A question regarding al-Mu'ayyah?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : ... its application to ...?
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : What is the basis for applying the term "haqiqah" (reality) to it, given that it is ... in relation to what it is attributed to?
The Shaykh : Yes, but it is a reality (haqiqah) in relation to what it is attributed to. So if I say "the water is with the milk," it is a reality with it. Be patient. And if I say "this person is with this person" in terms of victory and support, it is a reality. A reality, yes.
The questioner : ... between two things.
The Shaykh : The difference is clear between what is attributed to this and what is attributed to that. The distinction here is according to the attributions, meaning according to what it is attributed to. Just as the difference between the power of the Creator and the power of the created is very apparent according to what it is attributed to. Otherwise, power, in itself as power, is the doing of a thing without weakness, but it differs according to the attribution. Yes.
The questioner : Do we say it is a real al-Mu'ayyah and that is enough, or do we elaborate on it?
The Shaykh : How is it a reality? Yes, we say it is a real al-Mu'ayyah and that it is used in its real meaning, not in the figurative meaning.
The questioner : In relation to what it is attributed to.
The Shaykh : In relation to what it is attributed to. Just as when it is attributed to some of the created things, it is a reality in relation to what it is attributed to in this aspect, and a reality in relation to what it is attributed to in the other aspect.
The questioner : This ... is necessary.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : The last one.
The Shaykh : And what is it?
The questioner : ... in relation to what it is attributed to.
The Shaykh : It is a necessary known fact. But did we not say now that it is a reality, but it is fitting for Him? And Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) adopted this and explicitly stated that it is a reality so that the door is not opened for those who argue with us? The Asha'irah said, "You deny figurative interpretation (ta'wil) for us and say that everything Allah attributes to Himself is a reality. Why do you say that al-Mu'ayyah is figurative?" The people of the Sunnah and the community answered them with one of two approaches:
Some of them said, "It is metaphorical, but the evidence points to it. We do not deny ta'wil (figurative interpretation) to you in an absolute sense; rather, we deny the ta'wil that has no evidence for it."
And some of them said, "No, we do not concede that it is metaphorical; rather, we say it is a reality, but it is fitting for Allah (Mighty and Majestic), and it is not impossible for a thing to be with another thing while it is far from it." Yes, and the Shaykh al-Islam gave an example for this, saying, "They say, 'We are still traveling and the star is with us, and we are still traveling and the moon is with us,' and yet it is far from us in the sky." And it is called "with us" as a reality in the Arabic language, in the Arabic language. And this is, meaning, the path of the Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) in this regard. There is no doubt that it closes the door against those who argue with us on the issue of ta'wil (figurative interpretation), on the issue of ta'wil (figurative interpretation). But if we are compelled to concede that it is ta'wil (figurative interpretation), then we say we have evidence. And if the evidence points to ta'wil (figurative interpretation), then it is upon our eyes and heads. Just as we agree with you in the saying of Allah the Exalted,[An-Nahl 16:98] If we took the apparent meaning of the wording, the meaning would be after the recitation, but the meaning is undoubtedly before the recitation, as explained by the Sunnah. And when the evidence points to ta'wil (figurative interpretation), it becomes the intended meaning, because who is the one who interpreted this wording with this meaning, which is ta'wil (figurative interpretation)? It is its owner, the one who spoke it. For this reason, when Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) intended ta'wil (figurative interpretation) in His saying, When Allah intended something other than its apparent meaning, what did He say? He clarified it, saying, So the result is that if the evidence points to ta'wil (figurative interpretation), it is obligatory for us to say it, and this becomes an explanation of the speech from whom? From the one who spoke it. So if I said, for example, "Honor Zayd," and there are, for example, four Zayds, and I said, "I mean this one," is that clear? It is not possible that the second, third, or fourth Zayd is intended. If the speaker explains his speech with his intention, then in reality it is not denied and it is not ta'wil (figurative interpretation). So we answer everyone who argues with us with such texts by answering with one of two things: either by denying that it is ta'wil (figurative interpretation) and taking the wording to the reality that is fitting for Allah (Mighty and Majestic), or if the evidence points to ta'wil (figurative interpretation), we say there is no objection to it, there is no objection to it. Yes, for this reason, ta'wil (figurative interpretation) is not condemned absolutely, and it does not mean it is accepted absolutely or rejected absolutely. Some of it is acceptable and some of it is rejected. Interpreting a wording contrary to its apparent meaning in accordance with the indication of the Shari'ah (Islamic sacred law) is not considered a transgression against the texts, but rather it is in accordance with the texts and is necessary. And Allah knows best.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Yes
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : What is the basis for applying the term "haqiqah" (reality) to it, given that it is ... in relation to what it is attributed to?
