Navigation Menu For The Summary
Abu al Hasan al Ashari’s Repentance And Stages In Aqeedah
Praise Of Abu al Hasan From The Scholars
The Creed Of Abu al Hasan In The Attributes
Textual Attributes And Following The Salaf
How Abu al Hasan’s Creed Refutes The Later Ashariyyah
Navigation For The Full Article
Beginning Of The Full Article
How did Abu al Hasan transition to the madhhab of the Salaf?
The first view: that Shaykh Abu al Hasan had only two stages
The second view: That Shaykh Abu al Hasan had three stages
The stronger view between the two
The second view follows sound rules of preference
The supporters of the second view clearly mention the three stages
Looking at the books that Shaykh Abu al Hasan wrote at the end of his life
The soundness of saying that Abu al Hasan Al Ashari accepted the madhhab of the Salaf in the chapter of the attributes
How Abu al Hasan refuted the belief of the Ashariyyah in the chapter of the attributes
Affirming the attributes upon their reality
The way of the Salaf in carrying the attributes upon their apparent and real meanings
The agreement of Shaykh Abu al Hasan with this consensus of the Salaf
The agreement of Shaykh Abu al Hasan with the Salaf continuted…
Summary regarding the textual attributes
Summary
Abu al Hasan al Ashari’s Repentance And Stages In Aqeedah
Abu al Hasan al Ashari grew up under the Muʿtazili influence of his stepfather Abu Ali al Jubbai, became an imam for them, and remained on their madhhab for around forty years. When doubts entered his heart, he prayed for guidance and saw the Prophet ﷺ in a dream, who told him: “Upon you is to cling to my Sunnah.”
He then compared the beliefs of kalam with the Qur’an and Sunnah, accepted what agreed with revelation, and threw everything else behind his back, including his own opinions (Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari p. 38–39).
He then withdrew in his house for about fifteen days. After that he came to the main mosque, mounted the pulpit, and announced that he had left the Muʿtazilah. He publicly declared that he used to say the Qur’an is created, that Allah is not seen with the eyes, and that evil actions are purely the servant’s doing, then said he was now repenting and refuting the Muʿtazilah, and that he had stripped himself of his former belief “just as I strip off this garment”, which he removed and threw away (Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari p. 39; al Fihrist Ibn al Nadim p. 257; Siyar Aʿlam al Nubala 15/89; Wafayat al Aʿyan 3/285).
The scholars then differed about how many scholarly stages he passed through. Many later Ashariyyah say there were only two stages: Muʿtazili, then the way of Ibn Kullab, relying on statements that simply show his repentance from the Muʿtazilah and his support for Ahl al Sunnah with rational proofs (Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari p. 127; Wafayat al Aʿyan 3/285).
A large number of imams, however, clearly state that he had three stages: first Muʿtazili, then Kullabi, then the madhhab of the Salaf in the attributes.
Al Dhahabi explains that in works like Maqalat al Islamiyyin and al Ibanah he sets out the creed of Ahl al Sunnah, affirming Allah’s istiwa over the Throne, the face, the two hands, and the other textual attributes, passing them as they came and saying that it is not permissible to interpret istiwa as istila, and then adds: “With everything that we have mentioned from their words we also say, and to this we adopt” (Kitab al Arsh 2/373–387).
Ibn Kathir summarises these as three stages and states that al Ibanah, written at the end of his life, follows the way of the Salaf in the attributes (Ithaf al Sadat al Muttaqin 2/6).
Ibn Taymiyyah refines this third stage into two steps: al Ashari first took the foundations of hadith from Zakariyya al Sajji in Basrah, then when he came to Baghdad he took further matters from the Hanbalis there, and that final state was what he died upon (Majmu al Fatawa 3/228, 5/555).
Other imams explain that some Ashari transmitters simply did not see these later works, like al Ibanah and his letter to the people of Bab al Abwab, which were written in Baghdad at the end of his life, so they only reported his earlier Kullabi phase.
Praise Of Abu al Hasan
Abu al Qasim al Qushayri mentions that what people found fault with Abu al Hasan for was nothing but his affirmation of Allah’s decree and the attributes of majesty such as power, knowledge, life, hearing, sight, face, hand, and that the Qur’an is His uncreated speech (Shikayat Ahl al Sunnah).
He also narrates from Abu Ali al Daqaq, from Zahir ibn Ahmad al Faqih, that al Ashari died with his head in Zahir’s lap while saying at the moment of death: “May Allah curse the Muʿtazilah, the ones who make false display and tear things apart” (Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari p. 226).
Ibn Asakir, in Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari, strongly defends the soundness of his creed, saying that people of knowledge and examination regard his belief as correct, and that the great worshippers agree with most of what he holds. He then quotes at length from al Ibanah, where al Ashari explains his belief and says that his religion is to hold fast to the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of His Prophet ﷺ, and what is narrated from the companions, followers and imams of hadith.
He explicitly says: “With that we cling, and upon what Ahmad ibn Hanbal was upon, may Allah brighten his face, we speak” and praises Ahmad as the imam by whom Allah clarified truth, suppressed innovators and exposed the doubts of the deviants (Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari p. 163–164).
