A Response to Those Who Said That the Verses of Attributes Are Ambiguous, and That the Truth Regarding Them Is Delegating Their Meaning

Here is a question: Many theologians have said that the verses of attributes are among the ambiguous verses, and they have said that the interpretation of the ambiguous verses is known only to Allah. Consequently, they concluded that the meaning of the verses of attributes is not known. For this reason, they stated that the truth regarding the verses of attributes is delegating their meaning. Pay attention to the meaning: their claim that the truth is delegating their meaning and that one should not speak about them at all results from these two things: First, that the verses of attributes are among the ambiguous verses, and second, that the interpretation of the ambiguous verses is known only to Allah. Thus, the conclusion is that we should not delve into the meanings of the verses of attributes because they are ambiguous and their interpretation is known only to Allah, and it is not permissible to delve into what cannot be known. Pay attention. However, we say that this statement is false. First, we ask: What do you mean by ambiguous? Or what do you mean by ambiguity in the verses of attributes? If they say, “We mean the ambiguity of the meaning, which is what we intend,” we say: This is an error. Why? Because the meanings of the verses of attributes are clear and known, and there is no ambiguity in them, not at all. As Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “Rising above the Throne is not unknown.” It is not unknown to anyone; rather, it is known, known to everyone. “He rose above the Throne” means He elevated Himself above it, and there is no problem with this. If they mean by ambiguity the ambiguity of the reality and the manner, then they are truthful, but they do not intend this. If they were to say, “We know the meaning but we do not know the reality and the manner,” we would say this is a correct school of thought. But they say, “We do not know the meaning, the manner, or the reality.” For this reason, they are called the people of delegating meaning and the people of declaring ignorance, because they say that all the verses and hadiths of attributes are not known to anyone, and that our reading is like the reading of a non-Arab of Arabic speech, or like the reading of an Arab of non-Arab speech, or like reading the letters of the alphabet: alif, ba, tha, and so on. This is their view regarding what? Regarding the verses of attributes. And it is undoubtedly an erroneous view. How do we know the meaning of the verses of ablution, prayer, and the like? Either it is not considered anything regarding the attributes of Allah, and we are ignorant of the meanings of the verses of attributes, which are more deserving of knowledge than anything else, and true worship is not possible without knowing the attributes of Allah (Mighty and Majestic). So we say: If you intended that the reality by which they are described is not known, we say: You are truthful. But if you say that their meaning is not known and that it is unknown, this is an error. So now, if someone asks: Are the verses of attributes among the ambiguous verses? We say: It is not correct to say this absolutely, neither in the negative nor in the affirmative. Although you encounter in the books of the principles of jurisprudence that when they want to give an example of the ambiguous, they say: “Like the verses of attributes.” This is an error. This is an error, because it is necessary to distinguish. If they intended semantic ambiguity, this is an error; rather, they are among the clear, decisive verses. If they intended the ambiguity of the reality, in that we do not know the manner of these attributes and do not encompass them, then this is the truth. But they do not intend this; they intend the first.