The Shaykh’s response to some of the later generations regarding their figurative interpretation of some of the attributes of Allah the Exalted.

The Shaykh : And from here we move to what I mentioned earlier, which is that this research has a connection to creed. There are verses in the Noble Book and hadiths in the authentic Sunnah that contain phrases and expressions which many of the later generations turn away from interpreting according to their apparent meaning, following a path similar to this path of figurative interpretation and estimating a deleted possessive. For example, to the end of the hadith, and as He the Exalted and Majestic said in the Noble Qur'an . The scholars here have two positions. The first position, which is the correct one, is to interpret these texts from the Book and the Sunnah regarding the attributes of Allah the Exalted and Majestic according to their apparent meaning without figurative interpretation. "Your Lord came" means "Your Lord came." The second position is certainly an error because it contradicts the methodology of the Salaf, such as interpreting as "the army of your Lord" or "the punishment of your Lord" or similar estimates of deleted possessives. Likewise, these later generations interpreted the previously mentioned hadith and its like, "Allah descends," and they said, "Allah... rather, what descends is His mercy." They also estimated a deleted possessive here. What I want to say briefly and concisely is that although estimating a deleted possessive is known in the Arabic language, and this is a clear example before you: "He saw hunger in the faces of his companions," we said, "He saw the effect of hunger." Likewise in the Qur'an, "the people of the village," here there is a deleted possessive. So I say, although this is known in the Arabic language, it is necessary to establish a criterion and a rule for when it is permissible to estimate a deleted possessive and when it is not, otherwise the matter becomes chaos. And... this rule was established by the scholars of language, not only the scholars of the Salaf, but the difference is that those who established this rule from the later generations did not adhere to it in practice and knowledge. The scientific linguistic rule states that the default for every expression is the literal meaning, not the figurative, unless the literal meaning is impossible. At that time, the impossibility of the literal meaning, meaning the inability to interpret the Arabic sentence according to its truth and apparent meaning, is a proof that diverts to interpreting the expression figuratively. They mentioned this, and this is the criterion and rule as we indicated, but they did not adhere to it except those who followed the methodology of the Salaf. And here we are now between some examples connected to Allah the Exalted and Majestic and His attributes. They interpreted as "the punishment of your Lord came," for example. They interpreted and said, "His power," and much, much more.
And the previous hadith means His mercy. What compelled these people? What is the proof that diverts from interpreting these texts according to the literal meaning? Nothing except that their minds were too narrow to believe in one of the attributes of Allah the Exalted and Majestic. This is Allah who is not seen and not felt, and He is only known through His signs. Likewise, regarding His attributes, what is said about the Essence is said about them. We do not know Allah except from His signs and His effects. If Allah the Exalted and Majestic says about Himself and connects , why do we say "the punishment of your Lord came" or "the army of your Lord"? We want to say that Allah does not come. Why? Because they imagine that when Allah says about Himself "He comes," He comes on two legs, for example, or comes tired and panting, and similar attributes that pertain to humans. But Allah the Exalted and Majestic, so that such a false meaning does not come to anyone's mind and they do not interpret the true sentence because of it, said . This is a negation of likeness and an affirmation of two of the attributes of Allah the Exalted and Majestic. Does it come to a person's mind when they read that His hearing is like our hearing? No. That His sight is like our sight? No. Likewise, for all the attributes of Allah the Exalted and Majestic, it is said: "There is nothing like Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing." But in His knowledge, His wisdom, and His attributes, all of His attributes, He does not resemble any of His creations. Glorified and Exalted is He above that.
Likewise, when He described Himself as "He came," why do we imagine that His coming is like the coming of created, weak humans? Let us say He comes in a way whose reality He knows and we do not know, the reality of His Essence, so that we may know the reality of His attributes.
Likewise, "Allah descends." These created beings, by virtue of being human, cannot grasp the reality of the descent of Allah, and every human is the same. Is this an excuse for interpreting the descent? The answer is no, because if it is permissible to interpret one of the attributes of Allah due to the inability of humans to grasp its reality, this leads to the absolute denial of the existence of Allah the Exalted and Majestic, because it leads to the denial of all the attributes.