Al Dhahabi says he saw four works of Abu al Hasan on the foundations in which he mentions the principles of the madhhab of the Salaf regarding the attributes, says that the texts are to be left as they came, and then adds: “This is my saying and this is my religion, and they are not to be interpreted” (Siyar Aʿlam al Nubala 15/86; al Uluw 237–239).
He praises al Ashari’s intelligence, knowledge and many writings.
Ibn Kathir repeats that Abu al Hasan moved from iʿtizal to affirming only the seven attributes with interpretation of the rest, and finally to affirming all the attributes without asking how and without likening, following the way of the Salaf, and that this last state is what appears in al Ibanah and in what al Baqillani and Imam al Haramain later inclined towards (Ithaf al Sadat al Muttaqin 2/6).
Al Alusi explicitly says that the end of al Ashari’s life was upon the noble madhhab, indeed upon what the Salaf were upon in all matters of belief. He quotes from al Ibanah that al Ashari’s belief is to hold fast to the Book and Sunnah and what is narrated from the companions and imams of hadith, and that “we say what Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said”.
He concludes that this shows his creed was the creed of the Salaf and comments that what the Ashariyyah are upon today is not what their imam ended upon, then says: “If only they had returned as he returned and followed what he followed” (Gharaib al Ightirab p. 385–386).
Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al Qayyim note that when al Ashari left the Muʿtazilah he followed Ibn Kullab, leaned to the people of Sunnah and hadith, and attached himself to Imam Ahmad, and that early Hanbalis praised his refutation of the Muʿtazilah and counted him among those who supported the Sunnah in general (Majmu al Fatawa 5/555; Ijtima al Juyush al Islamiyyah 2/284–285).
The Creed Of Abu al Hasan In The Attributes
Affirming The Attributes On Their Real Meanings
Abu al Hasan lays down a clear principle regarding the speech of Allah: “The rule concerning the speech of Allah, exalted is He, is that it is to be carried upon its apparent and real meaning, and that nothing is turned away from its apparent meaning to metaphor except with a proof,” then uses as an example His saying “for what I created with My two hands” (al Ibanah ʿan Usul ad Diyana p. 139).
He explains in his letter to the people of Bab al Abwab that names such as living, knowing, able, speaker and willing are only real when the underlying attributes exist; otherwise the description is either metaphor or a lie. Since Allah is truly described with these names, the attributes that make them real must be affirmed for Him (Risalah ila Ahl ath Thaghr bi Bab al Abwab p. 122–123).
This approach is the opposite of what many later Ashariyyah say, that the apparent meanings of the texts of the attributes are not intended.
Abu Hamid al Ghazali, for example, calls those who take “The Most Merciful rose over the Throne” on its apparent wording “a misguided group” and says that the one who succeeds is the one who is certain of denying settling on the Throne (al Mankhul p. 251).
Al Sawi in his marginal notes on Tafsir al Jalalayn treats taking the apparent meanings of such texts as following the mutashabih for discord and even links it to unbelief. Other late Ashariyyah say that whoever affirms the attributes with their real meanings is from the people of tajsim (al Intisar li Ahl as Sunnah p. 171).
Abu al Hasan’s principle directly refutes this foundation.
Textual Attributes And Following The Salaf
In Maqalat al Islamiyyin, Abu al Hasan records the aqeedah of “Ahl al Sunnah and the people of hadith” as affirming that Allah is above His Throne as He said, that He has a face, two hands and two eyes, that He hears and sees, that nothing occurs in the earth of good or evil except by His will, that the Qur’an is His uncreated speech, that He descends to the heaven of this universe, that He will come on the Day of Resurrection, that He draws near to His servants, and that the believers will see Him with their eyes on the Day of Resurrection.
He affirms all of this “without asking how” and says these texts are not to be interpreted as metaphor (Maqalat al Islamiyyin 1/226; al Ibanah pp. 121, 125, 193).
He explicitly rejects interpreting istiwa as istila and says that this is not permissible. He argues at length that “what I created with My two hands” cannot be reduced to power or favour, since then there would be no special honour for Adam عليه السلام over Iblis and it would become permissible to say Allah is established over everything, even filthy places, which no Muslim accepts.
He shows that the repeated mention of the hand in the Qur’an verses and hadiths about grasping, taking and writing proves it is a real attribute, not a figure of speech.
In al Ibanah he answers the question about his belief by stating that his religion is to hold fast to the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of His Prophet ﷺ, and what is narrated from the companions, followers and imams of hadith, and he repeats: “With that we cling, and upon what Ahmad ibn Hanbal was upon we speak.”
He then lists the core matters of iman and immediately after affirms that Allah is over His Throne, that He has a face, two hands and two eyes, that His names are not other than Him, that He has knowledge, that He will be seen with the eyes, and that all the narrations of His descending, coming, drawing near and turning hearts are to be accepted as they came, without likening and without asking how (Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari p. 163–164; al Ibanah).