The Shaykh : Yes, but it is a reality (haqiqah) in relation to what it is attributed to. So if I say "the water is with the milk," it is a reality with it. Be patient. And if I say "this person is with this person" in terms of victory and support, it is a reality. A reality, yes.
The questioner : ... between two things.
The Shaykh : The difference is clear between what is attributed to this and what is attributed to that. The distinction here is according to the attributions, meaning according to what it is attributed to. Just as the difference between the power of the Creator and the power of the created is very apparent according to what it is attributed to. Otherwise, power, in itself as power, is the doing of a thing without weakness, but it differs according to the attribution. Yes.
The questioner : Do we say it is a real al-Mu'ayyah and that is enough, or do we elaborate on it?
The Shaykh : How is it a reality? Yes, we say it is a real al-Mu'ayyah and that it is used in its real meaning, not in the figurative meaning.
The questioner : In relation to what it is attributed to.
The Shaykh : In relation to what it is attributed to. Just as when it is attributed to some of the created things, it is a reality in relation to what it is attributed to in this aspect, and a reality in relation to what it is attributed to in the other aspect.
The questioner : This ... is necessary.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : The last one.
The Shaykh : And what is it?
The questioner : ... in relation to what it is attributed to.
The Shaykh : It is a necessary known fact. But did we not say now that it is a reality, but it is fitting for Him? And Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) adopted this and explicitly stated that it is a reality so that the door is not opened for those who argue with us? The Asha'irah said, "You deny figurative interpretation (ta'wil) for us and say that everything Allah attributes to Himself is a reality. Why do you say that al-Mu'ayyah is figurative?" The people of the Sunnah and the community answered them with one of two approaches:
Some of them said, "It is metaphorical, but the evidence points to it. We do not deny ta'wil (figurative interpretation) to you in an absolute sense; rather, we deny the ta'wil that has no evidence for it."
And some of them said, "No, we do not concede that it is metaphorical; rather, we say it is a reality, but it is fitting for Allah (Mighty and Majestic), and it is not impossible for a thing to be with another thing while it is far from it." Yes, and the Shaykh al-Islam gave an example for this, saying, "They say, 'We are still traveling and the star is with us, and we are still traveling and the moon is with us,' and yet it is far from us in the sky." And it is called "with us" as a reality in the Arabic language, in the Arabic language. And this is, meaning, the path of the Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) in this regard. There is no doubt that it closes the door against those who argue with us on the issue of ta'wil (figurative interpretation), on the issue of ta'wil (figurative interpretation). But if we are compelled to concede that it is ta'wil (figurative interpretation), then we say we have evidence. And if the evidence points to ta'wil (figurative interpretation), then it is upon our eyes and heads. Just as we agree with you in the saying of Allah the Exalted,
So when you recite the Qur'an, [first] seek refuge in Allah from Satan, the expelled [from His mercy].
فإذا قرأت القرآن فاستعذ بالله من الشيطان الرجيمMy servant was hungry and you did not feed him, or he asked you for food and you did not feed him, and he was sick and you did not visit him.
عبدي جعت فلم تطعمني او استطعمتك فلم تطعمني ومرضت فلم تعدنيDid you not know that my servant so-and-so asked you for food and you did not feed him, and he was sick and you did not visit him?
أما علمت أن عبدي فلان استطعمك فلم تطعمه ومرض فلم تعده تعدهThe questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Yes