ALLAHS ATTRIBUTES-SOME CLARIFICATION [Archive]

View Full Version : ALLAHS ATTRIBUTES-SOME CLARIFICATION

asharee_salafi

7th April 2005, 10:44 PM

Assalaamulekum,

About Allahs attributes. Which Im a bit confused upon.

Id like to ask.(Please answer only if you know, Abu Zubair you may want to have a crack at this?!.....{PLS}.......)

1. When we say that Allah rose over the throne...Does this mean that Allah is prone to change? If so does that mean that the arsh was above him? Since to move from one place to another entails that something is aobe him?

2.When I was with HT we learned that Allah cant have limits. If thats the case why has Allah got only 2 hands....Surely that would be an imperfection wouldnt it? How can Allah have a limit or imperfection in ''a manner that befits his majesty''. One couldnt say that Allah sneezes or coughs or cries in a manner that befits his majesty so why would this imperfection be in a manner that befits his majesty? I.e the fact that Allah 2 hands ONLY.(Uthaymeen states this)

3 we know that Allah is above the creation......But what is this statemnt from the scholars who are salafi when theys ay that Allah exists around the creation? Are they saying that the whole creation is ''in'' Allah . because in order to exist around something, that object must be in what ever it is. in this case Allah swt.

4. If one stands on the north pole and says Allah is above me then what about the man who stands on the south pole and says Allah is above me..............? Is Allah above and BELOW the creation?

Jazak ALLAH KHARUN.

Im nearly understanding the concept of Allahs siffat its just the above questions are a bit of a thorn in teh side of me .

Jazak ALLAH KHAIRUN AND PLEASE PRAY FOR ME.

AND NO COPY AND PASTES FROM ABU RUMAYSAH! lol

Abu_Abdallah

8th April 2005, 04:55 PM

al_Salamu Alaikum wa-Rahmtullah,

Brother asharee_salafi said:

"When we say that Allah rose over the throne...Does this mean that Allah is prone to change?"

No. Allah's Rising/Establishment over the Throne does not necessiate change - for 'rising' with reference to the creation does entail change, while Allah, ta'ala, is outside His creation, and therefore this does not mean that He changes - far is Allah from what the weak slaves speculate about!

"If so does that mean that the arsh was above him? Since to move from one place to another entails that something is above him?"

Allah is above the heavens, made Istiwa' over His Throne - as He informed us. Movement from place to place does not necessiate Him, for He transcend His Creation - and therefore Intiqal and Haraka is not necessary for him. Whoever believes that Allah was below the Throne before Ascending it is innovator, and belies the Qur'an and the Sunnah which affirms Allah's Aboveness from any perspective - be He before he Ascended the Throne, or before He Descend in the 3rd part of the night to the lowest heaven or in any other matter in which Satan deludes him.
May Allah protect us from the deception of the devil!

And the brother in Islam said:

"When I was with HT we learned that Allah cant have limits. If thats the case why has Allah got only 2 hands....Surely that would be an imperfection wouldnt it? How can Allah have a limit or imperfection in ''a manner that befits his majesty''. One couldnt say that Allah sneezes or coughs or cries in a manner that befits his majesty so why would this imperfection be in a manner that befits his majesty? I.e the fact that Allah 2 hands ONLY.(Uthaymeen states this)"

-Is HT the group known as Hizb al-Tahrir? Whatever they say, or any other group for that matter, then only the scholars are authorities, and not 'parties', 'groups' or any other entity, except: the Salaf al-Salih from among the Companions, the Followers and does who followed them in goodness.
-HT denial that Allah has limits is based on speculation - and not any firm evidence in the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Allah and His Prophet ordered us to affirm anything the Qur'an and the Sunnah affirms, and to deny anything these two sources deny. As for 'limits' then they can have meanings that suit Allah and meanings that dont suit Him. If you mean - as I understand from you - with 'limit' something which you, and others, understand as imperfection, then Allah is the Perfet, free from imperfection! Thus he is free from 'limits'.
-Allah's Two Hands are Perfect, as is His Speech, His Face, His Eyes etc. Who told you that the affirmation of Two Hands is 'surely.. an imperfection'?! That's a baatil deduction! Allah has Two Hands simply because He stated so, and His Prophet too, and the Salaf and the Righteous Khalaf also - and the Ahl al-Sunnah state this adding 'in a manner that befits Him' - and that's true.
-Whoever says: Allah cries in a matter that befits Him, or He sneezes in a matter that befits Him etc. then whoever adds such false analogies of Allah with the Creation then he's a Mushabbih without doubt! How can someone dares to state something about Allah, ta'ala, which He can't find in the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet?! Or for that matter in the statements of the Salaf?! What difference is there between the Christians who say: Allah is the Father of Jesus - na'udhu billah - but 'in a manner that befits Him'?! For the Christians surely do not say that He is his natural father! Whoever calls and names Allah in a manner not named and called by the Qur'an and the Sunnah, either in word or meaning, then he's either an Mushabbih or Mu'attil - he surely is an innovator!

and:

"we know that Allah is above the creation......But what is this statemnt from the scholars who are salafi when theys ay that Allah exists around the creation? Are they saying that the whole creation is ''in'' Allah . because in order to exist around something, that object must be in what ever it is. in this case Allah swt."

Whoever said Allah, ta'ala, exists 'around the creation'? Where can the original statement be found who said this.

and finally the brother asked:

"If one stands on the north pole and says Allah is above me then what about the man who stands on the south pole and says Allah is above me..............? Is Allah above and BELOW the creation?"

SubhanAllah, to those who do not fear Allah as He must be feared! How can someone boldly ask such things when Allah, ta'ala, already said that's He's above the creation!? Wherever you stand, northpole, southpole, in the deepest of Hell, in the seventh heaven, in front of Allah, flying etc. you are always below Him, who's the Great, the Highest, for Allah is Above His Creation - in any circumstance and from any perspective..

High is Allah above what the people say about Him!

May Allah grant you fear! Amin.

Abuz Zubair

9th April 2005, 07:38 AM

as-Salaamu 'Alaikum,

Bro Sharif Abu Ja'far, are you *the* Sharif Abu Ja'far who dealt with Abu Ja'far al-Kadhab on HTS? If so, then we are more then delighted to have you on this forum!

JazakumAllahu Khairan for your concern and efforts in defence of the true Sunni creed.

I am a bit overwhelmed with projects at the moment, and find it difficult to get some time out to reply to some of the pressing posts pertaining to sifat, asharis etc... I am sure you must have written a lot about most of these issues asked, so I guess you can share some of my burden?:)

Bro Ashari_Salafi, since Sharif Abu Ja'far is here, you need me not anymore! Direct all your questions to him InshaaAllah :)

wasalam

asharee_salafi

9th April 2005, 06:02 PM

Assalaamulekum.

Jazak ALLAH KHAIR FOR YOUR REPLY abu jafar.

1.So what i deduced from your post was that Allah is beyond change and beyond movement.

For instance we accept that Allah desecnds to the lowest heaven without him leaving the throne or being part of his creation.

so likewise we accept that fact that Allah went over the throne(not really rose) and when Allah went over the throne it didnt in any way inply movement,change or the arhs being above Allah. Am I right?

2.YES MAY allah grant us all fear ameen. I asked those questions out of sincerity not because I lacked fear of ALLAH. Indeed the reason why I did ask was because im petrified of any kind of ''comparing'' Allah with the creation. Jazak Allahu Khairun.

3.The point about the earth being a sphere and saying Allah is above me while standing on the top of the earth and standing a the bottom of the earth and saying ALLAH IS ABOVE ME. I didnt get it since it dont make sense. how can Allah be above and below at the same time? surely nothing can overshadow him ?

