Explanation of the author's statement: "The first point is that reason and revelation, each of them, indicate the distinctness of the Creator from the created in all of His attributes, so the attributes of the Creator befit Him
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : The answer is from several angles:
"The first point is that reason and revelation, each of them, indicate the distinctness of the Creator from the created in all of His attributes. So the attributes of the Creator befit Him, and the attributes of the created befit it".
If revelation and reason indicate the distinctness of the Creator from the created, then the attributes that are established for the Creator must be distinct from the attributes that belong to the created, because the attribute of every thing is commensurate with it.
"So among the evidences from revelation for the distinctness of the Creator from the created is His saying, the Exalted:[Ash-Shuraa 42:11] ".
It is clear that similarity is negated in the case of Allah. The scholars differed regarding the kaff in His saying:. If we took the apparent meaning of , its apparent meaning would be that Allah affirmed for Himself a like, and that this like has no like, and the matter is not so, for Allah the Exalted has no like whatsoever.
They said: So the kaff here is superfluous, and the intended meaning is: Nothing is like Him.
It was said: The superfluous part is the word "like" (mithl), and the intended meaning is: Nothing is like He is.
It was said: There is no addition, neither in the kaff nor in the word "like" (mithl), but he negated the similarity of the like in the sense of exaggeration, and if the like of the like is negated, the original is negated, because if the original existed, the like would have a like.
It was said: The word "like" (mithl) here means attribute, meaning: Nothing is like His attribute.
But the closest view, and Allah knows best, is that "like" (mithl) is as it is, and that the kaff was added for exaggeration, meaning: As if he negated the like twice, once with the form of the kaff, and once with the form of "like" (mithl), and this is the closest view.
The result is that this is a refutation of the mushabbihah, is it not? Because he says:[Ash-Shuraa 42:11].
He said: "And among the evidences from reason is that it is said: How can the Creator, who is perfect in every respect, for whom perfection is a necessary attribute of His essence, and who is the bestower of perfection, be similar to the created being, which is deficient, for whom deficiency is a necessary attribute of its essence, and which is in need of one who perfects it?!"
Is this correct? It is said: You, O mushabbih, do you believe that the Creator is more perfect than the created? He will say: Yes, I believe that.
If you believe that the Creator is more perfect than the created, how can His attributes be like the attributes of the created? His attributes must be more perfect, because you yourself say that the Creator is more perfect than the created, and this is in fact a refutation of you, for if He is more perfect, it follows that His attributes are not similar to the attributes of the created.
"The first point is that reason and revelation, each of them, indicate the distinctness of the Creator from the created in all of His attributes. So the attributes of the Creator befit Him, and the attributes of the created befit it".
If revelation and reason indicate the distinctness of the Creator from the created, then the attributes that are established for the Creator must be distinct from the attributes that belong to the created, because the attribute of every thing is commensurate with it.
"So among the evidences from revelation for the distinctness of the Creator from the created is His saying, the Exalted:
There is nothing like unto Him
ليس كمثله شيءIt is clear that similarity is negated in the case of Allah. The scholars differed regarding the kaff in His saying:
There is nothing like Him
ليس كمثلهThere is nothing like Him
ليس كمثلهThey said: So the kaff here is superfluous, and the intended meaning is: Nothing is like Him.
It was said: The superfluous part is the word "like" (mithl), and the intended meaning is: Nothing is like He is.
It was said: There is no addition, neither in the kaff nor in the word "like" (mithl), but he negated the similarity of the like in the sense of exaggeration, and if the like of the like is negated, the original is negated, because if the original existed, the like would have a like.
It was said: The word "like" (mithl) here means attribute, meaning: Nothing is like His attribute.
But the closest view, and Allah knows best, is that "like" (mithl) is as it is, and that the kaff was added for exaggeration, meaning: As if he negated the like twice, once with the form of the kaff, and once with the form of "like" (mithl), and this is the closest view.
The result is that this is a refutation of the mushabbihah, is it not? Because he says:
There is nothing like unto Him
ليس كمثله شيءHe said: "And among the evidences from reason is that it is said: How can the Creator, who is perfect in every respect, for whom perfection is a necessary attribute of His essence, and who is the bestower of perfection, be similar to the created being, which is deficient, for whom deficiency is a necessary attribute of its essence, and which is in need of one who perfects it?!"
Is this correct? It is said: You, O mushabbih, do you believe that the Creator is more perfect than the created? He will say: Yes, I believe that.
If you believe that the Creator is more perfect than the created, how can His attributes be like the attributes of the created? His attributes must be more perfect, because you yourself say that the Creator is more perfect than the created, and this is in fact a refutation of you, for if He is more perfect, it follows that His attributes are not similar to the attributes of the created.