Is Ibn al-Qayyim’s statement regarding the people of Kalam that “the necessary is the very same as the necessitated” correct, and what is the correct position on this principle?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The principle ... the people of Kalam [hold] that the necessary is the very same as the necessitated.
The Shaykh : No, no, the necessary is not the same as the necessitated, by the consensus of people of sound intellect.
The questioner : Yes, that is right.
The Shaykh : But Ibn al-Qayyim refuted them when he said that this composition necessitates composition; he wanted to invalidate their argument.
The questioner : Well, this principle, as long as it is negated and no sane person can say it,
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : How do you mean he attributed it to them?
The questioner : He says this is actually their statement; this is actually their statement. Did not we say to those who claimed that Allah is in every place by His essence: it necessitates for you that He is in the bushes, the filth, the bellies of dogs, the bellies of donkeys, and the like? They do not say this. If they did say this, the scholars would have declared them disbelievers and pelted them with stones. But it is a necessary consequence of their statement. So it does not follow that the necessary consequence of a statement must be a statement made by its speaker. And we mentioned to you previously ... and we mentioned in the book *Al-Qawa'id al-Muthla* (The Correct Principles) whether the necessary consequence of a statement is a statement or not? And we said that if the statement is the statement of Allah and His Messenger, then its necessary consequence is true, because Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, knows what consequences follow from His statement. As for humans, the necessary consequence of their statement is either that they deny it and explicitly state their denial, in which case it is not attributed to them; or they remain silent about it, and if it were mentioned to them, they would retract their statement; or they remain silent about it, and if it were mentioned to them, they would respond. A person may make a statement without being aware of its necessary consequences. When their necessary consequences are mentioned to them, they either respond to them or commit to them, in which case they are false, or they say that these are not necessary consequences and deny them. Is that clear?
The questioner : They have no proof.
The Shaykh : They have no proof at all. And we say that all people agree that the attributes are not composed with the essence, never. Yes.
The Shaykh : No, no, the necessary is not the same as the necessitated, by the consensus of people of sound intellect.
The questioner : Yes, that is right.
The Shaykh : But Ibn al-Qayyim refuted them when he said that this composition necessitates composition; he wanted to invalidate their argument.
The questioner : Well, this principle, as long as it is negated and no sane person can say it,
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : How do you mean he attributed it to them?
The questioner : He says this is actually their statement; this is actually their statement. Did not we say to those who claimed that Allah is in every place by His essence: it necessitates for you that He is in the bushes, the filth, the bellies of dogs, the bellies of donkeys, and the like? They do not say this. If they did say this, the scholars would have declared them disbelievers and pelted them with stones. But it is a necessary consequence of their statement. So it does not follow that the necessary consequence of a statement must be a statement made by its speaker. And we mentioned to you previously ... and we mentioned in the book *Al-Qawa'id al-Muthla* (The Correct Principles) whether the necessary consequence of a statement is a statement or not? And we said that if the statement is the statement of Allah and His Messenger, then its necessary consequence is true, because Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, knows what consequences follow from His statement. As for humans, the necessary consequence of their statement is either that they deny it and explicitly state their denial, in which case it is not attributed to them; or they remain silent about it, and if it were mentioned to them, they would retract their statement; or they remain silent about it, and if it were mentioned to them, they would respond. A person may make a statement without being aware of its necessary consequences. When their necessary consequences are mentioned to them, they either respond to them or commit to them, in which case they are false, or they say that these are not necessary consequences and deny them. Is that clear?
The questioner : They have no proof.
The Shaykh : They have no proof at all. And we say that all people agree that the attributes are not composed with the essence, never. Yes.