The belief of Ahlu Sunnah Wal Jamaacah

[Pi]

Is it permissible for a Muslim

to believe that Allah is in the

sky in literal sense?

©Nuh Ha Mim Keller 1995

 

 

No. The literal sense of being "in the sky" would mean that Allah is actually in one of His creatures, for the sky is something created. It is not permissible to believe that Allah indwells or occupies (in Arabic, hulul) any of His creatures, as the Christians believe about Jesus, or the Hindus about their avatars.

What is obligatory for a human being to know is that Allah is ghaniyy or "absolutely free from need" of anything He has created. He explicitly says in surat al-Ankabut of the Qur'an,

 

"Verily Allah is absolutely free of need of anything in the worlds" (Qur'an 29:6).

Allah mentions this attribute of ghina or "freedom of need for anything whatsoever" in some seventeen verses in the Qur'an. It is a central point of Islamic `aqida or faith, and is the reason why it is impossible that Allah could be Jesus (upon whom be peace) or be anyone else with a body and form: because bodies need space and time, while Allah has absolutely no need for anything. This is the `aqida of the Qur'an, and Muslim scholars have kept it in view in understanding other Qur'anic verses or hadiths.

Muslims lift their hands toward the sky when they make supplications (du'a) to Allah because the sky is the qibla for du'a, not that Allah occupies that particular direction--just as the Kaaba is the qibla of the prayer (salat), without Muslims believing that Allah is in that direction. Rather, Allah in His wisdom has made the qibla a sign (ayah) of Muslim unity, just as He has made the sky the sign of His exaltedness and His infinitude, meanings which come to the heart of every believer merely by facing the sky and supplicating Allah.

 

It was part of the divine wisdom to incorporate these meanings into the prophetic sunna to uplift the hearts of the people who first heard them, and to direct them to the exaltedness and infinitude of Allah through the greatest and most palpable physical sign of them: the visible sky that Allah had raised above them. Many of them, especially when newly from the Jahiliyya or "pre-Islamic Period of Ignorance", were extremely close to physical, perceptible realities and had little conception of anything besides--as is attested to by their idols, which were images set up on the ground. Umar ibn al-Khattab mentions, for example, that in the Jahiliyya, they might make their idols out of dates, and if they later grew hungry, they would simply eat them. The language of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) in conveying the exaltedness of Allah Most High to such people was of course in terms they could understand without difficulty, and used the imagery of the sky above them. Imam al-Qurtubi, the famous Qur'anic exegete of the seventh/thirteenth century, says:

 

The hadiths on this subject are numerous, rigorously authenticated (sahih), and widely known, and indicate the exaltedness of Allah, being undeniable by anyone except an atheist or obstinate ignoramus. Their meaning is to dignify Allah and exalt Him above all that is base and low, to characterize Him by exaltedness and greatness, not by being in places, particular directions, or within limits, for these are the qualities of physical bodies (al-Jami li ahkam al-Qur'an. 20 vols. Cairo 1387/1967. Reprint (20 vols in 10). Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, n.d.,18.216).

In this connection, a hadith has been related by Malik in his Muwatta' and by Muslim in his Sahih, that Muawiya ibn al-Hakam came to the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) and told him, "I am very newly from the Jahiliyya, and now Allah has brought Islam," and he proceeded to ask about various Jahiliyya practices, until at last he said that he had slapped his slave girl, and asked if he should free her, as was obligatory if she was a believer. The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) requested that she be brought, and then asked her, "Where is Allah?" and she said, "In the sky (Fi al-sama)"; whereupon he asked her, "Who am I?" and she said, "You are the Messenger of Allah"; at which he said, Free her, "for she is a believer" (Sahih Muslim, 5 vols. Cairo 1376/1956. Reprint. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1403/1983, 1.382: 538). Imam Nawawi says of this hadith:

This is one of the "hadiths of the attributes," about which scholars have two positions. The first is to have faith in it without discussing its meaning, while believing of Allah Most High that "there is nothing whatsoever like unto Him" (Qur'an 42:11), and that He is exalted above having any of the attributes of His creatures. The second is to figuratively explain it in a fitting way, scholars who hold this position adducing that the point of the hadith was to test the slave girl: Was she a monotheist, who affirmed that the Creator, the Disposer, the Doer, is Allah alone and that He is the one called upon when a person making supplication (du'a) faces the sky--just as those performing the prayer (salat) face the Kaaba, since the sky is the qibla of those who supplicate, as the Kaaba is the qibla of those who perform the prayer--or was she a worshipper of the idols which they placed in front of themselves? So when she said, In the sky, it was plain that she was not an idol worshipper (Sahih Muslim bi Sharh al-Nawawi. 18 vols. Cairo 1349/1930. Reprint (18 vols. in 9). Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1401/1981, 5.24).

It is noteworthy that Imam Nawawi does not mention understanding the hadith literally as a possible scholarly position at all. This occasions surprise today among some Muslims, who imagine that what is at stake is the principle of accepting a single rigorously authenticated (sahih) hadith as evidence in Islamic faith (`aqida), for this hadith is such a single hadith, of those termed in Arabic ahad, or "conveyed by a single chain of transmission", as opposed to being mutawatir or "conveyed by so many chains of transmission that it is impossible it could have been forged".

