A reading from the words of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah on the hadith (Adam was created in His image), with an explanation of the scholars' statements on it and a discussion of them.

Al-Halabi : It appears that this is not from the words of Shaykh al-Islam that he quoted from *Bayan Tala'is al-Jahmiyyah* in more than half the book. I mean, more than half of this book is taken from the words of Shaykh al-Islam from *Bayan Tala'is al-Jahmiyyah*, the manuscript copy, so he published it, and the words are Shaykh al-Islam's (may Allah have mercy on him). He says: "If it is said, 'The saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): '—this, if this hadith is understood to refer to the image of Allah the Exalted, its apparent meaning would be that Allah's height is sixty cubits. And Allah the Exalted, as Ibn Khuzaymah said, is too Great to be described by cubits and spans. And it is known that this measurement is false regarding Allah, according to the view of those who affirm a limit and measure for Him from among the affirmers, and according to the view of the deniers. As for the deniers, it is apparent. As for the affirmers, in their view, the measure of Allah is greater, and His limit is not known except by Him, and His Footstool has encompassed the heavens and the earth, and the Footstool in the Throne is like a ring thrown on a barren land, and the Throne's measure is not known except by Allah the Exalted. And Allah the Exalted said..."

The Shaykh : Excuse me, it seems I heard you say "like a ring." Is it with a sukun or with a fathah? I think it is *halqah* (with a sukun).
Al-Halabi : Correct, Shaykh, the words are correct, but it appears that in it is a fathah and movement, but each has a meaning, so which one...?

The Shaykh : Here it is with the jazm (conjugation), yes.
Al-Halabi : May Allah reward you with good, Shaykh. He says, "As for the affirmers, in their view, the measure of Allah the Exalted is greater, and His limit is not known except by Him (Glorified and Exalted is He), and His Footstool has encompassed the heavens and the earth, and the Footstool in the Throne is like a ring thrown on a barren land, and the Throne's measure is not known except by Allah the Exalted. And Allah the Exalted said: ."

The Shaykh : (Glorified and Exalted is He), Allah is free from what they associate with Him.
Al-Halabi : I mean, and by Allah, the texts have been mass-transmitted from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), from the hadith of Abu Hurayrah, Ibn 'Umar, Ibn Mas'ud, and Ibn 'Abbas: . Ibn 'Abbas said: "The seven heavens and the seven earths and what is between them and what is in them, in the Hand of the Merciful, are like a mustard seed in one of your hands." And if the matter is so, it is greater and more exalted than to be measured by this measure. And this is known by necessity from reason and religion. It was said: "The apparent meaning of the hadith is not that Allah's height is sixty cubits, and whoever claims that this is its apparent meaning or interprets it that way is a fabricator, a liar, and an innovator, for the falsity of this is known by necessity from reason and religion, as mentioned before. And it is also known that it is not apparent from the hadith, for the pronoun in 'his height' refers to Adam, about whom it was said: . Then he said, 'Adam's height is sixty cubits.' So when He created him, He said to him, 'Go to that group of angels.' So all these pronouns refer to Adam, and this is one of them. So the word 'height' and its measure are not included in the meaning of 'image' such that it would be said, 'If it is said that Allah created Adam in His image, it must be in His measure and height.' Rather, it is known that two created things can be such that one is in the image of the other, with a great difference in the type of their essence and the measure of their essence. And the heavens and the moon may appear in the image of water or a mirror of extreme smallness, and it is said, 'This is its image,' with the knowledge that the reality of the heavens and the earth is greater than that by a proportion where one has no relation to the other. And so is the artist who depicts the image of the heavens, stars, sun, mountains, and seas in the image of that, even though what he depicts, even if it resembles that, is the furthest thing from its reality and measure. And the addition varies in its indication according to the thing to which it is added. So when he said at the end of the hadith: , this necessitates similarity of type in measure, because the image of the added thing is of the same type as the image of the thing to which it is added, and their reality is one. As for his saying, 'Allah created Adam in His image,' it necessitates only a type of similarity, not necessitating identity in reality or measure. As for those who thought that the pronoun in 'his height is sixty cubits,' since it refers to Adam, did not have an image before that on which he was created, and we mentioned multiple aspects indicating the falsity of that. For this reason, some of the hadith scholars who want not to narrate this meaning to some people say, 'Adam was created, his height is sixty cubits.' If this is in explaining the measure of Adam's image on which Allah created him, it is not said in such a case, 'Adam was created in the image of Adam,' but it may be said, 'He was created in this image, in this description.' For this, in the wording, there is no addition that necessitates the precedence of the image on which he was created, but rather there is specification and explanation of the image he was in after creation. Even though this is not suitable to be said in this wording, because the saying of the one who says, 'Adam was created, or Adam was created in the image of Adam, or in the image that was Adam's,' if he intends by it the measurement, which is that it is sixty cubits, if this is in explaining the measure of Adam's image on which Allah created him, it is not said in such a case, 'Adam was created in the image of Adam,' but it may be said, 'He was created in this image, in this description.' For this, in the wording, there is no addition that necessitates the precedence of the image on which he was created, but rather there is specification and explanation of the image he was in after creation. Even though this is not suitable to be said in this wording, because the saying of the one who says, 'Adam was created, or Adam was created in the image of Adam, or in the image that was Adam's,' if he intends by it the measurement, which is that it is sixty cubits, it necessitates that the addressed ones know that by less than this address, for the address defined by the lam or the addition necessitates the precedence of the addressed ones' knowledge of that defined thing. And it is known that the addressed ones did not know Adam's height. And this is not suitable to be said regarding the measure, and what is mentioned in the Surah of Adam of his being created from the beginning and the like of that, for this is known, unlike the measure. So the hadith informed of two sentences: that He created Adam in His image, and that his height is sixty cubits. This measurement is not the measurement of the image on which he was created, such that it would be said, 'It is the image of Adam.' May Allah have mercy on Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah..."

