AL-ALBANI DISDAINS DENIAL OF ALLAH'S SEEABLENESS ADOPTED BY THE PROPHET'S COMPANIONS
The following is quoted from Al-Albani's Al-Fatawi page 143:
Not only was conception of Allah's seeableness referred to by the Prophet's tradition, but also it was asserted in the Holy Quran that is uninterruptedly related to the Prophet. Regarding the Exalted's saying, (Some faces on that day shall be bright. Looking at [waiting for] their Lord.), the faces intended are surely the believers' who shall be looking at their Lord. Mutazilites and Shias invented a philosophy indicating that meaning of the Verse is looking at the Lord's boons. Such sorts of philosophy is surely an ax destructuring the authentic traditions.
Al-Albani and his likes, as a matter of fact, missed the fact that it is impermissible to rest upon a part of the Holy Quran and neglect others. Thus, it is essential to take in consideration the Verses, (Visions comprehend him not,) and (Nothing like a likeness of Him;), in addition to many others pertaining denying Allah's seeableness. The next step is lining the decisive with the allegorical Verses. In this regard it is so appreciable to cite that the Verse
( 19 )
involved is revealing a morrow situation before entering to the Paradise. This is evidenced by God's saying, (And other faces on that day shall be gloomy, knowing that they will be made to befall them some great calamity. 75:256)
The believers' faces shall be tending to their Lord, waiting for His mercy and bounty. The unbelievers', on the other hand, shall be lassitude, anticipating His penalty. As a result, the Verses are lacking any signal to ocular sight at Allah's Entity whether after or before abiding in the Paradise.
Secondly, they missed that considering disregarding narratives about Allah's seeableness is a sort of destructuring the Prophet's tradition, it is they who did perpetrate such a destruction since they disregarded the authentic narratives of Aisha recorded by AlBukhari, Muslim and others.
It is seemly to say that Verses regarding denial of Allah's seeableness are downright and decisive. It is also improper to intersect such Verses by others the surface perspectives of which show Allah's optical seeableness. Allegorical Verses should be measured to the decisive, and their appearances should be passed.
Within the hadiths, there are those denying Allah's seeableness and others admitting. Both are authentic and recorded in dependable references. They are too contrasted to be regarded. Hence, it is necessary to favor some and neglect the others. It is illtimed to arise the misallegation that Mutazilites and Shias were the originators of such denial and regarding such a denial as destructuring the Prophet's traditions. The entire adopters of Allah's optical seeableness, such as AlAlbani and Bin Baz, hint at narratives of Aisha. Meanwhile, those who ruled of impracticability of Allah's seeableness and corporeality referred to narratives of Allah's seeableness. This matter, then, is not reckoned with destructuring of the Prophet's traditions. In study of principals of jurisprudence, this matter is named 'equality and preponderancy'. One of the conclusive principal of this discipline is favoring the most suitable group to the less in case it is unworkable to combine contrasted hadiths. Preference, here, is the share of hadiths of denying Allah's seeableness. The following are additional points of superiority of hadiths regarding denial of Allah's seeableness:
Hadiths regarding denial of Allah's seeableness are concordant to Quranic decisive Verses, such as, (Visions comprehend him not, and he comprehends all visions), and (Nothing like a likeness of Him;).
Hadiths involved are concordant to origin. The origin, however, is ruling of impracticability of Allah's optical seeableness till a decisive proof is provided.
Hadiths of the Prophet's household and Aisha regarding denial of Allah's seeableness are opposing and nullifying the others. Hadiths of Allah's seeableness, however, are neither opposing nor nullifying the others.
( 20 )
Unlike those proving Allah's seeableness, hadiths of impracticability of Allah's seeableness are concordant to the decisive ruling of intellect.
