(Obligating the people of figurative interpretation to a fourth matter, which is answering the argument of the opponent) And likewise we demand of you a fourth matter*** And by Allah, you have no ability for this
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
In this passage, the author (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned that the people of figurative interpretation are obligated to a fourth matter, which is answering the opponent, because the call is not complete except with two things: establishing the proof and answering the proof of the opponent. It is not sufficient, if you want to prefer one statement over another, to merely mention the proof of your statement; rather, it is necessary to mention the proof of your statement and the answer to the proof of the opponent. Otherwise, the opponent's proof remains standing. For example, if someone says that the intended meaning of "Hand" is "Power," we say: You are obligated to four matters:
The first: the existence of a factor that diverts from the literal meaning
The second: the possibility of the word carrying the meaning of "Power"
The third: the specification of the meaning you mentioned, because it is possible that it is neither the literal hand nor power, but rather another meaning other than the one you specified
The fourth: the possibility of the word carrying the meaning in this specific context. The author did not mention this here, but he mentioned it in *Mukhtasar al-Sawa'i'iq*
The fifth: answering the evidence of the opponent.
Now, the opponent says that the intended meaning of the literal hand is... they say the intended meaning of the hand is power. Now, what is your answer to the evidence of the opponent? They said: Because if we accepted the evidence of the opponent, it would necessitate ascribing a body to Allah, meaning that Allah is a body, or ascribing parts to Him, meaning that Allah has parts and limbs. Yes, we say to them: Who said that this is necessary? If it is necessary, then it is the truth; and if it is not necessary, then this does not obligate us to adhere to it. If it is not necessary, it is false and does not obligate us to adhere to it. And we say to them: Parts and components only apply to whom? To the created. As for the Creator, we do not say this, because it is known that a part or component is that which remains when the whole is deprived of it. As for the Creator, none of His attributes can be separated from Him. I mean by this the essential attributes, because the essential attributes are necessary and cannot be separated from Him, neither eternally nor forever. So where is the necessary falsehood that you mentioned would follow if we affirmed the texts in their literal sense? Pay attention to these five:
The first: the existence of a diverting factor
The second: the possibility of the word carrying the meaning in general
The third: its possibility of carrying the meaning in this specific context, because a word may carry a meaning in general but not in this context
The fourth: the specification of the meanings you mentioned, because it is possible that the intended meaning is another meaning other than what you mentioned
The fifth: answering the opponent
All of these, and praise be to Allah, are negated in the figurative interpretation they claimed, by which they contradicted the path of the Salaf. And the rest of the discussion will come, if Allah wills, on...
We are now explaining what is before us of the *Nuniyyah*, and its recitation will follow, if Allah wills.
A section on the similarities of the distorters of the texts with the Jews, and their inheritance of distortion from them, and the innocence of the people of affirmation from what they accused them of regarding these similarities. Yes.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : How?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : This is from here, the explanation. So we say: Although this was recited, Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "And likewise we demand of you a fourth matter" We demand from whom? We demand from the people of figurative interpretation a fourth matter. And we mentioned in the explanation that it is possible to make it a fifth matter, because the previous matters are four: the diverting evidence, the possibility of the word for the meaning they mentioned, its possibility in this specific context, the specification that it is the intended meaning, the possibility that the intended meaning is other than that, and the fifth is this.
"And likewise we demand of you a fourth matter *** And by Allah, you have no ability for this"
Likewise, do you have no ability for this?
The student: For this
The Shaykh : Look at the second copy, yes.
The student: Ability for this.
The Shaykh : "And by Allah, you have no ability for this." His saying: "Ability for this" was supposed to be said as "ability" (nominative case), meaning you have no ability for this in the nominative case, but he made it in the accusative case due to the necessity of poetry. But if we say "ability for this" (with the preposition), the matter is clear.
In this passage, the author (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned that the people of figurative interpretation are obligated to a fourth matter, which is answering the opponent, because the call is not complete except with two things: establishing the proof and answering the proof of the opponent. It is not sufficient, if you want to prefer one statement over another, to merely mention the proof of your statement; rather, it is necessary to mention the proof of your statement and the answer to the proof of the opponent. Otherwise, the opponent's proof remains standing. For example, if someone says that the intended meaning of "Hand" is "Power," we say: You are obligated to four matters:
The first: the existence of a factor that diverts from the literal meaning
The second: the possibility of the word carrying the meaning of "Power"
The third: the specification of the meaning you mentioned, because it is possible that it is neither the literal hand nor power, but rather another meaning other than the one you specified
The fourth: the possibility of the word carrying the meaning in this specific context. The author did not mention this here, but he mentioned it in *Mukhtasar al-Sawa'i'iq*
The fifth: answering the evidence of the opponent.
Now, the opponent says that the intended meaning of the literal hand is... they say the intended meaning of the hand is power. Now, what is your answer to the evidence of the opponent? They said: Because if we accepted the evidence of the opponent, it would necessitate ascribing a body to Allah, meaning that Allah is a body, or ascribing parts to Him, meaning that Allah has parts and limbs. Yes, we say to them: Who said that this is necessary? If it is necessary, then it is the truth; and if it is not necessary, then this does not obligate us to adhere to it. If it is not necessary, it is false and does not obligate us to adhere to it. And we say to them: Parts and components only apply to whom? To the created. As for the Creator, we do not say this, because it is known that a part or component is that which remains when the whole is deprived of it. As for the Creator, none of His attributes can be separated from Him. I mean by this the essential attributes, because the essential attributes are necessary and cannot be separated from Him, neither eternally nor forever. So where is the necessary falsehood that you mentioned would follow if we affirmed the texts in their literal sense? Pay attention to these five:
The first: the existence of a diverting factor
The second: the possibility of the word carrying the meaning in general
The third: its possibility of carrying the meaning in this specific context, because a word may carry a meaning in general but not in this context
The fourth: the specification of the meanings you mentioned, because it is possible that the intended meaning is another meaning other than what you mentioned
The fifth: answering the opponent
All of these, and praise be to Allah, are negated in the figurative interpretation they claimed, by which they contradicted the path of the Salaf. And the rest of the discussion will come, if Allah wills, on...
We are now explaining what is before us of the *Nuniyyah*, and its recitation will follow, if Allah wills.
A section on the similarities of the distorters of the texts with the Jews, and their inheritance of distortion from them, and the innocence of the people of affirmation from what they accused them of regarding these similarities. Yes.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : How?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : This is from here, the explanation. So we say: Although this was recited, Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "And likewise we demand of you a fourth matter" We demand from whom? We demand from the people of figurative interpretation a fourth matter. And we mentioned in the explanation that it is possible to make it a fifth matter, because the previous matters are four: the diverting evidence, the possibility of the word for the meaning they mentioned, its possibility in this specific context, the specification that it is the intended meaning, the possibility that the intended meaning is other than that, and the fifth is this.
"And likewise we demand of you a fourth matter *** And by Allah, you have no ability for this"
Likewise, do you have no ability for this?
The student: For this
The Shaykh : Look at the second copy, yes.
The student: Ability for this.
The Shaykh : "And by Allah, you have no ability for this." His saying: "Ability for this" was supposed to be said as "ability" (nominative case), meaning you have no ability for this in the nominative case, but he made it in the accusative case due to the necessity of poetry. But if we say "ability for this" (with the preposition), the matter is clear.