Sharif10
3rd July 2008, 06:15 AM
Salam Alaikum,
I've been reading threads concerning issues of Aqidah, mostly questions asked by Ahlus Sunnah and responses, particularly by Abuz Zubair, and I have found them useful because I have had many of the same questions myself. Anyways, concerning Aqidah, I have come to the following conclusions, and I would appreciate some relevant feedback.
I think that the reason there is often so much confusion concerning issues of aqidah of Allah's attributes is because we are trying to describe Allah with names that we do not, and cannot, understand when applied to Allah. Some groups (Asharis, Muturidis, Mutazilites) say Allah cannot have a hand, and they give some reasons. But such reasoning is faulty because we cannot understand it when applied to Allah. Take the argument about whether Allah’s hands are limbs, whether this is possible or not. Well, what is a hand when applied to Allah? What is a limb when applied to Allah? If Allah is “istawa ‘ala ‘Arsh,” does this mean He is "sitting" upon the throne? Does this mean He is touching the throne? Well, what does "sitting" mean when applied to Allah? What would "touching" the throne mean when applied to Allah? We don’t know and we can’t say, because Allah does not resemble His creation. So, we affirm the names that Allah has given, and we cannot say anything else about them, simply because we cannot comprehend them. Hence Imam Ahmed’s statement that we affirm the attributes of Allah, "without how", and the Athari position. Also, we do not assign a meaning of “power” or such to Allah’s qualities, because there is no textual or linguistic proof for this position. We simply say that these qualities are referring to Allah’s essence, we affirm them without likening them to the creation, and we cannot proceed into any further description. If this is kept in mind, and no further speculation is done, and all of the debates about Allah's attributes of essence are simply ignored, then I think all of the problems simply fade. I believe that this is the correct position, and the often misunderstood Athari/Salafi position, correct? And in such a case, I feel that there is no additional benefit in discussion, but that it will only lead to further confusion, as we will just be going around in circles (hence the conflicts). I hope that I am correct, and I would appreciate feedback to my conclusions, inshallah.
I've been reading threads concerning issues of Aqidah, mostly questions asked by Ahlus Sunnah and responses, particularly by Abuz Zubair, and I have found them useful because I have had many of the same questions myself. Anyways, concerning Aqidah, I have come to the following conclusions, and I would appreciate some relevant feedback.
I think that the reason there is often so much confusion concerning issues of aqidah of Allah's attributes is because we are trying to describe Allah with names that we do not, and cannot, understand when applied to Allah. Some groups (Asharis, Muturidis, Mutazilites) say Allah cannot have a hand, and they give some reasons. But such reasoning is faulty because we cannot understand it when applied to Allah. Take the argument about whether Allah’s hands are limbs, whether this is possible or not. Well, what is a hand when applied to Allah? What is a limb when applied to Allah? If Allah is “istawa ‘ala ‘Arsh,” does this mean He is "sitting" upon the throne? Does this mean He is touching the throne? Well, what does "sitting" mean when applied to Allah? What would "touching" the throne mean when applied to Allah? We don’t know and we can’t say, because Allah does not resemble His creation. So, we affirm the names that Allah has given, and we cannot say anything else about them, simply because we cannot comprehend them. Hence Imam Ahmed’s statement that we affirm the attributes of Allah, "without how", and the Athari position. Also, we do not assign a meaning of “power” or such to Allah’s qualities, because there is no textual or linguistic proof for this position. We simply say that these qualities are referring to Allah’s essence, we affirm them without likening them to the creation, and we cannot proceed into any further description. If this is kept in mind, and no further speculation is done, and all of the debates about Allah's attributes of essence are simply ignored, then I think all of the problems simply fade. I believe that this is the correct position, and the often misunderstood Athari/Salafi position, correct? And in such a case, I feel that there is no additional benefit in discussion, but that it will only lead to further confusion, as we will just be going around in circles (hence the conflicts). I hope that I am correct, and I would appreciate feedback to my conclusions, inshallah.