Yet this is not what is at stake, because hadiths of its type are only considered acceptable as evidence by traditional scholars of Islamic `aqida if one condition can be met: that the tenet of faith mentioned in the hadith is salimun min al-muarada or "free of conflicting evidence". This condition is not met by this particular hadith for a number of reasons. First, the story described in the hadith has come to us in a number of other well-authenticated versions that vary a great deal from the "Where is Allah?--In the sky" version. One of these is related by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih with a well-authenticated (hasan) chain of transmission, in which the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) asked the slave girl, "'Who is your Lord?' and she said, 'Allah'; whereupon he asked her, 'Who am I?' and she said, 'You are the Messenger of Allah'; at which he said, 'Free her, for she is a believer'" (al-Ihsan fi taqrib Sahih Ibn Hibban, 18 vols. Beirut: Muassasa al-Risala, 1408/1988, 1.419: 189).

 

In another version, related by Abd al-Razzaq with a rigorously authenticated (sahih) chain of transmission, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said to her, "Do you testify that there is no god but Allah?" and she said yes. He said, "Do you testify that I am the Messenger of Allah?" and she said yes. He said, "Do you believe in resurrection after death?" and she said yes. He said, "Free her" (al-Musannaf, 11 vols. Beirut: al-Majlis al-Ilmi, 1390/1970, 9.175: 16814).

 

In other versions, the slave girl cannot speak, but merely points to the sky in answer. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani has said of the various versions of this hadith, "There is great contradiction in the wording" (Talkhis al-habir, 4 vols. in 2. Cairo: Maktaba al-Kulliyat al-Azhariyya, 1399/1979, 3.250). When a hadith has numerous conflicting versions, there is a strong possibility that it has been related merely in terms of what one or more narrators understood (riwaya bi al-ma'na), and hence one of the versions is not adequate to establish a point of `aqida.

 

Second, this latter consideration is especially applicable to the point in question because the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) explicitly detailed the pillars of Islamic faith (iman) in a hadith related in Sahih Muslim when he answered the questions of the angel Gabriel, saying, True faith (iman) is to believe in Allah, His angels, His Books, His messengers, the Last Day, and to believe destiny (qadr), its good and evil (Sahih Muslim, 1.37: 8)--and he did not mention anything about Allah being "in the sky". If it had been the decisive test of a Muslims belief or unbelief (as in the "in the sky" hadith seems to imply), it would have been obligatory for the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) to mention it in this hadith, the whole point of which is to say precisely what "iman is".

 

Third, if one takes the hadith as meaning that Allah is literally "in the sky", it conflicts with other equally sahih hadiths that have presumably equal right to be taken literally--such as the hadith qudsi related by al-Hakim that Allah Most High says, "I am with My servant when he makes remembrance of Me and his lips move with Me" (al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihayn. 4 vols. Hyderabad, 1334/1916. Reprint (with index vol. 5). Beirut: Dar al-Marifa, n.d., 1.496), a hadith that al- Hakim said was rigorously authenticated (sahih), which al-Dhahabi confirmed. Or such as the hadith related by al-Nasai, Abu Dawud, and Muslim that "the closest a servant is to his Lord is while prostrating" (Sahih Muslim, 1.350: 482)--whereas if Allah were literally "in the sky", the closest one would be to Him would be while standing upright. Or such as the hadith related by al-Bukhari in his Sahih, in which the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) forbade spitting during prayer ahead of one, because when a person prays, "his Lord is in front of him" (Sahih al-Bukhari, 1.112: 406). Finally, in the hadiths of the Mir'aj or "Nocturnal Ascent", the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) was shown all of the seven heavens (samawat) by Gabriel, and Allah was not mentioned as being in any of them.

 

Fourth, the literal interpretation of Allah being "in the sky" contradicts two fundamentals of Islamic `aqida established by the Qur'an. The first of these is Allah's attribute of mukhalafa li al- hawadith or "not resembling created things in any way", as Allah says in surat al-Shura, "There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him" (Qur'an 42:11), whereas if He were literally "in the sky", there would be innumerable things like unto Him in such respects as having altitude, position, direction, and so forth. The second fundamental that it contradicts, as mentioned above, is Allah's attribute of ghina or "being absolutely free of need for anything created" that He affirms in numerous verses in the Qur'an. It is impossible that Allah could be a corporeal entity because bodies need space and time, while Allah has absolutely no need for anything.

 

Fifth, the literalist interpretation of "in the sky" entails that the sky encompasses Allah on all sides, such that He would be smaller than it, and it would thus be greater than Allah, which is patently false.

