Schools of Thought and Sects, Dought & clear, - * Refutation of those who falsely claim that Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (mayAllah have mercy on him) was one of those who say that Allah is a physical entity

gb

Share ::-

- -

Is it true that Shaykhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said that Allah is a filled body that does not have cavity (hole) inside, in 'Majmul Fatawa'', vol.17, pg.214/215 and Bayyan Talbis Jahmiyyah, vol.1, pg.511 etc like deviant aasharis and maturidis claim?
-
Praise be to Allah
Firstly:
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) was subjected, by the promoters of innovation, to campaigns aimed at distorting his image, and that was only because he stood up to the promoters of innovation, debated with them, proved them wrong and highlighted the extent of their deviation from the path of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and his Companions, and he told them to adhere to the Qur’an and Sunnah. So these people and their followers got angry with him and started to fabricate lies against him, attributing to him words and ideas that he never said; in fact it is proven that he rejected and refuted such ideas!
One of the gravest sins that a person may commit is slander, which means fabricating lies and attributing to a Muslim something that is not true. The sin is even worse if that Muslim against whom lies are fabricated is a respected scholar and one of the imams of Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa‘ah, such as Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him), because these people want to cast aspersions on him with regard to the methodology of Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa‘ah, and give precedence to their own deviant methodologies.
Secondly:
The methodology of Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa‘ah with regard to the names and attributes of Allah, may He be exalted, is well known; it is to affirm what Allah affirmed for Himself and deny what He denied for Himself, without likening His attributes to any of His creation, without discussing the nature of those attributes, without distorting the meanings thereof and without denying what is meant. This has been explained previously in a number of fatwas; see fatwa no. 122675.
With regard to novel terminology introduced byahl al-kalaam(Islamic philosophers), such as “physical entity” and “direction”, Ahl as-Sunnah neither confirm nor deny this terminology; rather they think that using these terms or denying them comes under the heading of reprehensible innovations.
As for what these words may mean, the one who uses these words is to be questioned as to what he means by that; then if the meaning he intends is correct, we affirm it, but if he intends a false meaning, we reject it. But we do not express these meanings except in the shar‘i terminology that is mentioned in the Qur’an and Sunnah; we do not use this novel terminology.
The views of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) with regard to this issue are well known, which is that it is not permissible to affirm the word “physical entity” with regard to Allah, may He be exalted, or to deny it either, because the Qur’an and Sunnah never used such a word, and because this is a very general word that could be used to refer to something true or it could be used to refer to something false. He stated that this is the view of Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa‘ah, including the Sahaabah, Taabi‘een and leading scholars of the Muslims, such as the four imams and others.
There follow some quotations from his books which highlight the lies of this fabricator with regard to what he attributed to Shaykh al-Islam.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
It is well-known that there is no report from any of the Prophets or from the Sahaabah or from the Taabi‘een or from any of the early generations of the ummah to suggest that Allah is a physical entity or that He is not a physical entity. Rather denying or affirming that is an innovation according to Islam. End quote.
Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa(5/434)
Thirdly:
We checked the two places in the books of Shaykh al-Islam that are mentioned in the question, and we did not find that he affirmed that Allah, may He be exalted, is a physical entity.
With regard toMajmoo‘ al-Fataawa(17/214-215), there is nothing of that nature mentioned there; rather there is a discussion of the meaning of the soorah “Qul Huwa Allahu Ahad”. He mentioned the meaning of the name of Allahas-Samad, and the difference of opinion among the commentators of the early generations (17/214-216).
Then he mentioned a lengthy discussion refuting various groups of innovators, and stated that the view of the leading scholars of Ahl as-Sunnah is the correct view. Then he said (17/303):
Imam Ahmad followed the way of his predecessors, the leading scholars of Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa‘ah, who adhered to the Qur’an and Sunnah and followed that which Allah revealed to them, which is to look and see:
Whatever we find that the Lord affirmed for Himself (of attributes) in His Book, we affirm it, and whatever we find that He denied for Himself, we deny it.
Every word that is found in the Qur’an and Sunnah by way of affirmation, the meaning of that word is to be affirmed.
Every word that is found by way of denial, the meaning of that word is to be denied.
As for words that are not found in the Qur’an and Sunnah, or even in the words of the Sahaabah and those who followed them in truth, and all the leading imams of the Muslims, either by way of affirmation or denial, and people disputed concerning them:
These words are not to be affirmed or denied, except after finding out about their meanings. Then if their meanings are found to refer to something that the Lord affirmed for Himself, they are to be affirmed.
If their meanings are found to refer to something that the Lord denied for Himself, then they are to be denied.
If we find that the wording may be used to affirm something true or false, or to deny something true or false, or it is so ambiguous that it may refer to something true or false, and the one who used it intended some of that, but when he uses it, it may give the impression to people, or make them understand, what he intends or what he does not intend:
Then in this case these words are not to be used in the context of either affirming or denying, such as the words “substance”, “physical entity”, occupying space”, “direction” and similar words. It is rare that anyone uses these words either to affirm or deny, but there will be some false notion inserted into it, even if he intended to say something sound.