4.how do we interpret the hadeeth of Muhammed peace and blessingse be upon him when he is quoted as saying there is ''nothing above him and nothing before him'' Imam bayhaqi quotes this hadeeth and if My memeory serves me correct Ibn taymiyyah quotes it in aqeedah wasitiyah. The asharees use the afformentioned to say that Allah doesnt have a ''place''

5. And lastly- We know that ALlah is beyond parts in terms of separation-Abu zubair said on on his previous posst that Allah ant have parts in that sense because he terms himself AHAD.

so if Allah is AHAD then what about the fact that we know the Quran is the word of Allah ,i.e it has a set number of sentences........it is in the arabic language.....Allah himself will follow the rules of arabic by saying 'bismillah..' . My question is How can that be eternal? To what extent are the asharees correct to say that the Quran is an expression of the actual eternal Kalam of ALLAH.The speech of Allah has a BEGINING AND END. HOW CAN ALLAH INFINITE ATTRIBUTES HAVE BEGINNINGS ABSCRIBED TO THEM

I know some salfees say they way 'Allah spoke the quran is different to teh way we speak........' But how is that so since Allah will no doubt has said ''bismillah...'' I hope you get my point AND i HAVENT CONFUSED YOU MORE.

Im inshALlah gonna send you a personal pm aswell so be on a lookout.(pls)

Abu_Abdallah

10th April 2005, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by Abuz Zubair

as-Salaamu 'Alaikum,

Bro Sharif Abu Ja'far, are you *the* Sharif Abu Ja'far who dealt with Abu Ja'far al-Kadhab on HTS? If so, then we are more then delighted to have you on this forum!

JazakumAllahu Khairan for your concern and efforts in defence of the true Sunni creed.

I am a bit overwhelmed with projects at the moment, and find it difficult to get some time out to reply to some of the pressing posts pertaining to sifat, asharis etc... I am sure you must have written a lot about most of these issues asked, so I guess you can share some of my burden?:)

Bro Ashari_Salafi, since Sharif Abu Ja'far is here, you need me not anymore! Direct all your questions to him InshaaAllah :)

wasalam



al-Salamu alikum wa-RAhmatullahi wa-Barakatuhu,

Yes, I am. May Allah reward you for your efforts!

wa-Salam!

Abuz Zubair

18th April 2005, 07:39 AM

As-Salaamu ‘Alaikum brother Ash’ari_Salafi,

When the Ash’aris say that Allah is beyond change, we need to understand what they exactly mean by that, how they came to that conclusion, and whether or not they are right in saying that.

To objectively understand where the Ash’aris are coming from, we must look back in the history to see why they say what they say, for most of the pseudo Ash’aris we have today do not have a clue about their own doctrine, and hence they cannot be expected to know our – the true Sunni – doctrine.

The Philosophers would claim that the world is eternal just like Allah, because Allah has eternally been the Creator, and that necessitates that the creation has co-existed with Allah. Meaning, the creation of Allah came parallel to Allah’s act of creation. This is out right Kufr.

To challenge this argument, and to prove Allah’s existence, and therefore the truth of the Prophet – SallAllahu ‘alaihi wa-sallam – the Ash’aris came up with their argument to prove that the world is NOT eternal, and that it has a beginning (Haadith), and the perfect cause to bring it into being is the Creator. Hence, to prove this argument, they presented the following set of arguments.

1) The Creator’s existence cannot be proven, except by proving the created-ness of the world. 

2) The created-ness of the world cannot be proven, except by proving the beginning of that which the world is made of, and that is bodies (al-Jism). 

3) They then proved the created-ness of bodies by claiming that all bodies undergo change/events (Hawadith, such as motion, and rest). 

4) They then said that motion and rest, both have beginnings. 

5) They then said that anything that undergoes change/events (such as motion and rest), must have a beginning. 

6) They also added that anything which does not precede all the change/events also has a beginning (Haadith). 

7) They then finally denied the infinite regress of events in the past (Hawadith la awwala laha) 

The problems we have with this method of proving God’s existence is:

1) This isn’t the only way of proving Allah’s existence and eternity, and the finite nature and the created-ness of the world. The Ash’aris – in clear opposition to their Imam, made this argument as the only way to prove God’s eternity and created-ness of the world. 

2) We contest their method for many reasons, and to start with because we believe in infinite regress of events in the past (al-Tasalsul fil-Madhi), as well as in future, because it is nonsensical to affirm such for the future and deny it for the past, as the Ash'aris do. 

The Ash’aris, upon hearing this from us, accuse us of Kufr, because to them affirming infinite regress in the past is agreeing with the philosophers in their doctrine of eternity of the world.

We disagree by saying that infinite regress in the past does not necessitate that the world is eternal, because it is equally nonsensical for the Philosophers to believe that the creation co-existed with the Creator. Rather, logic dictates that the creation comes only after the act of creation. Therefore, Allah’s act of creation precedes the creation, which makes the creation (Hadith), that which has a beginning.

Secondly, we say to the Ash’aris that you rejected infinite regress in the past and as a result, claimed that eternally Allah wasn’t able to create (mumtani’), but then it became ‘possible’ (mumkin) for Him to create, without any apparent cause (Tarjih bila murajjih).

This is while the Ash’aris believe that anything which is mumkin (i.e. something, which could equally exist and not exist), there must be a murajjih (determinant) to tilt the balance in favour of existence, otherwise, it forever remains non-existent. So we ask them, what is the ‘determinant’ here which made it ‘possible’ for Allah to create before which He wasn’t able to?

They say in reply that the ‘determinant’ was Allah’s eternal will, while that which he willed was delayed and came much later, in spite of Him having the ability to bring it about.

We say in response, that this argument, like all your previous arguments, is illogical. Because, when there is a will combined with the ability to carry it out, then that which is willed must come about there and then, and not later. For if it does not come about, there and then, then that is either due to lack of ability or lack of will, where as Allah does what He Wills when He Wills, and He has the power to do everything, which means, that which he Wills, instantly comes about without a delay, as He says: kun fa yakun – be! And it is!

Therefore, Ahlus-Sunnah reject the Philosophers’ argument, that that which is willed co-exists with the will, just as they reject the Ash’ari argument, that that which is willed is delayed and comes much after the actual will. Rather, we say that that which is willed comes straight after His Will and is not delayed at all, for whatever Allah wills, happens, and whatever He does not Will, does not happen.

Therefore, once we understand the issue of infinite regress in the past, and therefore affirming that Allah has a Will, and that He does what He likes and WHEN He likes, then the whole concept of ‘change’ taking place in Allah becomes easy to understand.

In fact, isn’t it easier just to believe in what Allah has informed us in His Book, that He becomes Angry and Hates the Kafir for his Kufr, and becomes Pleased and Loves him when He becomes a Muslim? Or what we know from the Sunnah that Allah will become so angry on the Day of Judgement, in a way He has never been this angry before, nor will have ever become this angry later? What is it all if not ‘change’?

With respect to Allah’s movement when He rose over the throne, or when He descends to the lowest heaven, then things like directions and leaving or occupying of space, and such factors are relevant more to the creation. To claim that affirming Allah rising over the throne, necessitates that he moves and leaves a space for another, is in fact the very Tashbih.

I think the Hadeeth you are referring to is: He is the first, with nothing before Him, and the Last with nothing after Him, the Dhahir (i.e. the most high) with nothing above Him, and al-Batin (hidden/closest), there is nothing closer to us than Him. The Hadeeth is a proof against them, and not for them. Plus, what’s Quran and Sunnah got to do with their believes? Read their books on creed, you can hardly count the verses and Ahadeeth on one hand.

