Explanation of Ibn al-Qayyim’s (may Allah have mercy on him) *Nuniyyah*

The reader: In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and all his Companions.
"And he decreed that Allah is not an actor *** Who performs an act that subsists in Him without proof
Rather, His act is the acted-upon...".

The Shaykh : His saying: "without proof" is connected to "decreed," meaning he decreed this, and he has no evidence for it. Repeat the verse.
The reader: "And he decreed that Allah is not an actor *** Who performs an act that subsists in Him without proof
Rather, His act is the acted-upon, external to His essence *** Like an attribute, not the essence, in calculation
And compulsion is his doctrine, which the eyes of the sinners have affirmed *** And the partisans of Satan
They were in fear of disobedience, this *** is their act...".

The Shaykh : Since they were.
The reader: "They were in fear of disobedience, this *** is their act..."

The Shaykh : Since they were
The reader: "They were in fear of disobedience, this"

The Shaykh : Since it is their act
The reader: "They were in fear of disobedience, this *** is their act, and the sin is for the human
And blame does not go beyond him, for he is an actor *** By the will and power of the animal
So Jahm and his partisans relieved them from the *** severe blame, and they did not pass in safety
So Jahm and his partisans relieved them from the *** severe blame, and they did not pass in safety
But they carried their sins, and upon *** the Lord of the servants, with majesty and safety
And they disavowed them, saying they are *** His acts; what is the human’s recourse?
The Compeller did not burden a soul with what it can bear *** How, when it is compelled to disobedience?
The Compeller did not burden a soul with what it can bear *** How, when it is compelled to disobedience?
And likewise, the acts of obedience have also become *** compelled, so for them there is a compulsion
And the servant, in reality, is like an ostrich *** Burdened with carrying and flying".

The Shaykh :"This indicates both, and it has no hands for that" Yes.
The reader: "Since its image indicates both *** This, and it has no hands for that
So for that, he said that the obedience of people *** And likewise what they did of disobedience
Is the very act of the Lord, not their acts *** So he cries out about them at..."

The Shaykh : It is correct, it is correct
The reader: It is correct "Is the very act of the Lord, not their acts *** So he cries out about them at this, two negations
Negation of their power over it first *** And its emanation..."

The Shaykh : And its emanation
The reader: "Negation of their power over it first *** And its emanation from them by negation..."

The Shaykh : By negation
The reader: "Negation of their power over it first *** And its emanation from them by a second negation
It is said: They did not fast, nor pray, nor *** give zakah, nor slaughter from the offering
And likewise, they did not drink, nor kill, nor *** steal, and there is no deviant among them"

The Shaykh : Deviant, but but
The reader: "And likewise, they did not drink, nor kill, nor *** steal, and there is no deviant fornicator among them
And likewise, they did not come by their choice *** with disbelief, Islam, and faith
Except in the sense of metaphor, because they *** subsisted in them like taste and colors
They were compelled to what their Creator willed *** There is no one who helps and no one who is helped"

The Shaykh : And other
The reader: "They were compelled to what their Creator willed *** There is no one who helps and no one who is helped
All are compelled and not facilitated *** Like the dead wrapped inside the shrouds
And likewise, the acts of the Supreme did not subsist *** in Him either, out of fear of events
So if you combine"

The Shaykh : Combine
The reader: "Combine his two statements, they produce *** a lie and a falsehood, clear slander
Since the acts are not the act of our God *** And the Lord is not an actor of disobedience
So if the attribute of the Divine and His act *** and His speech and the acts of humans are negated
Then there is no creation, no command, no *** revelation, and no burdening of a weak servant
And he decreed...".

