A Refutation of Contemporary Anthropomorphism

**FlagBearer** · 13th January 2008

AsSalaamu 'Alaykum

Does anyone have anythingthat addresses/refutes the 'so-called' points in the following article insha'Allaah? Jazak'Allaahu khayr in advance.

A Refutation of Contemporary Anthropomorphism
as Expressed in the So-called "Fundamentals of Tawheed"

Bilal Philips says:

“He has neither corporeal body nor is He a formless spirit. He has a form befitting His majesty, the like of which no man has ever seen or conceived, and which will only be seen (to the degree of man’s finite limitations) by the people of paradise.”

The above statement made by Bilal Philips proves that he is from the mujassima (anthropomorphists), who commit tajseem by attributing a body to Allah Azza Wajal. None of the Sahaba, Tabi’een or Tabi al-Tabi’een, also known as the salaf us-salih (or pious predecessors), said that Allah has a “form” because for anything to have a form, it must be composed of parts, dimensions, and limits. Bodies, parts, dimensions, and limits are all attributes of the weak creation which Allahu Ta’ala, the Majestic, is not attributed with. The ulema of Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jama’ah use the verse “Laysa ka mithlihi shayy...(42:11)” to refute the false claims of the mujassima. That is, “There is nothing like Him whatsoever...”

Imam Abu Ja’far at-Tahawi (239-321), who lived most of his life in the noble and blessed time period of the “salaf” praised by the Prophet (‘Alayhi-salatu-wassalaam) in sahih ahadeeth refutes the mujassima in his famous Statement of Islamic Doctrine, “Al-Aqida al-Tahawiyya.” Imam Tahawi states in #38 of his Al-Aqida: “He [Allah] is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs....” Such a statement clearly states that it does not befit Almighty Allah to be attributed with a “form,” since parts, limbs, and restrictions are characteristics of anything which has a form. It must be noted that Imam Tahawi lived at a time when both the direct and indirect disciples of the four Imams of Islamic Law (Abu Hanifa, Shafi’i, Malik, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal) were teaching and practicing. This period was the greatest age of Hadeeth and fiqh studies, and Imam Tahawi studied with all the living authorities in his days.

Al-Badr al-‘Ayni said that when the mujtahid Ahmad ibn Hanbal died, Tahawi was 12; when Imam Bukhari died, he was 27; when Imam Muslim died, he was 32; when Imam Ibn Majah died, he was 44; when Imam Abu Dawud died, he was 46; when Tirmidhi died, he was 50, and when Imam Nisa’i died, he was 74.

Ahl al-Sunna scholars like Imam Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari have praised Imam Tahawi for his knowledge in hadeeth and fiqh. This is agreed upon by Ibn Katheer and Dhahabi also. Ibn Taymiya disagreed with this consensus as it is a common habit of his in many issues of fiqh and ‘aqeeda.

Hujjat ul-Islam Imam Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, the renowned Ahl al-Sunna Mujaddid, said in his “Ihya ‘ulum al-din,” under the section explaining the “Transcendence” of Allahu-Ta’ala:

“He [Allah] is not a body with a form, or a limitary, quantitative substance, not resembling bodies in quantifiability or divisibility, or in being a substance or qualified by a substance....He does not resemble anything that exists, nor anything that exists resembles Him. There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him, nor is He like unto anything. He is not delimited by magnitude, contained in places, encompassed by directions, or bounded by heavens or earth....”

What Bilal Philips said: “He has a form befitting His majesty...” means that Allah has a form which is not like the form of the creation.

Furthermore, Bilal Philips said: “He has neither corporeal body...” to mean that Allah’s form is not corporeal like that of the creation, but non-corporeal. That is, he claims that Allah has a non-corporeal body, or a body not like other bodies.

According to Imam al-Baihaqi, in his “Manaqib Ahmad,” he relates with a sahih chain that Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: “A person commits an act of disbelief (kufr) if he says Allah is a body, even if he says: Allah is a body but not like other bodies.”

He continues: “The expressions are taken from language and from Islam, and linguists applied ‘body’ to a thing that has length, width, thickness, form, structure, and components. The expression has not been handed down in Shari’a. Therefore, it is invalid and cannot be used.”

One can see that Bilal Philips is in opposition to what the Shari’a teaches, as the mujtahid mutlaq Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal beautifully refutes his anthropomorphic claims.