 

For these reasons and others, Islamic scholars have viewed it obligatory to figuratively interpret the above hadith and other texts containing similar figures of speech, in ways consonant with how the Arabic language is used. Consider the Qur'anic verse "Do you feel safe that He who is in the sky will not make the earth swallow you while it quakes" (Qur'an 67:16), for which the following examples of traditional tafsir or "Qur'anic commentary" can be offered:

 

(al-Qurtubi:) The more exacting scholars hold that it [in the sky] means, "Do you feel secure from Him who is over the sky"--just as Allah says, "Journey in the earth" (Qur'an 9:2), meaning journey over it--not over the sky by way of physical contact or spatialization, but by way of omnipotent power and control. Another position is that it means "Do you feel secure from Him who is over ('ala) the sky," just as it is said, "So-and-so is over Iraq and the Hijaz", meaning that he is the governor and commander of them (al-Jami li ahkam al-Qur'an, 18.216).

(al-Shirbini al-Khatib:) There are various interpretive aspects to "He who is in the sky," one of which is that it means "He whose dominion is in the sky," because it is the dwelling place of the angels, and there are His Throne, His Kursi, the Guarded Tablet; and from it are made to descend His decrees, His Books, His commands, and His prohibitions. A second interpretive possibility is that "He who is in the sky" omits the first term of an ascriptive construction (idafa)--in other words, "Do you feel safe from the Creator of him who is in the sky"; meaning the angels who dwell in the sky, for they are the ones who are commanded to dispense the divine mercy or divine vengeance (al-Siraj al-Munir. 4 vols. Bulaq 1285/1886. Reprint. Beirut: Dar al-Marifa, n.d., 4.344).

 

(Fakhr al-Din al-Razi:) "He who is in the sky" may mean the angel who is authorized to inflict divine punishments; that is, Gabriel (upon whom be peace); the words "cause the earth to swallow you" meaning "by Allah's command and leave" (Tafsir al-Fakhr al-Razi. 32 vols. Beirut 1401/1981. Reprint (32 vols. in 16). Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1405/1985, 30.70).

 

(Abu Hayyan al-Nahwi:) Or the context of these words may be according to the convictions of those being addressed [the unbelievers], for they were anthropomorphists. So that the meaning would be, "Do you feel safe from Him whom you claim is in the sky?--while He is exalted above all place" (Tafsir al-nahr al-madd min al-Bahr al-muhit. 2 vols. in 3. Beirut: Dar al-Janan and Muassasa al-Kutub al-Thaqafiyya, 1407/1987, 2.1132).

 

(Qadi Iyad:) There is no disagreement among Muslims, one and all--their legal scholars, their hadith scholars, their scholars of theology, both those of them capable of expert scholarly reasoning and those who merely follow the scholarship of others--that the textual evidences that mention Allah Most High being "in the sky", such as His words, "Do you feel safe that He who is in the sky will not make the earth swallow you," and so forth, are not as their literal sense (dhahir) seems to imply, but rather, all scholars interpret them in other than their ostensive sense (Sahih Muslim bi Sharh al-Nawawi, 5.24).

 

We now turn to a final example, the hadith related by Muslim that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:

Your Lord Blessed and Exalted descends each night to the sky of this world, when the last third of the night remains, and says: "Who supplicates Me, that I may answer him? Who asks Me, that I may give to him? Who seeks My forgiveness, that I may forgive him?" (Sahih Muslim, 1.521: 758).

This hadith, if we reflect for a moment, is not about `aqida, but rather has a quite practical point to establish; namely, that we are supposed to do something in the last third of the night, to rise and pray. This is why Imam al-Nawawi, when he gave the present chapter names to the headings of Sahih Muslim, put this hadith under "Instilling Desire to Supplicate and Make Remembrance of Allah (dhikr) in the Last of the Night, and the Answering Therein". As for the meaning of "descends" in the hadith, al-Nawawi says:

This is one of the "hadiths of the Attributes", and there are two positions about it, as previously mentioned in the "Book of Iman". To summarize, the first position, which is the school of the majority of early Muslims and some theologians, is that one should believe that the hadith is true in a way befitting Allah Most High, while the literal meaning of it as known to us and applicable to ourselves is not what is intended, without discussing the figurative meaning, though we believe that Allah is transcendently above all attributes of createdness, of change of position, of motion, and all other attributes of created things.

The second position, the school of most theologians, of whole groups of the early Muslims (salaf), and reported from Malik and al-Awzai, is that such hadiths should be figuratively interpreted in a way appropriate to them in their contexts. According to this school of thought, they interpret the hadith in two ways. The first is the interpretation of Malik ibn Anas and others, that it [your Lord descends] means "His mercy, command, and angels descend," just as it is said, "The sultan did such-and-such," when his followers did it at his command. The second is that it is a metaphor signifying [Allah's] concern for those making supplication, by answering them and kindness toward them (Sahih Muslim bi Sharh al-Nawawi, 6.3637).

