WAHABISTS' TEXTS OF CORPORALISM
Praised be Allah. Blessings and peace be upon Allah's apostle and his household and companions. Lately, I inspected reply of Sheik Ahmed Mahmud Duhloub, issued in AlBelagh Magazine, No. 637, regarding a question about the exegesis of God's saying, (He settled on the Throne). Within his reply, Sheik Duhloub referred pointing out that 'settle' implies 'seize and have in possession', to the worthy ancestors.
Since this reference is a candid mistake, I just intend to attract attentions to this point so that readers shall not reckon that sentence with the master scholars' sayings. As a matter of fact, the right thing is that exegesis is ascribed to the Jahmites and Mutazilites and their fellows who denied the divine attributes and denuded the Praised and Exalted Creator from attributes of perfection He used for Himself.
Scholars of the worthy ancestors denied such an interpretation and asserted that Allah's settling is treated as same as the other attributes, that are confirmed for the Lord as they fit His glory, passing over distortion, denudation, modification or representation. Malik stated, "Settling is known and
its way is unexplored, and believing in this is obligatory and questioning about it is heresy." Sunni descendants were brought up on this belief. In his ArRisaletul Hamawiya, Ibn Teimiya writes down,
"This is the Book of Allah, from beginning to end, and this is the Prophet's traditions, from beginning to end, and these are words of the Prophet's companions and their followers, and these are words of the other masters. All these are filled in, either by text or extrinsic meaning, with the fact that Allah, the Praised and Exalted, is the High and the Supreme Who is over and exalted on everything, and over the Throne and over the heavens. This is proved by His saying, (To Him do ascends the good words; and the good deeds lift them up. 35:10), and the innumerable authentic and qualified hadiths; such as the Prophet's ascending to his Lord, and the angels' descending from and ascending to the Lord and the like."
Depending on our current debate, it is now quite clear for readers that what is falsely imputed to the worthy ancestors, by Ahmed Mahmud Duhloub, has been such a calamitous mistake and indubitable prevarication that it is impermissible to regard. The worthy ancestors' words respecting this topic is positively familiar and continuously reported. This meaning is clarified by SheikulIslam Ibn Teimiya, by contending that Allah's settling is highness on the Throne, and believing in so is obligatory, and the way of that elevation is exclusively known by Allah, the Praised. This meaning is related to Ummu Salama, UmmulMuminin, and Rabia Bin Abi Abdirrahman, Malik's master. It is really the indisputable right. Unquestionably, AhlusSunna adopted this opinion. The same thing is said about the other divine attributes; hearing, viewing, satisfaction, ire, hand, foot, fingers, uttering, will and the like. It is averred that such attributes are linguistically known; therefore, it is obligatory to believe in even the way is unfamiliar for us and quite familiar by Allah, the Praised, exclusively. It is also imperative to believe in perfection of the divine attributes in such a way that He is not like any of His creatures. Hence, Allah's hand, fingers, satisfaction are different from ours. He, the Praised, says, (Nothing like the likeness of Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing). Believers, however, are required to adhere to what was told by Allah and His Prophet, and what was pursued by the worthy ancestors; the Prophet's companions and their virtuous followers. They are also advised to beware themes of the heretic who shunned the divine Book and the Prophet's traditions and rested upon their ideas and intellectuals fanatically; therefore, they deviated and led to deviation.
Ibn Baz's AlFetawi, part 2 page 98:
In an article titled (For being the strongest nation), issued in No. 3383, 3/4/1408, of AlSharq AlAwsat newspaper, Muhyiddin AsSafi, referring to discrepancy between the worthy ancestors and their descendants about the divine attributes, writes down, "In the Holy Quran, there are some Verses accrediting material descriptions to Allah, the Exalted. God's sayings, (The hand
of Allah is above their hands), (Everything is perishable except His face) and (The Beneficent settled on the Throne) are good examples of the forecited fact. Scholars follow one of the following two courses in comprehending such Verses. First, course of the worthy ancestors, which is proving what Allah has proved for Himself passing over denudation, modification or representation, and observing evading depriving the Divine Essence of attributes. They also averred that the extrinsic meanings of aspects of such Verses are unintended. For God's saying, (Nothing is like the likeness of Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing), promoting Allah, the Exalted, against whatsoever may be a means of comparison to the creatures was the base on which they depend in their faith. Second, course of the worthy descendants, which is interpreting such words and resting upon metaphoric meanings. Hence, for them, 'hand', 'face' and 'settling' suggest aptitude, person and predominance and seizure, respectively. Convictional proofs on Allah's being not a corporeality, were provided. Besides, God says, (Nothing like the likeness of Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing) proves so. As a matter of fact, both courses are accurate and authentically related and recorded in reference books of master scholars."