Other false claims of the mujassima, in addition to Bilal Philips, are made by other wahhabees also like the late so-called Mufti of Saudi Arabia Abdl Aziz bin Abdullah bin Baaz. Bin Baaz, in his commentary of Imam Abu Ja’afar at-Tahawi’s “Al-Aqida,” says under footnote #3:

“By hudood (limits) the author [refering to Imam Tahawi] means such as known by humans since no one except Allah Almighty knows His limits.”

One can see that Bin Baaz, the majassim, says that Allah has limits, when it is clearly stated by Ahl al-Sunna scholars like Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Imam Ghazali, and Imam Baihaqi that Allah is clear of any limits whatsoever. The noble Imam Tahawi clearly said:

“He [Allah] is beyond...being restricted...”

He did not say:

“Allah has restrictions which humans don’t know but restrictions which only Allah knows.”

Bin Baaz misrepresents the pious Salaf and is following the footsteps of Shaytan by trying to twist the correct explanations of sahih treatises written by Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jama’ah. Wahhabees are infamous for their mockery and misrepresentation of Ahl al-Sunna scholars.
Furthermore, Bin Baaz says in the same footnote:

“Similarly, his [refering to Imam Tahawi] saying “The six directions do not surround Him like all other innovations ” means the six created directions. He does not means the negation of Allah being above His creation and established on His throne because His position is not covered by the six directions, as He is above this universe and surroundings.”

Like Bilal Philips, Bin Baaz has also contradicted himself. According to Bin Baaz, Allah is not bound by the “created directions,” but then contradicts himself by saying,

“All the evidence from the Book and the authentic Mutawatir Sunnah prove that He is in the direction above us”

later in the same footnote. The deviation of their intellectc compel them to contradictory statments and the do not heven realized it. Bin Baaz is not only contradicting himself, but also lying in behalf of the Qur’an and the authentic Mutawatir Sunnah. The fact is that the Qur’an, Sunna and the Ahl al-Sunna scholars have never attributed a direction to Allah.

A hadeeth related by Imam Bukhari states:

“Allah existed eternally when there was nothing else with Him.”

This means that absolutely nothing existed, including the throne. Everything that came into existence after once having been in a state of non-existence is a creation which does not possess eternal attributes. The Ahl al-Sunna ulema say that the claim that Allah is sitting on His Throne indeed stipulates a direction because the throne is a creation of Allah, and all of creation is located in “created directions.” Saying that Allah is in the “direction” of the throne is indeed imposing a sensory limitation to Allahu Ta’ala. After all, is the throne not located in a particular direction? The fact is that the throne is located in a certain direction and a certain place. For Allah to be localized on the Throne would mean that Allah is in a place. This opposes the creed of Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jama’ah. Imam Bukhari, who passed away in 256 AH,
believed that Allah exists without a place, as it is authentically stated by Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his “Fath al-Bari.”

In addition to Bilal Philips and Bin Baaz, other wahhabees have also imposed directions for Allahu Ta’ala, and opposed the sahih creed of Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jama’ah. Muhammad Khalil Harras, another wahhabi, writes in his translation of Ibn Taymiya’s “Sharh Aqeedah al-Wasitiyyah,” page 73:

“The Mutazila deny the vision. This denial is based on refusing to accept Allah in any direction for it is necessary for a thing being seen to be in the direction of the seer...”

Al-Harras thus claims Allah must be in a direction to be seen in the Hereafter. This makes him a mujassim like Bilal Philips and Bin Baaz. The Ahl al-Sunna scholar Imam Abu Ja’far at-Tahawi in his “al-Aqida” once again refutes this mujassim by saying:

#35 says: “The Seeing of Allah by the People of the Garden is true, without their vision being all-encompassing and without the manner of their vision being known....We do not delve into that, trying to interpret it according to our own opinions or letting our imaginations have free rein.”

Also, remember that “Allah is not contained by the six directions.”

Bilal Philips also opposes the sahih creed of the salaf us- salih like a-Harras by saying:

“He has a form befitting His majesty, the like of which no man has ever seen or conceived, and which will only be seen (to the degree of ma's finite limitations) by the people of paradise.” (emphasis added),

One clearly sees that this statement of Bilal Philips is based on his imagination and sensory delusion, and it is in opposition to the creed of the pious salaf.

Other wahhabis like Muhammad Saleh al-Uthaymeen, shows that he is also a mujassim by saying in his “Aqidat al-muslim” that

“Allah’s establishment on the throne means that He is sitting ‘in person’ on His Throne.”

The hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his “Fath al-Bari” rejected the statement that Allah is on the Throne “in person” as equally preposterous as saying that Allah is everywhere. Ibn al-Jawzi in his “Daf shubah al-tashbih said:

“They said: He is established on the Throne “in person.” But this addition is not related by anyone!”