The Shaykh : ...It remains in my mind thatThe Shaykh : al-Tuwayjiri addressed this, and that he returned the first pronoun to Allah, and the second pronoun to Adam. This is what he mentioned.The Shaykh : I do not think anyone can bring more than that. But even so, in this non-obvious meaning, when a person hears, 'Allah created Adam in His image, his height is sixty cubits'...

The questioner : They say, 'O Shaykh, the Qur'an and the Sunnah indicate that this does not refer back to Allah, and every person...'

The Shaykh : The issue is that what has no disagreement does not need detail. May Allah bless you, soThe Shaykh : Here he excelled in this negation, and as we said briefly just now, no one says that the height of the Lord of the Worlds is sixty cubits. But the pronoun refers back to Adam. So if it is possible for us to return the two pronouns to... what was our discussion? The reality is, our discussion was that we do not get enthusiastic in refuting the opponents. And do not hold it against me if I am frank with you, as 'Abdullah did, even if he narrated from others, saying, 'They say that this is what? A Jahmi.' The one who says that the pronoun in 'in His image' refers back to Adam, whose saying is this? A Jahmi's saying.

The questioner : But they do not say Al-Albani is a Jahmi, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : This is not my personal concern, may Allah bless you. I am but a man among these Muslims. And if Al-Albani, who is filled with the creed of the Book and the Sunnah and on the methodology of the pious predecessors, says this saying, and you say, 'They do not say about him personally,' but what about the one who is around the correct creed, who promotes one man and delays another, do they not say about him, if he says this saying, that he is a Jahmi? Of course, they say about him that he is a Jahmi. So this enthusiasm, with the possibility of returning the pronoun without any denial, to Adam, while adhering to the other narration, without disturbing the first pronoun referring to Allah, and the second pronoun referring to Adam, as long as there is room here for this meaning, without this adherent to this room or one circulating in this room being exposed to denying an attribute of Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He), why this heat and why this strictness that it is said that whoever says this interpretation or figurative interpretation is a Jahmi?

The questioner : Shall I answer, O Shaykh?

The Shaykh: Go ahead.

The questioner : They say that the righteous Salaf (may Allah have mercy on them), who brought us this hadith, interpreted it with this interpretation. So if we say that the pronoun refers to Adam, we would be contradicting them. They mention that Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him), al-Dhahabi, Ishaq, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal (may Allah have mercy on them) all agree and mention this in the biographies of the Hanbali scholars, citing the Salaf. They ask: Among the Salaf, who said that the pronoun refers to Adam other than Ibn Khuzaymah?

