Ibn Jawzi rebukes Abul Hasan al-Ashari [Archive]

View Full Version : Ibn Jawzi rebukes Abul Hasan al-Ashari

qadri

21st May 2006, 06:40 PM

as salaamu'alaikum.

Please see the link:
http://z3.invisionfree.com/sunnipress/index.php?showtopic=336

abu_zayd99

22nd May 2006, 04:21 AM

*******

Originally Posted by qadri

as salaamu'alaikum.

Please see the link:
http://z3.invisionfree.com/sunnipress/index.php?showtopic=336


Could you translate this or anyone else?******* JazaakAllah Khairun.

Also, Abuz Zubair is this the aforementioned text in regards to ibn al-jawzi and the ashaa'ira?

Abuz Zubair

22nd May 2006, 01:22 PM

The following is an excerpt from my forthcoming bio on Ibn al-Jawzi.

You will find the passage from Sayd al-Khatir translated below.

Ash’ari theologians
The vehement defence of the Sunna and palpable attacks on unorthodox views were a distinct feature of Ibn al-Jawzi’s sermons. His attacks against the Ash’aris include his famous remark he once made on the pulpit: ‘The heretics claim; i) there is none in the Heavens, ii) neither is there Qur’an in the Mushaf, and iii) nor is there a Prophet in the grave; ‘your three shameful facets’’ *******

Ibn al-Jawzi writes, while complaining about certain Ash’arites indoctrinating the masses with the Ash’arite dogma: ‘A group of non-Arab heretics arrived in Baghdad and mounted the pulpits to sermon the masses. They would claim, in most of their gatherings: There is no ‘Speech of Allah’ on the earth, and is the Mushaf anything but paper, Galls and Vitriol?******* Allah is not in the Heavens, and the slave-girl to whom the Prophet said: ‘Where is Allah?’ was dumb and therefore pointed towards the sky, meaning: He is not from the idols worshipped on this earth.

They then said: ‘Where are the ‘letterists’, who claim that the Quran is composed of letters and sound? Rather, the Quran is only an expression of Jibril.’ They continued in this vein, until the sacredness of the Quran diminished in the hearts of many.’

He then mentions at length, the arguments for the orthodox approach towards the Quran, and commends Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal for his rigid stance in the issue, which united all the Muslims on one belief: the Quran, which is contained in the Mushaf, is the uncreated Speech of Allah. He then mentions al-Ash’ari in a disparaging manner saying: ‘Then, people did not differ in this issue, until there appeared ‘Ali b. Isma’il al-Ash’ari, who at first, held the beliefs of the Mu’tazilites. It then occurred to him, as he claimed, that Allah’s Speech is subsisting in the divine Essence (sifah qa’imah bil-that). His claim, therefore, necessitated that what we have (of the Quran) is created.’

Theological errors
Ibn al-Jawzi created a storm in the traditionalist-textualist Hanbali school by writing his infamous book Daf’ Shubah al-Tashbih bi Akuff al-Tanzih (Rebuttal of the Insinuations of Anthropomorphism at the Hands of Divine Transcendence), which drew fierce attacks from all corners of the Hanbali world. The book came is a reaction to Ibn Hamid, Abu Ya’la and Ibn al-Zaghuni, who too were accused of fanaticism in their approach to affirming Allah’s attribute, for often they would use baseless and unfounded narrations to affirm an Attribute for Allah.