How Abu al Hasan’s Creed Refutes The Later Ashariyyah
Later Ashariyyah built their theology of the attributes on the claim that the apparent meanings of the Qur’an verses and hadiths are not intended, that these texts must be diverted by ta’wil, and that whoever affirms the apparent meanings is either a mushabbih or a mujassim, and some went as far as to call that unbelief (al Mankhul p. 251; hashiyat al Sawi; al Intisar li Ahl as Sunnah p. 171).
Abu al Hasan, in his final stage, does the opposite. He sets the rule that the speech of Allah is carried upon its apparent and real meaning and that nothing is turned to metaphor without proof.
He affirms all the textual attributes upon their real meanings, declares it invalid to interpret istiwa as istila, refutes those who say hand means favour or power, and insists that the texts be passed on as they came. He repeatedly states that this is his belief and his religion, and that this is the creed of Ahl al Sunnah and the people of hadith, especially Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal.
Because of this, Ibn Taymiyyah says that al Ashari and the leading ones among his early companions such as Abu al Hasan at Tabari and al Qadi Abu Bakr al Baqillani agreed in affirming the textual attributes mentioned in the Qur’an, like istiwa, the face and the hand, and in rejecting interpretation, and that he has no two views on this; the two views belong to his followers, not to him (Dar Taʿarud al Aql wan Naql 2/17).
Al Alusi therefore concludes that what the later Ashariyyah follow is not what their imam ended his life upon, and wishes that they had returned as he returned (Gharaib al Ightirab p. 385–386).
His repentance, his stages in aqeedah, the praise of the imams, and the clear content of al Ibanah and his other late works together show that his final creed in the attributes is that of the Salaf, and that it directly undermines the later Ashari creed that claims to be based on his name. This same final creed is also reflected in later presentations and editions of al Ibanah that transmit his text and its affirmation of the attributes upon their reality.
Beginning Of The Full Article
During Abu Hasan Al Ashari’s life he moved from the madhhab of the Muʿtazilah to the way of Ibn Kullab, then to the way of the Salaf, searching for the truth and returning to it. It is as if he was acting upon the advice that Umar ibn al Khattab gave to his grandfather Abu Musa al Ashari, may Allah be pleased with them both. He died in Baghdad in the year 324AH, may Allah have mercy on him.
Part of his story in returning to the truth is what Ibn Asakir (d. 571AH), reported from Ibn Azrah. He said: “Al Ashari is our shaykh and our imam, and he is the one on whom we rely. He remained upon the madhhab of the Muʿtazilah for forty years and was an imam for them. Then he withdrew from people in his house for fifteen days.
After that he came out to the main mosque, climbed the pulpit and said: ‘People, I stayed away from you for this period because I examined the arguments and they were equal in my sight; no truth became stronger than falsehood and no falsehood became stronger than truth.
So I asked Allah, blessed and exalted, to guide me, and He guided me to believe in what I have placed in these books of mine. I have stripped myself of everything I used to believe, just as I strip myself of this garment.’ Then he stripped off a garment he was wearing and threw it away.” (Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari fima nusiba ila al Ashari, Ibn Asakir p 39)
The Ashariyyah ARE ascribed to Shaykh Abu al Hasan. In reality they differ from him in many parts of aqeedah. One of the clearest of these parts is the chapter of the attributes of Allah, glory be to Him.
This article was written to clarify how the Ashariyyah differ from what Shaykh Abu al Hasan al Ashari, may Allah have mercy on him, was upon in the last part of his life in the chapter of the attributes of Allah, glory be to Him. This will be set out in two sections:
- How did Shaykh Abu al Hasan transition to the madhhab of the Salaf?
- How Shaykh Abu al Hasan refuted the belief of the Ashariyyah in the chapter of the attributes.
Now comes the time to begin what is intended, by the help of the King who alone is worshipped, glory be to Him and praise.
How did Abu al Hasan transition to the madhhab of the Salaf?
The scholars who wrote the biography of Abu al Hasan al Ashari all agreed that he passed through a number of stages in his scholarly life.
Second: they also agreed that in the early part of his scholarly life he was on the madhhab of the Muʿtazilah, influenced by Abu Ali al Jubbai the Muʿtazili and following him, and that he remained in that state for 40 years, then repented and left the madhhab of the Muʿtazilah.
al Dhahabi confirms this when he says: “It has reached us that Abu al Hasan repented and climbed the pulpit of Basrah and said: ‘I used to say that the Qur’an is created, that Allah is not seen with the eyes and that evil actions are my doing and not by decree, and I am now repenting, believing in refuting the Muʿtazilah.’”
Footnote: (al Fihrist by Ibn al Nadim, p. 257)
(Siyar Alam al Nubala, al Dhahabi 15/89)
Third: the views of the scholars differ about the number of scholarly stages that Shaykh Abu al Hasan passed through.
There are two main views.
These two views became a line of separation between the Ashariyyah and the followers of the Salaf in the chapter of the attributes of Allah, glory be to Him.
So it is fair to present both views for careful consideration, in order to reach a conclusion that clarifies the final scholarly state that Abu al Hasan al Ashari reached.