THEY DENOUNCED AND MISTREATED AISHA, THEIR MOTHER
In his KitabutTawhid, page 225, Ibn Khuzeima records:
As much as I conceive, Aisha uttered her words while she was highly enraged. It was more becoming for her to use a better utterance for communicating her idea. It is unacceptable for any to pronounce, "Ibn Abbas, Abu Dherr, Anas Bin Malik or any group of people had forged a grave fabrication against their Lord!" People, however, may use words of less value during rage. The extensiveness of this matter can be summarized by stating that Aisha, Abu Dherr, Ibn Abbas and Anas Bin Malik were engaged in dispute appertained to the subject whether the Prophet (peace be upon him) had seen his Lord or not. Aisha (God please her) answers with negation, while Abu Dherr and Ibn Abbas (God please them) affirm so. Aisha does not relate that the Prophet himself has informed her of not seeing his Lord, the Elevated (!), she only repeats Quranic Verses, (Visions comprehend him not,) and (And it is not for any mortal that Allah should speak to him except by revelation or from behind a veil;). A scrutinizing glance at the Verses involved, with being guided to the correct, exposes that both have nothing inciting to forging grave lies against Allah! God's saying, (Visions comprehend him not), may refer to two meanings adopted by followers of conception of Allah's seeableness. First, it may be accordant to the saying of 'the Quran's interpreter' addressed at Ikrima, the slave, "That is His brilliance which is his brilliance. Nothing would comprehend Him when He comes into view by His brilliance." The second meaning is that people's eyes cannot comprehend Him. Pursuant to the Arabic tongue, the item 'absar' visions includes commonly a group's eyes. It is unfeasible to use 'absar' for individuals' eyes. The item 'basar' vision expresses an individual's eyes. In a like fashion, it is impracticable to use 'basaran' two visions for expressing an individual's eyes. Hence, it is unacceptable to use 'absar' for expressing a single individual's organs of sight. Falsity and prevarication shall be certainly imputed to us if we claim that visions can see our Lord in this world.
Claiming of the Prophet's having seen his Lord exclusively does not propose that visions have seen the Lord in this world. How is it, ye, possessors of intellects, practical for those who deny the Prophet's having seen his Lord exclusively, to prove that visions have seen the Lord. Perceiving this point leads to understanding that Ibn Abbas, Abu Dherr, Anas Bin Malik and their adherents had neither forged grave lies against Allah nor had they opposed a single letter of Allah's Book regarding this question!!
Aisha uttered the Verse, (And it is not for any mortal that Allah should speak to him except by revelation or from behind a veil;), during providing evidences on impracticability of the Prophet's having seen his Lord. Neither Abu Dherr,
( 21 )
Ibn Abbas, Anas Bin Malik (God please them) nor did any of their followers, in the question involved, allege that Allah communicate the Prophet in these very moments of seeing. Therefore, none could attest any sort of contrast to the Verse concerned. Those claiming the Prophet's having seen his Lord are not opposing God's saying, (And it is not for any mortal that Allah should speak to him except by revelation or from behind a veil;). Those claiming God's having communicated the Prophet at the same time of their reciprocal optical viewing, are only opposing the Verse.
In spite of his exalted standing, scholarship, godfearing and position in Islam and knowledge, Ibn Omar seeks the reality of this question from the Quran's interpreter and the Prophet's cousin. "Has the Prophet (peace be upon him) seen his Lord?" Ibn Omar asks Ibn Abbas as he esteems his full acquaintance of this question. It was proved that Ibn Abbas could certify the Prophet's having seen his Lord. This question, in fact, is not attained by intellects, opinions, hearts and conjecture. Such a knowledge is received through prophetic course only. This course, however, is limited to a divine book or a favorable prophet. As much as I am to surmise, no single acquainted individual may doubt that personal inference and conjecture were the authors of Ibn Abbas's claiming of the Prophet's having seen his Lord. The same may be said about Abu Dherr and Anas Bin Malik.
Conclusively, we should repeat the words of Mu'ammar Bin Rashid regarding discrepancy between Aisha (God please her) and Ibn Abbas (God please him) about question of Allah's optical seeableness. "For us, Aisha is not more knowledgeable than Ibn Abbas." We add that Aisha, the veracious and daughter of the veracious and dearest of God's dearest, was educated and jurisprudent. Ibn Abbas, on the other hand, was cousin of the Prophet (peace be upon him) who supplicated God to bestow him with wisdom and knowledgeability. This is the operation of that supplication. He is named the Quran's interpreter. AlFaruq (God please him), as well, was wont to accept Ibn Abbas's opinions even contrasted to others of older age and superiority in accompanying the Prophet (peace be upon him). It is impossible to say that Ibn Abbas forged a grave lie against Allah, just because he affirmed a matter denied by Aisha (God please her). Even in cases of misrepresentation of a Quranic Verse or a prophetic tradition, scholars should never utter such a statement. How is it then admissible to impute forging grave lies to Allah to individuals proving a matter not explicated in the Quran or through the Prophet's traditions? Understand this question and make not mistakes!!
