The Shaykh’s response to those who delegate the names and attributes of Allah

The questioner : Our Shaykh, some scholars say that the methodology of the Salaf regarding

The Shaykh : Repeat that for me.

The questioner : Some scholars say that the methodology of the Salaf regarding the attributes is to say and not to say "He rose above it with His Self." So one does not say "with His Self," only "He rose above it," only "He descends," without any thought at all. What is your answer?

The Shaykh : Yes, my answer is as the Imam of the Abode of Migration, Imam Malik, said: "The rising is known, the how is unknown, and asking about it is an innovation. Take this man away." We say to these people about whom you mentioned, and who are called the people of tafwid (delegation), that they are not of the Salaf, near or far. We say to these people: When you say do not say "The Most Merciful rose above the Throne with His Self," but rather we say "The Most Merciful rose above the Throne," that is what they say. We ask them: Do you say this with understanding or without understanding? We say to them: We agree with you in principle. , do you say it with understanding or without understanding? If he says: Without understanding. Then he has fallen and been exposed, and we know from him that he is a denier of attributes (mu'atil), hiding behind what many before and after him claimed, that they intend to exonerate Allah (tanzih). We also intend to exonerate Allah, but with understanding. So what is the meaning of ? Perhaps you have understood up to this point?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Well, just as you say: "Glory be to my Lord, the Most High." And just as you say: to the end of the verse. So Allah - Mighty and Majestic - is above His Throne, as Imam 'Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak said: "Allah - Blessed and Exalted is He - is above His Throne with His Self, and He is with you with His knowledge - three things - Allah - Blessed and Exalted is He - is above His Throne with His Self, distinct from His creation, and He is with them with His knowledge." When Imam 'Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak says this word, he says it out of his understanding; because al-Rahman (The Most Merciful) is one of the names by which our Lord - Mighty and Majestic - is named, like the name al-Ilah (The God), so it is a name of the Self. If he said "Al-'Alim (The All-Knowing) al-Basir (The All-Seeing)," that would be a name of an attribute, but Allah and al-Rahman are names of the Self. So the word "with His Self" is not an addition from us, but rather it is what every person understands. For example: "Allah created the heavens and the earth." If we say: "With His Self He created the heavens and the earth," this does not mean that we added a meaning that is not taken from the word Allah. "Allah created the heavens and the earth" means "Allah created the heavens and the earth with His Self," and no one participated with Him in that other than Him. This interpretation, or explanation, does not mean that we are the ones who interpreted it as that advisor mistakenly wants to say: Say "The Most Merciful rose above the Throne" and do not say "with His Self." If we say "The Most Merciful rose above the Throne" with understanding, its meaning is "with His Self." And if we say "The Most Merciful rose above the Throne" as words whose meaning we do not know, then we have contradicted the righteous Salaf, as is the case with all the attributes in which we believe with them, without likening (tashbih) and without denial (ta'til), without likening to His saying - Exalted is He - : , and without denial to His saying: . So some of the old sects, the Mu'tazilah, used to deny Allah of these two attributes, the attribute of hearing and seeing. They would say: He - meaning He is All-Knowing - Allah is All-Knowing, established , but here He says: So they denied these two attributes and rejected them. Why? Because they imagine that if we believe in what came in the book of our Lord without likening, nevertheless in their opinion we are likening Him. This is a long discussion, and its end leads these deniers to denying the existence of Allah - Blessed and Exalted is He - from the start. Imam Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah - may Allah have mercy on him - pointed to that when he said: "The one who ascribes a body to Allah worships an idol, and the one who denies attributes worships non-existence." Both are astray, but which is more astray? The one who denied with absolute denial; because they say, and we mentioned this in some of our old gatherings when they speak about Allah - Mighty and Majestic - and that He rose above the Throne, they say: No, our Lord is not described, it is not said of Him - Mighty and Majestic - -in their view- that Allah is above, it is not said "above," He is not above and He is not below, He is not on the right and He is not on the left, He is not inside the world and He is not outside it. So they returned to non-existence. Therefore Ibn al-Qayyim said rightly: "The denier worships non-existence" - pure non-existence. If He is not inside the world and not outside it, if one were to ask the most eloquent person in description: Describe for us the non-existent, what is it? And he said to you: It is not above and it is not below, not right, not left, not behind, not inside the world and not outside it. We say to him: You are right, this is the non-existent. So they described their Lord as what? Non-existent, when they denied Him of attributes. So the denier worships non-existence. We must stand at the limits of the Shari'ah and not use analogies; because Allah - Mighty and Majestic - if He is All-Hearing and All-Seeing, His hearing is not like our hearing and His seeing is not like our seeing, just as His existence is not like our existence. So we say now: Allah exists and I exist. Does that mean that we say, so that we do not fall into what they claim is likening in one of two things, that we deny a truth of two truths? Allah exists and I and you and the created things also exist. So it is necessary to deny a truth of two truths, and whichever one is denied, what happens? It is twisted. If you say: I exist, Allah exists. No, there is sharing, there is likening. So Allah does not exist; because there is likening of the Creator to the created. How does He not exist, He does not exist, so I am not existing -the brothers laugh andThe Shaykh : - the sweetest of them is bitter, no, so Allah exists and I exist, but His existence, as they say, what is it? Existence without what? A Creator, the Necessary Existent, whereas I am the Possible Existent; because Allah - Mighty and Majestic - is the One who created me, and if He wills, He will annihilate me. And therefore He said, to establish this great distinction: . So we affirm what He affirmed and deny what He denied. He denied: , , He affirmed, so His hearing and seeing are two realities, two established attributes, but . In any case, rejecting all the attributes makes you at ease, and you do not fall into likening or denial. This is the answer to what you asked. Please.