The Shaykh : No problem. Here a question arises: Is this an agreed-upon matter among the Salaf?

The questioner : They say that the Salaf denied...

The Shaykh : No, do not say "they" to me. I understand that you have appointed yourself to report their words, so do not increase in caution. They say, they say, they say. Do not be afraid; I will know that the beginning and end of your speech is reporting from others. Good? Relax.

The questioner : But I have something, Shaykh. The one who asks me, I understand two things from him. The first is that he wants, for example, to know who held this belief. And if he wants to know what I believe, he asks me to state it explicitly...

The Shaykh : Good, this is a possibility, is it not? As you say. So we will relieve you of that and put you face to face: you are a reporter, not an adopter. Understood? A reporter. I say "reporter" in Arabic. What does it mean? So-and-so reported from so-and-so. He may report truthfully, he may report falsely, etc. So, so that our speech does not fall into repetitive phrases, I understand that you are reporting and not adopting. Understood?

The questioner : Good, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Understood?

The questioner : Okay.

The Shaykh : Do not repeat your words; but repeat what you asked me: Is this an agreed-upon matter?

The questioner : It is agreed upon in the three centuries.

The Shaykh : I do not think you are still... We tell you: leave the reporting and say what you believe. I do not think your statement that it is agreed upon in the three centuries is correct.

The questioner : No, in the three centuries they did not agree on this.

The Shaykh : Ah, I understood the opposite.
Al-Halabi : That is what our Shaykh said.

The questioner : Do you want me to be a reporter or do you want me to state my belief?

The Shaykh : No, I am asking: if you are a reporter, I am asking you now regarding the report: Do they say that this is an agreed-upon matter?

The questioner : Yes, and the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned that in his refutation of al-Razi.

The Shaykh : Okay, but this is a mistake. A mistake either from you or from Ibn Taymiyyah.

The questioner : No, Ibn Taymiyyah...

The Shaykh : No, wait a moment. Wait, and your patience is only from Allah. I am mentioning this, but I do not rely on what I mention because I am an old Shaykh.

The questioner : May Allah preserve you and protect you.

The Shaykh : I am mentioning that Ibn Taymiyyah reported the statement of Ibn Khuzaymah. Do you not remember with me, and you are young, of course?
Al-Halabi : And he adds, the Shaykh al-Islam transmitted from him or about him: "As for the statement of those who say the pronoun refers to Adam, as Imam Ahmad mentioned from some of the hadith scholars of Basra, and he mentions that from Abu Thawr, it is..." meaning that it is the statement of Abu Thawr and the statement of the hadith scholars of the people of Basra, let alone the statement of Ibn Khuzaymah later...

The Shaykh : If we know this, we are relieved.

The questioner : Excuse me, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Are you now reporting about yourself or are you still reporting about others?

The questioner : I am reporting about myself and about others at the same time.

The Shaykh : No, that is enough for you...

The questioner : O Shaykh.The Shaykh : Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned that this is from the hadith scholars of Basra, and I mentioned this...The Shaykh : to me before I came, and he mentioned that from Abu Thawr (may Allah have mercy on him). And I also found this statement...

The Shaykh : No problem, this statement does not benefit us.

The questioner : But the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah also mentioned here in this book that this is the statement of the three centuries...

The Shaykh : But it is a mistake.

The questioner : Meaning he says: "And the three centuries agreed on this..."

The Shaykh : No problem, my brother, this is a mistake. This is a contradiction.

The questioner : What do I do? What is my sin, Shaykh?

The Shaykh : And am I sinning you? I am not sinning you and I am not blaming you; but I am clarifying to you that those who say this with this generality and comprehensiveness... what do you have with me now?

The questioner : I am with you, Shaykh. Okay, those who say this with this generality and comprehensiveness?

The Shaykh : They are contradictory. They are contradictory in themselves.

The questioner : You are correct.

The Shaykh : Because on one side he says this statement, and on another side he says the opposite of what negates it. I do not say the opposite of it.

The questioner : Unless he has a technical term for this.

The Shaykh : No, no, there is no technical term.