The first view: that Shaykh Abu al Hasan had only two stages
Some of the Ashariyyah, especially the later ones among them, hold that Shaykh Abu al Hasan al Ashari had only two stages in his scholarly life. The first was his following the madhhab of the Muʿtazilah. The second was his move to the madhhab of Abd Allah ibn Saeed ibn Kullab. They, that is the Ashariyyah, think that Ibn Kullab was upon the madhhab of Ahl as Sunnah.
The correct view is that the way of Ibn Kullab is closer to the truth and to the Sunnah than the saying of the Muʿtazilah, but he was still seen by the Salaf as an innovator because of what he said regarding the Qur’an and his denial of the attributes of action that are connected to the Self of Allah.
Ibn Taymiyyah said: When Abu al Hasan al Ashʿari (d. 324 AH) withdrew from the Muʿtazilah, he followed the approach of Abu Muhammad Ibn Kullab (d. 240 AH). A group then appeared who claimed the Sunnah and hadith, from the Salimiyyah and others, such as Abu Ali al Ahwazi (d. 446 AH).
They mention alleged faults about Abu al Hasan, but these are fabrications made up by the Muʿtazilah and others against him, because al Ashʿari exposed the contradictions in the Muʿtazilah and the corruption of their views in a way no one else had done, until he utterly defeated them and left them completely subdued.
Majmu al Fatawa, Ibn Taymiyyah 5/555
Ibn Taymiyyah also said: Even if the Muʿtazilah were refuted so strongly that it was said, al Ashʿari (d. 324 AH) confined them inside the narrowest of prisons, this is also true because of how clearly he exposed the contradictions in their core principles. He knew their madhhahib well, since he had been a student of Abu Ali al Jubba’i (d. 303 AH), and studied the foundations of the Muʿtazilah under him for forty years.
Then, when he moved to the approach of Abu Muhammad Abd Allah ibn Sa’id ibn Kullab (d. 245 AH), which is closer to the Sunnah than the approach of the Muʿtazilah, he affirmed the attributes, affirmed highness, and affirmed that Allah is distinct from creation, and he held that highness is established by the intellect.
So, because (Abu Hasan) al Ashʿariwas so familiar with the foundations of the Muʿtazilah, he made their contradictions and corruption clear in a way that subdued them. And because he also exposed the contradictions of the Muʿtazilah, the Rafidah, the philosophers, and others like them, he gained the honour and standing that he gained.
For Allah does not wrong even the weight of an atom. If there is a good deed, He multiplies it, and He gives, from His own bounty, a tremendous reward.
However, al Ashʿari fell short of the approach of Ibn Kullab. And the view held here differed from Ibn Kullab and al Ashʿari, by denying the reported attributes and denying highness, while the best among them treat it as one of the attributes known only through transmitted evidence, even though Ibn Kullab (d. 245 AH) was regarded by the Salaf as an innovator because of what he said about the Qur’an, and because he denied the action attributes that are established with Allah’s essence.
al Fatawa al Kubra, Ibn Taymiyyah 6/631
They support their claim with a number of quotations. It is enough to mention two of them.
Abu Bakr ibn Furak, who died in 406AH, says: “Shaykh Abu al Hasan Ali ibn Ismail al Ashari moved from the madhahib of the Muʿtazilah to supporting the madhahib of Ahl as Sunnah wal Jamaah with rational proofs, and he wrote books about that.” (Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari fima nusiba ila al Ashari, Ibn Asakir p127)
Ibn Khallikan (d. 681AH), says: “At first Abu al Hasan al Ashari was a Muʿtazili. Then he repented from the saying of ‘justice’ and ‘created Qur’an’ in the main mosque of Basrah on a Friday. He went up on a raised seat and called out with the loudest voice:
‘Whoever knows me has known me; whoever does not know me, I will tell him who I am. I am so and so, son of so and so. I used to say that the Qur’an is created, that Allah is not seen by the eyes and that evil actions are my doing. I now repent and leave this, and I believe in refuting the Muʿtazilah and bringing out their scandals and their faults.’” (Wafayat al Ayan, Ibn Khallikan 3/285)
Anyone who is fair can see that these and similar statements which the Ashariyyah mention do not in themselves prove the number of scholarly stages that Shaykh Abu al Hasan passed through. The most that can be understood from them is that he declared his repentance from the madhhab of the Muʿtazilah, that he left it and that he became concerned with refuting them.
The second view: That Shaykh Abu al Hasan had three stages
A group of scholars of biographies and history clearly say that Abu al Hasan al Ashari passed through three stages in his scholarly life:
- Following the madhhab of the Muʿtazilah.
- Moving to the way of Ibn Kullab.
- Moving to the madhhab of the Salaf in the chapter of the attributes.
Here are some of the scholars’ words which show this.
Imam Al Dhahabi says below.
Abu al Hasan al Ashari (d. 324 AH)
Abu al Hasan Ali ibn Ismail al Ashari رحمه الله said in his book which he authored, Ikhtilaf al Musallin wa Maqalat al Islamiyyin, after mentioning in it the sects of the Rawafid, the Khawarij, the Jahmiyyah and others, up to where he said:
He mentioned the belief of Ahl al Sunnah and the people of hadith, and the summary of what they say: that they affirm Allah, His angels, His books and His messengers, and what has come from Allah, and what the reliable narrators have narrated from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ; they do not reject anything of that.