The Shaykh : Good, this passage contains two things. The first thing is that Allah, Glorified and Exalted, is not an actor who performs an act that subsists in Him. So He is not a Creator who creates a creation that subsists in His essence, nor is He One who rises above the Throne in a way that subsists in His essence, nor is He One who comes on the Day of Resurrection in a way that subsists in His essence, nor is He One who descends to the lowest heaven in a way that subsists in His essence, nor is He One who provides sustenance in a way that subsists in His essence. So no act ever subsists in His essence. Why? He said: Because these acts are created things (accidents). If they subsisted in the Lord, Mighty and Majestic, He would be a created thing (accident), because created things do not subsist except in a created thing. Look how he has placed *ta'til* (denial of the divine attributes) in the form of *tanzih* (transcendence). The one who hears this speech says, "Yes, this is correct." But in reality, it is not *tanzih*, but rather *ta'til* of the perfection of Allah, Mighty and Majestic. He says that Allah, Glorified and Exalted, does not perform an act that subsists in Him. Then he says that the human also does not perform an act that subsists in him. Yes. And he says: "And compulsion is his doctrine, which the eyes of the sinners have affirmed". He says the human is not an actor who performs an act that subsists in him, because he is compelled to do so. Good. Who is the actor? Who is the actor of the human’s act? He says it is Allah. He is the actor of the human’s act. And this is astonishing. They negate the act of Allah from Him, and they attribute the act of the servant to Allah. Look at the madness, not the intellect. Yes. So he says: "The human is not an actor, compelled to his act: fornication, theft, drinking wine, killing the soul, all of that is compelled". He prayed, fasted, gave zakah, performed Hajj, was dutiful to parents, maintained family ties, was kind to neighbors, all of that is compelled upon him. Compelled upon him. He has no action in it. These acts that subsist in the human are in the position of the attributes that are in his body. Is he red, white, black, tall, or short by his choice or without his choice? Without his choice. He says the same acts are like these accidents or attributes, exactly like the attributes. He has no will or power in them. So they negated the human’s power over his worship, his act, and his choice. And they said that the act is not his act. So he did not fast, nor pray, nor give zakah, nor perform Hajj, and so on. Good. How? He said: Yes, so it means Allah burdened him with something he cannot bear, just as the ostrich is burdened with carrying and flying. One who sees the ostrich says, "By Allah, this is large in body. Now, put two bags of sugar and two bags of rice on it, because it is large in body and can bear it." And he sees its wings and says, "This flies. We must burden it with flying and carrying." It does not fly. He says: "Thus, the acts of the human are burdened upon him, even if he cannot bear them. Burdened upon him, even if he cannot bear them." So this group, and may Allah protect us from them, negated the subsistence of acts in Allah, and negated the subsistence of acts in the human. And by that, they invalidated the divine decree and the Shari'ah. Yes, and they invalidated wisdom. And it has been mentioned that they do not attribute wisdom to Allah, or do they? If the human acts without his choice, how do we praise the obedient and how do we blame the disobedient? How do we punish the disobedient and how do we reward the obedient? And if Allah does not have an act subsisting in Him, where is His speech, where is His act, where is His creation, and where is His management? So it necessitates, according to their saying, the negation of all the Shari'ahs and the invalidation of the divine decree and the Shari'ah. Yes, because they do not see that this is an act subsisting in Allah. That means they see that Allah, Mighty and Majestic, if He acts, the act is only the acted-upon. But for an act to subsist in Him, no, He is a created thing without a creator, subsisting in Allah. And Allah is a Creator without an attribute subsisting in Him. Rather, a Creator means He has a created thing. Yes.

The questioner : ... contradiction

The Shaykh : Yes, how is it a contradiction?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Yes, they affirm that the act of the servant is the act of Allah, then they deny the act of Allah which is His attribute. And this is the greatest contradiction. Yes. So there is no doubt that the saying that the intellect does not accept other than it is what the Book and the Sunnah indicate: that Allah is described with acts, and that the acts are His attribute, Glorified and Exalted, subsisting in Him. And the occurrence of the act does not necessitate the occurrence of the actor, without doubt. Is it possible for an acted-upon to exist without an act? Is it possible for a built palace to exist without a builder building it? No. So the acted-upon necessitates the precedence of the act, otherwise the acted-upon would not occur. And we also say that the human is an actor. And the actor, if he were not an actor, if a man fornicated, we would go and beat one who did not fornicate, or not? Because this one did not act. Yes. So we say: What the Book and the Sunnah indicate is that the human has an act subsisting in him, for which he is praised and blamed, rewarded and punished, and by which he reaches the highest degrees or the lowest depths of the Fire. This is without doubt, and it is the requirement of the intellect and the Shari'ah. Yes.
The reader: "And he decreed upon His names their occurrence *** And their creation from among the worlds
So look at his *ta'til* of the attributes and the *** acts and the names of the Merciful
What is included in this *ta'til* of *** negation and denial and disbelief, but he displayed a statement...".