This was a part of Ibn Khuzeima's words. He was, however, the tutor of compilers of the Sahih books and the grand instructor. He spared no efforts for proving Aisha's flaw in denial of the Prophet's having seen his Lord with his own eyes. These replicative words were too rude to be stood even by the
( 22 )
revisor of his book; Sheik Mohammed Khalil Harras, an instructor in College of Religion Principals in AlAzhar. In his commentary, Harras writes down:
Aisha (God please her) only traverses and denies the matter involved affirmatively. She said to Masruq, "Your words have made my hair chill!" It is unrightful for the author Ibn Khuzeima to learn his mother civility!! She did realize what to say. Secondly, Aisha (God please her) addresses generally without identifying any addressee. No narration mentioned that Ibn Abbas had claimed the Prophet's having seen his Lord with his own eyes. He only claimed that it was with heart and mind. Saving Ibn Abbas, the general companions of the Prophet, such as Ibn Mas'ud and others, were agreeing with Aisha in question of denial of Allah's optical seeableness. Regarding the other wives of the Prophet, despite the fact that none of them could occupy any part of scholarship and jurisprudence Aisha enjoyed, no single narrative revealed they had disagreed her in the question concerned. Attesters of a matter should provide evidences. Attesters of Allah's optical seeableness could not provide any. Hence, denial is the origin till an evidence is proved. Aisha (God please her) supported her claim of denial with some Quranic Verses as testifiers. Correctness of a claim is regarded after an evidence is provided. Otherwise, denial is preferred since it does not need an evidence. How should that grand instructor have been disappointed by his knowledgeability when he misthought that the denied matter was visions' comprehending Him in such a way that providing a single vision was involved, comprehension should be realizable!! Considering someone says, "I do not have pomegranate." This claim does not mean that he may have a single grain of pomegranate. God's mercy be upon Ibn Khuzeima. He had erred. None, however, is perfect.
In addition to the previous words of Sheik Mohammed Harras, we may add the following:
Except for Abu Dherr's question and Aisha's asking the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), there was no single narrative recorded in references of hadith relied upon by Sunnis, our brothers, regarding the optical seeableness involved. Denial of Allah's optical seeableness, however, was confirmed in the two narratives previously excluded. Personal inference was the proof of those who claimed the Prophet's having seen his Lord with his own eyes. They, however, rested upon no narrative at all.
Contradiction, in fact, occurs between narratives of Abu Dherr and Aisha regarding the Prophet's denial of his having seen his Lord from a side, and personal inference from the other. Ibn Abbas's narratives are so contrasted and confused that they should be ruled as ineffective. Therefore, the origin, which is denial of the question involved, is supposed except in case that an evidence is provided.
( 23 )
Before he denounces Aisha, Ibn Khuzeima himself had recorded narratives related by Ibn Abbas concerning denial of Allah's seeableness. On Page 200, he writes down:
With reference to exegesis of the Verse, (And certainly he saw him in another descent.), variant narrations were ascribed to Ibn Abbas. Some related that sight had been with the heart.
Al-Qasim Bin Mohammed Bin Ebbad Al-Muhellebi: Abdullah Bin Dawud Al-Khureibi: Al-Amesh: Ziyad Bin Hussain: Abul-Aliya:
Regarding God's saying, (And certainly he saw him in another descent.), Ibn Abbas stated, "He had seen Him with the heart."
Ismail: Abdurrezaq: Israil: Semmak: Ikrima:
Regarding God's saying, (The heart was not untrue in making him see what he saw.), Ibn Abbas stated, "He had seen Him with the heart."
