Continuation and repetition of the stages of the *ta'til* (denial of the divine attributes) in their negation of the names
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : And peace be upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and all his Companions.
It has been mentioned previously that these *ta'til* (denial of the divine attributes) people, who denied, distorted, interpreted figuratively, and accused those who take the texts at their face value of *tashbih* (likening Allah to creation) and disbelief, used to advise one another.
The author said:
"So if they argue with you, say to them: *** This is *ta'wil* (figurative interpretation), and it is a secondary usage"
That is, some of them would say to others: If they argue with you—meaning, who? The people of the Sunnah and the Salaf (the earliest generations)—then say to them: This is *ta'wil* (figurative interpretation), and it is a secondary usage, while the literal meaning is the primary usage. And for this reason, they defined *ta'wil* (figurative interpretation) as a word used in a meaning other than its original one, due to a connection with a context that prevents the intention of the literal meaning.
"So if they prevail over you regarding *ta'wil* (figurative interpretation), say to them: *** The reality of faith cannot be derived from it" certainty
That is, if they prevail over you regarding *ta'wil* (figurative interpretation), and *ta'wil* (figurative interpretation) becomes inappropriate and unacceptable, then they move to another stage, which is that these proofs do not yield the reality of certainty. Why?
He said: "I" meaning, it is derived "And those are verbal proofs *** Separated from certainty since long ago". And I told you that they say: What are these proofs? The brother, yes, that is correct.
The student: They do not yield certainty.
The Shaykh : They do not yield certainty, either in terms of establishment or in terms of indication. For example, if the proof is from the Qur'an, they say: It is speculative in terms of indication. And if it is from the Sunnah and is *mutawatir* (a mass-transmitted report), they say: It is speculative in terms of indication as well. And if it is a report with a limited chain, they say: It is speculative in terms of both establishment and indication. Which do they start with, establishment or indication? They start with establishment first, because if it is not established, the inquiry is sufficient. If it is established, then start with indication. So we begin first with the texts regarding their establishment, then their indication. They say that if it is not possible to criticize the establishment, then criticize the indication. Good.
It has been mentioned previously that these *ta'til* (denial of the divine attributes) people, who denied, distorted, interpreted figuratively, and accused those who take the texts at their face value of *tashbih* (likening Allah to creation) and disbelief, used to advise one another.
The author said:
"So if they argue with you, say to them: *** This is *ta'wil* (figurative interpretation), and it is a secondary usage"
That is, some of them would say to others: If they argue with you—meaning, who? The people of the Sunnah and the Salaf (the earliest generations)—then say to them: This is *ta'wil* (figurative interpretation), and it is a secondary usage, while the literal meaning is the primary usage. And for this reason, they defined *ta'wil* (figurative interpretation) as a word used in a meaning other than its original one, due to a connection with a context that prevents the intention of the literal meaning.
"So if they prevail over you regarding *ta'wil* (figurative interpretation), say to them: *** The reality of faith cannot be derived from it" certainty
That is, if they prevail over you regarding *ta'wil* (figurative interpretation), and *ta'wil* (figurative interpretation) becomes inappropriate and unacceptable, then they move to another stage, which is that these proofs do not yield the reality of certainty. Why?
He said: "I" meaning, it is derived "And those are verbal proofs *** Separated from certainty since long ago". And I told you that they say: What are these proofs? The brother, yes, that is correct.
The student: They do not yield certainty.
The Shaykh : They do not yield certainty, either in terms of establishment or in terms of indication. For example, if the proof is from the Qur'an, they say: It is speculative in terms of indication. And if it is from the Sunnah and is *mutawatir* (a mass-transmitted report), they say: It is speculative in terms of indication as well. And if it is a report with a limited chain, they say: It is speculative in terms of both establishment and indication. Which do they start with, establishment or indication? They start with establishment first, because if it is not established, the inquiry is sufficient. If it is established, then start with indication. So we begin first with the texts regarding their establishment, then their indication. They say that if it is not possible to criticize the establishment, then criticize the indication. Good.