The ruling on one who denies the attributes of Allah the Exalted.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Now, regarding denial, the chapter is: one who denies something of the names and attributes.
We have previously established that denial is of two types, is it not? Denial by refutation and denial by figurative interpretation. As for denial by refutation, it is disbelief. It is disbelief if one denies what is established, because it is refutation. For example, if someone says: "Allah did not rise above the Throne," we say this is disbelief. Why? Because he refuted Allah. He refuted the statement of Allah the Exalted[Taha 20:5] and refuting the Qur'an or the authentic hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is disbelief.
The second is denial by figurative interpretation, where one denies the literal meaning and interprets it to a figurative meaning. He says: "Allah rose above the Throne in truth, but rising means dominion." Does he become a disbeliever? We say: if he has a justification in the Arabic language, meaning that the meaning to which he interpreted the text is consistent with the Arabic language, then he does not become a disbeliever for that, because he is excused by what? By his interpretation. And if he has no justification, then he is like the one who denies it, because he attributed to the word what it does not indicate linguistically, even figuratively. What does that mean? It means denial and refutation, so he becomes a disbeliever by that. This is the criterion in this issue regarding the denial of something of the names and attributes. Yes?
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : There is a doubt in it, there is a doubt in the Arabic language, because they mentioned examples for it, and among them is what they mentioned and used as evidence:
"Bishr has taken dominion over Iraq *** without a sword or spilled blood" But we have previously responded to this.
We have previously established that denial is of two types, is it not? Denial by refutation and denial by figurative interpretation. As for denial by refutation, it is disbelief. It is disbelief if one denies what is established, because it is refutation. For example, if someone says: "Allah did not rise above the Throne," we say this is disbelief. Why? Because he refuted Allah. He refuted the statement of Allah the Exalted
The Most Merciful [who is] above the Throne established.
الرحمن على العرش استوىThe second is denial by figurative interpretation, where one denies the literal meaning and interprets it to a figurative meaning. He says: "Allah rose above the Throne in truth, but rising means dominion." Does he become a disbeliever? We say: if he has a justification in the Arabic language, meaning that the meaning to which he interpreted the text is consistent with the Arabic language, then he does not become a disbeliever for that, because he is excused by what? By his interpretation. And if he has no justification, then he is like the one who denies it, because he attributed to the word what it does not indicate linguistically, even figuratively. What does that mean? It means denial and refutation, so he becomes a disbeliever by that. This is the criterion in this issue regarding the denial of something of the names and attributes. Yes?
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : There is a doubt in it, there is a doubt in the Arabic language, because they mentioned examples for it, and among them is what they mentioned and used as evidence:
"Bishr has taken dominion over Iraq *** without a sword or spilled blood" But we have previously responded to this.