The strange matter is that in the commencement of his commentary, Ibn Khuzeima overlooked Aisha's manifest narrative concerning the Prophet's denying seeing his Lord. Importunately, he insisted on reckoning that narrative with personal opinion and inference. Finally, he had to declare that Aisha's relation was tradition of the Prophet. Nevertheless, he imposed Ibn Abbas's saying as a hadith standing against Aisha's. He ruled that Ibn Abbas's narrative must have been following Aisha's. How did he realize that Ibn Abbas's saying had been a narrative, and following Aisha's? Even if this is acceptable, Aisha's narrative is such an absolute denial that it opposes and traverses the converse ones. Ibn Abbas's narration is a partial affirmation. How is it, then, acceptable to prefer to the previous? Furthermore, how could Ibn Khuzeima conclude a general ruling of preferring narratives of affirmation to those of denial in case of contradiction, deciding the previous as repealing the latter? Would he, then, apply this ruling on narrations denying the Prophet's having nominated Ali in his will and those proving this question? As for his ruling, narratives affirming the Prophet's having nominated Ali (peace be upon him) for succeeding him in leadership should be preferred to those denying. In addition, would Ibn Khuzeima commit himself to the claim that Ibn Abbas's words are always preferred to Aisha's? In this case, he should regard his testimony that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) had nominated Ali (peace be upon him) as his successor in leadership, and ordered Muslims of declaring their fealty to him in Ghadir Khum just after the Farewell Pilgrimage
11. And, similarly, he should overlook Aisha's testimony that the Prophet was deceased before he had willed of anything to anybody!!
____________
11. The Farewell Pilgrimage is the final pilgrimage peformed by the Prophet.
( 24 )
Ibn Khuzeima would never commit himself to anything! Because he was brought up and fed with conception of Allah's optical seeableness, he is ready to engage himself in confiscatory, inferential and seemingly contradictory affairs for proving that conception.
In his TafseerulMenar, part 9 page 148, Mohammed Abduh did say honorably:
Consequently, it is realizable that Ibn Abbas's narrations contrary to Aisha's, was only personal inference without being imputed to the Prophet. Reports of Ibn Abbas's dedicating seeing by heart is acceptable contradiction to the authentic exegesis of Sura of Najm, imputed to the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), that it was Gabriel, the Angel, whom had been seen by the Prophet in his actual appearance. Likewise, Ibn Abbas's saying, related by Ikrima, was probably conceived from Ka'bulAhbar about whom Muawiya, the narrator, say: "Lies were largely uttered by Ka'bulAhbar." This saying, however, is recorded by AlBukhari. Ibn Isaaq, the reporter of the other narrative, is fabricator. He is trusted in reports regarding battles only, not hadiths. Hence, his report involved is valueless. In reports and conceptions, Ibn Abbas's absolute affirmation is preponderant.
From words of Mohammed Abduh, recorded in TafseerulMenar, part 9 page 139, we can perceive that Aisha's words are judged as evidential inference if inference is ascribed to her. He says:
Aisha, one of the most eloquent people of Quraish, refers to visions' incomprehensibility as an evidence on denial of Allah's seeableness in regard to the difference between the two. She also provides God's saying, (And it is not for any mortal that Allah should speak to him except by revelation or from behind a veil;), as another evidence. Scholars, however, applied these evidences to Allah's seeableness in this world. Like this world, Allah's visual comprehensibility is also impracticable in the Hereafter.
( 25 )
Chp 2-TRENDS TOWARDS VERSES AND HADITHS OF DIVINE ATTRIBUTES
Since first century, four or more schools were originated due to the Sunnis' engagement in admissibility in hadiths of Allah's optical seeableness. These ideological schools were come forth a long time before emergence of their jurisprudential schools. Up to now, these ideological trends prevailed masters and followers of these jurisprudential schools.
The first trend is school of interpretation. This school is almostly the nearest to AhlulBeit's sect
12. Its basic sentiment is regarding the decisive Verses of Allah's oneness, such as, (Nothing like a likeness of Him;), and, (Visions comprehend him not.), as the base of promoting Allah, the Exalted against unfitting affairs. It also tends to represent any text signaling at Allah's corporeality or optical seeableness in a way harmonizing intellectual judgments and other Quranic and prophetic texts. It seems that followers of this school are forming the majority among the former, as we ass the recent, Sunni scholars. Philosophers and Mutazilites enter under this class. It is the trend adopted by AhlulBeit; the Prophet's household (peace be upon them).
