The People of Innovation Challenge Us by Claiming We Interpret the Attributes, as in the Hadith of Cursing Time; How Do We Respond to Them?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The people who interpret the attributes challenge us, saying, "How did you interpret the hadith, while you do not interpret the attributes?"
The Shaykh : Yes, we say that it is not among the attributes in the first place.
The questioner : the names
The Shaykh : Nor is it among the names. That is, it is known that "al-dehr" (time) in the Arabic language means time. Is it possible that Allah is time?
The questioner : They say that Allah said such and such.
The Shaykh : Fine, He said such and such, and it does not contradict, but we know from the context of His speech that He means by "al-dehr" its reversal, because He explained it. Note that we do not deny interpretation (ta'wil) in principle; rather, we deny interpretation that is not based on evidence. As for what is based on evidence, we have not actually interpreted, nor have we distorted the words of Allah and His Messenger from their meaning, because we relied on what Allah and His Messenger said. If the interpretation is based on evidence, it is no longer an interpretation, or we can say it is an interpretation, but the speech of the one who said the words we interpreted indicates the meaning he intended, because the speaker is one, namely Allah (Mighty and Majestic) or the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). If we carry some of his words to others, this is not a blameworthy interpretation. We mentioned in our book "The Correct Rules" that we have two responses to the People of Innovation in this issue. The first response is to say that we do not deny the interpretation indicated by evidence; we do not deny it. Allah (Mighty and Majestic) began it and explained its meaning, right? Yes, we do not deny this, because Allah explained it. If the explanation comes from Allah and His Messenger, whether it is connected to this evidence or separate from it, then our interpretation of it is with proof, and the proof is from the one who spoke it. It is as if he says, "I intended by my words such and such." There is no objection to saying that this is the intended meaning. We criticize the people of interpretation because they interpret without evidence, except for what they merely suppose by reason, and not by true intellect.
The Shaykh : Yes, we say that it is not among the attributes in the first place.
The questioner : the names
The Shaykh : Nor is it among the names. That is, it is known that "al-dehr" (time) in the Arabic language means time. Is it possible that Allah is time?
The questioner : They say that Allah said such and such.
The Shaykh : Fine, He said such and such, and it does not contradict, but we know from the context of His speech that He means by "al-dehr" its reversal, because He explained it. Note that we do not deny interpretation (ta'wil) in principle; rather, we deny interpretation that is not based on evidence. As for what is based on evidence, we have not actually interpreted, nor have we distorted the words of Allah and His Messenger from their meaning, because we relied on what Allah and His Messenger said. If the interpretation is based on evidence, it is no longer an interpretation, or we can say it is an interpretation, but the speech of the one who said the words we interpreted indicates the meaning he intended, because the speaker is one, namely Allah (Mighty and Majestic) or the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). If we carry some of his words to others, this is not a blameworthy interpretation. We mentioned in our book "The Correct Rules" that we have two responses to the People of Innovation in this issue. The first response is to say that we do not deny the interpretation indicated by evidence; we do not deny it.