The questioner : If his intended meaning is the majority...?

The Shaykh : There is no technical term, but if you want to proceed in defending Ibn Taymiyyah and others by the way of the theologians, I will support you with my support. I will tell you: put in a deleted modifier and the phrase of the Shaykh al-Islam will be correct. What is his phrase exactly?
Al-Halabi : The one I read?

The Shaykh : No, no. The issue is: what about this?

The questioner : The three centuries.

The Shaykh : The three centuries. Put in a deleted modifier: "Most of the three centuries." I have finished it for the Shaykh al-Islam.
Al-Halabi : He mentioned two phrases in the context. Whichever he mentions, the first phrase: "This is the statement of the three centuries." So with this meaning, it is correct with this addition.

The Shaykh : Allow me to correct myself, or rather my wording. If I said "in order to" mean taking Ibn Taymiyyah out of the open contradiction by adding a deleted modifier, then this, by his statement, is in order to mitigate the error.
Al-Halabi : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : But it is not correct either.
Al-Halabi : Yes, yes.

The Shaykh : Meaning, if I said now, if I said "Most of the three centuries" with this meaning that the pronoun refers to Allah, I would also be mistaken. But I would be more deeply immersed in error if I said "The people of the three centuries" with this. So, pity us, some evil is less than some.
Al-Halabi : Okay, why is the error from the perspective of benefit, our Shaykh?

The Shaykh : Where did the thoroughness come from? This happens to scholars often, and this is leniency in expression. Most scholars are like this. Who has counted the statements of the scholars in every century? This is closest to claiming consensus, about which Imam Ahmad said that wonderful word: "Whoever claims consensus has lied, and he does not know; perhaps they differed." The Shaykh al-Islam came upon the hadith scholars of the people of Basra and Abu Thawr, and so on. It is possible that, as they say, "in the corners there are secrets." These people may have other examples from scholars. And so, even with this patching, in my expression of the phrase, "most" would also be leniency. Because it is difficult to say, because this issue requires enumerating the scholars: these said so and these said so. Did you count these? By Allah, these are more than those. This is an operation that is impossible. There is only leniency in expression, leniency in expression.

The questioner : Shaykh, their argument in this is that the righteous Salaf accepted these hadiths and left them as they came, and they did not address their interpretation. They said that the pronoun refers to Allah. If we say as they said that the pronoun refers to Allah, and what sufficed them suffices us, and we remain silent about what they remained silent about, and we do not interfere in what does not concern us?

The Shaykh : Halimah has returned to her old habit. This is an old proverb.

The questioner : Meaning this issue from the beginning...

The Shaykh : No, no problem. You are saying "we do not interpret." The previous question returns: What is meant by "do not interpret"? Meaning it is not understood?

The questioner : It is understood that the pronoun refers to Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He); but...

The Shaykh : Who said this? The Salaf?

The questioner : The Salaf.

The Shaykh : You are now saying "the Salaf," but what is the benefit of repeating your previous statement?

The questioner : The benefit of this is that if you want to refute them, we say that it is not correct that the Salaf say the pronoun refers to Allah.

The Shaykh : We are done with this. Why do you return to reporting their words to force me again, so I return and say this is not correct? What is the benefit?

The questioner : I said there is another response, Shaykh, other than this?

The Shaykh : That is enough, that is enough. What I actually intended to say behind this research is the first word when you asked me if they agreed on it. The answer should have been no. As long as there is agreement, I am at ease in the matter; I am not a non-Salafi, or a follower of the later generations. If I see the opinion of Abu Thawr, for example, and the scholars of Basra, as long as there are two opinions in the issue, and I take one of the opinions that is supported first by the Arabic language and second by the Salafi methodology—meaning I do not deny any of the attributes of Allah—I say, for example, that Allah has a face, do you see? Allah has a face, taking this from the hadith of the Gathering. So if I refer the pronoun to Adam, I do not deny the face in a general, absolute sense. So what is the danger that befalls someone like me who argues with the author’s statement, quoting Ibn Taymiyyah, quoting Imam Ahmad, that whoever refers the pronoun to Adam is a Jahmi? Why this heat when there is disagreement in the issue?