Even Sulayman ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, the wahhabi founder’s grandson, declared anyone a kafir who used the term “in person” in relation to Allah being in a place in his “al-Tawdih ‘an tawhid al-khallaq fi jawab ahl al-‘Iraq.”

Be attentive that the Ahl al-Sunna scholars in Ibn Taymiya’s time accused him of being a mujassim. Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani’s biography of Ibn Taymiyya in “al-durar al-kaamina fi a‘yaan al-mi’at al-thaamina” [The Hidden Pearls Concerning the Famous People of the Eighth Century] is sahih dalail (proof) to justify such a claim. Ibn Hajar states authentic statements in his book such as:

“People were divided into parties because of him. Some considered him an anthropomorphist [mujassim] because of what he mentioned in ‘al- ‘aqeeda al-Hamawiyya’ and ‘al-‘aqeeda al-Waasitiyya’ and other books of his, such as Allah’s hand, foot, shin, and face being litteral attributes of Allah (Sifaatun Haqeeqiyyatun lillaah) and that He is established upon the Throne with His Essence (wa annahu mustawin ‘ala al-‘arshi bi dhaatihi). It was said to him that were this the case He would necessarily be subject to spatial confinement (al-tahayyuz) and divisibility (al-inqisaam). He replied: “I do not concede that spatial confinement and divisibility are (necessarily) properties of bodies (anaa laa usallimu anna al-tahayyuz wa al-inqisaam min khawass al- ajsaam),” whereupon it was adduced against him (ulzima) that he held Allah’s Essence to be subject to spatial confinement.”

Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn al-Jawzi (508-597), a Hanbali scholar, warned people of the ‘mujassima’ who speak in the name of Ahmad ibn Hanbal falsely in his “Daf shubah al-tashbih be akuff al-tanzih” (The repelling with hands of transcendence of the sophistries of likening Allah to His creation). The wahhabees are not the only mujassima in the history of Islam. The mujassima have existed before them and have been refuted by scholars of Ahl al-Sunna. For example, the scholar Ibn Hibban, who died in 354 AH, was expelled from Sijistan for refusing to assert limits to Allah. Wahhabees are only reving the tajseem of the mujassima of the past. Today and in the past, wahhabees have been refuted by scholars of Ahl al-Sunna as the mujassima in the past were refuted by the ulema in their times.

The Wahhabis are the mujassima of today, and mujassims like Bilal Philips, Abdl Aziz bin Abdullah bin Baaz, Muhammad Khalil Harras, and Muhammad Saleh al-Uthaymeen must be refuted in light of the proof provided by the Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jama'ah, the noble adherents of the Hanafi, Shafi’i, Maliki, and Hanbali schools of Jurisprudence.

Wa 'Alaykum asSalaam
-FlagBearer-

**ali** · 13th January 2008

not that i care anything at all about the idiots who did this but the basis of their arguement is addressed in the begginning

The above statement made by Bilal Philips proves that he is from the mujassima (anthropomorphists), who commit tajseem by attributing a body to Allah Azza Wajal. None of the Sahaba, Tabi’een or Tabi al-Tabi’een, also known as the salaf us-salih (or pious predecessors), said that Allah has a “form” because for anything to have a form, it must be composed of parts, dimensions, and limits. Bodies, parts, dimensions, and limits are all attributes of the weak creation which Allahu Ta’ala, the Majestic, is not attributed with. The ulema of Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jama’ah use the verse “Laysa ka mithlihi shayy...(42:11)” to refute the false claims of the mujassima. That is, “There is nothing like Him whatsoever...”

the point is
1. they charge him as being a mujaasim based on what ground. based on

2. the salaf or the sahaba never spoke with this word.

that is incorrect based ona primal asl with ahlu-sunnah. That asl is
"We affirm whatever Allah and his Messenger affirm and we negate whatever Allah and His messenger negate, and matters which have not been mentioned, then acceptence nor rejection is to be performed until inquiry as to the meaning of what is intended by the sayer"

but here, the ash;aris compeltely overrule the asl of ahlu-sunnah which is enough of a reason they care nothing about the principles of ahlu-sunnah, yet ironic they call themselves "ahlu-sunnah".
ANd the main basis for their oppostion is

3. The basis of their lack of acting upon the established usool of ahlu-sunnah is by completely and hastily rejecting jism (form) outright without inquiry as to the actuality of what the speaker intends. And the basis for their rejction is because of their Master, Shaykhul-Falasafiyyah Aristotle's Aqeedatul-Aristotle who laid for them their aqeedah and which he mentions an asl, that is

"because anything to have a form, it must be composed of parts, dimensions, and limits. Bodies, parts, dimensions, and limits are all attributes of the weak creation"

well, their arguement now becomes reversed on them. We asked. Who in this galaxy said this from the prophet and the sahaba and the salafu-saalih. We know who. J'ad bin Dirhaam, and Bishr al-Marisi said that. Not ahlu-sunnah.