The early generations and leading scholars disapproved of these novel terms because they contained falsehood and lies, and speaking about Allah without knowledge. [End quote]
This quotation is not sufficient; rather one should check what Shaykh al-Islam said at length concerning this issue, because there is great benefit in doing so, and it contains proofs of the lies of those who accused him of saying that Allah is a physical entity – Allah forbid. May Allah have mercy on him and forgive him.
What he discussed in his other important major work,Bayaan Talbees al-Jahamiyyah, and in his great book,Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah, or any of his other writings, does not go beyond what we have already quoted and explained here.
The other quotation referred to [in the question] is to be found inBayaan Talbees al-Jahamiyyah(1/511). The attribution here is to the first edition, which was published by Muhammad ibn ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan ibn Qaasim, as the questioner stated, and not the complete annotated version of the book. It has the same approach to the issue, but it should be noted that this text is quoted from the book of Shaykh al-IslamMinhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah, as was pointed out by the commentator in his footnote, so as to complete and make up for the shortcoming of the copy of the book that he had. Therefore we will quote the text from its original source, so as to see it in context, then we will refer the reader to the place where the quotation may be found in both books.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
As for the words “physical entity”, “substance”, “occupying space”, “direction” and so on, neither the Qur’an nor the Sunnah use these words when referring to Allah, either by way of denial or affirmation. Similarly, none of the Sahaabah or those who followed them in truth, or any of the leading scholars from among Ahl al-Bayt [the Prophet’s family] or otherwise, not one of them used such words when referring to Allah, either by way of denial or affirmation.
The first ones who were known to speak of such matters, by way of denial or affirmation, were ahl al-kalaam (Islamic philosophers), both those who denied the divine attributes, such as the Jahamis and Mu‘talizah, and those who affirmed the divine attributes, such as those among the Raafidis and others who believed that Allah is a physical entity.
Those who denied the divine attributes denied these words, and included in their denial attributes that Allah and His Messenger affirmed, such as the fact that Allah has knowledge, might, will, love, pleasure, and anger, and is exalted. They said: He does not see and He does not speak the Qur’an or anything else; rather what is meant by His speaking is that He creates words in some physical entity other than Himself, and so on.
Those who affirmed the divine attributes included in that attributes that Allah and His Messenger denied, to the extent that they said that He sees in this world by means of physical eyes, His hand could be shaken and He could be embraced… Allah, may He be glorified, is far above being described with any attributes that are exclusively for created beings, for anything that is exclusively for created beings is an attribute of imperfection, whereas Allah, may He be exalted, is far above all imperfection and deserves the utmost perfection. There is no equal to Him in any of the attributes of perfection, for He is far above shortcomings in any way; in His utmost perfection He is far above there being anything like unto Him, as He, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Say (O Muhammad (Peace be upon him)): ‘He is Allah, (the) One.
‘Allah-us-Samad (The Self-Sufficient Master, Whom all creatures need, He neither eats nor drinks).
‘He begets not, nor was He begotten;
‘And there is none co-equal or comparable unto Him’”
[al-Ikhlaas 112:1-4]. [end quote]
See:Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah(2/527-533).
Then Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
We should study the issues in this field, and whatever Allah and His Messenger affirm (with regard to divine attributes) we should affirm.
And whatever Allah and His Messenger deny, we should deny.
Whatever words are mentioned in the texts are to be adhered to when affirming and denying, so we affirm what the texts affirm of words and meanings, and we deny what the texts deny of words and meanings.
As for the words concerning which there is a dispute among those scholars of the later generations who invented them– such as the terms “physical entity”, “substance”, “occupying space”, “direction” and the like – they should not be denied or affirmed until we see what was meant by the one who uttered them.
If what he meant when denying and affirming was a correct meaning that is in accordance with what the Messenger said, then the meaning that he intended by that word should be approved, but it should be expressed using the words that are used in the texts (of the Qur’an and Sunnah), and not in these invented, ambiguous words, except in the case of necessity, and with some comments to explain the intended meaning.
Necessity refers to cases such as when one is discussing the issue with someone and cannot convey what he wants to convey to him except by using these words.
But if the one who uttered it intended some false meaning, then that meaning should be rejected.
If he combines both true and false meanings, then what is true should be affirmed and what is false should be rejected.
If two people agree on the meaning, and dispute as to whether this wording refers to it or not, it should be expressed in a way on which they both agree on the meaning thereof, and the one who is closest to being correct is the one who is in harmony with the regular usage of language. End quote.
Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah(2/554-555)
What we must do is read the words of the scholar, and indeed the words of any writer, in the context in which the author mentioned it. As for taking only part of what he said, and quoting it in isolation of what comes before and after it, so as to prove one’s claims or lies, this is the way of the promoters of innovation and deviation.
What words could be clearer, and what way of discussing this issue could be better, than the way in which Shaykh al-Islam discussed this matter? What a great imam he was!
We hope that what we have mentioned above is sufficient.
We ask Allah, may He be exalted, to show us the truth as truth and help us to follow it, and to show us falsehood as false and help us to avoid it.
And Allah knows best.












-
-
:: Share ::

- - - -

-