His first point is from Ibn Abbas saying the narration of Allah’s feet being upon the kursi (footstool) is ambigious. This is a common argument Asharis and Maturidis make but generally they will use the verse below to argue this.
Surah Al ‘Imran (3:7):
هُوَ ٱلَّذِىٓ أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ مِنْهُ ءَايَٰتٌ مُّحْكَمَٰتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَٰبِهَٰتٌ فَأَمَّا ٱلَّذِينَ فِى قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَٰبَهَ مِنْهُ ٱبْتِغَآءَ ٱلْفِتْنَةِ وَٱبْتِغَآءَ تَأْوِيلِهِۦ ۗ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُۥٓ إِلَّا ٱللَّهُۗ وَٱلرَّٰسِخُونَ فِى ٱلْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ ءَامَنَّا بِهِۦ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا ۗ وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلَّآ أُو۟لُوا۟ ٱلْأَلْبَٰبِ
“He is the One who sent down to you the Book. In it are verses that are clear – they are the foundation of the Book – and others that are ambiguous. As for those in whose hearts is deviation, they follow what is ambiguous in it, seeking discord and seeking its interpretation. But no one knows its interpretation except Allah. And those firm in knowledge say, ‘We believe in it; all is from our Lord.’ But none take heed except those of understanding.”
This argument does not work because this verse is in regards to the Qur’an, what about the sifaat of Allah that are not mentioned in the Qur’an but in the ahadith such as Laughter (dahk), Image (surah), Fingers (isba), would this verse not apply to these attributes and if so what is the evidence it does?
Nonetheless, Shayk Al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah says that negating knowledge of the interpreation does not mean negating knowledge of meaning. The Qur’an was revealed to be understood, reflected upon, and acted upon, and Allah Himself affirms that it is clear and in Arabic so that people may understand. If its meanings were unknown, then there would be no purpose in commanding people to ponder over it. The sahabah and tabi‘un all spoke about and explained the Qur’an, including the verses on sifat (attributes of Allah), proving that its meanings were known.
When it is said that no one knows its ta’wil except Allah, this refers to the unseen realities of things, not their meanings. Just as the exact details of the Day of Judgment are unknown while its concept is understood, the same applies to Allah’s sifat—we know what knowledge, power, hearing, and seeing mean, but the how of these realities is known only to Allah. Imam Malik made this clear when he said: “The kayf (how) is unknown.” The Prophet ﷺ made du’a for Ibn Abbas to be taught ta’wil, and this refers to the ta’wil of his commands aswell as what is halal and haram, which people can understand and act upon. We also have narrations of Ibn Abbas saying he knows the meaning of the mutashabiha verses which I will reference later.
Translation: If it is said: This is from the mutashabih [unclear meanings], or that there is in it something that is from the mutashabih, as it was narrated from some of the imams that they called some of what the jahmiyyah, used as proof as mutashabih, then it is said: What is in the Qur’an is that no one knows its ta’wil [true explanation] except Allah, whether it is the mutashabih or the whole book as mentioned before. And negating knowledge of its ta’wil does not mean negating knowledge of its meaning, as we explained in what is about the Day of Judgment and its matters.
This way is strong if the hadith of Ibn Ishaq about the delegation of Najran is proven, that they used as proof against the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) the words “Inna” and “Nahnu” and similar. This is also supported by the fact that it is proven that there is mutashabih in the Qur’an, meaning what carries two meanings. In the matters of sifat [attributes] there is something of this, just as this is the case in the matters of resurrection, and even more so. Because negating resemblance between Allah and His creation is greater than negating resemblance between the promises of Jannah [Paradise] and the things of this world.
The key point in the answer is what we mentioned first, that negating knowledge of the ta’wil does not mean negating knowledge of the meaning. And we add more proof to this: Allah, the Most High, says: (And indeed, We have given people in this Qur’an every kind of example so that they may remember * an Arabic Qur’an without any crookedness) and He also says: (These are the verses of the clear book * Indeed, We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur’an so that you may understand). So, He informed us that He sent it down for them to understand and that He wanted them to remember.
He also said: (And these are examples We set forth for the people so that they may reflect).
So, He encouraged pondering over it, understanding it, and reflecting upon it, and He did not exclude anything from this. Rather, there are many verses that confirm this general meaning, like His saying: (Do they not ponder over the Qur’an, or are there locks upon their hearts?) and His saying: (Do they not ponder over the Qur’an? If it were from other than Allah, they would have found in it much contradiction). And it is clear that negating contradiction in it can only be proven through pondering over all of it, for pondering over part of it does not prove the absence of contradiction unless all of it is pondered over.
And Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) was asked: Did the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) leave anything with you? He said: No, by the One who split the seed and created the soul, except that which a servant is given understanding of in His Book, and what is in this paper. So, he informed that understanding differs among the ummah [nation], and understanding is more specific than knowledge and ruling, as Allah, the Most High, said: (So We gave understanding of it to Sulayman, and to each We gave ruling and knowledge). And the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “Perhaps one who receives [knowledge] conveys it to one who understands it better than him,” and he said: “Convey from me, even if it is one verse.”
Also, the early generations, from the sahabah, and tabi’un [followers] and the whole ummah, have spoken about all the texts of the Qur’an, including the verses about the sifat, explaining them according to their meanings and clarifying them. And they narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) many ahadith that match the Qur’an. The greatest among the sahabah in this matter were like Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (d. 32 AH), who used to say: “If I knew of anyone with more knowledge of the Book of Allah than me, whom the camels could reach, I would go to him,” and Abdullah ibn Abbas (d. 68 AH), whom the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) made du’a for.