The questioner : Because you do not believe that there is any resemblance between the face of Adam and the face of the Most Merciful.

The Shaykh : How can you say that? I say, linguistically and hadith-wise, regarding al-Bukhari, and how do you say that because you believe...

The questioner : Because you do not believe that there is any resemblance between the face of the Most Merciful and the face of Adam.

The Shaykh : Where did I speak? Or did I not hear?

The questioner : They say the problem is that there is a resemblance between the face of the Most Merciful and the face of Adam.

The Shaykh: Who is it?

The questioner : Those who say that the pronoun refers to Allah, and it is obligatory for the Salafi and the believer to believe this. What I understand is that there is a point of resemblance, but this resemblance does not imply similarity in all aspects.

The Shaykh : Is this the statement of Ibn Taymiyyah?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : That is not what I mean. I am asking what is the danger that befalls someone like me who refers the pronoun to Adam?

The questioner : It is what I mentioned to you.

The Shaykh : What is the danger?

The questioner : That you do not believe there is a point of resemblance between the face of the Most Merciful and the face of Adam.

The Shaykh : How did you understand it?
Al-Halabi : Our Shaykh, it seems he establishes from the hadith, which is , that there is a point of resemblance between Adam, between the face of Adam and the face of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He). So if you interpret this hadith as referring to Adam, you deny this resemblance. As for establishing the face, that is a second issue. So now we have two issues, as they say: the issue of establishing the face, on which we and you agree; and the issue of the type of similarity between the face of Adam and the face of Allah, which you have denied, so the danger has occurred.

The Shaykh : This is serious, O Abdullah.

The questioner : This is the problem, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : This is serious.

The questioner : I say to them, O people, fear Allah. And they say, no, this is the belief of the righteous Salaf, and whoever does not believe this is either a Jahmi or a Salafi who has erred, just as Ibn Khuzaymah erred.

The Shaykh : Meaning, as part of the creed, if we say...
Al-Halabi : No problem, O our Shaykh. Our brother Salim mentioned their wording more precisely, so your answer will be clearer, O Shaykh, if Allah wills.
Salim : They say that the "face" here does not mean an attribute. So Adam is in the likeness of the Most Merciful, meaning Adam has a face and the Most Merciful has a face. Adam has a face befitting his poverty, and Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) has a face befitting His majesty and perfection. They do not say that there is a similarity between the face of Allah and the face of the Most Merciful, meaning that Adam resembles the Most Merciful. No, they say that the "face" here means an attribute. So what the brother mentioned about them suggests a serious matter.

The Shaykh : I am telling him it is a serious matter.

The questioner : I, O Shaykh, asked al-Tuwajiri (may Allah preserve him and make him scrupulous, and may Allah guide us and him). I said to him, O Shaykh, do you permit me to interpret this hadith with this interpretation that was mentioned?The Shaykh : Salim : Meaning the one he just mentioned to us? He said, no, it is not for us to interpret it; we pass it over as it came. I said, O Shaykh, it implies likening, and you say... He said, this is not our statement, and whoever says that the apparent meaning of this hadith implies likening is mistaken. And the Shaykh of Islam, Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him), refuted them in...

The Shaykh : Your speech is contradictory now.

The questioner : He says, O Shaykh, there is a point of similarity, O Shaykh, between Adam and...

The Shaykh : O my brother, you just quoted al-Tuwajiri, and praise be to Allah, he denied what? The similarity.

The questioner : No, O Shaykh, they are more than one and they divided into groups regarding this hadith. They divided into groups. Some say we pass this hadith over as it came, we do not interpret it, and we do not give it a figurative interpretation. I mentioned this interpretation to them, and they said, no, we do not bring that. I said to them, like His face...

The Shaykh : Meaning they are now Mu'azzilah in this group you are talking about now, which we call number one. So these are Mu'azzilah?

The questioner : Yes, but they do not admit that they are Mu'azzilah.

The Shaykh: There is no power nor strength except with Allah.