The second trend is school of commendation. Followers of this school abstain from construing Quranic and prophetic texts respecting the divine attributes. They commend their meanings to God. This trend is followed by most of the former narrators and few of the recent.
The third trend is school of extrinsic meanings. Followers of this school suspend the extrinsic meanings of the divine texts. They believe that Allah, the Exalted, has material hand, face, leg and rim. Christians and Jews adopt this trend. Ka'bul-Ahbar, Wahab Bin Munebbih and their associates took the task of publicizing this trend among Muslims. It became the formal trend adopted by
____________
12. Ahlul-Beit stands for the Prophet's progeny, and their sect is Shism.
( 26 )
the ruling regimes in the Umayid reign. Hanbalites, as well as part of the Asharists, adopted that trend. Ibn Teimiya and Wahabists attempted at attaching this trend to the worthy ancestors and Sunnis.
The fourth trend is school of commuters, vacillators and the perplexed. Models of such three categories have been rendered in our Al-Aqa'idul-Islamiya, Volume One.
The name 'Metawila' - interpreters - commonly used in Syria, Palestine and Egypt at describing the Shias, was, seemingly, originated from the corporalists who ruled of the Shias' atheism. They also ruled of atheism of Muslims, apart from their sects, whose course was finding suitable representation for the Quranic and prophetic texts.
Although majority of Sunnis, our brothers, are 'interpreters', the name of 'Metawila', with all of its ill meanings and effects, was stuck to the Shias, the wronged. The description 'Mitwali' gave an idea in mentalities of the Shias' rivals, worse than that of 'kafir' - Disbeliever -.
The following is a rather detailed submission of these trends.
SCHOOL OF INTERPRETATION
Followers of school of interpretation, who form majority of scholars, allege that it is normal that every idiom should be interpreted in the most suitable way. An utterance is exposed pursuant to its real meaning unless there is a pronunciational or intellectual obstacle against appropriating. Only then, metaphorical meaning is adapted according to principals of discourse experienced by specialists.
The Arabic is highly remarkable in rhetoric and eloquence due to various expressive styles of metaphor, metonymy, allegory, simile …etc. Thus, the Prophet's companions and their associates dealt with expressions of the Holy Quran and hadiths on this basis. They appreciated that texts, appearances of which contrast Allah's divine exaltation, were metaphoric, listed under comparing the percipient to the materialistic so that Allah's attributes and deeds would be evidently conceived by ordinary mentalities. They decided the unintendedness of susceptible appearances of such divine texts. Hence, metaphor should be referred to, for interpreting. In God's saying, (The hand of Allah is above their hands. 48:10), neither the organic hand nor is any akin thing, had by Allah, is intended. He, the Exalted, alludes that the other party of allegiance of fealty, altogether with His propensity, prevalence and elevation, is higher than the previous. As a matter of fact, this is very natural in any language. In our daily speech, expressions of gratitude are said as an answer for those who address at you, "You have done a heartbreaking job." Immediately, it is understood that a heartbreaking job is a deed of an expressive value that it affected emotions. It does not mean that due to that job spears or bullets were
( 27 )
sent to hearts that made them breakable. Hearts, however, cannot be broken, materially.
EYAD, THE JUDGE, ASSERTS THE MUSLIMS' UNANIMITY ON INTERPRETATION
In his Sharhu Sahihi Muslim, volume 3, part 5, page 24, AnNawawi records:
Eyad, the judge, states:
Including jurisprudents and hadithists, Muslims unanimously rest upon that the skyey phenomena mentioned in the Holy Quran should not be taken for their preliminary meaning of their aspects. The entire Muslims found interpretation for such expressions.
An-Nawawi, in volume 5, part 9, page 117 of the same reference, records the following:
Eyad, the judge, states:
Al-Marizi interprets 'Yadnu' come close mentioned in the Holy Quran, as coming close of His mercy and dignity. It does not stand for the material closeness which is connected to distance and contiguity.
In Jami'ul-Ahadithil-Qudsiyyeti Mines-Sihah, part 1 page 74, the following is recorded:
An-Nawawi: This is one of the divine attributes texts. Two trends are regarded to the idea of this text. Trend of majority of theologists and a good number of the worthy ancestors is that the most fitting interpretation should be found for explicating such hadiths. Hence, Malik Bin Anas interpreted the most suitable meaning. He stated, "His mercy and affairs or angels are the things descended in stages."