 

The hadith scholar Ali al-Qari says about the above hadith of Allah's "descending":

You know that Malik and al-Awazai, who are among the greatest of the early Muslims, both gave detailed figurative interpretations to the hadith. . . . Another of them was Jafar al-Sadiq. Indeed a whole group of them [the early Muslims], as well as later scholars, said that whoever believes Allah to be in a particular physical direction is an unbeliever, as al-Iraqi has explicitly stated, saying that this was the position of Abu Hanifa, Malik, al-Shafi'i, al-Ashari, and al- Baqillani (Mirqat al-mafatih: sharh Mishkat al-masabih. 5 vols. Cairo 1309/1892. Reprint. Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, n.d., 2.137).

It is worth remembering that al-Iraqi was a hafiz or "hadith master", someone with over 100,000 hadiths by memory, while Ali al-Qari was a hadith authority who produced reference works still in use today on forged hadiths. In other words, each had the highest credentials for verifying the chains of transmission of the positions they relate. For this reason, their transmission of the position of the unbelief of whoever ascribes a direction to Allah carries its weight.

But perhaps it is fitter today to say that Muslims who believe that Allah is somehow "up there" are not unbelievers. For they have the shubha or "extenuating circumstance" that moneyed quarters in our times are aggressively pushing the bid'a of anthropomorphism. This bid'a was confined in previous centuries to a small handful of Hanbalis, who were rebutted time and again by ulama of Ahl al-Sunna like Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597/1201), who addressed his fellow Hanbalis in his Daf shubah al-tashbih bi akaff al-tanzih [Rebuttal of the insinuations of anthropomorphism at the hands of divine transcendence] with the words:

 

If you had said, "We but read the hadiths and remain silent," no one would have condemned you. What is shameful is that you interpret them literally. Do not surrreptiously introduce into the madhhab of this righteous, early Muslim man [Ahmad ibn Hanbal] that which is not of it. You have clothed this madhhab in shameful disgrace, until it can hardly be said "Hanbali" any more without saying anthropomorphist (Daf shubah al-tashbih bi akaff al-tanzih. Cairo n.d. Reprint. Cairo: al-Maktaba al-Tawfiqiyya, 1396/1976, 2829).

These beliefs apparently survived for some centuries in Khorasan, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the East, for Imam al-Kawthari notes that the Hanbali Ibn Taymiya (d. 728/1328) picked up the details of them from manuscripts on sects (nihal) when the libraries of scholars poured into Damascus with caravans fleeing from the Mongols farther east. He read them without a perspicacious teacher to guide him, came to believe what he understood from them, and went on to become an advocate for them in his own works (al-Kawthari, al-Sayf al-saqil fi al-radd ala Ibn Zafil. Cairo 1356/ 1937. Reprint. Cairo: Maktaba al-Zahran, n.d. 56).

He was imprisoned for these ideas numerous times before his death, the ulama of Damascus accusing him of anthropomorphism (al-Asqalani, al-Durar al-kamina fi ayan al-mia al-thamina. 4 vols. Hyderabad 134950/193031. Reprint. Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, n.d., 1.155).

 

Writings were authored by scholars like Abu Hayyan al-Nahwi (d. 745/ 1344), Taqi al-Din Subki (756/1355), Badr al-Din ibn Jamaa (d. 733/ 1333), al-Amir al-Sanani, author of Subul al-salam (d. 1182/1768), Taqi al-Din al-Hisni, author of Kifayat al-akhyar, (d. 829/1426), and Ibn Hajar al-Haytami (d. 974/1567) in rebuttal of his `aqida, and it remained without acceptance by Muslims for another four hundred years, until the eighteenth-century Wahhabi movement, which followed Ibn Taymiya on points of `aqida, and made him its "Sheikh of Islam." But was not until with the advent of printing in the Arab world that Ibn Taymiya's books (and the tenets of this sect) really saw the light of day, when a wealthy merchant from Jedda commissioned the printing of his Minhaj al-sunna and other works on `aqida in Egypt at the end of the last century, resurrected this time as Salafism or "return to early Islam." They have since been carried to all parts of the Islamic world, borne upon a flood of copious funding from one or two modern Muslim countries, whose efforts have filled mosques with books, pamphlets, and young men who push these ideas and even ascribe them (with Ibn Taymiya's questionable chains of transmission, or none at all) to the Imams of the earliest Muslims. My point, as regards considering Muslims believers or unbelievers, is that this kind of money can buy the influence and propaganda that turn night into day; so perhaps contemporary Muslims have some excuse for these ideas--until they have had a chance to learn that the God of Islam is transcendently above being a large man, just as He is transcendently above being subject to time or to space, which are but two of His creatures.

 

To summarize what I have said in answer to your question above, scholars take the primary texts of the Qur'an and sunna literally unless there is some cogent reason for them not to. In the case of Allah "descending" or being "in the sky", there are many such reasons. First, a literal interpretation of these texts makes it impossible to join between them and the many other rigorously authenticated texts about Allah being "with" a servant when he does dhikr, "closer to him than the jugular vein" (Qur'an 50:16), "in front of him" when he prays, "closest" to him when he is prostrating, "in the sky" when a slave girl was asked; "with you wherever you are" (Qur'an 58:4), and so on. These are incoherent when taken together literally, and only become free of contradictions when they are understood figuratively, as Malik, al-Awzai, and al-Nawawi have done above. Second, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) detailed the beliefs that every Muslim must have in the Gabriel Hadith in Sahih Muslim and others, and did not mention Allah being "in the sky" (or anywhere else) in any of them. Third, Allah's being "in the sky" as birds, clouds, and so on are in the sky in a literal sense contradicts the `aqida of the Qur'an that there is "nothing whatsoever like unto Him" (Qur'an 42:11). Fourth, the notion of Allah's being in particular places contradicts the `aqida expressed in seventeen verses of the Qur'an that Allah is free of need of anything, while things that occupy places need both space and time.