Ibn Taymiyya writes about the three aforementioned:
‘…from the third category are those who heard the traditions and the narrations, glorified the beliefs of the early Muslims, yet also shared some of the principles of the Jahmite-Mutakallimun. They did not have as much expertise in the Quran, Hadith and traditions, as did the Imams of Sunnah and Hadith; neither from the angle of distinguishing between the Sahih and the Dha’if, nor from the angle of grasping the meanings of those texts. They also held some of the intellectual arguments of the Jahmite-negators to be correct, and therefore, saw a visible contradiction between the two (text and rationale). This was the case with Abu Bakr Ibn Furak, al-Qadhi Abu Ya’la, Ibn ‘Aqil, et al. Due to this, they would sometimes prefer the method of allegorical exegesis (ta’wil), as did Ibn Furak and his likes while commenting on problematic traditions; or sometimes, they would ‘leave the meanings to Allah’ (tafwidh) saying: the apparent meaning must be retained (tujra ‘ala dhawahiriha), as did al-Qadhi Abu Ya’la and his likes; and sometimes, their opinions would differ, hence, they would prefer the former method at times, and the latter at other times, as was the case with Ibn ‘Aqil and his likes. Moreover, they would often mention amongst the problematic traditions, narrations that are false and fabricated, not knowing that they are forged; or not knowing the same tradition with a different wording which may solve the problem.’

Ibn al-Jawzi was more impressed with Ibn ‘Aqil than the others mentioned by Ibn Taymiyya, due to which he would often go for tafwidh, while sometimes opting for ta’wil. Such contradictory stance is demonstrated by his interpretation (ta’wil) of the Face of Allah, as referring to Allah’s essence in Daf’ Shubah al-Tashbih ; and then the rebuttal of the Mu’tazilites for the exact interpretation he is guilty of in Majalis Ibn al-Jawzi.******* In similar vein, he censures those who opt for Ta’wil and brands them ‘negators of Attributes’, and further denounces the Mu’tazalite interpretation of Hands as bounties, Ascension (istawa) as seizure (istawla), or Descent (nuzul) as mercy; yet he is found guilty of the same crimes in Daf’ Shubah al-Tashbih.

Towards the end of his work, Ibn al-Jawzi remarks: ‘When a group of ignorant ones learnt of my book, they were disappointed, for they had become used to the beliefs of their anthropomorphist leaders. Thus they said: This is not the Madhab.

I say (Ibn al-Jawzi): This is not your Madhab, nor the Madhab of those from your teachers you blind follow. I have, however, exonerated the Madhab of Imam Ahmad, and cleared him from the false narrations and nonsense utterances, without blind following anyone in my beliefs.’

No doubt, that none can challenge Ibn al-Jawzi’s claim with respect to himself; but as for exonerating Imam Ahmad of beliefs he views as anthropomorphism, then the scarcity of quotes from Imam Ahmad in his work, in spite of their copious presence in other popular and widely accepted Hanbali sources, remains a far cry from his claim. Al-Dhahabi also noticed Ibn al-Jawzi’s departure from the doctrine of Imam Ahmad and remarked: ‘… his excellence continued to increase and gain popularity until he died. May Allah have mercy on him and forgive him! Only if he did not indulge in allegorical exegesis (ta’wil) and opposed his Imam!’

Inevitably, he received criticisms by various Hanbali authorities, from his age up until today. From his contemporary critics was the Hanbali ‘Sheikh of Iraq’, Abu al-Fadhl Ishaq b. Muhammad al-‘Althi, who addressed Ibn al-Jawzi in harsh words in a letter, most of which was quoted by Ibn Rajab in Dhayl .

From the highlights of the letter is al-‘Althi’s remarks addressing Ibn al-Jawzi:
‘Amazing is of someone who adheres to the Madhab of the Salaf, and does not deem permissible to indulge in Kalam, who then moves to interpret that which he did not tolerate at first. He then says: If we say such and such, it would lead to such and such.

‘If you interpret the divine Attributes based upon linguistic interpretations, deeming it permissible for you, and refuse to accept the advice, (then know that) this is not the Madhab of the great Imam, Ahmad b. Hanbal – May Allah sanctify his soul. Therefore, it is not fitting for you to attribute yourself to him with such beliefs. So chose for yourself a different Madhab, if it is possible for you. For our (Hanbali) colleagues have not ceased to proclaim the blatant truth at all times, even if they were struck with the swords, not fearing anyone’s criticism.’