For example, Allah is Alive and I am alive. Do we deny the life of Allah? It is not said that His life is like our life. We do not say that His life is like our life, nor that our life is like His life, but His life is not like our life. Therefore, His coming is not like our coming, and His descent is not like our descent, because His Essence is not like our essences. And the problem is solved. Therefore, this estimation that the interpreters resort to has no motive for them except the concept of likening. So they fled from likening and fell into denial. Therefore, I hope that every Muslim memorizes this rule from the linguistic aspect and from the legal aspect. From the linguistic aspect, it is not permissible to interpret an expression other than its apparent meaning by estimating a deleted possessive except for a compelling necessity. For example, if a person says, "The prince came," is it correct for the listener to understand the expression as "the servant of the prince came," meaning by estimating a deleted possessive? This is denying the means of understanding between people, which is language. The speaker said, "The prince came," and the listener understood that he meant "the servant of the prince came." If someone came and said, "The prince came," and you remained silent, you would say, "You mean the servant of the prince came." This is denial.
This is if it were humans like us. What about when the speaker is our Lord and Creator? Glorified and Exalted is He, He says about Himself, and we do not know anything about Him absolutely except what He informed us about Himself. He says . We say, "Our Lord came, our Lord comes," but how? ... Allah descends. He descends in a true descent that befits His Majesty, Perfection, and Greatness, but we do not deny... and we do not interpret. They say, "Brother, estimating the possessive is known in the Arabic language." We say, yes, but there must be a compelling necessity. What is the compelling necessity? It must be either verbal, mentioned in the context or the preceding text, or it must be a necessary intellectual necessity. For example, the previous verse . Every person of intellect and understanding knows that the village is not asked. And the Arabs, when they spoke in this language, spoke in sentences whose apparent meaning is figurative, but they are the truth itself.
And this is what the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) uniquely detailed in his speech on, until it was said about him that he denies the existence of figurative language in the Arabic language. But the truth is that he denies this figurative language that the deniers or interpreters follow without proof. He brings an example or the known Arabic sentence, which is "The gutter flowed". The scholars mention it as an example of figurative language, and it is used in a similar way. Ibn Taymiyyah says, "This is a construction whose apparent meaning is figurative, but this sentence they call figurative gives the meaning that nothing else comes to mind." "The gutter flowed". Does any Arab understand "it melted"? Melted from intense heat, for example, the gutter? Or what comes to the minds of all Arabs is "The gutter flowed", meaning the water of the gutter flowed. Therefore, these sentences from which the estimation of this deleted possessive comes to mind are originally built on this arrangement and this meaning. But when you say "The prince came," it is possible that there is a deleted possessive there, because it is possible that the servant came and it is possible that the prince came. Here, the expression remains on its apparent meaning and is not interpreted figuratively unless a proof is found. But "The gutter flowed" cannot be understood as the gutter itself flowed. "The river flowed," and the river is the trench, does not mean the earth. This hole flowed, rather, the water of the river flowed.