What further shows the difference between “meaning” and “ta’wil” is that Sabiqh asked Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) about (Adh-dhariyat), and it is not from the sifat, but the sahabah explained it, such as Ali ibn Abi Talib (d. 40 AH) with Ibn al-Kawwa’ when he asked him about it. Ali disliked his question because he saw his intention behind it, but Ali’s people were not obedient to him as Umar’s people were, so he could not discipline him.
And (Adh-dhariyat), (Al-hamilat), (Al-jariyat), (Al-muqassimat) have a level of ambiguity, because the words could mean winds, clouds, stars, angels, or something else. The words do not mention what is being described. The ta’wil that only Allah knows is the exact winds, their measurements, their qualities, and when they blow, and the exact clouds, what they carry of rain, and when the rain falls, and likewise for (Al-jariyat) and (Al-muqassimat). This is what only Allah knows.
The same applies to the words “Inna (We)” and “Nahnu (We)” and other names of Allah that have the meaning of plurality, as the Christians misused. Their meaning is clear, which is Allah Himself. But the plural form indicates multiple meanings, just like different names such as Al-‘Alim [The All-Knowing], Al-Qadir [The All-Powerful], As-Sami’ [The All-Hearing], and Al-Basir [The All-Seeing]. The one being described is one, but the meanings of the names are different. The same applies to names that are in the plural form.
As for the ta’wil that is only for Allah, it is the reality of His dhat [essence] and His sifat, as Imam Malik (d. 179 AH) said: “The kayf [how] is unknown.” So, if they ask: What is the reality of His knowledge, power, hearing, and seeing? It is said: This is the ta’wil that only Allah knows.
How beautiful it is to refer ta’wil to the whole Qur’an! If it is said: Did not the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) say to Ibn Abbas: “O Allah, give him fiqh [understanding] in the religion and teach him ta’wil?” It is said: The ta’wil of commands and prohibitions is what he learns, and the lam here is for the known ta’wil. He did not say: The ta’wil of the whole Qur’an. So, the negated ta’wil is the ta’wil of reports whose realities are only known by Allah, while the known ta’wil is the command that the servants understand. This is like His saying: (Are they waiting except for its ta’wil? The Day its ta’wil comes) and (Rather, they denied what they could not understand and its ta’wil has not yet come to them).
What is meant here is the ta’wil of reports about the future, which is what “is waited for” and “comes” and “has not yet come.” As for the ta’wil of commands and prohibitions, that is already understood. The ta’wil of past reports, if included in ta’wil, is not something that is waited for. And Allah knows best, and in Him is success.
Majmu Fatawa By Shayk Al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (13/306-307 & 312-313)
Even if we concede that Ibn ‘Abbās believed these attributes to be among the mutashābihāt, this all backfires considering Ibn ‘Abbās himself claimed to know the interpretation of the mutashābih verses…
Translation: 6626- Ibn Abi Najih (died 131 AH), narrated from Mujahid (died 104 AH), who narrated from Ibn Abbas (died 68 AH) saying: I am among those who know its explanation.
Footenote: (Hasan because of Isa bin Maymun and Muhammad bin Amr al-Bahili).
6627- Ibn Abi Najih (died 131 AH) narrated from Mujahid (died 104 AH): “And those firm in knowledge” know its explanation and they say: We believe in it.
Footenote: (Hasan because of Isa bin Maymun and Muhammad bin Amr al-Bahili, and the hadith has been mentioned before with this chain, and that Ibn Abi Najih did not hear the explanation from Mujahid, but he took it from al-Qasim (died 112 AH), who heard it from Mujahid, and the knowledge is with Allah).
Tafsir At Tabari (3/107)
Ibn ‘Abbās also stated that he knows the interpretation of all of the Qur’ān except four words: “ghislīn,” “ḥanānā,” “awwāh,” and “al-raqīm.” This is an indicator that the “mutashābih” words like “istawā,” “wajh,” and “yad” were understood by him and that he didn’t do tafwīḍ
Next point he brings is Yahya bin Maʿīn saying اقر به ولا تحد فيه “Affirm it (nuzool/descent) without giving it a meaning”. When we look at other reports from the Imam we will know what he means here is to not to go into the modality, for example he says when a Jahmi says they deny Allah descends he tells us to respond by saying we believe in a Lord that does what he wills. When the Jahmiyyah deny Allah descends, they do it for the same reason the Asharis and Maturidis deny Allah descends, because they believe this is likening Allah to creation. If Yahya bin Ma’in responds to that and says he does this action however he wills it shows Yahya bin Ma’in affirms the reality of nuzool as opposed to the rejection of the reality of this action.
Translation: Yaḥyā bin Maʿīn saying “If you hear a Jahmi say: ‘I disbelieve in a Lord who descends,’ then say: ‘I believe in a Lord who does what He wills.”
Sharh Usool I‘tiqaad Ahlus-Sunna wal-Jamaa‘ah – al-Laalaka‘ee Pg 118
Now we have to look at the surrounding pages to what he quoted to understand why Ibn Abdul Barr to see what point he is trying to prove, when it comes to Allah descending, and we see that Ibn Abd al-Barr (d. 463 AH) states that the position of Ahl al-Sunnah and the imams of fiqh and hadith is to believe in these ahadith as they came, affirming their truth while asking how. The narrations he quotes in all these pages below are in regards to leaving the modality to Allah, not about us not knowing the meaning of the attributes, that’s the whole point Ibn Abdul Barr makes throughout the passage but this Ashari here only takes one line from it and runs with it. Just after mentioning the Athar of Yahya Bin Ma’in he narrates Imam Malik saying the Kayf (how) is majhool (unknown) and asking about the kayfiyyah is an innovation.