On page 160 of part 1 of the same reference, the following is written down:
The ever first matter to be believed is promoting Allah, the Exalted, against qualities of His creatures. Believing in a contrary matter is actually prejudicing faithfulness. Unanimously, the entire master Muslims agreed upon the fact that it is imperative to believe in the unintendedness of the extrinsic meanings thrown by Quranic Verses respecting Allah's attributes and ascribing material attributes to Him, the Exalted. It is inapplicable to accredit the apparent meanings of Quranic Verses to Allah, the Exalted.
The following is recorded in part 1 page 167 of the same reference:
In his Sharhul-Ahadith, Al-Mazini states:
This is among the matters obligatorily interpreted. It comprises God's having a hand. This may lead to the Lord's corporeality and limitedness.
( 28 )
In Siyeru A'laminNubela, part 8 page 243, At-Thehbi states:
At-Tufi: Scholars and regardable individuals unanimously agreed on the metaphoricality of this expression, and the metonymically statement of Allah's giving victory, aid and support to His slave. He, the Exalted, corresponds His divine Entity to instrumentalities used by His slaves. "By - through - Me he perceives. By me he sees. By me he strikes. By me he walks." This is a piece of a hadith.
For Wahabists, as it will be detailedly debated soon, they rule that interpretation of the Holy Quran and hadiths is wholly deviation from God's right path and atheism. Correspondingly, they must have ruled of the deviation and atheism of all of those who interpreted, including Ibn Khuzeima, their master in conception of Allah's corporeity. Bin Baz, however, advises of reviewing Ibn Khuzeima's books.
IBN KHUZEIMA INTERPRETS THE HADITH, "GOD CREATED ADAM ON HIS LOOK."
Sunnis, our brothers, narrate:
As he heard a man revile at a friend by saying, "Deformed be your look and its like.", the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) addressed at him, "Seek not deformation of his look. God had surely created Adam on his look."
Some of the Prophet's companions adhered to this saying claiming its concordance to the Jews' conception of Allah's creating Adam on His divine look. This means that mankind's look is as same as Allah's. We, the Shias, followed our imams (peace be upon them) who assert that the Prophet's intendment was, "The look of the man you are deforming is as same as the look of Adam." Hence the pronoun in 'his look' refers to the addressee, not God, the Exalted.
A good number of Sunni scholars agreed with us in this question. Ibn Khuzeima, the criticizer of Aisha and the so called 'the grand master' who embraces fanatically conception of Allah's optical seeableness, was one of those scholars involved.
In His At-Tawhid, page 37, Ibn Khuzeima says:
Some of the unacquainted misthought that 'his look' intended in the hadith involved refers to Allah. The Beneficent, our Lord, be more exalted than being intended. The pronoun 'his', in fact, refers to the reproached man. The Prophet (peace be upon him) intended that that reproached's look was the same chosen by Allah to be Adam's. As the reviler was censured by the Prophet for imputing deformation to his acquaintance's face and those bearing the same, this means he imputed deformation to Adam's face since his sons' faces are as same as his. God's mercy be upon you, perceive this point in this form so that you should
( 29 )
evade errors and misunderstanding, otherwise, you will be deviating the right path by adopting for conception of Allah's corporeity that is actual deviation.
An expression more ambiguous than that reported by Abu Hureira was mentioned in another report:
Yousuf Bin Musa: Jarir: Al-Amesh: Habib Bin Abi Thabit: Atta Bin Abi Rebah: Ibn Omar:
The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "Impute not deformation to faces. Sons of Adam were created on the look of the Beneficent."
At-Thawri reported the same wanting uninterrupted documentation.
Abu Musa Mohammed Bin Al-Muthenna: Abdurrahman Bin Mahdi: Sufian: Habib Bin Abi Thabit: Atta:
The Prophet (peace be upon him) stated, "Deformation should not be imputed to faces. Sons of Adam were created on the look of the Beneficent."
