An Explanation of the Summary of People's Disagreement Regarding the Noble Qur'an, and That It Revolves Around Two Principles: Is the Speech of Allah by His Will or not? And is it in His Essence or outside His Essence?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : In this chapter, he mentioned the summaries of the paths of the people of the earth and their disagreement regarding the Noble Qur'an, meaning: upon what does it revolve? He mentioned that it revolves around two principles, so pay attention to them: Is the Speech of Allah by His Will or not? And is it in His Essence or outside His Essence? These are two statements, and these are the two principles upon which the disagreement of people regarding the Speech of Allah, Mighty and Majestic, is built: Is it by His Will or not? And is it in His Essence or outside His Essence? Then the author returned to derive the details.
The author (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
"Then the first group said it is without Will *** And without His Desire, so there are two sects
One of them made it a meaning subsisting *** in the self, or they said it is five meanings"
The second one comes; the other sect said: It is a word and a meaning, and so on.
In this chapter, he mentioned the two principles upon which the disagreement of people regarding the Qur'an revolves, then he mentioned only the doctrine of the Asha'irah and the Kullabiyyah. He said: Those who said it is without Will are two sects. One of them made it a meaning subsisting in the self. I think you know who these are? Who are they? The Asha'irah. But the Asha'irah differed, as mentioned before; some said it is one meaning, and others said it is five meanings. Those who made it one meaning say: The command, the prohibition, the report, and the inquiry are one thing, and the Qur'an, the Torah, the Gospel, and the Psalms are one thing. And when Allah the Exalted commands a thing to be created and says "Be," it is like what is in the Qur'an meaning "Establish prayer"; they are all one thing. Yes.
"And Allah created these letters so *** They would make it understandable to the minds"
So the letters and the heard sounds are created, are they not? They are created. And they said that they are not the Qur'an, but rather they are created to indicate the Qur'an. So why is the Qur'an called the Speech of Allah? They said it is metaphorical. For this reason, he said:
"And sometimes it is called the Qur'an by the naming *** of metaphor, and that is a second usage"
Then they differed. The Asha'irah said it is an expression (ibarah), and the Kullabiyyah said it is a narration (hikayah), and they disputed. Listen to it.
"And likewise they differed, and it was said it is a narration about it" About whom? About the speech, about the Speech of Allah, because the speech is the meaning subsisting in the self, and what is heard is not the Speech of Allah. So it was said it is a narration about it. This is the doctrine of the Kullabiyyah, the followers of Abdullah ibn Sa'id ibn Kullab. They said: We do not say it is truly the Speech of Allah, nor do we say it is an expression about it, but it is a narration about it. But the Asha'irah said: No, we say it is an expression, an expression about it. Why? He said: Because if you say it is a narration, the narration makes the narrated thing like the thing from which it is narrated. For this reason, he said: "Since what is narrated is like the source *** And this word and meaning are different"
The Asha'irah said to the Kullabiyyah: We do not agree with you that it is a narration, because the narration makes what is narrated here? Like the source. For example, if I narrate your speech, I transmit it with its wording, without addition or subtraction, as it is said "He narrated the hadith exactly as it was," since the first part, which is the source, is the counterpart of the second part, which is what is narrated. And on this basis, it is not correct to say it is a narration, because what is heard is a word and the speech is a meaning, and the word is not the meaning.
In any case, they have precision among them, but all of them are in error. So the Asha'irah say to the Kullabiyyah: We do not agree with you that it is a narration, because the narration of a thing necessitates that the narrated thing is the source, and this is not possible, because the speech is a meaning, and what is heard is a word, not a meaning. The speech is not created, and what is heard is created, so it is not possible to say it is a narration due to the lack of agreement.
He said: "And for this it is said: He narrated the hadith exactly *** Since the first part is the counterpart of the second
That is why they said, "We do not say it is a narrative, *** we say it is the expression of the Furqan."
The author (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
"Then the first group said it is without Will *** And without His Desire, so there are two sects
One of them made it a meaning subsisting *** in the self, or they said it is five meanings"
The second one comes; the other sect said: It is a word and a meaning, and so on.
In this chapter, he mentioned the two principles upon which the disagreement of people regarding the Qur'an revolves, then he mentioned only the doctrine of the Asha'irah and the Kullabiyyah. He said: Those who said it is without Will are two sects. One of them made it a meaning subsisting in the self. I think you know who these are? Who are they? The Asha'irah. But the Asha'irah differed, as mentioned before; some said it is one meaning, and others said it is five meanings. Those who made it one meaning say: The command, the prohibition, the report, and the inquiry are one thing, and the Qur'an, the Torah, the Gospel, and the Psalms are one thing. And when Allah the Exalted commands a thing to be created and says "Be," it is like what is in the Qur'an meaning "Establish prayer"; they are all one thing. Yes.
"And Allah created these letters so *** They would make it understandable to the minds"
So the letters and the heard sounds are created, are they not? They are created. And they said that they are not the Qur'an, but rather they are created to indicate the Qur'an. So why is the Qur'an called the Speech of Allah? They said it is metaphorical. For this reason, he said:
"And sometimes it is called the Qur'an by the naming *** of metaphor, and that is a second usage"
Then they differed. The Asha'irah said it is an expression (ibarah), and the Kullabiyyah said it is a narration (hikayah), and they disputed. Listen to it.
"And likewise they differed, and it was said it is a narration about it" About whom? About the speech, about the Speech of Allah, because the speech is the meaning subsisting in the self, and what is heard is not the Speech of Allah. So it was said it is a narration about it. This is the doctrine of the Kullabiyyah, the followers of Abdullah ibn Sa'id ibn Kullab. They said: We do not say it is truly the Speech of Allah, nor do we say it is an expression about it, but it is a narration about it. But the Asha'irah said: No, we say it is an expression, an expression about it. Why? He said: Because if you say it is a narration, the narration makes the narrated thing like the thing from which it is narrated. For this reason, he said: "Since what is narrated is like the source *** And this word and meaning are different"
The Asha'irah said to the Kullabiyyah: We do not agree with you that it is a narration, because the narration makes what is narrated here? Like the source. For example, if I narrate your speech, I transmit it with its wording, without addition or subtraction, as it is said "He narrated the hadith exactly as it was," since the first part, which is the source, is the counterpart of the second part, which is what is narrated. And on this basis, it is not correct to say it is a narration, because what is heard is a word and the speech is a meaning, and the word is not the meaning.
In any case, they have precision among them, but all of them are in error. So the Asha'irah say to the Kullabiyyah: We do not agree with you that it is a narration, because the narration of a thing necessitates that the narrated thing is the source, and this is not possible, because the speech is a meaning, and what is heard is a word, not a meaning. The speech is not created, and what is heard is created, so it is not possible to say it is a narration due to the lack of agreement.
He said: "And for this it is said: He narrated the hadith exactly *** Since the first part is the counterpart of the second
That is why they said, "We do not say it is a narrative, *** we say it is the expression of the Furqan."