Ibn Abdul Barr then says the scholars viewed the hadith of descent similar to verses like (When his Lord appeared to the mountain) and (And your Lord comes). They affirmed these without asking how. They did not question how Allah comes, appears, or descends, because He is above all creation and does not resemble anything. He doesn’t say the Imams of hadith and fiqh did not know the meaning or that they left the meaning to Allah and the other narrations surrounding it do not show this, because if this was the case we would have repeatedly seen narrations of the Imams saying we narrate them without asking about the ma’na, but we do not.
Translation: Ishaq ibn Mansur said to Ahmad ibn Hanbal: “Our Lord, Blessed and Exalted, descends every night when the last third of the night remains to the lowest heaven. Do you not affirm these ahadith? And that the people of Jannah will see their Lord? And the hadith: ‘Do not insult faces, for Allah created Adam upon His image’? And that the Hellfire complained to its Lord? Until Allah places His foot in it? And that Musa, peace be upon him, struck the Angel of Death?”
Ahmad said: “All of this is authentic.” Ishaq said: “All of this is authentic, and only an innovator or one with weak judgment would reject it.”
Abu Umar said: “What the Ahl al-Sunnah and the imams of fiqh and hadith hold in this matter and similar issues is to have iman in what has come from the Prophet ﷺ, affirming it as true, and avoiding defining (the nature of them) or explaining how any of it is.”
Ahmad ibn Nasr asked Sufyan ibn Uyaynah about The hadith of Abdullah: ‘Indeed, Allah, Mighty and Majestic, places the heavens on a finger,’ and the hadith: ‘Indeed, the hearts of the children of Adam are between two fingers of the fingers of the Most Merciful,’ and ‘Indeed, Allah laughs at the one who remembers Him in the marketplaces,’ and ‘Indeed, He, Mighty and Majestic, descends to the lowest heaven every night,’ and similar ahadith?”
Sufyan said: “We narrate these ahadith and affirm them as they came, without explaining how.”
Al-Walid ibn Muslim asked Imam al-Awza’i, Sufyan al-Thawri, Malik ibn Anas, and al-Layth ibn Sa’d about these ahadith that have come concerning the sifat. They said: ‘Pass them on as they have come, without explaining how.'”
Abbas al-Dawri mentioned, saying: “I heard Yahya ibn Ma’in say: ‘I witnessed Zakariyya ibn ‘Adi ask Wakee’ ibn al-Jarrah, saying: “O Abu Sufyan, these ahadith—like the hadith: ‘The kursi is the place of the two feet’ and similar—what do you say about them?” Wakee’ said: “I met Isma’il ibn Abi Khalid, Sufyan, and Mas’ar, and they narrated these ahadith, but they did not explain anything.”
Abbas ibn Muhammad al-Dawri said, Abu Ubayd al-Qasim ibn Sallam, was told about a man from Ahl al-Sunnah who used to say regarding these ahadith that are narrated about seeing Allah, the kursi being the place of the two feet, and ‘Our Lord laughs at the despair of His servants,’ and ‘Indeed, Jahannam will not be full,’ and similar ahadith.
It was said that this man would say: ‘It occurs in our hearts that these ahadith are true.’ Abu Ubayd said: ‘This person’s matter seems weak to me. These ahadith are true without any doubt, narrated by trustworthy narrators, one after another. But if we are asked about the interpretation of these ahadith, we do not interpret them, nor do we describe them.'”
Imam Malik used to disapprove of those who narrated such ahadith. As Asba’ and Isa narrated from Ibn al-Qasim, he said: “I asked Malik about those who narrate the hadith: ‘Indeed, Allah created Adam upon His image,’ and the hadith: ‘Indeed, Allah will unveil His shin on the Day of Judgment,’ and that ‘He will place His hand into the Hellfire until He removes whom He wills.’ Malik strongly disapproved of this and forbade anyone from narrating it.
Malik disliked it because he feared people would engage in tashbih by asking how.
Ibn Wadih asked Yahya ibn Ma’in about the nuzul. He said: ‘Affirm it, but do not explain it in any way. Every scholar of Ahl al-Sunnah I have met affirms the hadith of nuzul.'” He said: “Ibn Ma’in told me: ‘Believe in it, but do not describe it.'” [The narration he uses]
Mahdi ibn Ja’far narrated on the authority of Malik ibn Anas, that someone asked him about the saying of Allah, Mighty and Majestic: The Most Merciful rose over the Throne. Imam Malik lowered his head, then said: “His rising is unknown, His action is not grasped by reason, and questioning about this is an innovation.”
Yahya ibn Ibrahim ibn Muzayn said: “Imam Malik disliked discussing these ahadith because they involve defining [the nature], description, and resemblance. Salvation is in stopping where Allah has spoken about Himself, with mention of a face, hands, extending, rising, and speech. He said: Wherever you turn, there is the face of Allah, and He said: Rather, both His hands are extended, and He said: The earth in its entirety will be in His grasp on the Day of Judgment, and the heavens will be folded in His right hand, and He said: The Most Merciful rose over the Throne.
So, let a person affirm what Allah has said and refer it back to Him without going beyond that, without interpreting it, and without asking ‘how,’ for that leads to destruction. Allah has obligated His servants to have iman in the revelation, but He has not obligated them to engage in interpretation, which none but Him knows.
It has reached me that Ibn al-Qasim did not see any harm in narrating the hadith: ‘Indeed, Allah laughed,’ because Allah’s laughter, descent, and amazement are not like those of creation.
The saying of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ: ‘Our Lord descends to the lowest heaven’ is, according to them, like the saying of Allah, Mighty and Majestic: When his Lord appeared to the mountain and like His saying: And your Lord comes, and the angels, rank upon rank. They all say: ‘He descends, appears, and comes without asking how.’ They do not say: ‘How does He come? How does He appear? How does He descend? From where does He come? From where does He appear? From where does He descend?’ because He is not like anything in creation, He is above all things, He has no partner, and He is exalted above resembling anything.