 

These reasons are not exhaustive, but are intended to answer your question by illustrating the `aqida and principles of traditional ulama in interpreting the kind of texts we are talking about. They show just how far from traditional Islam is the belief that Allah is "in the sky" in a literal sense, and why it is not permissible for any Muslim to believe this. And Allah alone gives success.

 

 

 

www.masud.co.uk | More by same Author

[Rahima]

Pi,

 

I have a small dilemma you see, I want my car fixed but I’m not really sure who I should go to-a fully qualified mechanic who has been in the trade for well over 30 years or my 16 year old neighbour who can now manage to open the hood?

[Pi]

So you disagree with the article. I guess this is your way of saying "I disagree with it but I wont explain why". Anyhow, it makes sense to me.

 

Are you gonna tell me what's wrong with it though? Other than that the author is supposedly inexperienced? Ugh!

 

P.S. Before I answer your question, I have to ask: is the qualified, thirty-years expert mechanic a fraud? If he is, I'll take my chances with the the amatuer.

 

P.P.S. By the way, what's wrong with the expert mechanics mentioned in this thread?

[xiinfaniin]

Pi, that Allah has beautiful attributes that meaningfully represent His qualities is no point of moot among the learned community of this Ummah. It is also equally agreed that Allah is unlike any thing we can perceive. In fact He is distinctively unique in His being.

 

The notion that Allah is physically everywhere has a weak scriptural support, and hence theologically unstable. We wouldn’t raise our hands upwards if that was the case! But it is also the case that some prominent scholars held a position similar to the one promoted by the article you posted.

 

But it all comes down to what is the safe way of interpreting Allah’s attributes, saaxiib? Should we use logic and rational methods to exalt Allah or should we follow how His messenger treated these verses? Should we inject fuzzy analogical rendition in to the Qur’an or should we uphold the original understanding of it and rely on their sound understanding? In my judgment, we can only know about Allah what He or his messenger told us about him, and that is suffice for us to know.

[Pi]

Originally posted by xiinfaniin:

But it is also the case that some

prominent scholars

held a position similar to the one promoted by the article you posted.

Honesty is the best policy. Thanks, dude. I couldnt understand arabic if my life depended on it, so in the meantime I'll follow the expert opinion of some of the scholars that you mentioned. Why do I follow one set of scholars instead of another. I will follow the position that not only makes sense to me, but also makes sense to alot of prominent scholars.

[xiinfaniin]

^^Yours is called taqliid, which is OK. Sor'f OK.

[S.O.S]

A/c,

 

Pi, if you wish to know where Allah is, then we can discuss that objectiveley... and I would start that by posing the question: WHERE IS ALLAAH?

 

But to post useless articles of misguidence is another subject.

 

So, what is it that bothers you so much and that wish to discuss it here and now ?

 

w/c

[Cumar]

As-salaam Alaikuum

 

Firstly, that article is riddled with many errors not to mention the unfounded accusations against Shaykh-ul-Islaam ibn Taymiyyah (may Allaah have Mercy on him). Nuh Keller is an Asharite Soofee and is known for his deviant beliefs regarding the Sifaat.

 

Nuh Keller mentions that Fee Samaa means 'In the Sky'. That is incorrect as fee is used injunction with the meaning of alaa.

 

So when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, "where is Allaah", she said "fee al-samaa" meaning above the Heavens.

 

Ibn Taymiyyah said in Bayaan Talbees ul-Jaymiyyah:

 

"And when it became established in the souls of the addressees (of the revelation) that Allaah is the Highest of the High, and the He is Above everything, the understanding of His saying, "Indeed He is (fee) the Heaven" became that He was High and Above everything. Likewise the slave girl when it was said to her, "where is Allaah," she said, "(fee) the Heaven," meaning above, without designating for Him a created body or His being contained in His Creation..Furthermore whosoever thinks that Allaah being (fee) the Heaven means that the Heaven surrounds or encloses Him, then he is a liar if he is quoting someone else or misguided if He believes this with respect to His Lord. We have not heard anyone understand this from this word (fee) just as we have not seen anyone quote this from anyone else"

 

Imaam Bukharee (may Allaah have mercy on him) compiled some authenthic narrations from the salaf in Khalq Af'aal al-Ebaad.

 

Ibn al-Mubaarak said, 'we do not say as the Jahmiyyah say that Allaah is on the earth, rather He has risen over His Throne.'