By this expression, a famous scholar who should not surmise knowledge, was perplexed. They misthought that attaching 'the look' to 'the Beneficent' is a sort of attaching attributes of entity. Yet, this is a big mistake and an ugly statement comparable to that of the anthropomorphists. May God protect Muslims and us against their statements!
As much as I can perceive, regarding interpreting this report, providing authenticity of communication is proved, there are three points of error. First, AtThawri contrasted AlAmesh in documentation. He relate without referring to Ibn Omar. Second, AlAmesh is fabricator. He could not receive the report directly from Habib Bin Abi Thabit. Third, Habib is also fabricator. He could not receive the report directly from Atta. Assuming authenticity of documentation of the report, it may hint at the idea that attaching 'the look' to 'the beneficent' is a sort of attaching creation to the Creator. Creatures are attached to the Beneficent since He was the Creator. Similarly, looks are attached to the Beneficent, the Creator. This is clear by God's sayings, (This is Allah's creation, but show Me what those besides Him have created. 31:11). Allah attaches creation to Him since He was the creator.
(This will be as Allah's shecamel for you, a sign. 7:73). Allah attached the she-camel to Him. He added, (Leave her to pasture on Allah's earth).
(They shall say: Was not Allah's earth spacious, so that you should have migrated therein? 4:97)
(Surely the land is Allah's; He causes such of His servants to inherit it as he pleases. 7:128). Allah attached the land to Him since it was He, the Creator.
(-Allah's nature- The nature made by Allah in which He has made men. 30:30). Allah attached that nature to Him as He made people in. God has not attached
( 30 )
to Him two attached items; one attachment of entity and the other is that of creation.
For evading errors, you should understand these two meanings. Considering the authenticity of communicative documentation of the report, sons of Adam were created according to the look created by the Beneficent when He, first, created and puffed spirit in Adam. Allah, the Exalted, says, (And certainly We created you, then We fashioned you. 7:11).
The following narrative is a good evidence on accuracy of the interpretation we have recently rendered:
Abu Musa Mohammed Bin Al-Muthenna: Abu Amir Adul-Melik Bin Omar: Al-Mughira Bin
Abdirrahman: Abuz-Zinad: Musa Bin Abi Othman: his father: Abu Hureira:
The Prophet (peace be upon him) stated, "Allah created Adam on his look. His was sixty yard long…etc."
Owing to its concordance to logic and our sect, we, the Shias, admit Ibn Khuzeima's interpretation involved. Wahabists, however, adopted for hadith of 'on the look of the Beneficent'. They alleged that Omar, the caliph, admitted the Jews' claim Allah's creating Adam on according to His divine look. So, they opted for a (god) of a look of mankind!!
SAMPLES OF AN-NAWAWI'S INTERPRETATION
In Sharhu Sahihi Muslim, part 2 page 116, An-Nawawi states:
"…he keeps on supplicating God till this causes God to laugh…" Scholars determine that God's laughter is an expression of His satisfaction with His slave's act, His affability to him and attiring the slave with His grace.
In the same reference, part 10 page 249, AnNawawi says:
(Release of Allah's hands) stands for His ability. Since people's acts are usually done by hands, Allah opted for this organ for promoting the significance intended.
In the same reference, volume 2 part 3 page 12, AnNawawi states:
"O Apostle of Allah! Have you seen your Lord?" asked Abu Dherr. "He is brilliance. How can I see brilliance?!" answered the Prophet. This implies that Allah's curtain is brilliance that cannot be seen. Eyad, the judge, asserts, "It is impossible to regard Allah's entity as a brilliance that is a corporeality. Allah, the Praised the Exalted, is excellently elevated against being so.
In the same reference, volume 4 part 7 page 6, AnNawawi says:
The Prophet (peace be upon him) stated, "Our Lord descends to the lowest heavens every night." Two conceptions vex this saying. First, majority of the
( 31 )
worthy ancestors and some of theologists claim that it is right as much as it conforms to Allah, the Exalted. Aspect of the saying is unintended. Allah is promoted against having His creatures' qualities. Second, this saying is metaphoric.
In the same reference, volume 4, part 7, page 98, AnNawawi records:
"…the beneficent should take with the right hand…" Al-Maziri claims that such statements are subject to customary expressions. Taking with the right hand is an expressive phrase that stands for Allah's admissibility to the alms. Allah, the Exalted, is excellently promoted against being a corporeality.
