The Meaning of the Poet's Statement: "So You Say This Much Has Exhausted Me..."; and Clarifying the Doubt of Those Who Say That the Act Is the Acted-Upon
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"So you say this much has exhausted me *** the people of Kalam"
He means this much, meaning this estimation, and Allah knows best that he intends this estimation, has exhausted the people of Kalam, meaning: it wearied them and baffled them.
"And it is based on two principles:
Is His act His acted-upon *** or other than it?"
He means this disagreement between the Asha'irah and between the Mu'tazilah and the Jahmiyyah is based on a principle: Is the act of Allah, based on two principles, the first: Is the act of Allah His acted-upon or other than it? This is the principle. Some of them said: The act is the acted-upon, and there is no act of Allah that is His act. And some of them said: The acted-upon is other than the act.
Sit down, everyone. What are the two principles?
The first principle: Is the act identical to the acted-upon, and the second principle: Is the act other than the acted-upon.
We know by our fitrah (the innate natural disposition) that the acted-upon is other than the act, is that not so? Meaning, the created thing is other than the creation of the Creator. So if a person builds a house, is the house his building or the effect of his building? The effect of his building. There is no doubt that the act is other than the acted-upon. But Allah (Mighty and Majestic) blinds the people of innovation. So now we have two principles. He says: "Is His act His acted-upon *** or other than it? They have two statements regarding them"
He said: "And those who say that it is identical to it ***" That is, that the act is identical to it, meaning identical to the acted-upon. Is this the first statement or the second? The first.
"*** They escaped from the attributes by means of accidents"
He means they said: We do not say that there is an act and an acted-upon, because if we said that there is an act subsisting in Allah, and we see the renewal of the acted-upon, yes, and the acted-upon is concomitant with the act, it would follow from that that accidents subsist in Allah, and accidents do not subsist except in an accident. May Allah make this easy for you to unravel, or upon you. Do you understand? We are now speaking with those who say that the act is identical to the acted-upon. The act is identical to the acted-upon. What is their argument? They said: If we said that the act is other than the acted-upon, it would follow that accidents subsist in Allah, meaning that Allah would be a receptacle for accidents, and accidents do not subsist except in an accident. The occurrence of the Creator (Mighty and Majestic), here? It is impossible rationally, by the Shari'ah, by fitrah, and in every way. It is impossible. So say that the act is the acted-upon in order to be safe from the subsistence of accidents in Allah. Is it clear, everyone, or not clear?
The student: It is clear.
The Shaykh : Okay, everyone knows that the act is concomitant with the acted-upon. Meaning: When I create something, my creation of it and my work upon it is concomitant with it, not non-concomitant? Concomitant. And the acted-upon are renewed, or not? They are renewed. So if we said that the acted-upon of Allah is other than His act, the act would be an accident attached to the essence of Allah, and accidents would be attached to Him, and this is impossible. So we are relieved of this by saying that the act of Allah is His acted-upon, and the acted-upon is separate and distinct from Allah. The acted-upon is separate and distinct from Allah. Okay.
He means this much, meaning this estimation, and Allah knows best that he intends this estimation, has exhausted the people of Kalam, meaning: it wearied them and baffled them.
"And it is based on two principles:
Is His act His acted-upon *** or other than it?"
He means this disagreement between the Asha'irah and between the Mu'tazilah and the Jahmiyyah is based on a principle: Is the act of Allah, based on two principles, the first: Is the act of Allah His acted-upon or other than it? This is the principle. Some of them said: The act is the acted-upon, and there is no act of Allah that is His act. And some of them said: The acted-upon is other than the act.
Sit down, everyone. What are the two principles?
The first principle: Is the act identical to the acted-upon, and the second principle: Is the act other than the acted-upon.
We know by our fitrah (the innate natural disposition) that the acted-upon is other than the act, is that not so? Meaning, the created thing is other than the creation of the Creator. So if a person builds a house, is the house his building or the effect of his building? The effect of his building. There is no doubt that the act is other than the acted-upon. But Allah (Mighty and Majestic) blinds the people of innovation. So now we have two principles. He says: "Is His act His acted-upon *** or other than it? They have two statements regarding them"
He said: "And those who say that it is identical to it ***" That is, that the act is identical to it, meaning identical to the acted-upon. Is this the first statement or the second? The first.
"*** They escaped from the attributes by means of accidents"
He means they said: We do not say that there is an act and an acted-upon, because if we said that there is an act subsisting in Allah, and we see the renewal of the acted-upon, yes, and the acted-upon is concomitant with the act, it would follow from that that accidents subsist in Allah, and accidents do not subsist except in an accident. May Allah make this easy for you to unravel, or upon you. Do you understand? We are now speaking with those who say that the act is identical to the acted-upon. The act is identical to the acted-upon. What is their argument? They said: If we said that the act is other than the acted-upon, it would follow that accidents subsist in Allah, meaning that Allah would be a receptacle for accidents, and accidents do not subsist except in an accident. The occurrence of the Creator (Mighty and Majestic), here? It is impossible rationally, by the Shari'ah, by fitrah, and in every way. It is impossible. So say that the act is the acted-upon in order to be safe from the subsistence of accidents in Allah. Is it clear, everyone, or not clear?
The student: It is clear.
The Shaykh : Okay, everyone knows that the act is concomitant with the acted-upon. Meaning: When I create something, my creation of it and my work upon it is concomitant with it, not non-concomitant? Concomitant. And the acted-upon are renewed, or not? They are renewed. So if we said that the acted-upon of Allah is other than His act, the act would be an accident attached to the essence of Allah, and accidents would be attached to Him, and this is impossible. So we are relieved of this by saying that the act of Allah is His acted-upon, and the acted-upon is separate and distinct from Allah. The acted-upon is separate and distinct from Allah. Okay.