 

And it was said to him, 'how should we know our Lord?' He said, 'above the Heavens, over/upon (alaa) His Throne'

 

Sadqa said, 'I heard Sulaiman at-Taimi saying, 'if I were asked, "where is Allaah?" I would say, "above (fee) the heaven". And if it said, "where was the Throne before the Heaven?" I would say, "over the water." And if it is said, "where was the Throne before the water?" I would say, "I do not know."'

 

 

As regards to the hadeeth about Nuzool then it is confirmed by the salaf that is affirmed in a manner that befits His Majesty and Perfection and we do not like it to the descendending of any of His creation. So we believe in His attributes (sifaat) as they were mentioned by Him without tahreef, ta'weel, tamtheel, tashbeeh or ta'teel.

 

Nuh Keller does not mention the statements of the Imaams regarding the Nuzool but tries to interpret that those who follow the salaf interpret as Allaah having a fixed direction which is an obvious lie.

 

Al-Laalikaa’ee (may Allaah have mercy on him) has a chapter stating the narrations of the Nuzool.

 

Fudail bin Ayaad said, when you hear the Jahmi say, "I disbelieve in a Lord that Descends"- say - "I believe in a Lord that does what He wills"

 

Yahya bin Ma’een said, when you hear the Jahmee say, "I disbelieve in a Lord that Descends", then say, "I believe in a Lord that does what he desires."

 

Imaam Ahmad said, He descends as He wills, according to His Knowledge and Power and Greatness. He encompasses everything with His Knowledge.

 

Hammad bin Salma said, "abuse whosoever you see rejecting this (i.e. the Nuzool)"

 

In addition, Nuh Keller forgots to mention the statement of his imaam Abul Hasan al-Asharee regarding the Nuzool.

 

"And we believe in all the narrations that the People of Narration have considered to be authentic concerning the Descent to the Lowest Heaven and that ‘the Lord,Exalted is He, says, "is there one asking, is there one seeking forgiveness"’ and the totality of what the quote and consider to be established, in opposition to the people of deviancy and misguidance."

 

Imaam al-Aajurree said:

 

"Faith in this is obligatory, and it is not allowed for the intelligent Muslim to say , ‘how does he descend?’ - and none would answer this except the Mu'tazila [for example the saying of some, that His command descends, and the saying of others that His angels descend etc.] As for the People of Truth, then they say, ‘faith in this is obligatory without asking how. Because the narrations are authentic to the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) - That Allaah descends to the lowest heaven every night and the ones who transmitted this narration to us are the ones that transmitted the rules of halaal and haraam, and the knowledge of salaah, and zakaah, and fasting, and hajj, and jihaad. So just as the scholars accepted these from them then like this, they accepted from them these sunan. And they said, the one who opposed these is horribly misguided. Warning him and warning against him."

 

The famous Hanbalee Imaam al-Jeelaanee whom Nuh Keller admires and follows him contradicts the view of Nuh Keller:

 

"And Allaah Descends every night to the Lowest Heaven howsoever He Wills, …and the meaning is not the descent of His Mercy or Reward as claimed by the Mu’tazila and the Asharees due to what is reported from Ubaadah bin Saamit that the Messenger of Allaah (Exalted is He) said….[mentioning the hadeeth of Descent]"

 

Abu Ja’far at-Tirmidhee said:

 

"The Nuzool (Descent) is understood, but the how/nature is unknown, and faith in it is obligatory, and to question about it (i.e. how) is a bid’ah."

 

As for Nuh Keller mentioning al-Jawzee refuting the Hanbalee Imaams, then this is a blatant lie. It is actually on the contrary, the foremost of the Hanbalee Imaams and other imaams refuted al-Jawzee for indulging in ta'weel.

 

Shaykh Mashur al-Salmaan said, "... I saw that it was necessary upon me to inform about the confusion of ibn al-Jawzee generally, and his errors concerning the Names and Attributes of Allaah specifically. For he has attributed in his book, 'Daf' Shubah at-Tashbeeh', things to Imaam Ahmad which he is free of.

 

adh-Dhahabee states, woe to him, if only he had not delved into ta'weel and thereby opposed his Imaam' And he said also, adding to the saying of Abdul Lateef about him, 'and there were many mistakes in what he wrote, for indeed he used to finish a book and not give it any consideration', 'I say: due to this he had many misinterpretations and different shades of neglecting examination. And he gained knowledge from writings... ['Siyar' 2/368]

 

Ibn Rajab al-Hanbalee said about him, a group of the scholars of our companions took a stand against him for his inclination towards ta'weel in his speech. And their rejection (of him) was severe in that. And their is no doubt that his speech in that (i.e. ta'weel) was confused and contradicting. So if he was cognisant of the ahaadeeth or narrations he would not consider lawful the doubts of the Mutakallimeen (People of Theological Rhetoric) and expose their corruptions. And he used to exalt Abu Wafaa ibn Aqueel and follow him in most of what he found in his words - although he refuted him in some points - and ibn Aqueel was skilled in philosophy but he was not well aquainted with hadeeth and narration. And this is why ibn Aqueel was shaky/confused in this topic...and Abul Farj followed him in this hue (talawwun)