Then he said: “And that Allah is over His Throne, as He said:
الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَى
The Most Merciful rose over the Throne. (Ta Ha 20–5)
And that He has two hands, without asking how, as He the Exalted said:
لِمَا خَلَقْتُ بِيَدَي
What I created with My two hands. (Sad 38–75)
And that the names of Allah are not to be said to be something other than Allah, as the Muʿtazilah and the Khawarij said. They affirm that Allah has knowledge, as He said:
أَنزَلَهُ بِعِلْمِهِ وَمَا تَحْمِلُ مِنْ أُنثى وَلَا تَضَعُ إِلَّا بِعِلْمِهِ
He sent it down with His knowledge and no female bears or gives birth except with His knowledge. (al Nisa 4–166, Fatir 35–11)
They affirm hearing and sight, and they do not deny that for Allah as the Muʿtazilah denied it. They say that nothing occurs in the earth of good or evil except by the will of Allah, and that things come to be by the will of Allah, as our Lord said:
وَمَا تَشَاؤُونَ إِلَّا أَن يَشَاء اللَّهُ
You do not will except that Allah wills. (al Insan 76–30)
Then he said:
And they say that the Qur’an is the speech of Allah, not created. They truly believe in the hadiths that have come from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ that Allah descends to the heaven of this world and says: “Is there anyone seeking forgiveness?” as the hadith has come. They affirm that Allah will come on the Day of Resurrection, as He said:
وَجَاء رَبُّكَ وَالْمَلَكُ صَفًّا صَفًّا
Your Lord will come, and the angels in rows upon rows. (al Fajr 89–22)
And that Allah draws near to His creation however He wills, as He said:
وَنَحْنُ أَقْرَبُ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ حَبْلِ الْوَرِيدِ
We are nearer to him than his jugular vein. (Qaf 50–16)
He mentioned many matters from the foundations of the Sunnah, up to where he said:
So this is a summary of what they command, what they practise and what they hold as their view, and that it is not permissible to interpret istiwa as istila (seizing and overpowering). And with everything that we have mentioned from their words we also say, and to this we adopt, and our success is only through Allah.” (The editor notes that in some manuscripts at this place there is the phrase that he requested from Ibn al Aʿrabi that he ask for him some usages and meanings from the languages of the Arabs that istiwa in the right of Allah means istila, and Ibn al Aʿrabi mentioned that he could not find that. It is clear that this phrase has no relation to the context here and is inserted, so the editor transferred it to the suitable place earlier in the words of Ibn al Aʿrabi that were already mentioned, section 246.)
His words in the same book on whether Allah is in a place
He رحمه الله mentioned in this same book in the chapter, “Is the Creator, Mighty and Majestic, in a place to the exclusion of another place, or not in any place, or in every place?” He said:
They differed regarding that into seventeen opinions. Among them is what Ahl al Sunnah and the people of hadith said: He is not a body, He does not resemble created things, and He is over the Throne as He said:
الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَى
The Most Merciful rose over the Throne. (Ta Ha 20–5)
We do not put ourselves forward in speech before Allah, rather we say: He rose over the Throne without asking how. And that Allah has two hands, as He said:
لِمَا خَلَقْتُ بِيَدَي
What I created with My two hands. (Sad 38–75)
And that He descends to the heaven of this world, as has come in the hadith.
The Muʿtazilah said: “He rose over the Throne” means “He seized and overpowered it.” And the Muʿtazilah said: “Hand” means “favour”, and His saying:
تَجْرِي بِأَعْيُنِنَا
Sailing under Our eyes. (al Qamar 54–14)
means “by Our knowledge.”
His words in “Jumal al Maqalat”
Abu al Hasan al Ashari said in the book Jumal al Maqalat. I saw it written in the hand of Abu Ali ibn Shadhan, and he had written it in the year a little over seventy and three hundred. In it, in mentioning the belief of the people of hadith, there is speech similar to this and close to its meaning. I left it out for fear of lengthening.
His words in “al Ibanah” in the chapter on istiwa
He رحمه الله said in his book al Ibanah on the foundations of the religion, in the chapter on istiwa:
If someone were to say, “What do you say about istiwa?” it is said: We say that Allah is established over the Throne, as He said:
الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَى
The Most Merciful rose over the Throne. (Ta Ha 20–5)
And He said:
إِلَيْهِ يَصْعَدُ الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ
To Him ascend good words. (Fatir 35–10)
And He said:
بَلْ رَفَعَهُ اللَّهُ إِلَيْهِ
Rather Allah raised him up to Himself. (al Nisa 4–158)
And He narrated from Pharaoh that he said:
يَا هَامَانُ ابْنِ لِي صَرْحًا لَعَلِّي أَبْلُغُ الْأَسْبَابَ أَسْبَابَ السَّمَاوَاتِ فَأَطَّلِعَ إِلَى إِلَهِ مُوسَى وَإِنِّي لَأَظُنُّهُ كَاذِبًا
“O Haman, build for me a tower so that I might reach the pathways the pathways of the heavens so that I may look at the God of Musa, but indeed I think he is a liar.” (Ghafir 40–36–37)
He considered him a liar in his saying that Allah is in the heavens. And the Exalted said:
أَأَمِنتُم مَّن فِي السَّمَاءِ أَن يَخْسِفَ بِكُمُ الْأَرْضَ
Do you feel secure from the One who is in the heaven that He will not cause the earth to swallow you? (al Mulk 67–16)
The heavens have above them the Throne. When the Throne is above the heavens, and everything high is called a heaven, this means all the heavens. What is intended is the Throne which is the highest of the heavens. Do you not see that He mentioned the heavens and said:
وَجَعَلَ الْقَمَرَ فِيهِنَّ نُورًا
He placed the moon as a light in them. (Nuh 71–16)
He did not intend that it fills them all completely.
