Ibn Jahbal al-Kilabi's questions for the Hanaabilah.

[Abu Zayd al-Atharee]

As salaam alaikum wa rahmatullah,

The following are some questions posed by Ibn Jahbal al-Kilabi in his refutation of Ibn Taymiyyah, can anyone provide some answers to his questions?

We (Ibn Jahbal and those that adhere to his position) say to him: What do you say concerning the mention of "several eyes" (a‘yun), the mention of the "flank" (janb), the mention of the single "shin" (saq), and the mention of the "several hands" (aydi)? If we take these literally then we must affirm a being that has one face with many eyes, a single side, many hands, and a single shin! What being on earth is possibly uglier? And if you take the liberty of interpreting this and that to be dual or singular, then why does Allah not mention it, nor the Prophet, nor the Salaf of the Community?

(Ibn Jahbal Al-Kilabi, The Refutation of Him (Ibn Taymiyya) who Attributes Direction to Allah (al-Raddu ‘ala Man Qala bil-Jiha), Introduction by Shaykh Wahbi Sulayman Ghawji, translation and notes by Gibril Fouad Haddad [Aqsa Publications, Birmingham UK 2008: http://www.aqsapublications.com], Chapter Seven. The Absurdity of His Literalism, pp. 221-223)

[Harris Hammam]

What do you say concerning the mention of "several eyes" (a‘yun), the mention of the "flank" (janb), the mention of the single "shin" (saq), and the mention of the "several hands" (aydi)? If we take these literally then we must affirm a being that has one face with many eyes, a single side, many hands, and a single shin! What being on earth is possibly uglier?

Firstly, Janb and Saq are affirmed by us no problem. We stick to the Nass.

Secondly, A'yun and Aydee only come when they are Mudaaf to the plural 1st person pronoun (denoting the Ta'dheem of Allah). In this case, if the Mudaaf Ilaih is plural by word, the Mudaaf also has to be plural by word. This is the Arabic way of expressing things. It does not mean that Allah has several eyes or hands.

Thirdly, some scholars have said that such verses refer to the angels. This is a strong opinion.

Fourthly, a question (forgive me for my ignorance): Where has Aydee come for Allah?

Fifthly, who are they to question the kayfiyyah of Allah's Jamaal?

Sixthly, these people are the same guys who do not affirm Soorah, Yad and Wajh for Allah as literal attributes as befit His Majesty. I guess they have nothing to look forward to in Jannah in terms of Ru'yah, with Allah outside place and their created gazes confined to space... Absolutely illogical

[Abu Najm Muhammad]

We (Ibn Jahbal and those that adhere to his position) say to him: What do you say concerning the mention of "several eyes" (a‘yun), the mention of the "flank" (janb), the mention of the single "shin" (saq), and the mention of the "several hands" (aydi)? If we take these literally then we must affirm a being that has one face with many eyes, a single side, many hands, and a single shin! What being on earth is possibly uglier? And if you take the liberty of interpreting this and that to be dual or singular, then why does Allah not mention it, nor the Prophet, nor the Salaf of the Community?

This is the true Tajseem, since know one ever declared this comparison before from the Hanaabilah...

They declared Allah, Exalted is He, as likened to a being on earth in order to understand His Attributes, perfect as they are...

Again, no one before from the Hanaabilah ever uttered statements such as these...

I would say that the accusation itself falls back on the pronouncer of the above quote since the one he is addressing never issued such statements...

[Harun_Abdullah]

I wonder if people read the books of the Hanbali scholars and UNDERSTAND them, because it is quite clear when I read from them that their beliefs on how to deal with the attributes of Allah (swt) are sound. There is no way that anyone can accuse them of bringing something new to the deen because it is clear that the sahaba themselves acknowledged the attributes of Allah (Swt) without likening those attributes to creation. Which is exactly what Hanbali do. There are many hadith where rasoolullah (saws) himself spoke on Allah's (Swt) attributes, and the sahabas accepted them without challenge unlike those who do Ta'teel today. Do you think they questioned Muhammad (swt) when he told the believers that they would see Allah (swt) like the full moon? And if you think it is antromorphic, then you either read from them and drew your own conclusions, or dont know what it means the "liken the creator to humans." because a former Christian, I can REALLY tell you what antromophicism is. If you were born and raised Muslim, you probably dont know as much about antromophism as you think you do to even be in the position to critcise the Hanbali as such. I have seen it first hand, and I can tell you that Hanbali are not that.

