And if you make this a metaphor, it is valid to*** deny it absolutely and in terms of possibility (Clarification of the signs of metaphor and whether metaphor exists absolutely)
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He says: "And if you make this a metaphor, it is valid to*** deny it absolutely and in terms of possibility"
If you make this a metaphor, then one of the signs of metaphor is the validity of its denial.
Metaphor has many signs, the most prominent of which are two. First: the immediate association of its opposite unless there is a context. Second: the validity of its denial. If I say, "I saw a lion," what comes to your mind is the real, predatory lion. But if I say, "I saw a lion carrying his book" or "reading his book," the intended meaning of "lion" here is a brave man, by context. Is it valid for me to say, "This is not a lion"?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Huh? It is valid, it is valid to deny it. So, metaphor can be denied. For this reason, according to their view and the agreed-upon rule, it is valid for a person to say: "Your Lord did not come," because "Your Lord came" is, in their view, a metaphor for the coming of His command. Based on this, it is valid for me to say: "Your Lord did not come."
"He established Himself above the Throne" means, in their view, "He took control," which is a metaphor for taking control. Therefore, according to their claim, it can be denied, and it is said: "Allah did not establish Himself above the Throne."
This is what led some scholars to say: "Metaphor exists in language but is prohibited in the Qur'an" He said: Because it is impossible to validly deny anything from the Qur'an ever, unlike language. The speech of Imru' al-Qays and others of the masters of language can be denied, but the speech of Allah cannot.
In any case, Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
"And if you make this a metaphor, it is valid to*** deny it absolutely and in terms of possibility"
Meaning: It is valid to say, "He did not establish Himself above the Throne," "He has no hand," "He does not come," "He does not approach," "He is not pleased," and the like.
If you make this a metaphor, then one of the signs of metaphor is the validity of its denial.
Metaphor has many signs, the most prominent of which are two. First: the immediate association of its opposite unless there is a context. Second: the validity of its denial. If I say, "I saw a lion," what comes to your mind is the real, predatory lion. But if I say, "I saw a lion carrying his book" or "reading his book," the intended meaning of "lion" here is a brave man, by context. Is it valid for me to say, "This is not a lion"?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Huh? It is valid, it is valid to deny it. So, metaphor can be denied. For this reason, according to their view and the agreed-upon rule, it is valid for a person to say: "Your Lord did not come," because "Your Lord came" is, in their view, a metaphor for the coming of His command. Based on this, it is valid for me to say: "Your Lord did not come."
"He established Himself above the Throne" means, in their view, "He took control," which is a metaphor for taking control. Therefore, according to their claim, it can be denied, and it is said: "Allah did not establish Himself above the Throne."
This is what led some scholars to say: "Metaphor exists in language but is prohibited in the Qur'an" He said: Because it is impossible to validly deny anything from the Qur'an ever, unlike language. The speech of Imru' al-Qays and others of the masters of language can be denied, but the speech of Allah cannot.
In any case, Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
"And if you make this a metaphor, it is valid to*** deny it absolutely and in terms of possibility"
Meaning: It is valid to say, "He did not establish Himself above the Throne," "He has no hand," "He does not come," "He does not approach," "He is not pleased," and the like.