Thus, Ibn al-Jawzi’s account in nearly all Hanbali biographical works remained tainted with this criticism. Ibn Rajab quotes Ibn al-Qadisi’s remarks on Ibn al-Jawzi’s controversy:

‘[The error] for which he was criticised by a group of our scholars and Imams from the Maqdisis and the ‘Althis [Hanbalis], was his tendency towards allegorical exegesis (ta’wil) in some of his speech. Their criticisms were severe in that regard. No doubt, his beliefs in this issue were quite contradictory. Even though, he was well-versed in traditions and narrations regarding the subject matter, he was not well-aware of the responses to the doubts of the Mutakallimun, nor the extent of their fallacy. He would also hold Abu al-Wafa Ibn ‘Aqil in great respect, and follow most of his beliefs, in spite of refuting him in some issues. Although, Ibn ‘Aqil excelled in Kalam, he wasn’t au fait on traditions and narrations, due to which he was inconsistent in this subject, with variegated opinions, and Ibn al-Jawzi simply followed him in his variegated opinions.’

Ibn Rajab then quotes Ibn Qudama saying:

‘Ibn al-Jawzi was the leading authority on the art of preaching in his age. He also authored excellent works in various sciences, and his efforts were generally accepted. He would teach Fiqh and author books to that end, just as he had memorised traditions and also authored in that respect. However, we are not pleased with his writings with respect to Sunnah (doctrine), nor his approach.’

The latest rebuttal of Daf’ Shubhat al-Tashbih is a two volume book by a contemporary Hanbali theologian and a traditionist, Sulayman b. Nasir al-‘Alwan called: Ithaf ahl al-Fadhl wal-Insaf bi Naqdh Kitab Ibn al-Jawzi Daf’ Shubah al-Tashbih wa Ta’liqat al-Saqqaf (An Offering to the Noble and Just, by Rebuttal of the book by Ibn al-Jawzi Daf’ Shubah al-Tashbih, and commentary of al-Saqqaf thereupon)

Due to Ibn al-Jawzi’s theological slips, some modern-day, and rather zealous Ash’arites have described him as an Ash’ari who ‘took a staunch Ash`ari stance in doctrine’; which comes as rather astonishing, since none from the Muslim biographers or historians ever described him as such. On the contrary, in spite of sharing some aspects of doctrine with the Ash’arites, he was nevertheless, a staunch Ash’ari detractor, as demonstrated in a number of his works.

abu_zayd99

24th May 2006, 04:42 AM

Assalaamualaikum Abuz Zubair,

*******

Some more stuff they are trying to say:

*******

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14139

*******

I was just listenting to Sheikh Waleed Basiyouni's lecture on the Jahmis, Mu'tazila and Ashaa'ira(havent finshed it up yet though), he was mentioning how the Jahmis have the thought that Allah exisits but doesnt exsist so as to fufill the ayah that Allah not like*******unto the*******creation.

*******

So do the Ashaa'ira believe in that as well?

*******

How do we respond to what they are insuniating.******* I remember the shiekh saying that ok one Allah exists or He doesnt,

if you say He does exsist and He doesnt, you are making Allah impossible so how can you ask people to worship something that is impossible.******* Also you say he doesnt exsist but He does, we say that as we hear Allah hears, as we see Allah sees etc...but His hearing is different from our hearing, His seeing is different from our seeing etc...and so His exsistance is different from our exsistance.

Waiting for your reply.******* JazaakAllah Khairun.

abu_zayd99

24th May 2006, 05:15 AM

Here is one of their responses:

*******

*******
Bismillah, May Allah send peace and blessing upon Muhammad, his family, his companion and his followers.

The Number one problem with Abuz Zubair’s Logic is as follows:

*******

1. He thinks of Allah in terms of His creation.
*******
***********************************
*******Abuz Zubair said, “We think of Allah in comparison to His creation, as the Prophet – SallAllahu ‘alaihi wa-sallam – said that the like the Heavens and the earth in Allah’s grasp are smaller than the smallest of particle in the hand of a human being. If one understand this, the relativity, and therefore irrelevance, of directions, such as upwards and downwards becomes obvious.”*******

And then basis his permissibility for this on his misunderstanding of a hadith in which he accuses the Prophet (sallahu alayhi wa salaam) of comparing Allah to His Creation.