The saying of Allah, Mighty and Majestic: When his Lord appeared to the mountain clearly shows that He was not appearing to it before that [This statement here proves Nuzool (Descent) is not an eternal act, meaning it is occurent, which Asharis and Maturidis deny for Allah]. This explains the meaning of the hadith of nuzul.
Kitab At-Tamhid (Sharh al-Muwatta) by Imam ibn Abdil-Barr (d. 463AH) (5/169-165)
Ibn Abd al-Barr says that Ahl al-Sunnah all agree that the sifat of Allah in the Qur’an and Sunnah are real. They do not interpret them as figurative like the Asha’irah and Maturudiyyah do. Ibn Abdul Barr saying we take the sifaat upon their reality refutes them because they do not take the reality of Allah’s descension to the lowest heaven, they will either say it is referring to the angels, his command or say they do not know the meaning of nuzool.
Translation: Ahl al-Sunnah are all agreed on affirming all the sifat (attributes) that are mentioned in the Qur’an and Sunnah, believing in them, and understanding them as real, not as figurative. But they do not describe how any of them are, and they do not limit them to a fixed description [meaning we do not go into the nature of them] . As for the people of innovation, the jahmiyyah, the mu’tazilah, and all of the khawarij, they all deny these sifat and do not take any of them as real. They claim that whoever affirms them is making tashbih (likening Allah to creation). But those who affirm these sifat say that the people who deny them are actually denying the One who is worshipped. And the truth is with the people who follow what is spoken in the Book of Allah.
Kitab At-Tamhid (Sharh al-Muwatta) by Imam ibn Abdil-Barr (d. 463AH) (7/145)
Ibn Kathir has already addressed this saying of Sufyan At Thawri and Mujahid and he says all deeds are vain except those that are intended for his Face (his essence), not that we do not know what Face means here, nor does face in the verse mean good deeds.
Qur’an 28:88
وَلَا تَدۡعُ مَعَ ٱللَّهِ إِلَٰهًا ءَاخَرَۘ لَآ إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَۚ كُلُّ شَيۡءٍ هَالِكٌ إِلَّا وَجۡهَهُۥۚ لَهُ ٱلۡحُكۡمُ وَإِلَيۡهِ تُرۡجَعُونَ
“And do not call upon another god with Allah. There is no god except Him. Everything will perish except His face. His is the judgment, and to Him you will be returned.”
Translation: The phrase “He used face to refer to the essence,” and similarly, His saying here: “Everything will perish except His Face” (Qur’an 28:88), means: except Him. It is established in the Sahih from the narration of Abu Salamah, from Abu Huraira, who said: The Messenger of Allah said: “The truest word ever spoken by a poet is the statement of Labid: Everything besides Allah is vain.”
Mujahid and Ath-Thawri said regarding the verse “Everything will perish except His Face”, “It means except what is intended for His Face.” Al-Bukhari narrated this as something agreed upon.
Ibn Jarir said: The one who says this is supported by the poet’s statement: I ask Allah for forgiveness for a sin I do not fully comprehend, the Lord of the worlds, to Him is the Face and the deed.
This explanation does not contradict the first interpretation, as it refers to the fact that all deeds are vain except those intended for Allah’s Face, meaning deeds done sincerely for Allah alone according to the Shari’ah.
The first explanation implies that all beings are perishable and will disappear except for His Essence (subhanahu wa ta’ala), for He is the First and the Last, before all things and after all things. Abu Bakr Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Dunya in his book At-Tafakkur wal-I’tibor narrated: Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr narrated to us, from Muslim ibn Ibrahim, from Umar ibn Sulaim al-Bahili, from Abu al-Walid, who said: Ibn Umar, when he wanted to remind himself, would go to the harbah (the place of battle) and stand at its door, then call out in a sorrowful voice: Where are your people?
Then he would return to himself and say: Everything will perish except His Face. And His saying: To Him belongs the judgment (Qur’an 28:88), means: the sovereignty and dominion, and there is no one to reverse His judgment. To Him you will return (Qur’an 28:88), meaning: on the Day of Judgment, where He will reward you for your deeds, with good for good, and evil for evil. And Allah knows best.
Tafsir Ibn Kathir 28:88
It is also very clear from this hadith, that the Prophet sough refuge in the face of Allah and swearing upon other than Allah is kufr akbar (major kufr).
Imam Tabari explains that the most fitting meaning of istiwa in “then He rose towards the heavens and fashioned them” is ‘ala wa irtafa’ (elevated and rose), meaning Allah ascended above the heavens and fashioned them with His power, creating them as seven heavens. He does not mention uluww al-qahr (elevation of power) or uluww al-sultan (elevation of authority) as meanings of istiwa, despite having previously listed various meanings of the word. This shows that istiwa here refers to rising and elevation, not dominion or authority. Tabari then criticizes those who reject the clear Arabic meaning of istiwa, explaining that they misinterpret it to avoid affirming that Allah rose and elevated over the heavens, fearing this would imply He was beneath them before.
However, Imam At Tabari argues that this false necessitation is incorrect, showing that he affirms the true meaning of istiwa without this misinterpretation. He then refutes the claim that istiwa must mean Allah was beneath before rising by stating that such reasoning would apply to all actions, demonstrating that the argument is flawed. Tabari also treats istiwa as an action that happened after the creation of the heavens and the earth, stating explicitly “the istiwa was after He created them as smoke.”
This proves that istiwa here is neither metaphorical nor referring to Allah’s dominion or sovereignty, as those are eternal and cannot be confined to a time frame of “before” or “after” creation.