 

Ibn Qudaama al-Maqdisi said, ibn al-Jawzee was the Imaam of his time except that we are not pleased with his writings on the Sunnah (in this context to mean belief/tawheed) nor his methodology in them' ['Dhail Tabaqaat al-Hanaabila' (1/415)]

 

Ibn Taymiyyah states, verily Abul Farj (ibn al-Jawzee) contradicted himself in this subject (i.e. the Names and Attributes of Allaah). And it is not established that he gave precedence to affirmation or negation. Rather he has speech in affirmation of (Allaahs Names and Attributes) and much speech scattered about in this work (i.e. 'Daf' Shubah at-Tashbeeh') that establishes that he negated (Allaahs Names and Attributes). And in this subject he is like many others, sometimes affirming and sometimes negating as is the state of Abu Wafaa' ibn Aqueel...['Fataawaa' (4/169)]

 

As for his accusations against Ibn Taymiyyah, alhumdillah, it has been responded to by many brothers who saw the baatil.

 

Reply to Accusations Against Shaykh ul-Islaam ibn Taymiyyah

http://www.sunnahonline.com/ilm/seerah/0048.htm

 

Asalaam Alaikuum

[Nur]

Pi

 

Allah SWT says in Quraan:

 

Yas'aluuunaka canil ahilla, qul hiya mawaaqiitun linnaasi wal Xajj

 

 

Meaning: They ask you concerning the crescents ( phases of the moon), tell them, its for time keeping, and for Hajj (season calendar)"

 

When the companions asked the prophet SAWS, they may have meant more of a philosophical question, however thge answer came in conjunction with an information that will lead to a practical application of the crescent ( Hilaal), so it was explained that its purpose if a tiem keeping devise.

 

When they asked about the Spirit, they were told that it was none of their business,

 

Today, most dialectic arguments that people disagree in, are issues that would never have found ground during the time of the Prophet SAWS, because that generation were interested only on practical information that can be leveraged to do good, or stop eveil, but never for the sake of polemics.

 

Now, it amzes me how much time is wasted on topics like these, because Ahlul Sunnah drew the line about Allahs attributes as follows :

 

1.We Say About Allah exactly what He said about Himself in Quraan and Sunnah.

 

2. We dont know how, or why.

 

3. Asking details of these how and why is innovation, no one ask ed before during the life of Prophet Muhammad SAWS, because no tangible worship was related to it. thus a waste of time and effort.

 

 

In that context, in the arabic language, Samaa is NOT SKY, its HIGH, from the root Samaa yasmuu.

 

Allah is most high, and subxaanallahi camma yasifuun.

 

 

Nur

[Khayr]

Pi,

 

I'm just wondering why you posted this? Just a bit cautious...thats all

 

The article by Shiekh Nuh has many references to alot of Ulema.

 

Its a scholarly reply and so to is the site that Suleyman cited.

 

You are dealing with issues of Aqeedah (Salafi and Ashari (most sunni ulema except for the some of the Ahl ul irfan) and they are interpretations dealing with Theology.

 

Positions and schools of thought can be explained but lets try to avoid attacking each side for that will lead us AWAY from TAWHID.

 

Something interesting that I found....

 

(Connection (tasbih) and anthropormorphism in the expressions of the Sunna)

 

An example of that is when the Prophet said, "The heart of the believer is between two of Allah's fingers." [at-Tirmidhi] The intellect looks at what the subject demands of reality and metaphor and that a 'limb' is impossible for Allah! 'Finger' is a sharted expression which can be applied to the limb or applied to blessing. The shepherd said:

 

 

Weak of staff [2], of Bedouin origin, you see him over them when

people have not had their blessing end in drought.

 

 

He said, "You see him over them" is a good indication of blessing by looking after them well. The Arabs say, "What an excellent finger so-and-so has over his property" meaning that his effect on it is to make his property grow because of his good management of it.

 

The swiftest turning over of things is what is turned over by the fingers because of their small size and perfect capacity for that. So their movement is swifter than the hand and other things. When Allah turns over the hearts of the slaves,

it is the swiftest thing. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was most eloquent to the Arabs in his supplication. using what they understood. Because for us, things are only turned over by the hand, he used turning with 'the fingers' because the fingers are part of the hand and are quicker.

Thus the Prophet said in his supplication, "O Overturner of hearts, make my heart firm in Your deen!" [ibn Majah] Allah's overturning of the hearts is what He creates in them of concern for good and interest in evil. When man senses the succession of thoughts which come to him in his heart, this is referred to as 'Allah turning the heart'. Man's knowledge cannot turn this away from himself. That is why the Prophet said, "O Overturner of hearts, make my heart firm in Your deen!"

 

Regarding this hadith, one of his wives said to him, "Do you fear then, Messenger of Allah?" He, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, replied, "The heart of the believer is between the fingers of Allah," so the Prophet indicated the swiftness of the turning from belief to disbelief and what they both contain. Allah said, "He inspired them with their depravity and godfearing." (91:8) This inspiration is the turning and the fingers are for speed. The fact that they are two ('two fingers') is the thought of good and the thought of evil.