We have seen all the Muslims raising their hands when they supplicate towards the heaven, because Allah is established over the Throne which is above the heavens. If Allah were not over the Throne, the people of the Muʿtazilah and the Jahmiyyah would not raise their hands towards the Throne.
Some people, the Haruriyyah, and others, have said that the meaning of “He rose” is that He seized, took possession and subdued, and that Allah is in every place. They denied that He is over the Throne as the people of truth said, and they took istiwa to mean power. If it were as they said, there would be no difference between the Throne and the seventh earth, since Allah is able over everything, and the earth is a thing.
So Allah is able over it and over the privies. Likewise, if He were established over the Throne in the sense of istila, it would be permissible to say that He is established over all things. Yet it is not permissible for any of the Muslims to say that Allah is established over the privies and the toilets. So it is invalid that istiwa over the Throne means istila.
He mentioned proofs from the Qur’an, the Sunnah, reason, and other evidences.
The transmission of Ibn Furak
Ibn Furak transmitted this statement that has preceded, from the people of hadith, from Imam Abu al Hasan al Ashari, in his book al Maqalat wal Khilaf bayn al Ashari wa Abi Muhammad Abdillah ibn Said ibn Kullab, which he authored. He said:
“The first section is a mention of what our shaykh Abu al Hasan رحمه الله related in the book al Maqalat concerning the general beliefs of the people of hadith, and what he clarified at the end of it, that he holds all of that.”
Then Ibn Furak set out the statement itself in full. Then he said at its end:
“So this is a verification for you, taken from his own wording, that he believed in these foundations, which are the principles of the people of hadith and the basis of their tawhid.”
Ahmad ibn Thabit al Turqi and what he read in “al Ibanah”
Abu al Abbas Ahmad ibn Thabit al Turqi said: “I read in the book of Abu al Hasan al Ashari, entitled al Ibanah, in the section of proofs for the affirmation of istiwa, that among what he said is:
‘Among the supplications of the people of Islam, when they turn in need to Allah, is that they say: O Resident of the Throne. And among their oaths is: No, by the One who veiled Himself with seven heavens.’”
Then al Turqi said: “This is taken from his saying: ‘Indeed Allah created seven heavens, then chose the highest of them and dwelt therein.’” (Ahmad ibn Thabit ibn Muhammad al Isfahani, Abu al Abbas al Turqi, used to hold that the spirit is eternal, and he had authored works. He died in the year 521 AH. al Ansab 8/235، al Siyar 19/528)
The testimony of Abu al Qasim al Qushayri
He also said that Abu al Qasim al Qushayri رحمه الله said in Shikayat Ahl al Sunnah:
“What they found fault with Abu al Hasan al Ashari for was nothing but that he affirmed the decree of Allah and the attributes of majesty, from His power, His knowledge, His life, His hearing and His sight, His face and His hand, and that the Qur’an is His speech, not created.” (Narrated from him by al Farawi.)
He narrated from him that he said: “I heard Abu Ali al Daqaq say: I heard Zahir ibn Ahmad al Faqih say: Al Ashari died with his head in my lap, and he was saying something at the time of his soul leaving: ‘May Allah curse the Muʿtazilah, the ones who make false display and tear things apart.’” (Al Farawi is Muhammad ibn al Fadl ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad al Saʿidi, Abu Abdillah al Farawi al Naysaburi al Shafiʿi, the hadith transmitter of Khurasan and the jurist of the Haram. He was born in 441 AH and died in 530 AH. al Siyar 19/615، Wafayat al Aʿyan 4/290) (Al Hasan ibn Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Ishaq, Abu Ali al Daqaq al Naysaburi, a Sufi upon the madhhab of al Ashari, died in 405 AH, and it is said in 406 AH. al Wafi bil Wafayat 12/165، Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari 226) (Zahir ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Isa, Abu Ali al Sarakhsi, a leading scholar, the jurist of Khurasan, the shaykh of the reciters and hadith scholars, born in 304 AH and died in 389 AH.)
