calm words, so refer to it for surely it is priceless.

The sum of the statement regarding the [word] ‘area’ is that if what is intended by it is an existent matter that is not Allah, it is created. And Allah, exalted is He, is above His creation; nothing from the created things surrounds Him, nor encompasses Him, for surely, He is distinct from the created things as will come in the book[5] from a group of the imams. And if what is intended by the [word] ‘area’ is non-existent matter i.e., what is above the universe, then there is nothing there except Allah alone.

This last meaning is the intent regarding the speech of the affirmers of exaltedness and the transmitters from the predecessors of the affirmation of the [word] ‘area’ for Allah, exalted is He, just as in al-Qurtubî’s transmission from them at the end of the book.

In al-Kashf ‘an Manâhij al-Adillah (pg. 66), Ibn Rushd said,

The Statement regarding Area: As for this characteristic, then the People of the Sharî’ah from the beginning of the affair[6] have not ceased affirming it for Allah, glorified is He, until the Mu’tazilah negated it. Then the later ones from the Ash’arîs followed them; like Abil-Ma’âlî and whoever was guided by his statement. All of the literal [meanings] of the Legislation necessitate affirmation of the [word] ‘area’; the likes of His statement, exalted is He … (then he mentioned some of the recognized verses, then said,) … until other than that from the verses that if the [incorrect] interpretation was imposed on them, all of the Legislation would become [incorrectly] interpreted, and if it was said about them that they were from the obscure [verses], all of the Legislation would become obscure because all of the laws agree that Allah is in the heaven, and that the angels descend with the Revelation to the Prophets. … .
https://rasheedgonzales.wordpress.com/2007/07/08/doubts-and-their-replies-part-2/#comments
« Last Edit: July 24, 2016, 05:54:44 PM by taha taha »

taha taha

Re: Was Ibn Taymiyyah a Anthropomorphist?
« Reply #6 on: July 24, 2016, 05:55:32 PM »
hope you didnt mind me adding that here as well instead of a new thread.

Abu Jasim Al-Salafi

  • *
  • Total likes: 47
  • +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • May Allah guide the Shi'a to the truth
    • مدونة الحق الإسلامي
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Was Ibn Taymiyyah a Anthropomorphist?
« Reply #7 on: July 24, 2016, 05:56:32 PM »
hope you didnt mind me adding that here as well instead of a new thread.

Of course I didn't, jazak-Allah khair.
May Allah guide the Shi'a to the truth. Ameen.

Student of Comparative Religion - Refuter of allegations made against Islam by Christians and Atheists.

taha taha

Re: Was Ibn Taymiyyah a Anthropomorphist?
« Reply #8 on: July 24, 2016, 07:56:03 PM »
Sometimes I feel that we are going off topic.
So I have joined this forum to post general topics not related to Shia.

http://ummahboard.com/forum.php



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
2525 Views
Last post July 16, 2016, 05:39:46 PM
by Abu Jasim Al-Salafi
5 Replies
871 Views
Last post November 30, 2017, 10:30:13 AM
by whoaretheshia
9 Replies
1616 Views
Last post December 13, 2017, 04:12:05 AM
by Noor-us-Sunnah
1 Replies
307 Views
Last post November 19, 2019, 11:28:50 AM
by Noor-us-Sunnah