In the same reference, volume 6 part 12 page 212, An-Nawawi writes down:
Eyad, the judge, declares:
Good conditions and sublime standing are the real meanings of being to the right of Allah.Ibn Arafa:
Coming from the right side implies the very suitable side.
In the same reference, part 8 page 16, An-Nawawi states:
"The just shall be on rostra of brilliance to the right of Allah. Allah's both hands are right."
Ibn Arafa explicates: The second expression draws attentions to the fact that 'the right' intended is not that limb.
In the same reference, part 8 page 44, AnNawawi records:
Al-Mawardi states: God's indignation, mentioned in the Prophet's saying, stands for rage. This is by reason that indignation is not ascribed to Allah, the Exalted and Praised.
On page 132, part 17, volume 9 of the same reference, An-Nawawi records:
Regarding explaining Ibn Omar's narrative of Allah's corporeality, Eyad, the judge, states: We do believe in Allah, the Exalted, and His divine attributes. We do not resemble Him to anything. The Prophet's clutching and opening his fingers is a representation of grabbing, extending and gathering creatures. It is also a representation to the grabbed and the extended; that are heavens and earths. It does not indicate to attributes of grabbing and extending, that are attributes of Allah, the Grabber, the Extender. 'Release of Allah's hands' stands for His ability. Since people's acts are usually done by hands, Allah opted for this organ for promoting the significance intended.
( 32 )
On page 60, part 17, volume 9 of the same reference, An-Nawawi records:
The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "Allah is more blissful for His slaves' repentance." Scholars explained Allah's bliss by His satisfaction. For assuring significance of satisfaction in receivers' minds, expression of bliss was used.
On page 182, part 17, volume 9, An-Nawawi states:
The Prophet (peace be upon him) stated: "The hell shall not be saturated unless Allah, the Blessed the Elevated, lays His leg in."
This is one of the most famed hadiths of divine attributes. Scholars were of two variant opinions regarding its exegesis. First, interpretation of these words should be neglected. The extrinsic meaning, however, is not intended since there is a suitable meaning involved. This opinion is adopted by majority of the worthy ancestors and a good number of theologists. Eyad, the judge, says:
The most apparent interpretation of this hadith is that they are people who deserved and were created for the hell. It is essential to pass over the surface of the text since it is decisively evidential that limbs are impracticably ascribed to Allah, the Exalted.
On page 44, part 10 of the same reference, An-Nawawi states:
Regarding the Prophet's saying, "Allah created Adam on his look.", this is one of hadiths of divine attributes. Some scholars discard stating any interpretation, claiming that they believe it but there should be a more suitable meaning since the surface is not intended. This opinion is adopted by most of the worthy ancestors. It is, however, the most cautious and appropriate. Another opinion states that such texts should be interpreted on bases of promoting Allah, the Exalted, against such descriptions.
On page 200 of Riyadhus-Salihin, AnNawawi records:
On Resurrection Day, believers shall be close to their Lord. This closeness expresses dignity and benevolence. It does have nothing to do with distances. Allah, the Praised, is promoted against distances.
WAHABISTS DISCARDED AN-NAWAWI'S MASTERY
Wahabist committee of issuing verdicts, part 3 page 136; Question 12 Verdict 4264:
Q. Some claim AnNawawi's resting upon Asharism in questions regarding the divine names and attributes. Is this true? What is your proof? Is it acceptable to provide such questions regarding scholars? Some claimed that in his book titled 'BustanulArifin', An-Nawawi proves his being Sufi. To which extent is this claim true?
( 33 )
A. Regarding the divine attributes, AnNawawi had a number of errors in which he rested upon course of the interpreters. Hence, he is disregardable in this affair. It is obligatory to adhere to sayings of Ahlus-Sunna
13 concerning confirming the divine names and attributes mentioned in the Holy Quran and the infallible authentic traditions of the Prophet. It is also obligatory to believe in such names and attributes in a way becoming to Allah, the Exalted, passing over distortion, denudation, modification or representation. Hence, it is imperative to apply God's saying, (Nothing is like a likeness of Him; and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.), and the like.
The Permanent Committee of Scholastic Searches and Issuing Verdicts.