 

So 'fingers' should be understood as we have stated.

'Fingers' can mean the limb and it can mean the blessing and good effect.

So which of the two aspects will you connect to the limb when these disconnected aspects demand it? Either we will be silent and entrust knowledge of that to Allah and to the one whom Allah has acquainted with it - a sent messenger or an inspired wali as long as the limb is negated, or we are overcome by inquisitiveness which takes control of us, although we ascribe that to an assimilating anthropomorphising innovator. It is not by inquisitiveness, but it is obligatory for the knower in that to clarify the aspects of disconnection in that expression so as to invalidate the argument of every disappointed anthropormorphist. May Allah turn to us and him and provide him with Islam! If we discuss that word which must give rise to tashbih, its explanation must be modified to an aspect which befits Allah - glory be to Him! This is the portion of the intellect in the linguistic convention of the phrase.

Source

[Cumar]

As-salaam Alaikuum brother

 

The article of Nuh Keller is a distortion from the statements of some of the Imaam. He neither references what the Imaams of the salaf said and those who follewed them in faith. The imaams say:

The correct faith in Allaah’s attributes means believing in them without denying them or their meanings (tateel), without interpreting them and changing their meanings (tahreef), without explaining how they are (takyeef) or likening Allaah’s attributes to those of the creation (tamtheel). This is the consesus reported. What Nuh Keller is doing is attempting to justify the Asharee 'aqeedah that sprung up during the time of the khalaf.

 

Brother Nuh, masha'Allaah, has explained the position of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama'ah. Unfortunately akhee, the Asharee and the Matureedee 'aqeedah are widely known and adopted by many Muslims. In fact, the Maaliki and the al-Shaafi'ee maddhabs are dominated by the Asharitees whilst the Hanafee maddhab is dominated by the Matureedee 'aqeedah. Only the Hanbalee maddhab remained the only school representing the views of the four imaams.

 

Brother Khayr, the text that you have quoted promotes ta'weel by trying to insert an figurative interpretation for what Allaah has affirmed Himself.

 

The Fingers reports are expressions of unclear interpretation (mutashabihat). We do not add or omit what is stated in the Glorious Qur'aan and the Sunnah. This goes against what the salaf have said about the Sifaat.

 

Further, that selective text is from the Futoohaat al-Makkiyyah (written by Ibn Arabee) and these are the books of kufr as stated by many Imaams. In fact, many Imaams have made takfeer on him for uttering disbelief.

 

Imaam Walee ad-Deen Ahmad al-Iraaqee said under the twenty first issue of his ‘Fataawaa al-Makkiyyah,’ "there is no doubt in including the Fusoos that is famous from him amongst the clear and explicit disbelief. The same applies to his ‘Futoohaat al-Makkiyyah.’ If these books are truly written by him (ibn Arabee) and he believed in what he wrote when he died then he is a kaafir who will remain for eternity in Hellfire. There is no doubt concerning this."

 

For more info:

http://63.175.194.25/index.php?QR=7691&dgn=4&ln=eng

[Khayr]

Suleyman,

 

saxib i'm aware of the source of those writings and the shiekh that wrote them. Were are debating ideas here, so lets try to keep the 'Takfeer' talk out of this. This will only lead us away from Tawhid and into useless argumentation.

 

to be con'td

[Cumar]

Akhee Khayr, I wasn't trying to offend you and I apologise if I did, but I was rather advising that one should not take statements from those who have uttered disbelief in their books. In fact, one cannot quote books riddled with major kufr. The mere fact that the excerpt that you quoted approves taweel is blameworthy. Lastly, I wasn't aware that this was a debate, but more like an elucidation of the allegations mentioned in the primary article.

 

Asalaam Alaikuum

[Pi]

Ummm, I'm done with this thread. Shaykh Nuh Ha Meem Keller is a innovative sufi. Imaam Nawawi, Ibn Hajar and a whole load of other scholars propagate kufr in their books. Right. May God give you shameless takfeeris what you deserve.

[Cumar]

Originally posted by Pi:

Ummm, I'm done with this thread. Shaykh Nuh Ha Meem Keller is a innovative sufi. Imaam Nawawi, Ibn Hajar and a whole load of other scholars propagate kufr in their books. Right. May God give you shameless takfeeris what you deserve.

As-salaam Alaikuum

 

You have posted an article that promotes the takfeer of Imaam Ibn Tamiyyah and yet you accuse me of making takfeer? Surely that is great injustice akhee. No one has the right to make takfeer except those who in authority, meaning the ameer and the scholars.

 

Further, Imaam Nawawee (may Allaah have mercy on him) is an Imaam of the Sunnah and he opposed the Asharee creed in many of his writings. Likewise for Imaam ibn Hajaar (may Allaah have mercy on him). I have heard of no scholar who made takfeer on them.

 

As-salaam Alaikuum