The questioner : Okay, O Shaykh, this is the first group. The second group exerted effort in interpreting the hadith and said that we say if we refer the pronoun to Allah the Exalted, that Allah has a face befitting His majesty and greatness, and that Adam has a face, and there is a point of resemblance in meaning, but this similarity in meaning does not imply similarity in all things, but rather it is a point from the perspective of the wording only. Just as Allah has a face, Adam has a face. Just as Allah (Exalted and Majestic is He) has an eye, Adam has an eye. They say from this perspective. Another group says, we do not say it is "in the likeness of Allah" as an addition of honor, and that this does not imply similarity. Just as the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said: . Does this mean that they are in the likeness of the full moon, that their faces are like the face of the moon? They said, no, this is not what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) intended. Rather, the addition "in the likeness of His face" means there is a point from the side of beauty, splendor, and beauty, and that among the most honorable of creation, Allah created Adam in the best form. And Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) also has perfection in His attributes. And a group after them said that this is an addition of honor, like saying "the Ka'bah of Allah" or "the House of Allah," or "the camel of Allah." This is approximately, O Shaykh, four groups. If they attribute it to Allah, they divide into four groups. One group says it is not for us to interpret it, among them...The Shaykh : Salim : al-Tuwajiri.

The Shaykh : What are these? Mu'azzilah. Say Mu'azzilah.

The questioner : Salim : Mu'azzilah.

The Shaykh : Say Mu'azzilah briefly, we need to understand you. I want to understand what you are saying.

The questioner : Salim : Mu'azzilah.

The Shaykh : Not "following the path," you are telling me.

The questioner : Salim : No, not "following the path."

The Shaykh : Meaning, I want to understand you in a word expressing three or four words. Do you understand from them that they are Mu'azzilah?

The questioner : Salim : Yes, O Shaykh, I understand that.

The Shaykh : And do you understand anything else?

The questioner : Salim : No, I understand this.

The Shaykh : That is it. The first group are Mu'azzilah. And who are they?

The questioner : The Shaykh : Salim : al-Tuwajiri.

The Shaykh: Who?

The questioner : The Shaykh : Salim : al-Tuwajiri.

The Shaykh : Al-Tuwajiri.

The questioner : He said, it is not for us to interpret it; we pass it over as it came.

The Shaykh : I seek refuge in Allah. Meaning, the title of the book is enough for you. Is he a Mu'azzil?

The questioner : Salim : No, in this issue, O Shaykh, he delegates the meaning, saying we pass the hadith over as it came.

The Shaykh : O my brother, may Allah bless you, do not repeat the speech to us. "Passing the hadith over as it came" among the scholars of the Salaf has a meaning other than delegation.

The questioner : Salim : Yes, O Shaykh, but in this, delegation is required of them.

The Shaykh : So if we stick to the word "delegator," let us leave al-Tuwajiri, in what you are narrating about him that he is a delegator. Do not say that he says "we pass the hadith over as it came." Because we, as Salafis, understand the phrase "pass the hadith over as it came" to mean we do not deny it, but rather we pass it over in the Arabic meaning that comes to the mind of every Arab, without sitting around it and falling into likening, or interpreting it and falling into denial. This is passing it over. So you do not quote two contradictory phrases from al-Tuwajiri. The first phrase, as a summary of what you understood from him that he is a delegator in this hadith, and then you say about him "we pass it over as it came." "Passing it over as it came," when Ibn Taymiyyah mentions it, explains to us, may Allah reward him with good, that the intended meaning is not without understanding, whereas delegation means without understanding. Are you with us in interpreting the meaning of the word delegation?

The questioner : Salim : I understand this, O Shaykh, if Allah wills, with you.

The Shaykh : Subhan Allah! I know you are with us well. Are you with us that the word delegation is not synonymous with "passing it over"?

The questioner : Salim : Yes, I am with you in this.

The Shaykh : Good. So you are now contradictory.

The questioner : Salim : I am not the one who is contradictory, rather...The Shaykh : Salim : He is the one who is contradictory. He mentions this and mentions this, and I quoted what he said.The Shaykh ...

The Shaykh : But what does his book testify to? That he is a delegator? Did you read his book?

The questioner : Salim : Yes, I read his book.

The Shaykh : Does his book indicate that he is a delegator?

The questioner : Salim : In what I believe?

The Shaykh : Yes, you are not anyone else.

The questioner : I believe he is delegated in this matter.

