Explanation of the author's statement: "And they do not ask how"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "And they do not ask how". It has been mentioned previously that asking how (takyif) means describing the manner of an attribute, whether you mention it with your tongue or with your heart. Pay attention, my brother: describing the manner of an attribute, whether you mention it with your tongue or with your heart. The people of the Sunnah and the community (Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama'ah) never ask how (takyif). That is, they do not say, "The manner of His Hand is such and such," or "The manner of His Face is such and such," or "The manner of His rising above the Throne (istiwa') is such and such," or "The manner of His descent to the lowest heaven is such and such." They do not ask how (takyif) with the tongue, nor with the heart. That is, the human soul does not imagine how Allah (Mighty and Majestic) rose above the Throne, or how He descends, or how His Face is, or how His Hand is. It is not possible for you to imagine that, and it is not permissible for you to attempt it either. Why? Because this leads you to one of two things: either likening Allah to creation (tashbih) or denial of the divine attributes (ta'til). That is, either you say, "I am now imagining the manner of such and such," or you are unable to do so and then you deny it. Therefore, it is not permissible for a person to attempt to know the manner of Allah's rising above the Throne (istiwa') on the Throne, or to say it with his tongue. Rather, he should not even ask about the manner, because Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "Asking about it is a religious innovation (bid'ah)". Do not say, "How did He rise above the Throne? How does He descend? How does He come? How is His Face? How is His Hand?" Do not say this. If you do, we will say that you are an innovator (mubtadi'). Do you understand? We have previously mentioned the evidence for the prohibition of asking how (takyif). We mentioned two textual proofs and a rational proof, or two proofs. Yes, two textual proofs. His saying (Glorified and Exalted is He): [Al-A'raf 7:33] to [Al-Baqarah 2:169], and His saying: [Al-Isra 17:36]. Do not follow this thing, and do not burden yourself with it.
The rational proof: We said that it is not possible to know the manner of a thing except by one of three things: witnessing it, witnessing its like, or the report of the truthful one about it. All of this is negated with regard to the attributes of Allah (Mighty and Majestic).
Second: If the manner of His Essence is not comprehensible, then the manner of His attributes is not comprehensible, because the discussion of attributes is a branch of the discussion of the Essence. For this reason, we told you that some scholars say: If a follower of the Jahmiyyah sect says to you, "Allah descends to the lowest heaven, so how does He descend?" then say to him: Based on the first textual proof, the Messenger informed us that He descends, but He did not inform us how He descends. This is based on the first proof, meaning there is no textual report.
Based on the second proof, he said: If he asks, "How does He descend?" then say: "How is He in His Essence?" He will say, "I do not know the manner of the Essence." Say to him: The discussion of attributes is a branch of the discussion of the Essence.
Now, is it possible that the meaning of the Salaf's statement "they do not ask how" is that they do not believe in a manner? No, because they believe that the attributes of Allah have a manner. Nothing that exists is without a manner. They know that the rising above the Throne (istiwa') has a manner, but they do not know it. For this reason, Malik said: "The manner is unknown". He did not say, "The manner is non-existent." He said, "The manner is unknown." There is a difference between the two expressions. The manner, yes, the manner is not known, not comprehensible, meaning it is not grasped by the intellect. He did not say that it is non-existent or not present. Rather, he said: "It is not comprehensible", meaning we do not grasp it with our intellects, but it has a basis. We mentioned that nothing that exists is without a manner, but we do not know the manner. Yes. For this reason, if someone were to say to us: "Describe for us, for example, a palace in another country. So-and-so, for example, has a palace in such-and-such a country. I know the palace, and I know that the palace has a manner, or does it not have a manner?" It has a manner; it has rooms, chambers, bathrooms, halls, and so on. But if he said, "What is its manner? Describe it for me," I would say: "I am unable to, because I do not know. I am unable to, because I do not know." But if he said, "His palace is like this palace," would that suffice or not? Because I witnessed its like. Now, if they do not ask how (takyif) regarding His attributes, that is fine.
Say, "My Lord has only forbidden immoralities
قُلْ إِنَّمَا حَرَّمَ رَبِّيَ الْفَوَاحِشَand to say about Allah what you do not know.
وَأَنْ تَقُولُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ مَا لَا تَعْلَمُونَAnd do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight and the heart - about all those [one] will be questioned.
وَلَا تَقْفُ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ إِنَّ السَّمْعَ وَالْبَصَرَ وَالْفُؤَادَ كُلُّ أُولَئِكَ كَانَ عَنْهُ مَسْئُولًاThe rational proof: We said that it is not possible to know the manner of a thing except by one of three things: witnessing it, witnessing its like, or the report of the truthful one about it. All of this is negated with regard to the attributes of Allah (Mighty and Majestic).
Second: If the manner of His Essence is not comprehensible, then the manner of His attributes is not comprehensible, because the discussion of attributes is a branch of the discussion of the Essence. For this reason, we told you that some scholars say: If a follower of the Jahmiyyah sect says to you, "Allah descends to the lowest heaven, so how does He descend?" then say to him: Based on the first textual proof, the Messenger informed us that He descends, but He did not inform us how He descends. This is based on the first proof, meaning there is no textual report.
Based on the second proof, he said: If he asks, "How does He descend?" then say: "How is He in His Essence?" He will say, "I do not know the manner of the Essence." Say to him: The discussion of attributes is a branch of the discussion of the Essence.
Now, is it possible that the meaning of the Salaf's statement "they do not ask how" is that they do not believe in a manner? No, because they believe that the attributes of Allah have a manner. Nothing that exists is without a manner. They know that the rising above the Throne (istiwa') has a manner, but they do not know it. For this reason, Malik said: "The manner is unknown". He did not say, "The manner is non-existent." He said, "The manner is unknown." There is a difference between the two expressions. The manner, yes, the manner is not known, not comprehensible, meaning it is not grasped by the intellect. He did not say that it is non-existent or not present. Rather, he said: "It is not comprehensible", meaning we do not grasp it with our intellects, but it has a basis. We mentioned that nothing that exists is without a manner, but we do not know the manner. Yes. For this reason, if someone were to say to us: "Describe for us, for example, a palace in another country. So-and-so, for example, has a palace in such-and-such a country. I know the palace, and I know that the palace has a manner, or does it not have a manner?" It has a manner; it has rooms, chambers, bathrooms, halls, and so on. But if he said, "What is its manner? Describe it for me," I would say: "I am unable to, because I do not know. I am unable to, because I do not know." But if he said, "His palace is like this palace," would that suffice or not? Because I witnessed its like. Now, if they do not ask how (takyif) regarding His attributes, that is fine.