When Ahl al-Sunnah say Ahad, meaning, he does not separate into ‘parts’ etc, as if He is composed of various different parts, and hence, He is in need of those parts. Rather He is not in need of anything. However, for Allah to have various attributes, like life, will, knowledge etc, or a Face, Two Eyes, etc, does not mean He is composed of 'parts'. As for your question regarding the speech of Allah being composed of letters and words, one after the other, how can it be then eternal; if you understand our argument about infinite regress of events in the past, you will understand how Allah’s words are eternal. In fact, to claim otherwise as the Mu’tazilas do is clear cut Kufr. The Quran that we have is the uncreated speech of Allah, which is composed of Suras, verses, words and letters. This has been the creed of Imam Ahmad, and the rest of Ahl al-Sunnah, and this is one of the strongest proof for the Sunni doctrine in support of infinite regress of events in past and future.

wasalam

asharee_salafi

18th April 2005, 09:30 PM

Assalaamulekum.

Jazak Allahu*******Khairun Abu Zubair. InshAllah I will print this off and read it properly and give any feedback. But*******I had a quick read and its really beneficial. I see where you are coming from and when you said gave the asharee history of the createdness of the world was very accurate, indeed Its a really good insight in to how they think (and to a certain extent myself!)

Thanks Again.

*******

18th April 2005, 11:04 PM

as-Salamu 'alaykum,

I don't know about the other brothers, but Abu Zubair's philosophical stuff just made my brain turn to mush.******* I am a bit slow on this kind of thing...what is the meaning of the "infinite regress of events in the past"?!******* Reading this just convinces me of my previous understanding:

- The philosophers and their ilk needlessly complicate simple*******things**************

- It all would have been a lot easier if people had just stuck to the Sunna 

- The ash'ariyya, like Abu Zubair said, based their math-hab on intellectual principles, and they used this framework to disregard the sunna and interpret it*******any way they wanted

Abu Zubair, can you tell us what books we would need to read (Arabic or otherwise) to understand the situation?******* And if possible, could you simplify what you said for normal people like me?

Jazak Allah Khair

Abuz Zubair

19th April 2005, 03:21 PM

Brother Muhaqiq,

For one to understand these philosophical arguments does not make anyone more intelligent than others. Rather, these philosophers and mutakllimun are the most stupid, and the most narrow-minded of Allah’s creation, primarily because they cannot think beyond time and space, finite and infinity, bodies, atoms and accidents.

Plus, such philosophical arguments are not understood by the modern day pseudo Ash’aris, so how can then the Ash’aris oblige the Muslim masses to prove God’s existence through their silly methods?

But anyway, infinite regress of events, meaning an event caused by another event, which is caused by another event, to infinity. For example, you were born of two parents, who were born of two parents, etc until infinity (which is obviously false). This is called infinite regress of events in the past (al-Tasalsul fil-Madhi). For Paradise and Hell to exist eternally in the future is called: infinite regress of events in the future (al-Tasalsul fil-Mustaqbal).

The Philosophers argue that the world has no beginning, and is eternal like Allah, due to infinite regress of events in the past with respect to Allah, since Allah has eternally been the Creator. The Ash’aris said in their refutation of the Philosophers that it is impossible for events to regress infinitely in the past, and the events must end at the ‘perfect cause’ which triggered all these events, and that ‘perfect cause’ being Allah. (‘perfect cause’ meaning that which causes something else to come about, but doesn’t need a cause for itself to have come about).

But this put the Ash’aris in another problem, and that is, if Allah has been the Creator eternally, then what actually caused the creation to come about at a specific time? This became problematic with another Ash’ari principle which they used to prove God’s existence, which says:

That which is equally possible to exist and not exist (i.e. the world), there must be a cause to bring it into existence, and that cause is none other than Allah.

So, on one hand they said that the cause must be Allah, and yet on the other hand, they said that Allah’s will has been eternal, yet the creation only came about ages after Allah’s will at certain time, so what was then the cause for the world to come about at that particular time?

To that, the Ash’aris responded by saying: Allah had willed eternally that at certain point in time the world would come about. However, Allah wasn’t able to bring it about, up until the moment the world came about, which is when the will was combined with the ability which resulted in the world.

What incredible intellectual garbage!

It makes more sense to believe, as Ahl al-Sunnah have believed that Allah has been the Creator and the Doer of whatever He likes, whenever He likes – in the past and in the future. They therefore affirmed for Allah infinite regress of events in the past and in the future. At the same time, they refuted the Philosophers who said that, this means that the creation has always co-existed with Allah from eternity; by saying that when Allah creates, straight after that the creation comes about, and hence everything Allah creates at whatever instance in time, has a beginning, and this refutes the argument of the Philosophers that the world is eternal. Indeed, if they were to say that the world is eternal, then that means nothing actually ever came about, and our senses acknowledge the falsity of such belief because we witness things coming into being from non-existence.

Important things to note here is that not everything that comes into being (Haadith) is created, but everything that is created comes into being (Haadith).

This is why Ahl al-Sunnah say that the Sifat of Allah are of three types:

1) The Sifat of Allah’s essence, which are eternal, such as His Life. 

2) The Sifat of Allah’s actions, which are not eternal, such as Allah rising over the Throne, or descending to the lowest heaven, or coming on the Day of Judgement to settle disputes and Judge. 

3) The Sifat that are composed of both, eternal aspects and non-eternal aspects, such as the attribute of Kalam, for Allah has eternally been a Mutakallim, meaning He has eternally possessed the quality of speech, while His Speech is not eternal, because He spoke to Musa at a particular time, after He created him. This also proves that just because something is not eternal is not necessarily created, due to the possibility of infinite regress of events in the past. Hence, the Quran being the speech of Allah, or Allah’s words to Musa, although they are not eternal, but they are not created either, for they are from the sifat of Allah, and Allah is not created, and likewise His Sifat are not created. 

I hope this explains, and if it doesn’t, don’t worry about it, for it will not be of any benefit to any of us in the hereafter.

If you want to study Kalam from the Sunni perspective then you should study Sharh al-Aqidah al-Tahawiyah by Ibn Abil-‘Izz al-Hanafi. However, you probably need to study it with someone who understands Kalam himself to be able to interpret the Sharih’s refutation of various Kalami arguments.

wasalam

asharee_salafi

19th April 2005, 09:04 PM

Assalaamulekum

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh I get what Brother Abu Zubair is saying.

I have to admit I did read it about 4 times over, but what your saying makes sense.......(well lets just say *******im 90%******* there! )

InshAllah Id like to come back to you one I have printed all that you have said and fully digested it.

I think its really good what you wrote, despite being philosophical it is neccesary that someone delves with these issues because I know from my personal self that what he said was actually what used to be on my mind i.e I came to the same ashari dilemma

Im still learning

Jazak Allahu Khairun and Assalaamulekum.

terrorthreat

20th April 2005, 06:59 AM

Subahnallah. This is very interesting stuff you should write an article about the history of the Ashari Aqeedah and there principles.

20th April 2005, 05:47 PM

as-Salamu 'alaykum,Here is something from Shaykh Munajjid's site that gives the advice of Shaykh ibn 'Uthaymin to the ash'ariyya. I have highlighted some words which I consider to be the most wise and concise ever spoken on the subject:Q. We are students who are seeking knowledge. We study ‘aqeedah with some teachers who are teaching us Ash’ari ‘aqeedah. They interpret the hand of Allaah as meaning His power or His blessing, and His being above His throne (istiwaa’) as meaning His sovereignty, and so on. What is the ruling on studying with these teachers? 

