And you say: "I made this with my hand," so that the hand is not like the hand in the saying of Allah the Exalted: {When I created it with My hand}.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"And you say: 'I made this with my hand'" or "with my two hands" if you wish. "I made this with my two hands" means a person made a chair for him with his hands, so you say, "I made this chair with my hand," perfectly.
Fine, and Allah the Mighty and Majestic said, yes, "so that the hand is not like the hand in the saying of Allah the Exalted:[Sad 38:75]" Why? [Sad 38:75] Because the hand in the first instance is attributed to the human being, the created one, and in the second to the Lord, the Creator. Because the hand in the example... do we need to write the first one? We mentioned the first one to you; it is not suitable. "Because the hand in the example is attributed to the created being, so it is fitting for it", meaning it is a hand fitting for the created being. "And in the verse it is attributed to the Creator, so it is befitting Him. No one with a sound fitrah and clear intellect believes that the hand of the Creator is like the hand of the created being". The difference between this example and the example in the verse about the village is clear: the village is the self itself, whereas this is an attribute in the self, which is the hand. So there is a difference between the two examples, but their meaning is the same regarding the fact that this is a reality in its place and that one is a reality in its place. Here he says, "No one with a sound fitrah." Who is the one with a sound fitrah? The one with a sound fitrah is the one who remained upon what Allah created the creatures with; his parents did not make him a Jew or a Christian, but he is upon his fitrah.
Clear intellect is the one whose intellect is not mixed with any trace of shirk (associating partners with Allah), or shubhah (a doubtful matter), or desire, but his intellect is clear, without any dust upon it. Because the clear intellect and the sound fitrah agree upon the truth. It is not possible for one with a clear intellect and a sound fitrah to imagine or suppose that the hand of the Creator is like the hand of the created being. And you say: "There is no one with you except Zayd," and "Zayd is nowhere except with you." The second sentence conveys a meaning different from the first, despite the identity of the words, but the composition differed, so the meaning changed with it.
We said that in the first instance, a single word has a word, and the composition of the speech conveys a meaning in its own way. If you say "There is no one with you except Zayd" and "Zayd is nowhere except with you," the words are the same, and the composition differs only in the order. The meaning derived from the first example, "There is no one with you except Zayd," is that there is no one with this addressee except Zayd, but Zayd may be in another place. So the restriction in "There is no one with you except Zayd" is in the one remaining in the place.
And you say, "Zayd is nowhere except with you." Here, what is restricted? You restricted the one remaining in the place. Yes, no. And you say, "Zayd," yes, and you say, "Zayd is nowhere except with you." You restricted Zayd in the place; he is nowhere except with you; he is not in another place. But are there other people with him, with the addressee? It is possible, unlike the first sentence. Although the composition is the same in the words, there is nothing but the order, but the first restriction is in the one remaining, and the second is in the place. So the second sentence conveys a meaning different from the first, despite the identity of the words, but the composition differed, so the meaning changed with it.
Fine, and Allah the Mighty and Majestic said, yes, "so that the hand is not like the hand in the saying of Allah the Exalted:
to that which I created with My hands
لما خلقت بيديto that which I created with My hands
لما خلقت بيديClear intellect is the one whose intellect is not mixed with any trace of shirk (associating partners with Allah), or shubhah (a doubtful matter), or desire, but his intellect is clear, without any dust upon it. Because the clear intellect and the sound fitrah agree upon the truth. It is not possible for one with a clear intellect and a sound fitrah to imagine or suppose that the hand of the Creator is like the hand of the created being. And you say: "There is no one with you except Zayd," and "Zayd is nowhere except with you." The second sentence conveys a meaning different from the first, despite the identity of the words, but the composition differed, so the meaning changed with it.
We said that in the first instance, a single word has a word, and the composition of the speech conveys a meaning in its own way. If you say "There is no one with you except Zayd" and "Zayd is nowhere except with you," the words are the same, and the composition differs only in the order. The meaning derived from the first example, "There is no one with you except Zayd," is that there is no one with this addressee except Zayd, but Zayd may be in another place. So the restriction in "There is no one with you except Zayd" is in the one remaining in the place.
And you say, "Zayd is nowhere except with you." Here, what is restricted? You restricted the one remaining in the place. Yes, no. And you say, "Zayd," yes, and you say, "Zayd is nowhere except with you." You restricted Zayd in the place; he is nowhere except with you; he is not in another place. But are there other people with him, with the addressee? It is possible, unlike the first sentence. Although the composition is the same in the words, there is nothing but the order, but the first restriction is in the one remaining, and the second is in the place. So the second sentence conveys a meaning different from the first, despite the identity of the words, but the composition differed, so the meaning changed with it.