May God pardon him and us, the writer of the previous article has made a mistake when he says, "They also averred that the extrinsic meanings of aspects of such Verses are unintended." The worthy ancestors and their ever followers prove and believe in veracity of attributes of perfection that Allah and His Prophet (peace be upon him) proved for Himself, as they fit His glory, passing over distortion, denudation, modification, representation, interpretation or commendation.
In his ArRisaletul Hamawiya, SheikulIslam Ibn Teimiya records, "In His AlAsma'u WesSifat, Abu Bakr AlBeihaqi relates the following to AlAwzai, with an authentic documentation:
'The Prophet's companions' followers and we were wont to maintain that Allah, the Exalted, is atop His Throne. We also believed in the divine attributes related to the Prophet's traditions.'
AlAwzai, one of the four most remarkable scholars of the followers of the Prophet's companions' followers age, relates commonness of maintaining that Allah, the Exalted, is atop His Throne and that He has audible attributes. This saying was declared after emergence of Jahm, the denier of Allah's being atop His Throne and having attributes, so that people could realize that the worthy ancestors' sect opposed such ideas.
The writer mentions that "course of the worthy descendants is interpreting such words and resting upon metaphoric meanings. Hence, for them, 'hand', 'face' and 'settling' suggest aptitude, person and predominance and seizure, respectively. Convictional proofs on Allah's being not a corporal, were provided. Besides, God says, (Nothing is like the likeness of Him, and He is the
Hearing, the Seeing) proves so. As a matter of fact, both courses are accurate and authentically related and recorded in reference books of master scholars." I say that these statements are not quite true. Not both courses are accurate. Course of the worthy ancestors is the only accurate and the obligatorily pursued, since it represents ensuing the divine Book and the Prophet's traditions, and acceding to attitudes of the Prophet's companions, their followers and their followers. By proving attributes of perfection, this course promotes Allah, the Praised the Exalted, against attributes of imperfection and nonorganic, incomplete and privative substances. This is the truth, indeed. The interpretation, on the other hand, is adopted by the worthy descendant theologists. It is opposite to the right since it is arbitration of the imperfect intellects and capricious representation of Allah's words. By adopting this, depriving Allah, the Glorified the Elevated, of attributes of perfection is engaged. Thus, interpreters escaped from anthropomorphism to fall in denudation.
Concisely, course of the worthy ancestors is the only right that is bindingly followed and ensued. The other sect of interpreting attributes of Allah, the Glorified the Elevated, is wrong and contradictory to Allah's Book and the Prophet's traditions and the worthy ancestors of the nation.
The writer's claim Allah's being not a corporeality, is unproved since neither the divine Book nor did the Prophet's traditions assert nor deny this matter. In this case, the most apropos procedure is suspending such matters. Intellects are out of process of specifying the divine attributes. This process is consecratory. It is suspended on Quranic and prophetic texts.
Bin Baz's AlFetawi, part 2 page 105:
From: AbdulAzeez Bin Abdillah Bin Baz.
To: Mohammed Bin Ahmed Sindi, the esquire.
Having received your prolonged missive, I noted the following points included:
1. The claim Allah is greatly promoted against occupying a space or being encompassed by a definite space.
2. Your saying, "While I was reviewing Sa'd Sadiq's Sira'un Beinel Haqqi WelBatil, …these Verses and hadiths were the argumentative evidences on God's material Exaltation. If I were able to realize what the author and his likes should gain from publicizing such beliefs that, in most cases, call forth seditious matters, disorder and disunity… Ordinary people would heed this book and believe that Allah is existent in the heavens… Manifestly, I have quoted words of ArRazi, AlQurtubi and AsSawi."