A: 

<big>Praise be to Allaah. </big>

<big>These people who interpret the Qur’aan in this manner, whether they are called Ash’aris or some other name, have gone astray from the path of the righteous salaf. Not even one letter of what these people say in their misinterpretations has been narrated from the righteous salaf. Let them bring one word from the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), or from Abu Bakr, or ‘Umar, or ‘Uthmaan, or ‘Ali, to say that they interpreted Allaah’s hand as meaning His power, or that they interpreted His being above the Throne (istiwaa’) as referring to His Sovereignty, or that they interpreted His Face as meaning reward, or that they interpreted His love as meaning reward, etc. Let them produce one word from them to show that they interpreted these aayahs and similar verses in the manner that these people interpret them. If they cannot produce any such thing, let it be said that either the righteous salaf, headed by the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), the leader of the pious, were unaware of the meaning of this tremendous ‘aqeedah (of Islam), or they did know it but they concealed the truth. But neither of these can be said of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or of any of the Rightly-Guided Khaleefahs, or of his Companions (may Allaah be pleased with them). If that is the case then we have to follow their path (the path of the Prophet and the Rightly-Guided Khaleefahs). </big>

My advice to these people is to fear Allaah and to abandon what So and so said, and to come back to the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and the way of the Rightly-Guided Khaleefahs who came after him. They should know that there will come a Day when they will return to Allaah, when they will not be able to use the opinion of So and so as evidence. By Allaah, So and so will not be able to help them on that Day. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

And (remember) the Day (Allaah) will call to them, and say: What answer gave you to the Messengers?[al-Qasas 28:65] 

He did not say, Remember the Day when (Allaah) will call to them and say, ‘What answer gave you to So and so…?’ 

And Allaah says in His Book (interpretation of the meaning): 

So believe in Allaah and His Messenger (Muhammad), the Prophet who can neither read nor write (i.e. Muhammad), who believes in Allaah and His Words, and follow him so that you may be guided” [al-A’raaf 7:158] 

Allaah commanded us to believe in him and follow him. If this is the case then how can a person believe in Allaah and His Messenger in the true and complete sense, then turn away from the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and the way in which he believed in his Lord, and misinterpret the way in which Allaah has described Himself in His Book or the way in which His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) has described Him, simply because of illusions which they call rational thought? 

I advise them to come back to Allaah and to abandon any other opinion, and follow what Allaah and His Messenger say, for if they die following that they will have died following the truth. But if they go against that then they are in grave danger and those whose opinions they are following will not protect them from Allaah. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“(Remember) the Day when every person will come up pleading for himself, and every one will be paid in full for what he did (good or evil, belief or disbelief in the life of this world) and they will not be dealt with unjustly”[al-Nahl 16:111] 

I repeat this advice to every believer, to come back to the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) with regard to what he believes about his Lord and God, following the path of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), the rightly guided khaleefahs who came after him, and the imams of the Muslims who led the people in following the Sunnah of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), without referring to rational thought, which is no more than an illusion, concerning issue that have to do with Allaah and His names and attributes. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah spoke well when he described the ahl al-kalaam (“Islamic” philosophers) as “having been given intelligence but not knowledge, and had having been given smartness but not sincerity.” So one has to deepen one’s knowledge on the basis of the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). I ask Allaah to help us all to have faith and to cause us to meet Him when He is pleased with us, for He is Able to do all things. Praise be to Allaah, the Lord of the Worlds, and may Allaah send blessings and peace upon our Prophet Muhammad and his family and companions. 

I call upon all seekers of knowledge to call their brothers to that which they have heard, for by Allaah it is the truth. Whoever claims to have truth other than this, we will accept it and adhere to it (if it can be proven to be true). 

From Fataawa al-Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen, Kitaab al-‘Ilm, p. 226 (islam-qa.com)

20th April 2005, 05:51 PM

I apologise in advance for the html- I tried to remove it twice but it refused.

terrorthreat

20th April 2005, 10:10 PM

When this quote is given:

The commentator ibn Abi Al Izz says, He says, "As for the word "Jihah" (direction), it may imply something existent or non-existence. it is well known that there is nothing in existence except the creator and the created. hence, if by direction one means an existent other than Allah, it would be something created. As such it could not encompass Allah, for no created being can encompass Him. Exalted is He above that. If by the word direction one means something non-existent, that is, beyond the bounds of this world, then there is nothing there except Allah. Taking direction in this sense, if we say that Allah is in a certain direction or space, it is correct, for it means that He is above the world, beyond limits of creation and beyond everything." 

The Ashari's Respond:What in the world is a non-existent direction? This does not logically make sense. 

Is this because logically Allah has to fit there definiton of what Allah should be like? Or is it a lack of understandig of what direction means?

asharee_salafi

22nd April 2005, 04:35 PM

Assalaamulekum.

I see what you say about Allahs speech Abu Zubair.

Its better to phrase it******* that Allah has instances where his speech is given to the creation. An instance whereby it has a begining and an end.

Where as Allah's words are always eternal since he has Always been speaking, as the ayat says in the Quran whereby if the oceans were ink etc

(im 97% there now! Alhamdullilah lol)

Abuz Zubair

22nd April 2005, 08:28 PM

No brother,

It is better to phrase it as the Salaf phrased it: Allah speaks whenever He wishes, and however He wishes.

Allah's speech is eternal, in the sense that he has always been able to speak - since eternity. It does not mean that He must speak at every single moment. Rather, He speaks, whenever He wishes.

wasalam

asharee_salafi

10th May 2005, 05:41 PM

Asalaamualekum Abu Zubair Can you confirm wether the following is actually attributes to imam abu hanifah, http://muslim-canada.org/fiqh.htm******* its aparently quoted from fiqh al akbar

It says in this article that abu hanifah said *******that who ever says that 

''His attributes existed in pre-eternity, without being created or called into existence at a particular moment. Whoever says that they are created or summoned into existence at a particular moment, or is uncertain about the attributes and doubts them, is an unbeliever in God Almighty. ''

ahl sunnah beleive that Allah speaks with a sound but over here it says that abu hanifah said that

''We speak by means of the speech organs and sounds, whereas God Most High speaks with neither organs nor sounds. ''

*******

Can you explain Abu hanifah's words with yours, was abu hanifah mistaken or is this a forgery from him?

Jazak Allah khairun, thanks a lot for your help and hard work

Abuz Zubair

21st May 2005, 05:08 PM

Firstly, please note that there is a lot of doubt surrounding the attribution of Fiqh al-Akbar to Imam Abu Hanifah. My guess is that much of the text actually is from Imam Abu Hanifah, however, it has been tempered with by an Ash’ari. The reason why I say this is because at the beginning of the treatise it affirms the seven attributes for Allah, exactly as the Ash’aris do, whereas this doctrine came about much later than Abu Hanifah. (Ibn Kullab was the pioneer of the 7 attributes doctrine, which was later adopted by al-Ash’ari).

Secondly, the statement you quoted:
''His attributes existed in pre-eternity, without being created or called into existence at a particular moment. Whoever says that they are created or summoned into existence at a particular moment, or is uncertain about the attributes and doubts them, is an unbeliever in God Almighty. ''

There is nothing wrong with this statement, because we believe that Allah has always been the creator, before He created the creation, just as He has always been able to speak before He spoke anything, etc. However, the words we actually speaks/says come into being, and yet they are not created, they are still His attributes. Hence, no attribute actually came into being, for Allah always remained mutakallim. This is further backed up by the text in Fiqh al-Akbar which explicitly states that Allah spoke to Musa directly without any translator, after having NOT spoken to him before that, because Musa simply wasn’t in existence. Common sense really!

''We speak by means of the speech organs and sounds, whereas God Most High speaks with neither organs nor sounds.”

This, I believe, is an Ash’arite tempering. As I said, the doctrine that Allah speaks – but without sound or letters – came as a merger between Mu’tazili and the Hanbali creed by Ibn Kullab. This doctrine was not around at the time of Imam Abu Hanifah.

asharee_salafi

26th May 2005, 03:34 PM

Assalaamulekum, 

Thanks a lot for the clarification! Its helped beyond measure.

According to the asharis isnt it blasphemy to say that Allahs attributes ( the type that contains Allahs actions) have a begining and end?

and secondly how do we refute those who try to deny istawa by using the ayat in chapter 6 verse 76-79 when Ibraheem peace be upon him saw the star rise and settle and said that it couldnt be his, peace and blessings be upon him's, lord

Jazak Allahu Khairun. Thanks =)

26th May 2005, 07:03 PM

as-Salamu 'alaykum,

Is the rising of Allah like the rising of His creation?******* Does it neccessitate physical transmission and that Allah occupies atoms?******* Are the Ash'ariyya stupid?