The Shaykh : Now, he also said that the names of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) are created. The names of Allah are created and are not eternal with His eternity. Why? He said: Because the name is other than the named. Is it correct that the name is other than the named? If you say yes, you are wrong, and if you say no, you are wrong. There is a detail here: if you mean by the name the word that indicates its referent, then it is the named. If I say, "Call for Zayd," you call for Zayd himself, the one named by this name, so it is he. But if I mean by the name the letters that indicate its referent, then it is undoubtedly other than him. This is why I write "Zayd stood up" and "Zayd sat down" and "I struck Zayd." With these letters, I struck him very hard, painfully. And Zayd, who is with me, says, "Did you hurt me or not?" No, he does not say that. Why? Because the name is other than the named. But if I say, "Call for Zayd," this is undoubtedly the named. Allah the Exalted said: The intended meaning is the named of this name, and the word does not allow for anything else. But if I say, "Write Allah, write Allah," the intended meaning is the name, meaning the letters that indicate its referent. On this basis, they say that the names of Allah are created because they are other than Him. So Allah is named by them after He had no name, may Allah protect us from that. Thus, He would be devoid of names, devoid of attributes, and devoid of actions. What remains on this basis? What has become of Him? They say He became non-existent. They say the name is an occurrence, the attributes have no attribute subsisting in Him, and the actions have no action subsisting in Him. So He was non-existent and then became existent. We ask Allah for safety. O Allah, guide us among those You have guided. Yes.
The reciter: "But he presented the doctrine thus *** in a mold..."

The Shaykh : Now, what do we say regarding this matter of the names and attributes? We say: Allah has always been and will always be with His names and attributes. So His names and attributes are eternal with His eternity. It is correct that the types of the action attributes or their instances are created. As for the essential attributes, they are eternal with the eternity of the Lord (Mighty and Majestic). And so are the names. Yes.
I say: We say that Allah has always been and will always be with His names and attributes. So His names and attributes are eternal with His eternity. Yes. But the types of some of the action attributes or their instances are what are created. For example, the rising above the Throne was not eternal, because the Throne is not eternal; it is created. The descent to the lowest heaven is created. Speech, in terms of its individual instances, is created. Yes. Now.
The reciter: "But he presented the doctrine thus *** in a mold of purifying the Most Merciful
And he came to the great disbelief and shaped it *** into a calf to test the tribe of cows
And he clothed it with various kinds of jewels...".

The Shaykh : From the tribe of cows?
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : No, the Jahmiyyah, or the deniers of the divine attributes, in general. Yes, to test the tribe of cows. The Jahmiyyah who followed this doctrine, yes, are cows. Yes, cows. Why? Because they followed this doctrine and were led astray by it. Yes.
The reciter: "And he clothed it with various kinds of jewels and ornaments"

The Shaykh : And ornaments... you have "ornaments" behind, what is it?
The reciter: "And he clothed it with various kinds of jewels and ornaments *** of pure pearl and of agate
So the cows of mankind saw it and it struck them *** as their brothers were struck in ancient times"

The Shaykh : Anciently.
The reciter: "So the cows of mankind saw it and it struck them *** as their brothers were struck in ancient times
A calf that led the servants astray with its voice *** one with its sound and the other with its letter
And most of the people...".

The Shaykh : Now, what is the calf? Yes, the people of Musa. Musa, the Samiri. When Musa went to his appointment with his Lord, he left Harun in charge of them. We know that Musa's appointment was for thirty nights, and Allah completed it with ten, making it forty nights. When the thirty nights were completed and he did not come, the Samiri created a fitnah from Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He). He made a calf from ornaments, from gold, in the shape of a calf. He said to them: "This is your god and the god of Musa. But Musa has gone astray and does not know. That is why the appointment was thirty days, and now it is more than thirty days because he does not know. So this is your god." When he said this, they returned to it and found it pleasing, and they worshipped the calf. They worshipped the calf, may Allah protect us from that. This is the calf of the Jews, the calf of the Jahmiyyah. What is it? It is the decorated doctrine that Jahm decorated. But the calf of the Children of Israel was in form, and this one is by distortion. That is why he said "with the letter of the second". This is by distortion: distorting words from their places and embellishing speech such that the ignorant person thinks it is water, until when he comes to it, he finds nothing. Yes.
The reciter: "And most of the people are people of appearances *** that appear to them; they are not people of meanings".

