The Shaykh al-Islam said: "And likewise al-Shafi'i, when he said to Hafs al-Fard when he said the Qur'an is created, 'I have disbelieved in the Great Allah,' explained to him that this statement is disbelief, and did not
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The reader: "And likewise al-Shafi'i, when he said to Hafs al-Fard when he said the Qur'an is created: ' I have disbelieved in the Great Allah ' explained to him that this statement is disbelief, and did not rule that Hafs had committed apostasy merely on that basis, because the argument by which he would be declared a disbeliever had not become clear to him. Had he believed that he was an apostate, he would have sought to kill him. And he explicitly stated in his books the acceptance of the testimony of the people of desires and praying behind them".
How is this, O Shaykh? He said: "I have disbelieved in the Great Allah"?
The Shaykh: Yes, it means I said a statement of a disbeliever, and it was not intended that he himself was a disbeliever, but "I have disbelieved" means I said a statement, yes, that causes disbelief.
The reader: "And likewise, Malik (may Allah have mercy on him), al-Shafi'i, and Ahmad said regarding the Qadari: if he denies the knowledge of Allah, he is a disbeliever. And the wording of some of them is: 'Debate the Qadariyyah regarding knowledge; if they acknowledge it, they are refuted, and if they deny it, they are disbelievers'".
The Shaykh : This was said by al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him). He said: "Debate them regarding knowledge; if they acknowledge it, they are refuted, and if they deny it, they are disbelievers". How is that? First, we must know who the Qadariyyah are? The Qadariyyah are those who say that the servant is independent in his action, with no connection to Allah in it. He is independent, doing by his will and leaving by his will, and there is no management by Allah the Exalted in it. So they say to the one debating them regarding knowledge: Say to him, "Does Allah the Exalted know the action of this servant or not?" If he says no, he is a disbeliever. And for this reason, they declared the extreme Qadariyyah of the first generation disbelievers, who said that the command is newly begun and that Allah does not know of the actions of the servants except what has occurred. If they acknowledge it, they are refuted. How are they refuted? It is said: "Did what occurred happen contrary to His knowledge or in accordance with it?" What do they say? No, they did not deny knowledge, they did not deny knowledge. So it is said to them: "Did what occurred from the servant happen in accordance with the knowledge of Allah or contrary to the knowledge of Allah?" Yes, according to the first option. If it is according to the first option, it is the will of Allah, because it is not possible for what contradicts His will to occur. And if they say the second, that He did not know, they are disbelievers, because denying knowledge is disbelief. The knowledge of the first generation is amazing, Subhan Allah. Otherwise, this does not come to the mind of a person. Perhaps he says if he acknowledges that it is with knowledge or in accordance with His knowledge, it is all the same. The important thing is that they say it did not occur by His will. But this argument is apparent: if they say it occurred contrary to His knowledge, because it is not His will, we say this is disbelief. And if they say it occurred in accordance with His knowledge, we say it must be His will, otherwise what He does not want would occur in His dominion.
How is this, O Shaykh? He said: "I have disbelieved in the Great Allah"?
The Shaykh: Yes, it means I said a statement of a disbeliever, and it was not intended that he himself was a disbeliever, but "I have disbelieved" means I said a statement, yes, that causes disbelief.
The reader: "And likewise, Malik (may Allah have mercy on him), al-Shafi'i, and Ahmad said regarding the Qadari: if he denies the knowledge of Allah, he is a disbeliever. And the wording of some of them is: 'Debate the Qadariyyah regarding knowledge; if they acknowledge it, they are refuted, and if they deny it, they are disbelievers'".
The Shaykh : This was said by al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him). He said: "Debate them regarding knowledge; if they acknowledge it, they are refuted, and if they deny it, they are disbelievers". How is that? First, we must know who the Qadariyyah are? The Qadariyyah are those who say that the servant is independent in his action, with no connection to Allah in it. He is independent, doing by his will and leaving by his will, and there is no management by Allah the Exalted in it. So they say to the one debating them regarding knowledge: Say to him, "Does Allah the Exalted know the action of this servant or not?" If he says no, he is a disbeliever. And for this reason, they declared the extreme Qadariyyah of the first generation disbelievers, who said that the command is newly begun and that Allah does not know of the actions of the servants except what has occurred. If they acknowledge it, they are refuted. How are they refuted? It is said: "Did what occurred happen contrary to His knowledge or in accordance with it?" What do they say? No, they did not deny knowledge, they did not deny knowledge. So it is said to them: "Did what occurred from the servant happen in accordance with the knowledge of Allah or contrary to the knowledge of Allah?" Yes, according to the first option. If it is according to the first option, it is the will of Allah, because it is not possible for what contradicts His will to occur. And if they say the second, that He did not know, they are disbelievers, because denying knowledge is disbelief. The knowledge of the first generation is amazing, Subhan Allah. Otherwise, this does not come to the mind of a person. Perhaps he says if he acknowledges that it is with knowledge or in accordance with His knowledge, it is all the same. The important thing is that they say it did not occur by His will. But this argument is apparent: if they say it occurred contrary to His knowledge, because it is not His will, we say this is disbelief. And if they say it occurred in accordance with His knowledge, we say it must be His will, otherwise what He does not want would occur in His dominion.