From your words, it is clear that you lack knowledge in belief of the divine names and attributes. You also crave to a special critique and such a
confidential care that shows you the accurate belief. You, God may bless you, should understand that Sunnis, including the Prophet's companions and their followers, have been unanimously supporting the fact that Allah is in the heavens, atop the Throne, and that hands are raised towards Him. These facts are proved through Quranic and authentic prophetic texts. They also have unanimously proved that Allah, the Praised, is too selfsufficient to be in need for a throne or alike matters. AhlusSunna asserted similar things about other divine attributes. Malik, for instance, says, "Meanings are realized according to requirements of the Arabic in which Allah addressed at His servants. The way is unknown."
These perfect and invariable meanings were used for exhibiting attributes of the Lord whose resemblant is nonexistent. Discussion of this mater needs further debate. God willing, we intend to do so soon after arrival in AlMadina. Besides, we intend to show you erroneous points in your book. At any rate, we advise you of reflecting upon the Holy Quran and believing that whatsoever indicated by the Quran, with regard to the divine attributes as well as the other subjects, is accurate and fitting Allah, the Praised. It is illicit to interpret, discount and commend the divine attributes. All these are acts of the heretic. AhlusSunna do neither interpret, discount nor do they commend the Verses and hadiths appertained to the divine attributes. They believe that all whatsoever indicated by meanings is a consistent right fitting Allah, the Praised, in a form quite different from any of His creatures. Allah, the Praised, says, (Say: He, Allah, is One. Allah is He on Whom all depend. He begets not, nor is He begotten. And none is like Him. 112) (Nothing like His likeness; and He is the Hearing the Seeing.) Hereby, God denied being like His creatures and confirmed hearing and sight to Himself in a fitting way. The same is said about the rest of the divine attributes.
We also advise you of reviewing the two replications of SheikhulIslam Ibn Teimiya, to people of Hemah and Tadmur. These two answers, AlHamawiya particularly, carry a remarkable virtue and a detail rendition regarding the Sunnis' opinions and presentation of their words. In the reply involved, there is sufficient replication on wording of the heretic. You are advised to see IbnulQeyim's AlEqidetun Nuniya and Mukhtassarus Sawaiq. Besides careful revision and demonstration of evidences inferred from the Quran, hadith and opinions of the worthy ancestors, exposition and clarification found in these two books may be not noticed in others.
Nothing new can be beheld in Bin Baz's previous words which were as same as Ibn Teimiya's. Truly, one matter could be conceived from the above. Both the supreme juriscounsult master and his industrious disciple rested upon God's having a material face as they passed by God's saying, (Everything is perishable except His face.)
Only had there been enough space to show models of IbnulQeyim's AlEqidetun Nuniya of which that respectful juriscounsult advises for taking in monotheism. In that poor so called poem, IbnulQeyim composes six thousand lines of the worst wording ever used in Arabic poetry. He confused monotheism so complicatedly that he disciplined the Muslim scholars' objective cogency to death.
WAHABISTS BETOOK MALIK AS THEIR CEILING AND ASCRIBED THEIR FAITH TO HIM
Bin Baz's AlFetawi, part 2 page 171:
He, the Praised, is over His creatures and settling on His Throne in such a way fitting His glory and magnificence. On the contrary of claims of the heretic Jahmites and their likes, who cited 'seize' as the interpretation of 'settle', the flawless meaning is that adopted by the worthy ancestors, which is that Allah arose on His Throne. This is evidenced by Malik's answering the question about way of God's settling remarked in God's saying, (The Beneficent settled on the Throne). Malik said, "Settling is known and its way is unexplored, and believing in this is obligatory and questioning about it is heresy."
Bin Baz's AlFetawi, part 2 page 518:
"O Malik! (The Beneficent settled on the Throne), how His settling was?", a man asked. "Settling is familiar. Inversely to the commended meaning, the known settling is the elevation. It way is unexplored… Take this man out. He is heretic," ordered Malik.
Considering Malik's verdict has been operative, what should the ruling of Omar's demonstrating that Allah, the Exalted, reposes on the Throne which cracks and creaks, squeaks or grate owing to the Lord's heavy weight, be?
Second, as Ahmed or another said, "Pass these texts as they are.", was Malik (God please him) adopting this belief when he provided that answer and decided heresy of that asker? The asker, however, was not heretic when he asked about meaning of God's saying. He became heretic just after he had asked about the way of God's settling. The forecited saying of Malik represents completely course of the worthy ancestors and their ever followers. Malik stated that linguistic meanings of such texts are known, while methods and ways are thoroughly not. None other than the Owner, can recognize the way of the Essence and the attributes. Meanwhile, settling, hearing and sight are realizable matters.