The praise of Ibn Asakir and his quotation from “al Ibanah”
Ibn Asakir said in Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari which he authored:
“If Abu al Hasan is as has been mentioned about him of sound belief and correctness of madhhab in the eyes of those people of knowledge and examination, and most of the great worshippers agree with most of what he holds, and none find fault with his madhhab except the people of ignorance and stubbornness, then it is necessary that his belief be reported from him as it truly is, with trustworthiness, so that his state in the soundness of his creed in the religion is known. So listen to what he mentioned in al Ibanah, for he said:
‘Praise belongs to Allah, the One, the Mighty, the Glorious, singled out with tawhid, magnified with praise, whom the descriptions of slaves do not encompass, who has no equal and no rival.’
He mentioned matters up to where he said, after he had refuted in the opening sermon the Muʿtazilah, the Qadariyyah, the Jahmiyyah, the Rawafid and the Murji’ah:
‘If someone were to say: You have rejected the saying of the Muʿtazilah, the Qadariyyah, the Jahmiyyah, the Haruriyyah, the Rawafid and the Murji’ah, so make known to us the saying which you hold and the religion upon which you practise.
It is said to him: Our saying which we say, and our religion upon which we practise, is holding fast to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Prophet ﷺ and what has been narrated from the Companions, the Followers and the imams of hadith. With that we cling, and upon what Ahmad ibn Hanbal was upon, may Allah brighten his face, we speak.
We keep away from whoever opposes his saying, for he is the virtuous imam, the complete leader through whom Allah made the truth clear at the time of the appearance of misguidance, clarified through him the path, suppressed through him the innovators, the deviation of the deviators, and the doubt of the doubters. May Allah have mercy on him, the advanced imam, the great respected one, and upon all the imams of the Muslims.
The summary of our saying is that we affirm Allah, His angels, His books and His messengers, and what has come from Allah, and what the reliable narrators have narrated from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. We do not reject anything of that.
We affirm that Allah is one God, alone, the Unique, the Self Sufficient Master, there is no god besides Him; that Muhammad is His servant and His messenger; that Paradise is true and Hellfire is true; that the Hour is coming, there is no doubt in it; and that Allah will resurrect those in the graves.
We affirm that Allah the Exalted is established over His Throne as He said:
الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَى
The Most Merciful rose over the Throne. (Ta Ha 20–5)
We affirm that Allah has a face, as He said:
وَيَبْقَى وَجْهُ رَبِّكَ ذُو الْجَلَالِ وَالْإِكْرَامِ
The Face of your Lord, full of majesty and honour, will remain. (al Rahman 55–27)
And that He has two hands, as He said:
بَلْ يَدَاهُ مَبْسُوطَتَانِ
Rather, both His hands are outspread. (al Ma’idah 5–64)
And He said:
لِمَا خَلَقْتُ بِيَدَي
What I created with My two hands. (Sad 38–75)
And that He has two eyes, without asking how, as He said:
تَجْرِي بِأَعْيُنِنَا
Sailing under Our eyes. (al Qamar 54–14)
Whoever claims that the names of Allah are something other than Him is misguided and misguiding. We affirm that Allah has knowledge, as He said:
أَنزَلَهُ بِعِلْمِهِ
He sent it down with His knowledge. (al Nisa 4–166)
Up to where he said:
And we hold that Allah will be seen with the eyes on the Day of Resurrection, just as the full moon is seen on the night when it is full; the believers will see Him.’
Up to where he said:
‘And we hold that He turns the hearts, and that the hearts are between two fingers from the fingers of His hand. And that He will place the heavens on a finger and the earths on a finger, as has come in the narration from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.’
Up to where he said:
‘And we truly believe in all the narrations which the transmitters have carried concerning His descending to the heaven of this world, and that the Lord says, “Is there anyone asking? Is there anyone seeking forgiveness?” in opposition to what the people of deviation and misguidance have said.
We refer in what we differ about to the Book of our Lord, Mighty and Majestic, the Sunnah of our Prophet ﷺ and the consensus of the Muslims and what is in their meaning. We say that Allah will come on the Day of Resurrection, as He said:
وَجَاء رَبُّكَ وَالْمَلَكُ صَفًّا صَفًّا
Your Lord will come, and the angels in rows upon rows. (al Fajr 89–22)
And that He draws near to His servants however He wills, as He said:
وَنَحْنُ أَقْرَبُ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ حَبْلِ الْوَرِيدِ
We are nearer to him than his jugular vein. (Qaf 50–16)
And as He said:
ثُمَّ دَنَا فَتَدَلَّى فَكَانَ قَابَ قَوْسَيْنِ أَوْ أَدْنَى
Then he drew near and came down and was at a distance of two bows or even nearer. (al Najm 53–8–9)
We believe in separating from every caller to innovation, and in keeping away from the people of desires. We will present proofs for what we have mentioned from our saying, and for what remains of it which we have not mentioned, chapter by chapter and matter by matter.’”
Ibn Asakir said: “So reflect, may Allah have mercy on you, upon this creed. How clear and evident it is. Acknowledge the virtue of this imam who explained it and clarified it.”
His book “al ʿAmad fi al Ru’yah” and his states
Ibn Asakir said: Abu al Hasan said in his book which he entitled al ʿAmad fi al Ru’yah: “We have authored a large book concerning the attributes, in which we spoke about the categories of the Muʿtazilah and the Jahmiyyah. In it are many sections regarding the attributes, concerning the affirmation of the face of Allah, the two hands, and His istiwa over the Throne.”