So, countering these expressions that were used with the definite intention of a figurative meaning with expressions whose apparent meaning is that their literal reality is intended, such as "So-and-so came" and "So-and-so went," where the person himself is the intended referent of the expression. From this, Ibn Taymiyyah said that it is not permissible to interpret the verses of attributes and the hadiths of attributes by assuming a deleted added noun, because these verses and these hadiths, at the time they speak about Allah (Mighty and Majestic), when the interpreters interpreted these verses and hadiths, they became speaking about other than Allah (Mighty and Majestic). So if Allah says about Himself "He came" and it is interpreted as "the angel came" or "the punishment came" or "the mercy came" or something similar, the speech becomes about other than Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He), and this results in very clear and obvious problems. I will limit myself now to one example in the previous hadith, to the end of the hadith. They interpreted the descent with the descent of mercy, so the objection came in the full hadith, saying: Who says "I am such and such" until the mercy appears? The meaning is corrupted. All of this is among the harms of interpreting the sacred texts due to the inability of human minds to understand the reality of the meaning if the texts are left on their apparent meaning. We are never obligated to understand the realities of the divine attributes, because it is impossible for us to be able to do so. From where do we have these minds to perceive the reality of the attributes? Have we perceived the reality of the Essence? We, as some scholars say, have this essence with us and we live in it, yet we have not perceived it, nor have we perceived the realities within it, such as the soul. So how can we perceive Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) and perceive His attributes (Blessed and Exalted is He)? This is impossible. So there is nothing but pure faith, free from all philosophy on one hand and rationalization, or faith without interpretation, denial of attributes, likening Allah to creation, or comparing Allah to creation. How excellent is what Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said, and he found this word from his Shaykh, Ibn Taymiyyah: "The one who denies attributes worships nothing, and the one who ascribes a body to Allah worships an idol". And therefore, interpretation is not permissible because it leads to denial of attributes, just as asking how an attribute is is not permissible because it leads to comparing Allah to creation, and all of this is contrary to the Noble Qur'an, and specifically to the previous verse . So here in this hadith, we say that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) looked at the hunger. We said "the trace of hunger" because hunger is not seen, so this was a linguistic indicator that the speaker is an Arab, meaning the trace of hunger in the faces of his Companions. Then he (peace be upon him) said: meaning lunch and dinner. The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) reminded them that Allah will expand their provision and that they will not remain in this narrowness and hardship of material life. Good things will come to them due to the Islamic conquests, so they will be served lunch from a large vessel containing meat broth, and they will also be served dinner with ... When they heard this material good news from the Messenger (may Allah's prayers and peace be upon him), they rushed to ask him. This indicates the jurisprudence of the Companions and their lack of inclination toward the world at the expense of the Hereafter. They said: "O Messenger of Allah, are we better off on that day?" "Better" here is not a name but a name of excellence, meaning "the best." Is our condition on that day better, or is it now? He said: He said: Why?
It appears that the nature of this world does not negate expansion in it with mindfulness of Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He). So it is not possible for the two scales to be equal for a person in terms of expansion in the world and expansion in the Hereafter. So balance between, or equalization between, worldly matters and Hereafter matters seems to be impossible. Whenever the Muslim leans in his obedience and worship and increasing in it for the sake of the Hereafter, his inclination and its fruit also decrease in what he obtains of material earnings. And the opposite is the opposite. It is not possible to equalize the two scales exactly. And this hadith indicates that to us, and other hadiths will come. Here, when the Messenger (may Allah's prayers and peace be upon him) gave them good news that they should not despair now of living in a life of hardship and hunger where they do not find the necessary sustenance, a time will soon come when good will come to them more than necessary ... And as is the reality for many Muslims today, where they cook more than needed, so they are forced in the end, after a day or two, and perhaps before the food has spoiled, the soul is disgusted from eating what it ate a day or two ago, so the fate of this food is being thrown to the ground. This is extravagance, and extravagance is wasting money, which is what the Shari'ah has forbidden by Book and Sunnah. Therefore, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said to them that this condition they are living in will disappear, and a time will soon come when the large vessels will come to them morning and evening with meat broth. They said: "Do you think that in the condition we are in now, in terms of the Hereafter aspect, where they were in the best state, and in the worldly aspect, where they were in the worst state, are we better now or on that day when the large vessels come to them with meat broth?" He said: .
This is the Sunnah of Allah in His creation. And therefore, you will not find a person who leans toward the world, even through lawful means, let alone through unlawful means, but that he has fallen short in his religion, much or little.
So we take from this hadith a lesson that if a Muslim finds some hardship in his life, he should not despair of himself or be sad, and let him remember that if he endures this life or this hardship of living and is content with the divine decree and destiny, he is better than those for whom some hardship in living was decreed, better than them.
With this hadith in which the Messenger (peace be upon him) says to the Companions: "You yourselves, on the day when the world comes to you and expands for you, you will not be as you are today. You are today better than on that day."
The hadith after it has a pause for me, meaning, according to the previous terminology, a blank that we were unable to verify.