The Shaykh : Allahu Akbar. This is the wisdom of the poem.
The reciter: "They are the husks"

The Shaykh : Most of the people are people of appearances. They look only at the apparent and do not look at what follows from this appearance and what results from it, and whether it is truth or falsehood, beneficial or harmful. You find them following every caller. And he (may Allah have mercy on him) said the truth: "Most of the people are people of appearances that appear to them; they are not people of meanings." Yes.
The reciter: "They are the husks, and in the husks is their sustenance *** and the kernel is the essence of man
And so the sects divided his saying *** and inherited it as the inheritance of the one with two arrows
None escaped...".
The Shaykh: The one with two arrows. Yes.

The questioner : ...

The Shaykh : "Al-Sahman" is the plural of "sahm" (arrow). Yes, yes.
The reciter: "And so the sects divided his saying *** and inherited it as the inheritance of the one with two arrows
None escaped from his sayings entirely except *** the people of Hadith and the partisans of the Qur'an
So they disavowed it with the disavowal of Haydar *** and the disavowal of the one born of Uthman".

The Shaykh : The correct one is "from Imran." The correct one is "from Imran." The correct one is "from Imran." Correct it. No, "and the disavowal of the one born of Imran". Write "from Imran" and we will see, if Allah wills. So they disavowed it.
The reciter: "So they disavowed it with the disavowal of Haydar *** and the disavowal of the one born of Imran
From every vile Shia and his description *** and the description of the Jews, the ones who permit fish".

The Shaykh : Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar. Yes. The author says: The sects, meaning the people of innovation, divided the saying of Jahm. One of them took a share, and one took a share, and one took two shares, and one took many shares. Yes. For example, he denied Allah of His names, denied Allah of His attributes, denied Allah of His actions, and said that faith is one thing and does not include speech and action. And he affirmed compulsion and denied that the servant has choice. Yes, these are five things. The people divided them. Among the people, some affirmed the names and denied the attributes, like the Mu'tazilah. And some affirmed the names and affirmed seven of the attributes, and they are the Asha'irah. And some said: "That the human being is compelled in his action, but it is not correct to say he is compelled; rather, we say his action is an acquisition for him and a creation by Allah", as the Asha'irah said. And for this reason, "acquisition" (kasb) with al-Ash'ari has no value at all; it is one of the things that has no meaning.
And some said: "That Allah the Exalted is not described with voluntary actions". So the important thing is that the people, may Allah protect us from that, divided the saying of Jahm. Some took a share, some took two shares, and some took three. Then the author (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned that none escaped from his sayings except the people of Hadith and the partisans of the Qur'an. O Allah, make us among them. The people of Hadith and the partisans of the Qur'an means his companions who are devoted to it. And they disavowed his sayings with the disavowal of Haydar from the Shi'ah. Who is Haydar? Ali ibn Abi Talib. And "al-Haydar" is a name for the lion. And he said that when he faced Marhab the Jew, he said:
"I am the one my mother named Haydar"
Yes. Haydar disavowed the Shi'ah. Disavowed the Shi'ah. Is the disavowal complete or incomplete? Complete. If he had gone out to fight them, indeed, he (may Allah be pleased with him) burned them with fire when Abdullah ibn Saba, the Jew, came to Ali ibn Abi Talib and said to him: "You are Allah". He said: "I am Allah?" He said: "Yes". He ordered his slave or his freed slave to dig trenches in the ground and fill them with firewood. Then he took this group and threw them into the fire. He did not kill them with the sword; he threw them into the fire in anger for Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He). And he said: "They will taste the fire of Hell before the fire of this world"
The student: ...

The Shaykh : On the contrary, they say he said: "They will taste the fire of this world before the fire of Hell". And he threw them into that. And there is no doubt that if he (may Allah be pleased with him) had gone out to fight them, he would be free from them.
Now, the disavowal also of the one born of Imran. Who is he? Musa. Is not Musa ibn Imran his name?

The questioner : Maryam...

The Shaykh : He is Musa ibn Imran. Musa ibn Imran. His name is Musa ibn Imran. Yes.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : No, no. This is Ali’s disavowal of Shi'ism. The one born of Imran is Musa. What is the disavowal? So he is innocent of what was said about him, and he disavowed it. This is Musa’s disavowal of the statement made about him, just as the people of the Sunnah disavow the statement of Jahm. It is also possible that the intended meaning of his saying, “the one born of Imran disavows”, is Musa’s disavowal of the Jews’ calf, just as the people of the Sunnah disavow the calf.