They fall into the same problem they always have- they get some image in their heads of what Allah's attributes and actions look like, and on the basis of that they nullify these attributes.******* How is the qiyas they use a just comparison for Allah?******* Subhan Allah, they are mushabbihhah!******* Why don't they instead spend their time accusing the tab'i Mujahid of kufr, for having opined that Allah's istawa was "rising" (in a manner that befits Him).

Abuz Zubair

30th May 2005, 11:49 AM

As-Salaamu ‘Alaikum,

They use 6:76-78 to say that no movement takes place in Allah, and the quality of movement makes something non-eternal, and therefore God must be not move.

The verses refer to Ibrahim – AS – witnessing the stars, the moon and the sun rising and setting, and claiming that ‘This is my Lord’.

Their line of argument goes like this: When Ibrahim saw the star, he said: This is my Lord.

When the star moved and set, He said, this cannot be my Lord ‘I do not like those that disappear’.

Hence, Ibrahim gave a rational proof for his Lord by mentioning the movement quality.

Our response is that firstly, Ibrahim never said ‘I do not like those who move’. Rather he said: ‘I do not like those that disappear’.

Because, the lord that disappears from his creation is not a lord. The Lord is always with His creation.

Secondly, if it was the movement factor which Ibrahim used to discern what is or isn’t his Lord, he would have never claimed the sun to be His Lord, because the sun actually rose (and therefore moved), before it set. Yet, Ibrahim called the sun his Lord, even though it rose and moved. However, he only negated lordship from the sun when it disappeared, NOT when it merely moved.

Therefore, we can conclude from that contrary to what the Ash’aris concluded that Ibrahim does not see movement negating Lordship of Allah, nor does he regard the size negating the Lordship of Allah, for when He looked at the sun, he said: This is my Lord, for this is bigger!

And lastly, Ibrahim does not regard the visibility factor negating the Lordship of Allah, and this comes more as a refutation of the Mu’tazilah than the Ash’aris, because the Ash’aris affirm the visibility of Allah.

And Allah knows best

wasalam

30th May 2005, 12:02 PM

as-Salamu 'alaykum,

I'm impressed with that answer!*******

ghuraba

19th February 2006, 09:11 PM

Assalaamu Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh,

Al Aqeedah Al Wasatiyah

by Ibn Taimiyah

DOWNLOAD:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=D9TXYA3P

The Reason this Creed was written
Ibn Taimiyah said:

"A Shafi'ite judge from Wasit (in Iraq) whose name is Radiy ad-Din al-Wasiti, visited me on his
way to Hajj (pilgrimage). This Sheikh was a man of goodness and faith. He complained to me of
the people's situation in that country (i.e., Iraq ) under the Tatars (Mongols) rule of ignorance,
injustice, and loss of faith and knowledge.
He asked me to write him an 'Aqidah (creed) as a reference to him and his family. But I
declined saying: Many creeds have been written. Refer to the scholars of the Sunnah. However,
he persisted in his request, saying: I do not want any creed but one you write. So I wrote this
one for him while I was sitting one afternoon.
Many copies of it are dispersed throughout Egypt, Iraq and other provinces. (Majmu' Fatawa Ibn
Taimiyah, VIII, p.164)

asharee_salafi

4th March 2006, 05:33 PM

Assalaamulekum,*******

I would like some clarification if that’s ok with you brother Abu Zubair, could you , provided you get time, fill me in with some quick answers. My questions are basically of clarification. I would really appreciate it even if they are simple “yes” or “no” answers despite the length of my questions.*******

*******I made them quite lengthy so that you may understand what I am saying . Point 4 is something to which I would like you to focus on if possible even if you have no time to answer the other questions. May Allah reward you ameen.*******

Please read my questions carefully, (as per usual ;) because I use certain phrases within a precise context. *******

1. There is a physical theory called the multiverse, there are many theories versions of it, one of the versions is that there is an infinite amount of universes that exist. They are continuously springing out of “nothing”. This process is eternal.*******

Is it Halal that we can believe in that, as although the universes have been springing from eternity, they each individually have a beginning, hence we can say that Allah has been creating them from eternity?*******

2. When we say that Allah’s actions have a beginning. Is it the case that they have an apparent beginning and an apparent end? As in actuality we cannot stipulate a “how” for them, if we describe Allah’s actions as actually having a beginning and end then that is saying the how of them, which is wrong.*******

*******Rather we should say we do not say Allah actions in actuality have a beginning ( or we do not know how they are) but in >relation< to human beings we see that Allah has actions that have a beginning and end.*******

One individual told me that it is better to say that Allah’s actions have a beginning and end, but only in relation to us. In actuality they are something we cannot understand, as our minds are bounded by space and time and Allah transcends that. Hence any action of Allah that takes place cannot be rationalised, as Allah is not like his creation.*******

3. When we say that infinite regress can take place, we only say this with regards to Allah, he can act an infinite regress of events back and forward, whereas the creation of Allah can not regress infinitely back with him unless he causes it so.*******

They can only infinitely regress back with him provided they are first initiated into existence by his command. As you quote the hadith Allah is “the first…” and of course Allah himself says: “be and it is”*******

Hence we can use the proof of God examples which the asharee’s use and some ahl Sunnah use ( e.g jafar idris) , that is: something contingent can not regress infinitely and it must end with a non contingent i.e. Allah.*******

But we can only use this argument in with regards to the creation only; hence we can’t make >general< statements and say that events cannot regress infinitely with regards to Allah like the asharee’s do. The problem here is that the asharee’s make valid rational statements but they then apply this rational statement upon the nature of Allah which is false, this is why it lead them to many heresy’s such as saying that the Quran was created.*******

*******

Am I right in the above?*******

4. From the statement of imam tahawi that, paraphrased, “he was the creator before he created anything”*******

We sunnis say that it was not the case that like the asharee’s believe that there was nothing…………and then, all of a sudden the pen came into existence, and then came the other series of events like the creation of the universe etc*******

Before the Pen was created, unlike the asharee’s, we ahl Sunnah wal jammah believe that Allah was never >mute<, Allah was never >dormant<, Allah was never >inactive< , Allah was never >extinct< *******

We do say that the pen is the first of Allah’s creation, however that is just with regards to >our< creation. *******

Because one of Allah attributes is that he is the creator. And he must always therefore be creating, it wasn’t the case that there was an eternity period before the Pen was created . Because again, we believe that ALLAH is the creator from an eternity ago.*******

The asharee’s say Allah will is eternal, but the problem came when it came to ALLAH *enacting* his Will. As they say Allah’s will cannot have instances as with events that come into being must be created (i.e action)*******

Hence ahl Sunnah wal******* jammah recognise that , as you say, when Allah wills something to be it comes about there and then, there is “no delay” to the will coming about.*******

Hence as Allah has been “willing from eternity” he has also been “creating from eternity” and his will his in relation to his creating ability.( I think, correct me if I am wrong)*******

Also Id like to confirm that :Allah has an eternal will that’s not created, Allah has an eternal knowledge that’s not created. So for instance, it’s in Allah’s knowledge that you and me will die at one point within time. *******

But Allah has not willed it to be so yet, because if Allah wills something, then it must come about there and then. *******

So it’s in Allah’s knowledge that you and I will die at one point in time but not in Allah’s will to be carried out as of yet i.e. the act of Allah’s will is not yet into play as he has not willed my death to be right now while typing this (may ALLAH give us long lives making him happy Ameen),*******

This does not mean that Allah will is not acting out somewhere else or that it is created, no rather Allah’s will is not created but is continuously being enacted along with his creating ability. *******

Am I right in the above?5. As Allah wills what he wants when he wants, how comes Allah determined the creation 50,000 years before the actual creation of the heavens and the earth itself ?I ask because if Allah wills something to be so, it must come about without delay.*******Jazak Allahu Kahirun for your help and patience, look forward to hearing from your good self.*******

Your brother,*******

WS*******

*******

*******

Side comment: I think the asharee understanding of a creator is limited because they just have “one role” for Allah where as ALLAH is way above their claims. With the acknowledgement of Allah’s infinite regress of events, we realise really Allah is so great, no mind can ever conceive of him. Ever.*******

waziri

9th March 2006, 03:36 PM

Those are some deep questions,i think i would need severel phds in different sciences to even understand the questions never mind try and answer them.