Translation: And some of them said: Istiwā’ is ‘uluw, and ‘uluw is elevation. And among those who said this is Al-Rabī ibn Anas. I was informed about this by Ammar ibn Al-Hasan, who said: ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Ja’far narrated to us from his father, from Al-Rabī ibn Anas(a Tabi’ee): “Then He Istiwa’ above the heavens,” meaning: He elevated to the sky. Then the interpreters of Istiwā’ as meaning ‘uluw and elevation differed regarding who it is that Istiwā’ to the sky. Some said: the one who Istiwa’ to the sky and elevated above it is its Creator and Maker. And some said: Rather, the one who elevated to it is the smoke which Allah made for the earth as a sky.
Abū Ja’far said: Istiwa’ in the speech of the Arabs is used in various ways; among them: the completion of a man’s youth and strength, so it is said when he reaches this state: “The man has Istiwā’ And among them: the straightening of what was crooked in affairs and causes, it is said from this: “The matter of so-and-so Istiwa’ if it became straight for him after being crooked.
And from this is the saying of Al-Tarmah ibn Hakīm: Abū Ja’far said: And the most appropriate meaning for the saying of Allah: “Then He Istiwa’ Thumma stawa ila samaa” and fashioned them is: He rose above them and elevated, so He managed them by His power and created them as seven heavens.
And it is astonishing for someone to deny the understood meaning from the speech of the Arabs in interpreting the saying of Allah: “Thumma stawa ila samaa” which is in the sense of elevation and rising, fleeing in his mind from the claim that if he interprets it with its understood meaning thus, it would necessitate according to his claim that He elevated and rose after being beneath it.
To then interpret it with an unknown and rejected interpretation, yet he does not escape from what he fled. It can be said to him: Do you claim that the interpretation of His saying “Istawa’ is: “turned towards”? Was He turned away from the sky, then turned towards it? If he claims that this is not a turning of action but a turning of management, it can be said to him.
Likewise, say: He rose above it with dominion and authority, not an elevation of movement and transition. Then he will not say anything about it except that he will be required to say the same in another. And if we did not dislike lengthening the book with what is not of its kind, we would have explained the corruption of every statement by anyone who said something contrary to the statement of the people of truth regarding it, and in what we have clarified, there is what elevates…
Tafsir At Tabari 2:29
Another blunder from this ashari not reading surrounding narrations that he quotes from, it is clear that he does not open the books he is quoting from because if he did I doubt he would quote from them knowing about these narrations. Justfrom the page before and on the same page he quotes from we see that Imam Ishaq Ibn Rahwayh is the last Imam this Ashari should be quoting from since he believes that Allah is separate from His creation, and he also says that Allah can descend without His Throne being empty of Him (proving he understood nuzool as a real act that Allah does not something that is unknown). He also proves Allah’s coming by quoting (And your Lord will come and the angels, rank upon rank) and argues that nothing prevents Allah from coming today as He will on the Day of Judgment.
Translation: Harb ibn Isma’il al-Kirmani said: I said to Ishaq ibn Rahwayh (d. 238 AH) about the saying of Allah (There is no private conversation of three except that He is the fourth of them) (al-Mujadilah: 7), how do you say about it? He said: Wherever you are, He is closer to you than the jugular vein, and He is separate from His creation.
Then he mentioned from Ibn al-Mubarak (d. 181 AH) his saying: He is upon His Throne, separate from His creation.
Then he said: The highest and clearest thing about this is the saying of Allah: (The Most Merciful rose over the Throne) (Taha: 5). – This was narrated by al-Khallal in (al-Sunnah) from Harb.
Ishaq ibn Rahwayh said: “I was gathered with this innovator – meaning Ibrahim ibn Abi Salih – in the gathering of the Amir Abdullah ibn Tahir, and the Amir asked me about the reports of nuzul [Allah’s descent], so I narrated them. Then Ibn Abi Salih said: ‘You have disbelieved! You say that the Lord descends from heaven to heaven?’ So I said: ‘I believe in a Lord who does what He wills.’”
This was narrated by al-Bayhaqi from al-Hakim, from Muhammad ibn Salih ibn Hani’ who heard it from Ahmad ibn Salamah. It is as if Ishaq the imam is addressing you with these words.
Ishaq ibn Rahwayh said: “I entered upon Ibn Tahir, and he said: ‘What are these ahadith that they narrate, that Allah descends to the lowest heaven?’ I said: ‘Yes, the trustworthy narrators who narrate ahkam [rulings] have narrated them.’ He said: ‘He descends and leaves His Throne?’ I said: ‘He is able to descend without His Throne being empty of Him.’ He said: ‘Yes.’ I said: ‘Then why do you speak against this?’”
Abu Hamid ibn al-Sharqi said: I heard Hamdan al-Sulami and Abu Dawud al-Khaffaf saying: We heard Ishaq saying: “Ibn Tahir said to me: ‘O Abu Ya’qub! This which you narrate (Our Lord descends every night), how does He descend?’ I said: ‘May Allah honour the Amir, it is not said “how.” He descends without asking how.’”
Ibrahim ibn Abi Talib said: I heard Ahmad ibn Sa’id al-Ribati say: “I was present in the gathering of Ibn Tahir, and Ishaq was present, and he was asked about the hadith of nuzul: ‘Is it authentic?’ He said: ‘Yes.’ Then one of the commanders said to him: ‘How does He descend?’ He said: ‘Affirm Him above first, then I will describe the descent for you.’ The man said: ‘I affirm Him above.’ So Ishaq said: ‘Allah said: (And your Lord will come and the angels, rank upon rank) (al-Fajr: 22).’ Then Ibn Tahir said: ‘O Abu Ya’qub, this is on the Day of Judgment.’ So Ishaq said: ‘And who prevents Him from coming today?'”
Ishaq ibn Rahwayh said: “Allah, the Most High, said: (The Most Merciful rose over the Throne) (Taha: 5). The consensus of the people of knowledge is that He is above the Throne, having risen, and He knows everything that is in the lowest part of the seventh earth.”