The Shaykh : So why do you say he says it this way? If his book states that he is delegated, and does not say that he transmits this hadith as it came,

The questioner : Yes, and even if he claims this.

The Shaykh : And even if he claims that he transmits the hadith as it came.

The questioner : Then this does not support him.

The Shaykh : What is in the book is what we are saying.

The questioner : Yes, it does not support him in this.

The Shaykh : Okay, let us leave the matter of delegation for now, all right?

The questioner: All right.

The Shaykh : Let us move to the second section, which is perhaps the section we cannot understand. What is the second section?

The questioner : They say that our statement that the pronoun refers to Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) and that the image of Adam is like the image of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) does not necessitate likening Allah to creation. Rather, it means that Allah has an image befitting His majesty, just as Adam has an image befitting him. And the image of Adam is like the image of Allah only in meaning, in a specific aspect of the meaning only, in a specific aspect. Just as Allah has a face befitting His majesty, Adam has a face befitting his weakness and incapacity. This is their statement: that Allah has, for example, an eye, and Adam has an eye, and so on.

The Shaykh : Okay, this second section, we say it.

The questioner : But you said that the pronoun refers to Adam?

The Shaykh : No problem, we say it in the general sense. Did you not say that He has a face? He has sight, He has hearing, and He has all the attributes.

The questioner : Do we not agree on this?

The Shaykh : This is what I told you, and we say this: that there is no likening Allah to creation, regardless of whether the pronoun refers to Adam or to the Lord of the Worlds.

The questioner : But Shaykh, I mean, I say that the wording of the hadith, the apparent meaning of the hadith, does not support them in this. Because its apparent meaning is likening Allah to creation if we refer it to Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He). Its apparent meaning is likening Allah to creation if we refer it to Allah. But if we refer it to Adam, there is no likening Allah to creation. So this is their figurative interpretation, and it is not the understanding of the Salaf, the righteous Salaf (may Allah have mercy on them)...

The Shaykh : Okay, let us keep this second section in mind to see what the third section is. This is perhaps something we will return to later, the second section.

The questioner : The third section: they said that it refers to Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He), the pronoun refers to Allah, but it is an addition of honor.

The Shaykh : Okay, what is the fourth section?

The questioner : The fourth section...

Another questioner : They are three sections.

The Shaykh : He said four. I mean, if they say that referring the pronoun to Allah is from the perspective of honor, as I gave examples: the she-camel of Allah, the house of Allah, and so on. We also say that, meaning not specifically for interpreting the hadith, but as a general principle. There is no objection to attributing something to Allah from the perspective of honor, all right?

The questioner : Okay.

The Shaykh : So we return to the second statement. I understood from you just now that they want to impose on us that the pronoun refers to Allah so that we believe there is a type of likening Allah to creation. Is this understanding correct?

The questioner : Some of them said this.

The Shaykh : You did not answer me?

The questioner : No, Shaykh, we have sections, and they are not just one?

The Shaykh : May Allah guide you, Shaykh Abdullah, but we understood the sections as three.

The questioner : Perhaps this will turn out to be a fourth section.

The Shaykh : No problem, but within the scope of the three, we are standing in the middle now, right or not?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Okay, so this middle statement between the first and the third. I understood from you previously that they say the one who refers the pronoun to Adam is a Jahmi, because he does not affirm a type of likening Allah to creation. Because if we refer the pronoun in the hadith to Allah, it gives a type of likening Allah to creation, so it must be believed in. This is how I understood it.

The questioner : I will give you the fourth section, which is this, the fourth section I just mentioned.

The Shaykh : ...
Al-Halabi : You have opened the way for him, O our Shaykh...

The Shaykh: All right.

The questioner : The second section does not say this, but the fourth section says this.

The Shaykh : Okay, this was in my mind as the fourth section, and it might be the second. The order does not matter to us, you see. Scholars sometimes say this in a disordered way, going back and forth. Now, in the verse of the creation of Adam, He made him hearing and seeing, right?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Is it correct to say there is a type of likening Allah to creation? Or is it, as the Shaykh al-Islam says in many of these places, that this is a shared term? A shared term, and every described entity takes from this shared term the meaning that befits it. So the human being, Allah the Exalted said: , he takes from it that he has two eyes...