Its amazing what some people want to know.

asharee_salafi

9th March 2006, 05:16 PM

salaam, No you don't need phd's , you just need to access imam izz al hanafi's book in arabic,

we all need to be acreful to make comments liek that.

just because something is complicated for our own understanding, doesn't mean it should not be asked

ws

waziri

9th March 2006, 08:20 PM

Sorry brother asharee salafi if my post in any way offended you it was not my intention to take the you know what.

I was just a bit dazed after reading your questions,im sure they are perfectly reasonable questions for those inteligent brothers who are in a position to look in to such matters,but as for myself i think i havent reached such a level.

Any way brother please do not take offence and once again sorry if i did offend you in any way.

wasalam

ps maybe you could help me with some aqeeda issues and understanding of certain statements of certain scholars.I asked brother abu zubair a question some time ago and he hasnt replied.

I wanted to know about the statement of ibn Bazz in which he said that Allah[swt]has limits that are not known to us but are known to him[swt],i dont understand this because it states in aqeeda at tahawiya that Allah[swt]is beyond having limits.

JazakAllah brother.

Abuz Zubair

10th March 2006, 07:24 AM

As-Salaamu ‘alaikum, 

There is a physical theory called the multiverse, there are many theories versions of it, one of the versions is that there is an infinite amount of universes that exist. They are continuously springing out of “nothing”. This process is eternal. 

Is it Halal that we can believe in that, as although the universes have been springing from eternity, they each individually have a beginning, hence we can say that Allah has been creating them from eternity? 

As you mentioned, the Multiverse theory has many versions, and it is not easy to prefer one theory over the other without closer examination. 

Theologically speaking, yes, it is possible for parallel worlds to exist, especially according to those scholars who believed that Allah has eternally been a ‘Doer’ and a ‘Creator’, and therefore, the question of ‘beginning of this world’ is restricted to ‘our world’. 

This is also illustrated in the Hadeeth that the first thing Allah created was the pen and ordered it to write all that is going to happen – before He created the heavens and the earth, when His Throne was above water. Here, we are told that the Throne was already in existence before He created the pen, and yet, the pen was the first of the creation; meaning in terms of our universe. 

As far as the existence infinite amount of universes is concerned, then it does seem problematic. For if there was an infinite amount of universes, then where is Allah? Secondly, infinity is possible, positively and negatively (1, 2, 3… and -1, -2, -3…) but its existence is restricted to our imagination. Moreover, as a matter of principle, even if the infinite is brought into existence in the real world, it must turn into finite, because it is impossible for finite to contain the infinite. 

For the universe to spring out of nothing, goes beyond reason, for nothing comes out of nothing. If we say that Allah brings them out of nothing, then that makes perfect sense, for every possible existence must have a cause that tips it into existence, or non-existence. As for this process being eternal, then I don’t see why it would be problematic, so long as all the universes have a beginning, and the originator is Allah, because each of these universes will always remain preceded by Allah; and hence Allah is al-Awwal Laisa Qablahu Shai’ (The First, without any thing preceding Him). 

However, endorsing the philosophy of multiverse in particular requires further insight into what this theory, and its various versions, are actually about. 

When we say that Allah’s actions have a beginning. Is it the case that they have an apparent beginning and an apparent end? As in actuality we cannot stipulate a “how” for them, if we describe Allah’s actions as actually having a beginning and end then that is saying the how of them, which is wrong 

When we say Allah’s actions have a beginning and an end, we mean that literally, because this is how Allah refers to His Speech in his Book: 

“No mention comes to them [i]anew (Muhdath) from their Lord except that they listen to it while they are at play” (al-Anbiya: 2) 

Here Allah describes His Speech as Muhdath, that which comes into being from nothingness. Yet, not every Muhdath is necessarily a creation, such as Allah’s speech. This where we must distinguish between Muhdath (something new) and Makhluq (creation), which the Jahmites, Mu’tazalites and the Ash’arites fail to recognize. 

In other words, actions of Allah come into being, and so do our actions, yet actions of Allah are not created, whereas our actions are created. 

One individual told me that it is better to say that Allah’s actions have a beginning and end, but only in relation to us. In actuality they are something we cannot understand, as our minds are bounded by space and time and Allah transcends that. Hence any action of Allah that takes place cannot be rationalised, as Allah is not like his creation 

This individual’s statement sounds vague, and it could have a correct or an incorrect meaning; although it seems that the intended meaning here is the incorrect one. 

To say the Allah transcends space and time is also vague, with both, correct and incorrect connotations. Primarily because we cannot even agree on the definition of time and space, let alone negating or attributing them to Allah. 

Likewise, the last statement that Allah’s actions are beyond reason is also vague. Shariah does not come with intellectual impossibilities, but it does come with issues that leave one amazed; such as the issue we are discussion (infinite regress of events in the past), or the issue of the Punishment of the Grave. Hence, Allah’s actions are not completely beyond reason, yet they are not fully comprehendible. Especially Allah’s actions like the act of creation at various points in time, etc. In fact, they are only problematic to the Mu’tazilites and the Ash’arites, and it only requires one to take of the Ash’ari goggles and look at things differently. 

When we say that infinite regress can take place, we only say this with regards to Allah, he can act an infinite regress of events back and forward, whereas the creation of Allah can not regress infinitely back with him unless he causes it so. 

They can only infinitely regress back with him provided they are first initiated into existence by his command. As you quote the hadith Allah is “the first…” and of course Allah himself says: “be and it is” 

Hence we can use the proof of God examples which the asharee’s use and some ahl Sunnah use ( e.g jafar idris) , that is: something contingent can not regress infinitely and it must end with a non contingent i.e. Allah. 

But we can only use this argument in with regards to the creation only; hence we can’t make >general< statements and say that events cannot regress infinitely with regards to Allah like the asharee’s do. The problem here is that the asharee’s make valid rational statements but they then apply this rational statement upon the nature of Allah which is false, this is why it lead them to many heresy’s such as saying that the Quran was created. 

The concept of ‘infinite regress’ can be categorized into three: 

1) The necessary infinite regress of events: Allah’s actions that He has been performing eternally as He Wills, and thus He refers to Himself as: Fa’aalun li-ma yureed, Doer of what He Intends. Allah’s Perfection dictates that He is Fa’aalun li-ma yureed eternally (past and future), for the lack of this quality at any point in time denotes imperfection, and Allah is far above that. 

2) The possible infinite regress: The object of His Actions, i.e. the creation. So if the Ash’aris deem it possible for the creation regress infinitely in the future, there is no reason why it should be impossible in the past, for Allah has always been the Doer and the Creator, in the past as well as the future. Although, it does not necessarily mean that the creation has always co-existed with the Creator, for Allah always precedes every single one of His creation, hence, every creation has a beginning, whereas Allah doesn’t. 

3) The impossible infinite regress: The infinite regress of causes, such that every cause is caused by a cause before it ad inifitum, for that will mean that nothing ever comes about. Like a soldier wanting to fire his gun, awaiting orders from his commander, who awaits order from his commander ad infinitum, the gun will never be fired, and likewise if this type of infinite regress was possible, the world would not be in existence. 

