What is the difference between our saying that tahrif (distortion of a text's meaning) occurs in the dalil (evidence) and ta'til (denial of the divine attributes) occurs in the madlul (the meaning conveyed)?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : What is the difference between our saying that tahrif (distortion of a text's meaning) occurs in the dalil (evidence) and ta'til (denial of the divine attributes) occurs in the madlul (the meaning conveyed)?
The Shaykh : Do you know the difference? I did not mention it just now, but I mentioned it before. Tahrif (distortion of a text's meaning) in the dalil (evidence) is regarding "He rose above the Throne" (istiwa'). They said "istiwa'" means "istawala" (to dominate), so they distorted the dalil (evidence) and distorted the meaning. They did not establish istiwaa' (rising above the Throne) for Allah, even though the verse indicates istiwaa' (rising above the Throne) for Allah. So he who distorts the dalil (evidence) negates the madlul (the meaning conveyed). And everyone who distorts the dalil (evidence) will negate the madlul (the meaning conveyed) and will claim a meaning that the wording does not indicate. Thus, he opposes the text from two angles: first, distorting the text from what was intended by it, and second, establishing a meaning that is not intended by it.
The Shaykh : Do you know the difference? I did not mention it just now, but I mentioned it before. Tahrif (distortion of a text's meaning) in the dalil (evidence) is regarding "He rose above the Throne" (istiwa'). They said "istiwa'" means "istawala" (to dominate), so they distorted the dalil (evidence) and distorted the meaning. They did not establish istiwaa' (rising above the Throne) for Allah, even though the verse indicates istiwaa' (rising above the Throne) for Allah. So he who distorts the dalil (evidence) negates the madlul (the meaning conveyed). And everyone who distorts the dalil (evidence) will negate the madlul (the meaning conveyed) and will claim a meaning that the wording does not indicate. Thus, he opposes the text from two angles: first, distorting the text from what was intended by it, and second, establishing a meaning that is not intended by it.