The questioner : This person said to me: , "Rise above" means "He is high." That is your understanding of "rose above." So what do you say, what is your understanding of "the hand," the hand of Allah, what do you say its meaning is? So what do I say to him?

The Shaykh : The hand by which He gives. I say, and it is not like my hand. What is this big problem? And what does he say?

The questioner : He says: Since the hand cannot be explained...

The Shaykh : No, no, what does he say, what is the intended meaning of the hand for him?

The questioner : He delegates it...

The Shaykh : So he is a denier then. So what is Allah? Existing? We return to the same topic, or non-existent?

The questioner: He is present.

The Shaykh : Existing and I exist, so he denied one of the two truths, and at that time we rule that the obligation of religious duty has fallen off you. -the brothers laugh, may Allah benefit them-
Al-Halabi : Our Shaykh, in the same issue, no problem.

The Shaykh: Go ahead.
Al-Halabi : My teacher, they are actually the later Asha'irah or the late Asha'irah. They denied the word "existing" as you pointed out at the end of your speech, our teacher. So they said: Because the word "existing" necessitates a Creator, so He is the Necessary Existent. So they fled in the explanation of al-Bayjuri and so on, they fled from the word "existing," and they said: We do not say "existing"; because the existing establishes a Creator, and Allah is the Necessary Existent.

The Shaykh : Ah, this is a verbal discussion, but this does not hold in argumentation; because...
Al-Halabi : I would like you to clarify this detail for us, meaning, does the word "existing" actually, as they claim, necessitate a Creator?

The Shaykh : No, no, but this is a Byzantine discussion, as they say, because they are now engaging in a verbal discussion. Indeed, the word "existing" (mawjud) is a passive participle that, according to human custom, usually implies that there is a creator for it. This cup and this pitcher, for example, exist because the one who made them brought them into existence, and so on. But Allah (Mighty and Majestic), as we said during the discussion, is the Necessarily Existent (Wajib al-Wujud). However, His being the Necessarily Existent does not negate that His existence is established. So we leave the rest of the existing things; their existence is established and their existence is realized. In that case, they flee from the discussion by clinging to a word that neither advances nor retards the matter. We have removed this name, "existing," from the dictionary of this study, but its existence is realized. They cannot say it is absent. Therefore, this clinging to this word does not benefit them in any way. I hope our brothers will memorize a phrase I read in a manuscript that is still in manuscript form, from the words of al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, and it may have been transmitted in some books: "What is said regarding the attributes is said regarding the Essence, in negation and affirmation." Do you say that Allah is existing or non-existent? Existing. If you say He is existing, and we have clarified the intended meaning of the word "existing," does that necessitate the likeness of the Creator to the created? The answer is no. Likewise, say regarding the attributes what you say regarding the Essence, and you will be at ease from all these discussions. This is because the truth is that delving into the details of these issues and debating them is misleading. Why is it misleading? Because many people may have been given logic and have come with argumentation, while other people have not been given knowledge or argumentation, and what do they have? Soundness and correct creed. But that arguer may overcome him with his argumentation because of the soundness of this person's knowledge and heart. Therefore, every Muslim should memorize this rule, which is based on the previous verse: "What is said regarding the attributes is said regarding the Essence, in negation and affirmation." In that case, you will be at ease from any discussion you might be forced to enter into when you are not prepared for it.
Al-Halabi : Our Shaykh, you mentioned in your speech the saying of al-Khatib al-Baghdadi in the introduction of Mukhtasar al-'Ulu, which you transmitted, O my teacher. This is a benefit for our brothers.

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you with good.
Al-Halabi : May Allah bless you.