Yes, we can use their basic argument: Everything that comes into being (Hadith) must have an originator (Muhdith). But is not necessarily their argument. They have no copyright on it, and in fact, Allah himself mentions this argument in the Quran (‘Were they created from nothing? Or are they the creators?’) 

What becomes problematic is when they transcend the obvious and introduce other arguments based on the first argument: i) Accidents (‘Aradh) come into being, ii) Accidents do not exist independently, rather they are contained within atoms (Jawhar), iii) Everything that consists of qualities that come into being (Hawadith), itself comes into being (Muhadath), iv) Therefore, atoms come into being (Muhdath), and hence they are created, v) bodies are composed of atoms, so they must also be created, vi) the universe is composed of bodies, that means the universe is also created, vii) If the universe comes into being, that means it must have a cause to bring it about, viii) Because infinite regress in the past is impossible, the chain must end at the ultimate Creator. 

These set of arguments are problematic, because firstly they are too long and secondly they are too ambiguous. For instance, there is difference of opinion amongst theologians as to what exactly is ‘Aradh, and is it the same as Sifah? What is the definition of Jawhar, or Jism (body), etc. Hence, this line of argumentation is too subjective and unnecessarily complicated. 

We do not need to go that deeply to prove that the world around us has a beginning, because we can sense through our five basic senses that everything around us comes about from nothing and ends. So if something is proven via five senses, it does not require such a longwinded line of argumentation and thinking to be proven. Such line of argumentation is only needed for things that are not obvious, or cannot be proven through five senses. 

Whether this argument is restricted to the creation, or also applied to Allah, then I need to agree first what this argument is. If we say that what we are denying here is infinite regress in the past altogether, then that cannot be applicable to Allah for the reasons stated above. If we are being more specific here, and negating only the infinite regress of causes, then yes, that is only applicable to the creation. 

We sunnis say that it was not the case that like the asharee’s believe that there was nothing…………and then, all of a sudden the pen came into existence, and then came the other series of events like the creation of the universe etc 

Whether the first thing to be created is in reference to our world, or every world is a matter of dispute amongst Ahl al-Sunnah. What seems to be the case is that al-Tahawi believes that the beginning mentioned in the Hadeeth is with reference to all the worlds, and not just our world. This understanding is a result of their understanding of the Hadith, and not that they share the Ash’ari principle of negating infinite regress with respect to Allah in the past. This is why al-Tahawi explicitly states: He was a creator before He created, to refute the Mu’tazilites and the Ash’arites. 

Rest of what you said sounds right. 

Hence as Allah has been “willing from eternity” he has also been “creating from eternity” and his will his in relation to his creating ability.( I think, correct me if I am wrong) 

Yes, for Allah to bring something about, He must have a) the will and b) the ability, and He has always had these two qualities, which means He was never incapable of Creation. Ash’aris, because they believe that infinite regress is impossible, they say that before Allah triggered the events into action, it was impossible for His to Create. But then it became possible for Him to create. This is nonsensical, for if an impossible becomes possible, it means it always has been possible. 

As Allah wills what he wants when he wants, how comes Allah determined the creation 50,000 years before the actual creation of the heavens and the earth itself ? 

I ask because if Allah wills something to be so, it must come about without delay 

Because Allah simply didn’t will for it to come about, except after 50,000 years. So when he willed for it to come about – that is after 50,000 years from writing the decree – the creation came about due to His Will coinciding with His Ability. 

Dear brother Waziri, 

The philosophical discussion above is a waste of time. The companions did not know about atoms, accidents or bodies, etc, yet they are guaranteed paradise. 

Others, like al-Fakhr al-Razi, the most intelligent theologian Ash’aris ever had, ended up writing books on witchcraft, and according to al-Dhahabi if it wasn’t for his repentance in his will, he would have died on apostasy. 

Guidance is in the sound divine texts, which never contradict sane intellect. 

Another point to note here, is that the Ash’aris consider it an obligation on part of every layman to reach God through these intellectual arguments, and that the failure to do so renders a person a Fasiq (according to the majority of Ash’aris), or even a Kafir (according to some Ash’aris). Yet, most – if not all – of the so-called Ash’aris today are clueless with respect to these arguments, and therefore Fussaq according to their own theology! 

I wanted to know about the statement of ibn Bazz in which he said that Allah[swt]has limits that are not known to us but are known to him[swt],i dont understand this because it states in aqeeda at tahawiya that Allah[swt]is beyond having limits. 

It depends what one means by the term ‘limit’, because the term is ambiguous and doesn’t have its origins in the divine texts, such that it can be given a Sharai meaning. 

If one says: Allah is limited, meaning that Allah has a limit which distinguishes Him from the rest of His creation, then yes, we affirm this limit for Allah, and this is the context in which Ibn al-Mubarak and Imam Ahmad affirmed a limit for Allah, as it is authentically narrated from them both. Otherwise, as Mr. TJ Winters admitted, if Allah is unlimited, then where is the space? Meaning, his assertion of unity of existence (Wahdat al-Wujud) 

If one says: Allah is limited, meaning that Allah’s control and dominion over the creation, or that His Knowledge, or other attributes are limited, then we cannot affirm that meaning, and this is the context in which Imam Ahmad and later al-Tahawi, negated limits from Allah. 

Wallahu Alam

waziri

10th March 2006, 10:02 AM

JazakAllah khair brother Abuz Zubair.

asharee_salafi

10th March 2006, 04:53 PM

Assalaam'ualykum brother Abu Zubair.

Jazak Allahu Khairun , thanks so much for the kind and detailed reply, could I please interest you in the following link about Ibn Taymiyyah and his posistion on infinite regress 

http://www.islamtoday.net/english/showme2.cfm?cat_id=31&sub_cat_id=810 (http://www.islamtoday.net/english/showme2.cfm?cat_id=31&sub_cat_id=810)

Its really good.

You have given a deep reply and I need time to think and read it through properly.

But could I make some quick points?

1. In Imam Izz al hanafi's book he quotes the hadeeth, parafrased, "there was nothing along with Allah" how is that reconciled with Allah creating from eternity? Or are their different versions of this hadeeth ? Maybe from my reading that " there was nothing along with Allah" is specific for this creation only.

2. You say 

"3) The impossible infinite regress: The infinite regress of causes, such that every cause is caused by a cause before it ad inifitum, for that will mean that nothing ever comes about. Like a soldier wanting to fire his gun, awaiting orders from his commander, who awaits order from his commander ad infinitum, the gun will never be fired, and likewise if this type of infinite regress was possible, the world would not be in existence. 



Yes you are right, there are 3 ways to look at infinite regress , Im surprised you brought up the issue. Where did you find this concept from? As I seen it mentioned in a few non Muslim articles. 

Anyways, you are right, giving that example.

But am I right in thinking therefore from the 3 points you mentioned that :

Each creation has its own cause and effect chain that can not run into eternity but must have a beginning as you mention . But Allah can create each creation for over eternity ?

Hence lets say for arguments sake, their is an infinite amount of worlds that Allah has created.

Each one of these worlds by themselves can not be without a beginning i.e have causes that run into infinitum but must have an initial beginning. By Allah's good will.

But the worlds themselves are forever being created. springing into existense AFTER Allah gives his command.

Jazak Allahu Khairuna nd thansk for taking the time and effort.

P.S Would you say I am getting the overall idea?

Dear Brother Wazir, no problems, forgive me if I counded rude as I type to fast!

Abuz Zubair

15th March 2006, 07:15 AM

In Imam Izz al hanafi's book he quotes the hadeeth, parafrased, "there was nothing along with Allah" how is that reconciled with Allah creating from eternity? Or are their different versions of this hadeeth ? Maybe from my reading that " there was nothing along with Allah" is specific for this creation only. 