As much as I think, Ahmed indicated miscomprehending the Verses and commending them to Allah exclusively. This trend is followed by the descendants. This is indeed the very denudation that leads to denying the Praised and Exalted Creator. I am highly touchy to SheikulIslam Ibn Teimiya's saying, "Anthropomorphists worship a pagan while Tatilites worship nothingness." The deviant heretics, especially in this country, claim that Allah is neither over, beneath, to the right, to the left, in nor out of this world. These are descriptions of nonexistent things. What should be the answer of any ordinary man if he is asked to provide a definition for nonexistence? Certainly he will answer: Nonexistence is nothingness. If he is also asked whether this nothingness is in or out this cosmos, the answer will be: This is incorrect, nothingness is neither in nor out of the cosmos. From this cause Ibn Teimiya said that Tatilites worship nonexistence.
We, hereby, concise the forecited prolonged essay of Bin Baz, by citing the following instructions and commentaries: Allah, the Exalted, is a corporeality. Corporealities are the only things existing in or beyond nature. Allah's settling on the Throne is a material matter. It is not valid to ask how; otherwise you shall be decided as atheist whom should be dismissed or killed. Besides, such procedures should not be regarded as intellectual terrorism since Malik had followed them. We, however, should refer to him in interpreting the divine attributes and religious terrorism. As a matter of face, we disagree to his heretic verdict of permissibility of visitating the Prophet's tomb!! Say not that Omar, the caliph, had represented God's reposal on His Throne as a man's sitting on a new made chair which cracks, creaks, squeaks or grates due to heavy weight!! This interpretation is legal for Omar, but illegal for others!!
Anyhow, the commenders committed a single intellectual terrorism, while Wahabists have been committing three ill deeds; two are reckoned with the intellectual terrorism and one to commendation. Commenders confessed of ignoring the Lord's way of settling on the Throne, and deemed forbidden asking about so. Wahabists confined people between two options; either to rest upon the extrinsic material settling as the very meaning involved, or to be lined up with Jahmites, Tatilites, deviants and atheists. After responding to the easier option; the previous, they will rule of your dissidence for your exposing Allah's corporeality concealment of which He has ordered, if you disregard commending that meaning to Allah. See how the forbidden commendation became obligatory after forcing on resting upon the material exegesis! Wahabists have been committing intellectual terrorism by forcing on resting upon the material exegesis, and another one by forcing on commending the physical settling and forcing on abstaining from asking about the way!!
A commender says: Do not open the door to questions and evade entering this place.
A Wahabist says: Jump from that high place, but evade falling to the ground!!
It was not proved that Malik had adopted the notion Wahabists held fast on.
1. AtThehbi's Siyeru A'laminNubela, part 8 page 100:
Jafar Bin Abdillah: A man asked Malik, "O Abu Abdillah! How was the Lord's settling mentioned in His saying, (The beneficent settled on the Throne)?" Malik had never been in such embarrassing moments. He nodded the head down and stroke the cane in his hand to the ground, and became sweaty. After a while, he raised the head, threw the cane and stated, "It is impracticable to ask 'how' about Allah. His settling is not inconceivable. Believing in so is obligatory. Asking about so is a heresy. I think you are a heretic. Take this man out." Hence, he dismissed the asker.
According to Salama Bin Shabib's narration, Malik stated, "I am afraid you are an aberrant."
2. AburRabi ArRashidini:
Ibn Wahab: We were attending at Malik when a man asked, "O Abu Abdillah! (The Beneficent settled on the Throne), how was that settling?" Malik nodded the dead down and became sweaty. After a while, he raised his head and said, "The Beneficent settled on the Throne as he describes Himself. It is impracticable to ask 'how' about Him. 'How' is invalidated for Him. You are an ill heretic. Take him out."
3. Mohammed Bin Amr Qamshard AnNisapuri:
Yahya Bin Yahya: We were attending at Malik when a man asked… The same previous narrative with the following addition, "Settling is not inconceivable."
4, 5. AtThehbi's Siyeru A'laminNubela, part 8 page 105:
Ibn Edi: Mohammed Bin Harun Bin Hassan: Salih Bin Yaqub: Habib Bin Abi Habib:
Malik stated, "Affairs of our Lord, the Blessed the Exalted, are descended. He is everlasting and unchanging." Yahya Bin Bukeir commented, "This is a qualified saying, but I did not hear it from Malik directly."