[Muslim_]

I'm gonna reiterate truesalefees questions, sorry bro, which scholars from the salaf regarded Janb as a Sifah of Allah ta'ala.

[Niqaabis]

I'm gonna reiterate truesalefees questions, sorry bro, which scholars from the salaf regarded Janb as a Sifah of Allah ta'ala.

Thats true, the position of Ahlul sunnah wal Jama'ah in regards to al Janb is not considered to be an attribute of Allaah subhaana wa ta'alaa, and
please can you provide where Ibn Taymiyyah did Ithbaat of Junb, as far as I have read Ibn Taymiyyah doesn't do Ithbaat of Junb.

(the above was written by my husband)

[Abu Najm Muhammad]

A list of Sifaat from a book that compiles two books, Qitf ath-Thamar by al-Qanuujee, and Masaa'il al-Jaahileeyah by 'Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhaab that summarizes the 'Aqeedat ul-'Ahl il-'Athaar:

ومن صفاته سبحانه : اليد (1) ، واليمين (2) ، والكف (3) ، والإصبع (4) ، والشمال (5) ، والقدم (6) ، والرجل (7) ، والوجه (8) ، والنفس (9) ، والعين (10) ، والنزول (11) ، والإتيان (12) ، والمجيء (13) ، والكلام (14) ، والقول (15) ، والساق (16) ، والحقو (17) ، والجنب (18) ، والفوق (19) ، والاستواء (20) ، والقوة (21) ، والقرب (22) ، والبعد (23) ، والضحك (24) ، والتعجب (25) ، والحب (26) ، والكره (27) ، والمقت (28) ، والرضا (29) ، والغضب (30) ، والسخط (31) ، والعلم (32) ، والحياة (33) ، والقدرة (34) ، والإرادة (35) ، والمشيئة (36) ، والفوق (37) ، والمعية (38) ، والفرح (39) ، إلى غير ذلك مما نطق به الكتاب والسنة . فأدلة ذلك مذكورة فيها

Notice #18...

[Muslim_]

A list of Sifaat from a book that compiles two books, Qitf ath-Thamar by al-Qanuujee, and Masaa'il al-Jaahileeyah by 'Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhaab that summarizes the 'Aqeedat ul-'Ahl il-'Athaar:



Notice #18...

Who said #18 exactly? 'Allama Bhopali or Imam ibn 'AbdilWahhab?

What about from the salaf?

PS Don't get all defensive

[Abu Najm Muhammad]

Who said #18 exactly? 'Allama Bhopali or Imam ibn 'AbdilWahhab?

What about from the salaf?

PS Don't get all defensive

I am just as curious as you are and reluctant to accept this list at face value after finding that in there...

It is interesting to note that whoever did the Tahqeeq added notes that quote ad-Daarimee as negating 'Janb' as a Sifah, and stated that whoever did so was ignorant of the meaning of the phrase in which it is used in the Qur'aan...

I have the quote but am about to shut down for the night (my computer and my self).

'In Shaa' Allah, I'll check this weekend...

[Muslim_]

I am just as curious as you are and reluctant to accept this list at face value after finding that in there...

It is interesting to note that whoever did the Tahqeeq added notes that quote ad-Daarimee as negating 'Janb' as a Sifah, and stated that whoever did so was ignorant of the meaning of the phrase in which it is used in the Qur'aan...

I have the quote but am about to shut down for the night (my computer and my self).

'In Shaa' Allah, I'll check this weekend...

JazakAllahu ta'ala khayr

What book is that from? Is it online?

You might want to check what 'Allama Mari' says regarding Janb as well as Haqwur Rahman, and compare that to what some of the salafi scholars have said.