Yes, the Hadeeth is in reference to our world, because: 

a) Because the people from Yemen came to the Prophet – SallAllahu ‘alaihi wa-sallam – and asked him specifically about this world (We came to ask you about the beginning of this being) 

b) The Hadeeth has been narrated with three different wordings: ‘there was nothing before Him’, ‘there was nothing with Him’ and ‘there is none other than Him’, while the incident only happened once. This shows that only one of these narrations have been narrated word-by-word, while other narrations have been narrated by meaning. Yet, there are other narrations that support the wording: ‘there was nothing before Him’, such as the Prophet’s words: ‘O Lord, You are the First and there is nothing before You’, whereas no other narration supports the other wordings. 

c) The narration also mentions: ‘His Throne was above water’ which clearly indicates that the Throne – a creation – was with Allah, before He created our world. 

Yes you are right, there are 3 ways to look at infinite regress , Im surprised you brought up the issue. Where did you find this concept from? As I seen it mentioned in a few non Muslim articles 

This is found in Ibn Abil-‘Izz’s Sharh. Can you refer me to the articles written by non-Muslims? Are they accessible on the web? 

Everything else you said sounds right… 

wasalam

asharee_salafi

17th March 2006, 04:15 PM

Assalaamulekum wr wb





1.[quote]To say the Allah transcends space and time is also vague, with both, correct and incorrect connotations. Primarily because we cannot even agree on the definition of time and space, let alone negating or attributing them to Allah. [quote]

*******

**************

When I say transcendent I mean, "separate". To what I understand the Salaf said that Allah was “above and separate” from his creation.

*******

I spoke to Sheikh Haytham and I asked him about the argument to which the Ash’arees use whereby they say that:

*******

"If you say Allah is above us, then what about if you go on the other side of the side of the earth*******and say Allah is above me, is Allah there too?"

*******

Sheikh Haytham told me that when we are on the North Pole and then we travel down to the South Pole of the earth why don’t we feel like we are on the underside of planet Earth? He said that the reason why we do not feel like we are on the underside is because the earth is so big that we lose the sense of direction that we are on the underside. Hence as the size increases the concept of dimensions goes away such that Allah will always be above us.

*******

Sheikh Haytham continued to say that the whole of Allah’s creation is a dot in his Hand ( to which he said there is a hadeeth to that effect) .Hence Allah surrounds that dot i.e. the creation ( in a manner without asking how)

*******

So because compared to Allah the whole of creation loses dimension, hence anywhere on that dot is "up".

*******

That’s what he said to me.

*******

Imagine a ball, everywhere on that ball is the direction up. So when we say Allah is beyond us we are simply saying he exists. So if we are laying down Allah is above us, if we are held up side down Allah is above us, if we are standing, Allah is above us at every angle.

*******



The universe, regardless of its topology will be a dot in the sight of God, and hence God would still be above them regardless of how the universe is shaped

An example would be a beach ball representing the universe, up close we see it has 3 dimensions but as soon as we take the ball further away into the horizon it loses its dimensions and becomes a dot in the horizon. So anywhere on this dot is "up"



Hence the universe is merely a dot in the sight of God and hence God is above the universe where ever we are,********************* 



When we say Allah is above, we cannot envisage him as a body over a throne because Allah exists beyond the universe realm of space ( i.e the creation) and hence the concept of distance becomes nullified.



Please go to this link*******( Im going to regret saying this!…) “Al-Qurtubee, adh-Dhahabee and al-Albaanee on al-Istiwaa and al'Uluww (http://www.salafipublications.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=AQD05&articleID=AQD050003&articlePages=1)**************" To see what I mean.



Do you think my justification is right?

2. Also, can you confirm that when you say Allah’s actions have a beginning and an end and arise from nothing, that you are not saying the takyeef or the “how” of Allah’s attributes. 

*******Not every person who says the “how” of Allahs attributes is from the mushabihah. Because some describe the actuality of Allahs actions/attributes but acknowledge that Allah is not like his creation. Which is Batil.

*******Please confirm 





Thanks ever so much,

Look forward to hearing from you,WSP.S http://www.stnews.org/Books-2489.htm*******heres that link

abuzayd

28th July 2008, 11:27 PM

It would seem that sunnianswers.com has a response using one of AZ's assertions.

http://sunnianswers.wordpress.com/2008/07/25/wahabi-contention-an-infinite-progression-is-impossible-according-to-the-wahabis/#comments

Skillganon

29th July 2008, 12:22 AM

asharee_salafi

31st July 2008, 03:20 PM

my my my old thread, how much things have changed! i check that l;ink already, im respect themf or being hardcore asharis and being honest with their aqeedah, as many of their contemporaries like to play word games.

Bassam Zawadi

13th September 2008, 08:26 AM

Therefore, Ahlus-Sunnah reject the Philosophers’ argument, that that which is willed co-exists with the will, just as they reject the Ash’ari argument, that that which is willed is delayed and comes much after the actual will. Rather, we say that that which is willed comes straight after His Will and is not delayed at all, for whatever Allah wills, happens, and whatever He does not Will, does not happen.

why can't Allah will that something occurs much later? Why are we necessarily assuming that whenever Allah wants to will something to occur, He needs it to occur immediately right after?

'Abd al-Kareem

13th September 2008, 10:52 AM

why can't Allah will that something occurs much later? Why are we necessarily assuming that whenever Allah wants to will something to occur, He needs it to occur immediately right after?I have read the following thread on al-Multaqa (english) and I know you have as well:
http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=2049

I am also confused on the matter, hopefully it can be cleared up insha Allah.

From what I understand: the people of kalaam say that Allah has already willed everything that is to occur and He is no longer willing anything to happen. If He were to will something to happen, they would consider this a change or whatever and they can't accept that. We have no problem saying that whenever Allah subhaanahu wa ta'aala wills something, He says 'Kun' (be) and it becomes.

You are asking: What is wrong with believing that Allah 'azza wa jall wills for something to happen at a later time? For example we know that Allah is going to end this dunya. He has willed that it did not happen yet, and it is going to happen soon. This does not show inability or imperfection.

I have the same question.

islamiclife

13th September 2008, 11:21 AM

why can't Allah will that something occurs much later? Why are we necessarily assuming that whenever Allah wants to will something to occur, He needs it to occur immediately right after?Shaylh Haitham has already covered this on Multaqa.

brother Basam, from textual evidence it is clear that Allah Ta'ala says "be and it is". From logically point of view, if you will something to happen, it cannot happen after years or so because it is bound to happen right away but if you don't want it to happen right away then you will not to will it to happen right away, lol. So first or second will has to come into action right away. It is logically impossible to prove that will can wait for years to happen.

wallahu a'lam

Abuz Zubair

13th September 2008, 12:42 PM

why can't Allah will that something occurs much later? Why are we necessarily assuming that whenever Allah wants to will something to occur, He needs it to occur immediately right after?
He can, but this isn't the dispute here.

We are saying that irrespective of WHEN, when Allah wants to do something it occurs. The Ash'aris say that it CANNOT occur up until the point when Allah decided to create the creation. I.e. It was impossible for Allah to create before that.

Plz read this (http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?t=16031) and this (http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?t=14556).

intheheartofgreenbirds

13th September 2008, 02:41 PM

I was having a debate with a ash`ari last night and I am in the midst of finding information from classical scholars to refute him insha Allah.. any help will be appreciated

mkeastone

13th September 2008, 04:16 PM

i was gona write a long reply. I'd be lying if I said I didnt think about this as well. The way I deal with these issues is that I take what the scholars both classic and contemporary scholars have said try to grasp the concept without asking too many question.

For example, Allah rose above the throne. Yes i believe that and i accept that. for me to think and say how? was the throne above Him? i stay away from this as i see this as danger. Who knows what the arsh is like, or the heavens and what is beyond. Who knows what dimensions and directions there are...?

Because this is rather confusing like Qadr sometimes.. I just believe it without trying to get into it too much.

Im not having a pop at anyone, im just trying to explain how I dealt with this.
Allah knows best