And there is no doubt that the first opinion is not the apparent meaning of the text, nor does the text imply it for anyone who reflects on the hadith, for the hadith contains what prevents it from two angles.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He says: "And there is no doubt that the first opinion is not the apparent meaning of the text, nor does the text imply it for anyone who reflects on the hadith, for the hadith contains what prevents it from two angles:
The first: That Allah the Exalted said:Sahih al-Bukhari 6502 My servant, and it is known that the servant is distinct from the Lord. Are you with us? It is known that the Lord is one thing and the servant is another. And He also said: Sahih al-Bukhari 6502 Thus, He established a servant and a worshipped One, one who draws near and the One to whom he draws near, a lover and a beloved, a questioner and one asked, a giver and one given to, one who seeks protection and the One by whom protection is sought, a protector and one protected. The context of the hadith indicates two distinct entities, each of which is other than the other. This prevents one of them from being a description of the other or a part of its parts."
A description of the other, if they say it is His hearing and sight, or a part of Him, if they say it is His hand and foot. And I believe this is the apparent meaning, is it not? A Lord and a servant, a questioner and one asked, clear? And what he mentioned of the rest, and this necessitates that they be two distinct entities, each one other than the other.
"The second angle: That the hearing, sight, hand, and foot of the wali (close friend of Allah) are all descriptions or parts of a created being that came into existence after it did not exist. Say yes or no? Yes, good. And no rational person can understand that the First Creator, before whom there was nothing, is the hearing, sight, hand, and foot of a created being. Indeed, the soul recoils from even imagining this meaning, and the tongue shrinks from uttering it, even hypothetically. How then is it permissible to say that this is the apparent meaning of the Qudsi hadith and that it has been diverted from this apparent meaning? Glory be to You, O Allah, and praise be to You; we cannot count Your praise. You are as You have praised Yourself."
And praise be to Allah, this is also clear. Their aggression upon us, their turning away from us, and their shouting at us in such examples makes it clear that it is all desire, injustice, and transgression.
"And when the invalidity and impossibility of the first opinion become clear, the second opinion becomes necessary, which is that Allah the Exalted guides this wali (close friend of Allah) in his hearing, sight, and work such that his perception through his hearing, sight, and work with his hand and foot is all for Allah the Exalted" Yes, here we say, as mentioned before, for Allah, and what? "And by Allah, and in Allah" We interpreted it. He said: "For Allah in sincerity, not wanting anything in his work except Allah Mighty and Majestic, and by Allah in seeking help" meaning he worships by Allah, by Allah, and were it not for Allah, he would not be able to worship Him. And in Allah in legislation and following, because "in" indicates location, so the meaning is in Allah, that is, in the legislation of Allah. Through this, he achieves the perfection of sincerity, seeking help, and following. This is the ultimate success. This is how the Salaf (the earliest generations) interpreted it, and it is an interpretation that matches the apparent wording, agrees with its essence, is necessitated by its context, and contains no figurative interpretation (ta'wil) or diversion of the text from its apparent meaning. Praise and grace belong to Allah.
The important point is that there is no text, whether Qur'an or Sunnah, whose apparent meaning is ever invalid, because Allah the Exalted described the Qur'an as descending with the truth and described the Messenger as being sent with the truth. It is impossible for there to be an invalid meaning in the speech of Allah or His Messenger, which is established from Him, absolutely.
The first: That Allah the Exalted said:
and My slave keeps on coming closer to Me through performing Nawafil (praying or doing extra deeds besides what is obligatory) till I love him
وما يزال عبدي يتقرب إلي بالنوافل حتى أحبهand if he asks Me, I will give him, and if he asks My protection (Refuge), I will protect him
ولئن سألني لأعطينه ولئن استعاذني لأعيذنهA description of the other, if they say it is His hearing and sight, or a part of Him, if they say it is His hand and foot. And I believe this is the apparent meaning, is it not? A Lord and a servant, a questioner and one asked, clear? And what he mentioned of the rest, and this necessitates that they be two distinct entities, each one other than the other.
"The second angle: That the hearing, sight, hand, and foot of the wali (close friend of Allah) are all descriptions or parts of a created being that came into existence after it did not exist. Say yes or no? Yes, good. And no rational person can understand that the First Creator, before whom there was nothing, is the hearing, sight, hand, and foot of a created being. Indeed, the soul recoils from even imagining this meaning, and the tongue shrinks from uttering it, even hypothetically. How then is it permissible to say that this is the apparent meaning of the Qudsi hadith and that it has been diverted from this apparent meaning? Glory be to You, O Allah, and praise be to You; we cannot count Your praise. You are as You have praised Yourself."
And praise be to Allah, this is also clear. Their aggression upon us, their turning away from us, and their shouting at us in such examples makes it clear that it is all desire, injustice, and transgression.
"And when the invalidity and impossibility of the first opinion become clear, the second opinion becomes necessary, which is that Allah the Exalted guides this wali (close friend of Allah) in his hearing, sight, and work such that his perception through his hearing, sight, and work with his hand and foot is all for Allah the Exalted" Yes, here we say, as mentioned before, for Allah, and what? "And by Allah, and in Allah" We interpreted it. He said: "For Allah in sincerity, not wanting anything in his work except Allah Mighty and Majestic, and by Allah in seeking help" meaning he worships by Allah, by Allah, and were it not for Allah, he would not be able to worship Him. And in Allah in legislation and following, because "in" indicates location, so the meaning is in Allah, that is, in the legislation of Allah. Through this, he achieves the perfection of sincerity, seeking help, and following. This is the ultimate success. This is how the Salaf (the earliest generations) interpreted it, and it is an interpretation that matches the apparent wording, agrees with its essence, is necessitated by its context, and contains no figurative interpretation (ta'wil) or diversion of the text from its apparent meaning. Praise and grace belong to Allah.
The important point is that there is no text, whether Qur'an or Sunnah, whose apparent meaning is ever invalid, because Allah the Exalted described the Qur'an as descending with the truth and described the Messenger as being sent with the truth. It is impossible for there to be an invalid meaning in the speech of Allah or His Messenger, which is established from Him, absolutely.