*******
****************************
*******
Originally Posted by Abuz Zubair

You showed your concern about comparing Allah to His creation, yet the Prophet – SallAllahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam – too, compared Allah to His creation, saying that we will see Allah, just as we see the full moon in clear sky.
The prophet to you, is an outright anthropomorphist, for he too, compared Allah to the moon.

May be it is time that you look in the mirror and admit, that perhaps you are on a different deen than the Prophet and the companions?

After all, when we make statements that you call anthropomorphic, we are always able to bring textual proofs that are even more anthropomorphic.

*******
*******
If one actually read the narration of the Prophet (sallahu alayhi wa salaam) is NOT comparing Allah to the Moon but rather he is explaining that we will have no difficulty in seeing Allah, just as we have no difficulty seeing the moon. He is ONLY explaining the Clarity of our seeing ALLAH. The Prophet (sallahu alyhi wa salaam) is NOT explaining any Attribute of Allah, Characteristic of Allah, nor an Action of Allah. He is explaining our attribute.

Abu Hurayrah relates: They (the Companions of the Prophet) said: O Messenger of Allaah, will we be able to see our Lord on the Day of Judgement? He replied: "Do you have any difficulty in seeing the sun at noon when there is no cloud over it?" They said: No. He again said: "Do you have any difficulty in seeing the moon on the fourteenth night when there is no cloud over it?" They said: No. Thereupon he said: "By Allah Who is the One in Whose Hand is my life, you will not face any more difficulty in seeing your Lord than you face in seeing one of them." (Muslim)

He is in NO WAY comparing Allah with the moon or the sun.

Now look at Ibn Taymiyyah’s statement, “His saying "He is with you" does not mean that He is commingled with the creatures: The language does not indicate this and it is against what the early generation of the Ummah agreed upon, and contrary to Allah's creation of all things; For example, the moon is one of Allah's Signs to be found amongst the smallest of his creatures; It is placed in the skies where it is at the same time with both the traveler and the non-traveller, wherever they are; and He, The Glorified, is on the Throne, watching over His creatures, ruling over them; This is, as well as other Signs of His Lordship."

Here Ibn Taymiyyah is comparing Allah with-ness with the With-ness of the moon.

I even color coded it to make it easy to see how Ibn taymiyyah is comparing Allah to the moon.

The difference is The Prophet is explaining our sight and Ibn Taymiyyah is explaining Allah's with-ness with His servants.

Ibn Taymiyyah is explaining the howness of Allah's with-ness.
The Prophet is explaining the Clarity of our vision.

That is a big difference.

That is a clear proof that Ibn Taymiyyah was an anthropomorphist and the text that he provided is NOT a proof.

Any logical person can see that.

And more can be said about this.

And Allah knows best.

*******

Also this:

*******

Subhan Allah. Ustadh Abdullah ibn Hamid `Ali just responded to this. Here is what he said, from Tariqul-Islam:
***********************************
*******Statements like "Allah is neither inside the world nor outside of 

it" and "He is neither connected to the world or disjoined from it" are true statements that can be ascribed to some of our Ash'ari brethren.

As for the argument that if Allah is neither inside nor outside of the world, then it would mean that He doesn't exist, since everything that exists must have a place, this is one of the erroneous assumptions made by Salafis that they have inherited from some of our great scholars of the past, like Imam Hafiz Al-Dhahabi, in spite of its erroneousness.

What makes it erroneous is that when you say that "Every thing in existence has a place" And since Allah is a 'thing' He must have a place too," you are saying that Allah is a thing comparable to other things. Or He is a thing comparable to created things. And that is making an analogy between Creator and creation, when there is unanimous agreement that no such analogy can be made!

For Allah said, "There is nothing like unto Him." [42:11] He said, "Do not draw likenesses to Allah." [16:74] And He said, "For Allah is the Highest Similitude [16:60]."