Kitab al-‘Uluw li al-‘Ali al-‘Adhim by Imam adh-Dhahabi Pg 178-179
Here he is doing butchering texts again, below we see the context as to why Ibn Qutaybah is denying the dhaahir, this is in reference to 2 weak hadiths which clearly show tajsim that state Allah ﷻ descends on a camel and that he Allah can create himself from sweat of horses. This is clearly a specific case.
Translation: When some people saw the extremism of those in negation, they countered them with extremism in anthropomorphism. They said with absolute tashbih (likening Allah to His creation) and with directions (aqtar) and boundaries (hudud), and they took the terms mentioned in the hadith upon the apparent (dhaahir) and said that there is a modality (kayfiyyah) to them. They interpreted repugnant hadiths such as the “sweat of the horses” similar fabricated narrations as they believed that affirming these is from the sunnah and that denying them is skepticism. Both groups are mistaken.
Allah has made the middle path a position of justice and has forbidden extremism in our religion, let alone in His attributes. He relieved us from thinking about how His attributes are, how He estimated, and how He created. He did not burden us with what He did not make part of our constitution and what is beyond our capacity.
Footenote: Hadith of the sweat of horses mentioned by Ibn Qutaybah- It is narrated from Abu Huraira (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Indeed, Allah created the horse and made it run until it sweated, then He created Himself from its sweat.”
This is a fabricated hadith, and the one accused of fabricating it is Muhammad bin Shuja’ al-Thalji (well known Jahmi, Jahmis were known to mix fabricated hadiths with authentic ones to decieve the people into rejecting the apparent)
Hadith of Arafat that Ibn Qutaybah is referring to-It is narrated from Asma’ who said that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “I saw my Lord, the Almighty, on a red camel, wearing His garment, and He was saying, ‘I have granted, I have forgiven, except for injustices.’ Then, on the night of Muzdalifah, He does not ascend to the lowest heaven, and the people turn to Mina.”
This is a false, fabricated hadith. Its chain of narration is filled with unknown and weak narrators. (Al-Mawdu’at 1/125).
Ikhtilaf fi al-lafz wa-al-radd ‘ala al-Jahmiyah wa -al-mushabbihah by Ibn Qutaybah Page 52-53
Not only that but in the same book Ibn Qutaybah mentions that hands for allah are hands as we know them. which demolishes his point on how there is no kayf and that the sifaat shouldn’t be taken by their apparent.
Translation: If someone asks us: What are the hands here? We say they are the hands that people know. This is what Ibn Abbas said about this verse: “The hands are the hands.” And the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Both of His hands are right hands.” So is it permissible for anyone to interpret the hands here as grace or two graces?
And He said: “When I created with My hands” [Sad: 75]. We say as Allah, the Exalted, said and as His Messenger said, and we do not feign ignorance, nor does our denial of anthropomorphism (tashbih) lead us to reject what He has described Himself with.
Ikhtilaf fi al-lafz wa-al-radd ‘ala al-Jahmiyah wa-al-mushabbihah by Ibn Qutaybah Page 41
Ibn Taymiyyah is refutes those who claim that the story of Ibrahim (peace be upon him) proves that movement is something that cannot be for Allah. He says that some people argue that when Ibrahim said “I do not love those that disappear,” he was rejecting the moon and stars because they move, since movement is something that only applies to bodies. However, Ibn Taymiyyah proves this is false.
He explains that afuwl (disappearing) means going away and being hidden, not just movement.
If Ibrahim was rejecting movement, he would have made his argument when they first appeared, not when they set.
Translation:
Al-Khattabi (d. 388 AH) criticised the approach of using a‘rad (accidents) as proof, and that they are necessary for ajsam (bodies). This approach was not mentioned in the Qur’an, but some people said that this was the approach of Ibrahim al-Khalil (peace be upon him) in his saying: (I do not love those that disappear) (al-An‘am: 76). They said this because aful (disappearing) is movement, and movement is something that bodies do not separate from.
This is false for many reasons: First: Aful, according to all the people of language and tafsir, means disappearing and being hidden.
Second: If he had used movement as proof, he would have made that argument from the moment they appeared, but he delayed it until the time of setting.
Third: The story of Ibrahim is actually stronger against their claim, because he did not make movement something that goes against what he was proving, but rather what went against it was afuwl (disappearing).
Dar at-Ta’arud al-‘Aql wan-Naql by Ibn Taymiyyah (8/355-356)
Translation: The people of tafwid (those who claim the meanings of sifat are unknown) found in the unclear words of some imams—when they would say to pass on the ahadith of sifat as they came—what they believed to be proof for their belief. Because of this, tafwid became common in al-Maghrib (the western lands), to the point that Ibn Khaldun (d. 808 AH) mentioned it in his Muqaddimah as the madhhab (way) of the salaf. However, false beliefs—no matter how wrong they are—do not allow people to be led to another false belief. One should not move from one falsehood to another, even if it is less false, as long as it is possible to explain the truth. For this reason, Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH) said: “Do not remove from Allah a sifah (attribute) because of how people see it as wrong.”
When the imams would say “pass it on without interpreting it,” they did not mean denying its reality. The interpretation that is being rejected here is actually asking how it is. This is like what Abu Ubayd (d. 224 AH) said: “If someone asks: How did He place His foot? How did He laugh? I say: This is not explained, and we have not heard anyone explain it.” He made the question about how the sifat are to be the same as questioning about their interpretation.
Al-Maghribiyyah sharh al-aqidah al-qayrawaniyyah – Abdulaziz at-Tarifi Pg 99
Translation: Abbas bin Muhammad al-Duri said I heard Abu Ubaid al-Qasim bin Salam (d, 224H), and he mentioned the chapter that is narrated about the vision, the chair, the place of the feet, the laughter of our Lord at the despair of His servants, His nearness to others, where our Lord was before He created the heavens, and that Hell will not be filled until your Lord, the Mighty and Majestic, places His foot in it, and it says, ‘Enough, enough,’ and similar hadiths.