Salih is unknown for me. Habib is so familiar. The most well known narrative related to Malik is that of AlWalid Bin Muslim who asked about texts of the divine attributes. Malik answered, "Pass them as they are, without exegesis." Subject to authenticity of Habib's narrative, Malik had two sayings in the question concerned.
6. Eyad, the judge:
Abu Talib AlMekki: Malik (God please him) was the most distant from theologists. He was also opposite of the Iraqis.
Sufian Bin Uyeina: A man asked Malik, "O Abu Abdillah! (The Beneficent settled on the Throne), how was that settling?" Malik could say nothing and became sweaty. After a while, he said, "His settling is familiar. It is impracticable to ask 'How' about Him. Asking about this is heresy. Believing in it is obligatory. I see you but a deviant. Take him out."
It is noticeable that there is no single narrative support Wahabists' claim of Malik's adopting for resting upon the extrinsic meanings of texts. Actually, these narrations refer to the opposite. In the first narration, Malik denied the general 'how' ascribed to Allah, the Exalted. He did not negate the way of God's settling. He says, "'It is impracticable to ask 'How' about Allah. His settling is not inconceivable." This means that settling for the Lord is originally out of a method or a way. It is not a material settling the way of which is not known, as Wahabists claim. Malik's 'not inconceivable' means that it is decisively provable to Allah, the Exalted, by Quranic texts. Where is, then, the evidence on their claims of material settling?
The second and third narrations support the first. Malik said, "The Beneficent settled on the Throne as he describes Himself. It is impracticable to ask 'how' about Him. 'How' is invalidated for Him." As a matter of face, the expression, "It is impracticable to ask 'how' about Him" is usually used in reports of AhlulBeit for negating materiality misalleged to Allah, the Elevated. The expression is also used for promoting God against such unfitting matters.
In the fourth narrative, Malik interpreted the Lord's descending into descending of His affairs. He says, "Affairs of our Lord, the Blessed the Exalted, are descended. He is everlasting and unchanging." For Wahabists, interpretation is a heresy, denudation, deviation and atheism. Therefore, pursuant to rulings of their sect, they should rule of heresy, denudation, deviation and atheism of Malik so that he may be free from being their ceiling!
The fifth narrative is pure commendation that does not stand for any sort of resting upon extrinsic or intrinsic meanings. AtThehbi himself declares so, "…asked about texts of the divine attributes. Malik answered, "Pass them as they are, without exegesis."
Malik's expression in the sixth narration, "His settling is familiar. It is impracticable to ask 'How' about Him", shows denial of inquiring the way of settling. This means that he denies the Lord's material settling adopted by Wahabists. The word 'for him' shows that he denies ways of the Lord's settling or the absolute 'how' accredited to Him. Malik's saying 'familiar' insinuates that this matter is provable by Quranic texts.
How is it, then, adequate for them to claim Malik's acceding to their sect? What for are they taking Malik as their ceiling? What for do they delude Muslims that Malik is one of them and with them and they, nearly, would be about to issue his membership to their club!!
AlMudawwanatulKubra, part 6 page 465:
Malik nodded the head down, sweated and thought for a considerable time when he was asked about God's settling in His saying, (The Beneficent settled on the Throne). After a while, he answered, "It is impracticable to ask 'how' about Him. His settling is not unfamiliar. Believing in so is obligatory and asking about it is a heresy. I see you a heretic. Take him out." Hence, the asker was dismissed.
The same is recorded in Asharani's AtTabaqat.
Like the earliest, Malik's answer in this narration commences with denial of the Lord's material settling they believe in. How was it, then, possible for them to claim that, by saying, "Settling is not unfamiliar", Malik intended at the Lord's material settling on the Throne. Exalted be Allah against so!
Our claim is also supported by Ashafii's words recorded in AsSibki's TabaqatusShafiiya, part 9 page 40: Ashafii: As I asked him about monotheism, Malik answered, "It is absolutely inapplicable to think that the Prophet (peace be upon him), who trained his nation how to cleanse after defecation, had not taught them monotheism. Once, he (peace be upon him) said, 'I have been ordered of fighting people till they say there is no god but Allah.'… He did not say that believing in Allah's occupying an elevated space, is within monotheism."