Imam Bukhari reports that the Prophet (pbuh) said that in the beginning, "There was Allah. And there was nothing other than Him." In one narration it states, "with Him." And in another it states, "before Him." This means that there was no time and no place with Him, since He is the Creator of both time and place. And if you deny that He is inside the world, you also have to deny that He is outside the world, since a place outside of the world is still a place. And all places are created by Him. So if we said that He is in a place outside of the world, we are still saying that He is inside of His creation.

This is the thing that Salafis don't understand. And their assumptions are derived from the fact that they incline toward likening Allah to creation anyway.*******
*******

*******
And in sha Allah, Shaykh Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah repented from his beliefs and was misunderstood. Regardless of what he said, he is one of the scholars of this ummah, and "the flesh of the scholars is poison."

======================================

The above was from the site.******* If you could respond to them that would be great.

danish al hyderabadee

24th May 2006, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by abu_zayd99

Assalaamualaikum Abuz Zubair,



Some more stuff they are trying to say:



http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14139



I was just listenting to Sheikh Waleed Basiyouni's lecture on the Jahmis, Mu'tazila and Ashaa'ira(havent finshed it up yet though), he was mentioning how the Jahmis have the thought that Allah exisits but doesnt exsist so as to fufill the ayah that Allah not like unto the creation.



So do the Ashaa'ira believe in that as well?



How do we respond to what they are insuniating. I remember the shiekh saying that ok one Allah exists or He doesnt,

if you say He does exsist and He doesnt, you are making Allah impossible so how can you ask people to worship something that is impossible. Also you say he doesnt exsist but He does, we say that as we hear Allah hears, as we see Allah sees etc...but His hearing is different from our hearing, His seeing is different from our seeing etc...and so His exsistance is different from our exsistance.

Waiting for your reply. JazaakAllah Khairun.

Of the 7 Attributes that the Asharis affirm is the attribute of existence.....along with KNowledge, Will, Power, Hearing, Sight, Speech

it was the pseudo-muslim jahmi groups that said that existence is an attribute of humans and there is nothing like God, so therefore God cannot exist.

Allah's existence has been answered by Allah in the Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet (SAW). Abuz Zubair in another post also mentioned this, i think under "Rotten Apples and Oranges"

Allahu Alim

danish al hyderabadee

24th May 2006, 11:01 AM

Salaam....i seem to have taken a shot at their futile kalaam....but i dont know if its good enough.....Allahu Alim

Abuz Zubair

24th May 2006, 03:56 PM

I have responded here:
http://islamicawakening.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=6883#6883

abu_zayd99

26th May 2006, 06:39 PM

Assalaamualaikum Abuz Zubair,

I was just wondering if you have gotten my pm's?

Umm Ahmed

31st July 2006, 07:19 AM

I was just listenting to Sheikh Waleed Basiyouni's lecture on the Jahmis, Mu'tazila and Ashaa'ira(havent finshed it up yet though), he was mentioning how the Jahmis have the thought that Allah exisits but doesnt exsist so as to fufill the ayah that Allah not like*unto the*creation.

As salaam alaykum , brother do you by any chance have this lecture so that I can listen to it ?

1st August 2006, 10:40 PM

I have responded here:
http://islamicawakening.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=6883#6883

Abu Zubair; the link is broken, please copy your response onto this thread.

Abuz Zubair

1st August 2006, 11:10 PM

I think I was referring to this:
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showpost.php?p=4652&postcount=50

danish al hyderabadee

2nd August 2006, 05:08 AM

As salaam alaykum , brother do you by any chance have this lecture so that I can listen to it ?

http://hudarp.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=28_42&products_id=72

Madarijas-Salikeen

1st April 2007, 04:22 AM

salamu alaykum

ibn jawzee seemed confused about his beliefs.

abu imaan an-nepalee

1st April 2007, 12:10 PM

salamu alaykum

ibn jawzee seemed confused about his beliefs.

and only those who seem confused refer to him as an authority for the hanbalis.

Madarijas-Salikeen

1st April 2007, 09:48 PM

as salaamu alaykum

your right brother and as we have seen the hanaabilah have spoken about his contradictory beliefs. I rather stick with Imam Ahmad rahimullah and ibn qudamah rahimullah.