So in this regard, we, and the ulema of ahlu-sunnah use the verse of "laysa kamithilihi shay" against those Philosophising Aristotlian heretics. That is, they incorperated Allah into the creational boundaries of logic. That means, Allah did not istiwaa over His throne because istiwaa, in the meaning of the salaf, means to rise, in a direction, and confined in a place, thus a limit, which Allah is beyond limits, thus ALlah canot be over His throne. Same with this, Allah has no form (somethign Allah did not state) because such and such and such and such. Thus they incorperate Allah into their limited creational and rather ficticious thinking of their Imaamul-Atham, Shaykhul-Akhbar, Hujjatul-Islam, Aristotle.

We, the Ahlu-sunnah, do not use wordly logic and what is necessitated of creational knowledge and appy it to Allah's divine being, particualrly without a text to prove it, for that in and of itself is the greatest tashbeeh of Allah azawajal and the greatest of all anthropomorphism.

and this is pretty much the extent of their forgery to Ahlu-sunnah in matters of
1. using Aristotle's usool in refutating the ahlu-sunnah, the salaf
2. distortion of historical precedent
3. relayment of weak and or shadh narrations
4. twisting what our scholars really said

an example of the fourth is

Other wahhabis like Muhammad Saleh al-Uthaymeen, shows that he is also a mujassim by saying in his “Aqidat al-muslim” that

“Allah’s establishment on the throne means that He is sitting ‘in person’ on His Throne.”

the word that was used if i remember is "istiqaran" which emants more to the effect of "settling" and not 'sitting"

they twist it to where he says 'jaalisu" when it is istiqar. and the wording istiqar is among the dhaahir meanigns of istiwaa, of which the salaf, and the later imaams of guidance who followed their way affirmed his meaning as a true, sunni, salafi meaning within the aqeedah of ahlu-sunnah.

here is another rexample of their wishful, heretcial thinking

Other false claims of the mujassima, in addition to Bilal Philips, are made by other wahhabees also like the late so-called Mufti of Saudi Arabia Abdl Aziz bin Abdullah bin Baaz. Bin Baaz, in his commentary of Imam Abu Ja’afar at-Tahawi’s “Al-Aqida,” says under footnote #3:

“By hudood (limits) the author [refering to Imam Tahawi] means such as known by humans since no one except Allah Almighty knows His limits.”

One can see that Bin Baaz, the majassim, says that Allah has limits, when it is clearly stated by Ahl al-Sunna scholars like Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Imam Ghazali, and Imam Baihaqi that Allah is clear of any limits whatsoever. The noble Imam Tahawi clearly said:

“He [Allah] is beyond...being restricted...”

He did not say:

“Allah has restrictions which humans don’t know but restrictions which only Allah knows.”

the "limits" that Bin baz was refering to was the limits Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal expounded against his refutation against the Jahmiyyah who beleived Allah was literally "unlimited" and took what these heretics say, to mean Allah is everywhere. Thus AHmad bin Hanbal said He is unlimited in perfection, quality, ability, power, etc, but He has a limit to his Divine Being , bi dhaat. That is Allahs actual being is not ongoing encompassing beyond His throne and into the creation, which was what Jahmiyyah was professing. This is the context of Bin Baz's explanation, but these simple-minded neanderthals simply have no type of reason nor intellect, which is quote ironic coming from a group who claims to be the craddle of 'intellect and reason of the Islamic creed" and the middle people between the mujassima (read, salafis, ahlu-sunnah, ahlul-hadeeth) and the m'utazilah

asalamu alaikum

**abu hafs** · 13th January 2008

“He has neither corporeal body nor is He a formless spirit. He has a form befitting His majesty, the like of which no man has ever seen or conceived, and which will only be seen (to the degree of man’s finite limitations) by the people of paradise.”

The above statement made by Bilal Philips proves that he is from the mujassima (anthropomorphists), who commit tajseem by attributing a body to Allah Azza Wajal.