He said: These hadiths are authentic, carried by the scholars of hadith and jurists, some on behalf of others. They are true to us, we do not doubt them, but if it is said, ‘How did He place His foot?’ or ‘How did He laugh?’ we say this is not to be interpreted, and we have not heard anyone interpret it.
Kitab As Sifaat by Imam Daraqutni Pages 58-59
‘Abdah Ibn Abī Barzah, a companion of Sufyān al-Thawrī, said that we do not do tafsīr of the attributes, but just afterwards, he mentions that the ṣifāt are understood by the people…
Translation: Abu Umar al-Talamanki (d. 429 AH) mentioned what Abu Dawud (d. 275 AH) narrated: Ghassan ibn al-Fadl—who was among the ulama (scholars)—said: ‘Abdah ibn Abi Barzah said: “The jahmiyyah (followers of Jahm ibn Safwan d. 128 AH) are an influence from the Jews and Christians. Whoever claims that the Qur’an is created has committed kufr, because the Qur’an is the kalam (speech) of Allah and His knowledge, and it has always existed and will always exist. Whoever puts actions before knowledge has committed kufr. Whoever claims that Jannah (Paradise) and Jahannam (Hellfire) have not yet been created has committed kufr, as Allah said: (And Adam, dwell you and your wife in Jannah) (al-Baqarah: 35), and as He said: (And indeed, Jannah has been brought near for the righteous) (Qaf: 31). Whoever claims that this Jannah is not the same Jannah that the believers will enter has committed kufr.
Allah is as He described Himself, without interpretation or tashbih (likening to creation). He is as-Sami’ (The All-Hearing) in relation to hearing, and al-Basir (The All-Seeing) in relation to sight. He is as He described Himself, and as people understand sifat (attributes), without explaining how they are, but as is befitting to Him.”
Kitab Sifat Rabb al-‘Alamin – Ibn Muhhib al-Maqdissi (789AH) (1/207)
Abū Ismā‘īl al-Harawī refutes this argument verbatim. He explains how the Ash‘arīs misinterpreted the command to affirm the ṣifāt “without a tafsīr” to mean “without explaining its meaning,” whereas it actually refers nothing more than to just not explain the kayfiyyah.
Translation: They interpreted those wicked interpretations with the intention that the common Muslims would be more distanced and more confused about them, so they would be more estranged when mentioned and more disturbed when heard. They lied. Rather, the interpretation is to say: A face, and then to say how. But “how” is not a matter of the Muslims’ discourse in this regard.
Dham al-Kalam wa Ahlihi – Imam Abu Isma’il al-Harawi (d. 481AH) (5/138)
The methodology of the Salaf was to accept the attributes upon their apparent without exceeding the bounds and delving into explanation of the modality of the ṣifāt. This is implied by Ibn al-Anbārī’s words here.
Ibn al-Anbari said: “The scholars of transmission and adherence to the tradition said that ‘al-a’yun’ (the eyes) refers to the eye. He said: And the eye of Allah is not to be explained beyond its apparent meaning, and no one is allowed to say: How is it, or what is its nature?”
Lisan Al Arab Volume 13 Page 301
The Salaf moreover spoke with respect to taking the sifat in accordance with their apparent (dhahir).
Ibn Abi Asim (d. 287) said: And all of what is in our book ‘Kitab al-Sunnah al-Kabir’ regarding what is in the chapters about reports [of the sifat] which must be affirmed, then we believe in them, in their authenticity, and in their upright transmission, and it is obligatory to submit to them on their apparent (dhahirihā)
Kitab al-Arsh, by Imam Ad Dhahabi (2/350)
The Ashari debater here uses the athar where Imām Aḥmad said we take the ḥadīth without modality or a meaning, which supposedly supports tafwīḍ al-ma‘nā.
Yazid ibn Harun (d.206AH) understood the word “ma‘nā” as sometimes referring to the modality (kayfiyyah) as opposed to the meaning.
Translation: Among the Imams of the Salaf, there were those who intended by “meaning” the concept of takyeef (ascribing a “how”), and so they denied it. For example, Yazid ibn Harun was asked about the meaning of a hadith concerning the attributes, and he became angry and upset, saying: “Woe to you! Who knows how this is?!” Thus, he interpreted the question about the “meaning” as a question about the kayf (modality), because he understood the questioner’s intent in that way.
Understanding the contexts of the statements of the Imams explains their varying usage of terms depending on the context, and to ascribe a single, identical meaning to all their statements is false. The Salaf used to remain silent about the verses concerning the attributes because the affirmation of their reality was firmly established in their hearts. Malik described the people of innovation by saying: “And they do not remain silent about what the Companions remained silent about.
Muqaddimat al-Risalah by Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawānī Pg 100
In this lengthy exposition by Isḥāq Ibn Rāhawayh, affirms the meanings are known in some places and denies it in others.
Translation: Abu Al-Sheikh Al-Asbahani mentioned in his book “Al-Sunnah” saying: “And what was permitted for me by my grandfather – may Allah have mercy on him – he said: Ishaq ibn Rahwayh said, ‘Indeed, Allah – Blessed and Exalted be He has described Himself in His Book with attributes such that all of creation is spared from needing to describe Him with anything other than what He has described Himself. And He has summarised them in His Book. Indeed, the Prophet only explained the meaning of what Allah Blessed and Exalted be He – intended. Allah said in His Book, where He mentioned ‘Isa ibn Maryam “You know what is in myself, and I do not know what is in yourself”
And He said in the clear verses of His Book, “And whoever is in the heavens and whoever is on the earth will fall dead except whom Allah wills” And the whole earth will be in His grip on the Day of Resurrection, and the heavens will be folded up in His Right Hand And He said, “Rather, both His Hands are extended” And He said, “The Hand of Allah is over their hands” And He said, “I created with My Hands” in many verses, “And He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing” And He said, “That you might be brought up under My Eye” All of what Allah has described Himself with, from the attributes we have mentioned, are found in the Qur’an, and whatever is not mentioned is as He has described.
