Is it correct to say tamthil or tashbih, and why?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : All right, Shaykh, some scholars use the terms tamthil and tashbih.
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : The closer to the truth.
The Shaykh : No, the correct term is tamthil. The correct phrase is "without tamthil," not "without tashbih."
The questioner : For several reasons.
The Shaykh : The first reason is that tamthil is the language of the Qur'an [Ash-Shuraa 42:11] [An-Nahl 16:74], and adhering to the wording of the text is preferable to introducing a new term.
Second, if one says "without tashbih" intending absolute tashbih, that is an error. If one intends tashbih in every respect, it is meaningless. Otherwise, it is non-Arabic language.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : I don't know; most of you don't understand. Did you understand? You know the term. If he intends absolute tashbih, it is an error. If he intends absolute tashbih in every respect, that is meaningless. You know the term now. All right, the meaning: if he intends absolute tashbih, meaning that Allah the Exalted does not resemble creation in any way, that is wrong, because there must be a shared basis in the meaning.
For example, knowledge: the Creator has knowledge, and the created has knowledge, so they share a basis in the meaning. This is a type of similarity. Power is the same; hearing and sight also share a basis in the meaning. This sharing of a basis in the meaning is a type of similarity. Therefore, it is not correct to say "without tashbih" absolutely. If he intends absolute tashbih, saying that He does not resemble anyone absolutely, that is meaningless, because no one says that the Creator and the created are identical, exactly the same. No one has ever said that. Even those who claimed the plurality of gods do not say they are equal. People are of three categories: one group claimed the oneness of gods, one group claimed their plurality, and one group denied them absolutely. Among those who denied them absolutely was Pharaoh[Al-Qasas 28:38], and he was lying in what he said, because Moses said to him while debating him [Al-Isra 17:102]. And what did Pharaoh say to him?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : He said, "I know nothing," or he remained silent.
The student: He remained silent.
The Shaykh : He remained silent in acknowledgment. And Allah, Mighty and Majestic, says[An-Naml 27:14]. But among them are those who acknowledge that there is a Creator. The Majus, the dualists, said that the world has two creators: light and darkness. Good comes from the light, and evil comes
The student: from the darkness.
The Shaykh : from the darkness. And yet they did not claim they were equal. They said light is better than darkness, because light is existence and illumination, while darkness is non-existence, and existence is better than non-existence. They also said light is better than darkness in its effects and creations, because it creates what?
The student: Good.
The Shaykh : Good, and darkness creates
The student: evil.
The Shaykh : evil. They also said light is eternal, and they have two views regarding darkness: whether it is created or uncreated. ... The Shaykh of Islam says "No one has affirmed two equal creators". Therefore, if you say "without tashbih" and mean absolute similarity, that is meaningless speech, because no one has held that view.
Third, if you say "without tashbih," some people consider affirming the attributes to be tashbih. So if you say "without tashbih," the meaning becomes "without affirming attributes." But if you say "without tamthil," there is no such ambiguity. Therefore, the expression denying tamthil is preferable for the three reasons we mentioned. Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : The closer to the truth.
The Shaykh : No, the correct term is tamthil. The correct phrase is "without tamthil," not "without tashbih."
The questioner : For several reasons.
The Shaykh : The first reason is that tamthil is the language of the Qur'an
There is nothing like Him
ليس كمثلهThere is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.
ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصيرSo do not assert similarities to Allah
فلا تضربوا لله الأمثالSecond, if one says "without tashbih" intending absolute tashbih, that is an error. If one intends tashbih in every respect, it is meaningless. Otherwise, it is non-Arabic language.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : I don't know; most of you don't understand. Did you understand? You know the term. If he intends absolute tashbih, it is an error. If he intends absolute tashbih in every respect, that is meaningless. You know the term now. All right, the meaning: if he intends absolute tashbih, meaning that Allah the Exalted does not resemble creation in any way, that is wrong, because there must be a shared basis in the meaning.
For example, knowledge: the Creator has knowledge, and the created has knowledge, so they share a basis in the meaning. This is a type of similarity. Power is the same; hearing and sight also share a basis in the meaning. This sharing of a basis in the meaning is a type of similarity. Therefore, it is not correct to say "without tashbih" absolutely. If he intends absolute tashbih, saying that He does not resemble anyone absolutely, that is meaningless, because no one says that the Creator and the created are identical, exactly the same. No one has ever said that. Even those who claimed the plurality of gods do not say they are equal. People are of three categories: one group claimed the oneness of gods, one group claimed their plurality, and one group denied them absolutely. Among those who denied them absolutely was Pharaoh
O eminent ones, I have not known you to have a god other than me
يا أيها الملأ ما علمت لكم من إله غيريYou have already known that none has sent down these [signs] except the Lord of the heavens and the earth as evidence
لقد علمت ما انزل هؤلاء إلا رب السماوات والأرض بصائرThe student: ...
The Shaykh : He said, "I know nothing," or he remained silent.
The student: He remained silent.
The Shaykh : He remained silent in acknowledgment. And Allah, Mighty and Majestic, says
And they rejected them, while their [inner] selves were convinced thereof
وجحدوا بها واستيقنتها أنفسهمThe student: from the darkness.
The Shaykh : from the darkness. And yet they did not claim they were equal. They said light is better than darkness, because light is existence and illumination, while darkness is non-existence, and existence is better than non-existence. They also said light is better than darkness in its effects and creations, because it creates what?
The student: Good.
The Shaykh : Good, and darkness creates
The student: evil.
The Shaykh : evil. They also said light is eternal, and they have two views regarding darkness: whether it is created or uncreated. ... The Shaykh of Islam says "No one has affirmed two equal creators". Therefore, if you say "without tashbih" and mean absolute similarity, that is meaningless speech, because no one has held that view.
Third, if you say "without tashbih," some people consider affirming the attributes to be tashbih. So if you say "without tashbih," the meaning becomes "without affirming attributes." But if you say "without tamthil," there is no such ambiguity. Therefore, the expression denying tamthil is preferable for the three reasons we mentioned. Yes.