It is obligatory upon the servants to submit to that and to worship (Him) without negating any of the attributes with which Allah has described Himself, or which the Messenger has described on His behalf, neither with words nor with intent.
It is only incumbent upon the Muslim to perform (his duty) and believe in his heart that what He has described Himself with in the Qur’an are indeed His attributes. No Prophet sent, nor angel brought near, can comprehend these attributes except with the names by which the Lord – Blessed and Exalted be He – has made them known. As for anyone from the children of Adam comprehending the true nature of these attributes, none can do so.
This is because Allah, the Exalted, only described from His attributes what the intellects of those of sound mind can bear, so that their faith in that would be firm. And their knowledge that He is described with what He has described Himself would be certain, yet none can grasp its ultimate reality or the end of His attributes. It is only incumbent upon the Muslim to affirm the knowledge of Allah’s attributes by following and submitting as it has come.
So, whoever is ignorant of that knowledge to the point of saying, “I only describe what Allah has said, but I do not know the meanings of that,” and ends up saying, in meaning, what the Jahmiyyah say: His handmeans His blessing, and they argue with His saying, “Our Hands are outspread in bounty” and similar things, has indeed strayed far from the straight path.
This is the essence of the words of the Jahmiyyah, where they believe in all the attributes of Allah we have described, yet they distort the meaning of the attributes from what Allah described them to be, until they say: “The meaning of ‘the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing’ is that the All-Hearing is the All-Seeing, and the meaning of the All-Seeing is the All-Hearing.’
At-Tis’eeniyyah by Ibn Taymiyyah – 90 ways to refute the Ash’ari (1/422-423)
For example, Imām Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (d. 241) used the coming and the arriving of Allāh as proof that He can be seen. Is it possible to deduce from al-maji and al-ityān that they can facilitate for the ru’yah if the meanings are completely unknown?
Translation: Ahmad [ibn Hanbal] said in the narration of Abu Talib regarding the verse “Are they waiting except that Allah should come to them in covers of clouds and the angels [as well]” [Al-Baqarah: 210] and “And your Lord comes with the angels, rank upon rank” [Al-Fajr: 22]: “Whoever says that Allah is not seen has disbelieved.” The apparent meaning of this is that Ahmad affirmed the coming of His essence, because he used this as evidence for the possibility of seeing Him. This is only used as evidence for the possibility of seeing Him if the coming and arrival are attributed to the essence.
Ibtaal at-Tawilat li Akhbaar as-Sifaat – al-Qadi Abu Ya’la (d. 458AH) Pg 158
Next, I will be showing the Ashari debater’s tweet of Imam Abdul Aziz Al Majshun suppsoedly negating modality for Allah.
Page beforehand shows the chain of this and ʿUmar bin Muḥammad bin ʿĪsā bin Saʿīd is a weak narrator — https://hadith.islam-db.com/narrators/25377/%D8%B9%D9%85%D8%B1-%D8%A8%D9%86-%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%85%D8%AF-%D8%A8%D9%86-%D8%B9%D9%8A%D8%B3%D9%89-%D8%A8%D9%86-%D8%B3%D8%B9%D9%8A%D8%AF
He also says there is no chain for narration of Imam Malik saying the kayf is majhool yet it, is found below the same scan he used previously..
Translation: Muhammad bin Abdul Malik narrated to us, saying: Abdullah bin Yunus narrated to us, saying: Baqi bin Makhlad narrated to us, saying: Bakr bin Abdullah al-Qurashi narrated to us, saying: Mahdi bin Ja’far narrated to us, from Malik bin Anas, that he was asked about the saying of Allah, the Almighty: “The Most Merciful rose over the Throne (Istawa)” (Quran 20:5): How did He rise (Istawa)? Malik lowered his head, then said: His rising (Istawa) is unknown.
Baqi said: And Ayyub bin Saleh al-Makhzumi narrated to us in Ramla, saying: We were with Malik when an Iraqi man came to him and said: O Abu Abdullah (Imam Malik), a question I want to ask you about. Malik lowered his head, then he (the man) said: O Abu Abdullah: “The Most Merciful rose over the Throne (Istawa).” How did He rise (Istawa)? Malik said: You have asked about something not unknown.
Kitab At-Tamhid (Sharh al-Muwatta) by Imam Ibn Abdil-Barr (5/163)
Again we see him using books that refute him If we go to Page 152 of his Imam Sijzi’s risalah and see what he says in regards to the sifaat of Allah.
Translation: If someone says: ‘Most of what you mentioned in this chapter relates to the witnessed, and Allah, the Exalted (28:1), is unlike what is witnessed. Therefore, His speech must not be composed of letters and sound, unless a clear text from the Qur’an, or a consensus of the ummah, or a report of mutawātir narrations affirm that Allah’s speech consists of letters and sound.’
It is said to him: ‘It is obligatory to understand that when Allah, the Exalted, describes Himself with an attribute that is intelligible to the Arabs, and the discourse was revealed to them in a manner that they are familiar with Allah did not clarify that it is different from what they understand, nor did the Prophet, when conveying it, explain it in a way that contradicts the apparent meaning, then it remains as they understand it and are familiar with it.
Risalah as-Sijzi ila Ahl az-Zubayd – Hafidh Abu Nasr as-Sijzi (d. 444AH) Pg 152