Al Ashari was born in the year two hundred and sixty and died in the year three hundred and twenty four in Basrah رحمه الله. He had been a Muʿtazili, then he repented, and he agreed with the people of hadith in matters in which they opposed the Muʿtazilah. Then he agreed with the people of hadith in most of what they say. That is what we knew of his state, from what we have mentioned about him transmitting their consensus on that and agreeing with them in all of it.
So he had three states: a state in which he was a Muʿtazili; a state in which he was Sunni in some matters but not others; and he was, in most of the foundations, Sunni. This is what we know of his state. May Allah have mercy on him and forgive him and all the Muslims.” (al Arsh, al Dhahabi 2/373–387)
Ibn Kathir said: Abu al Hasan al Ashari went through through three stages.
The first was the stage of iʿtizal, which he certainly abandoned.
The second stage was affirming the seven intellectual attributes, namely life, knowledge, power, will, hearing, sight, and speech, while interpreting the particular attributes such as the face, the two hands, the foot, the shin, and similar matters.
The third stage was affirming all of these attributes without asking how and without likening them, following the way of the Salaf. This was his approach in al Ibanah, which he authored at the end of his life. It was explained by al Baqillani and transmitted by Ibn Asakir. This is the position that al Baqillani inclined towards, as did Imam al Haramain al Juwayni and others from the leading early imams of the Ashʿari companions in the later stages of their views. And Allah knows best. (Ithaf al Sadat al Muttaqin bi Sharh Ihya Ulum al Din by Murtada al Zabidi 2/6)
It should be noted here that Shaykh al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, divided this third state into two stages. He said: “As for al Ashari, he is closer to the principles of Ahmad than Ibn Aqil is, and he follows them more. The nearer a person is in time to the Salaf, the more knowledge he has of what is transmitted and of sound reasoning.
“I used to explain this to the Hanbalis and clarify that al Ashari, even though he was one of the students of the Muʿtazilah and then repented, had been a student of al Jubbai and leaned towards the way of Ibn Kullab. He took the foundations of hadith from Zakariyya al Sajji in Basrah. Then when he came to Baghdad he took from the Hanbalis of Baghdad other matters. That was his final state, as he and his companions mentioned in their books.” (Majmu al Fatawa, Ibn Taymiyyah 3/228)
So Ibn Taymiyyah shows that the move of Shaykh Abu al Hasan from the way of Ibn Kullab to the madhhab of the Salaf in the chapter of the attributes passed through two steps. The first was his taking from Shaykh Zakariyya al Sajji the foundations of hadith. The second was his taking from the Hanbalis of Baghdad other matters. That final state was the state on which he died, may Allah have mercy on him.
The stronger view between the two
If someone looks fairly at the two views just mentioned, you will see that the second view is stronger.
In other words, Abu al Hasan al Ashari left the way of Ibn Kullab and accepted the madhhab of the Salaf in the chapter of the attributes, after he mixed with Shaykh Zakariyya al Sajji and then moved to Baghdad and was influenced by the Hanbali shaykhs there.
The most important reasons for preferring this view are as follows.
The second view follows sound rules of preference
This second view agrees with well established rules of preference which are known among the majority of the scholars. Among these rules are the following.
One rule is that the one who affirms something is preferred over the one who denies it, because the one who affirms has an extra piece of knowledge. In our case, the second view affirms that Abu al Hasan moved to the madhhab of the Salaf in the chapter of the attributes, whereas the first view denies this move or, more accurately, keeps silent about it. So by this rule the second view is preferred.
Another rule is that the one who knows is an argument against the one who does not know. (al Taqrib wal Irshad, al Baqillani 1/110).
The one who transmits that Shaykh Abu al Hasan changed from the way of Ibn Kullab to the madhhab of the Salaf in the attributes knows something which is hidden from the one who does not transmit that about him. So again this favours the second view.
The supporters of the second view clearly mention the three stages
The scholars who hold the second view clearly state that Shaykh Abu al Hasan al Ashari moved through three stages in his scholarly life. As for the supporters of the first view, they do not rely on statements which clearly say that he did not move to the madhhab of the Salaf. The most that they quote from scholars and historians is that Shaykh Abu al Hasan repented from the madhhab of the Muʿtazilah, left it and wrote against them.
Those quotations can also be understood in another way. Ibn Furak and those who followed him did not mention the third stage of the life of Abu al Hasan al Ashari, which is his leaving the way of Ibn Kullab and moving to the way of the Salaf in the attributes, because they had not seen his book al Ibanah and similar works in which he clearly agrees with the madhhab of the Salaf in the attributes.
Abu Hasan Al Ashari only wrote al Ibanah and similar books in Baghdad at the end of his life when his insight into the Sunnah had increased, whereas Ibn Furak only mentions his earlier writings.
Abu al ʿAbbas Ahmad ibn Thabit al Turuqi, the hadith master, the author of al Lawamiʿ fi al Jamʿ bayna al Sihah wa al Jawamiʿ fi Bayan Masʾalat al Istiwaʾ, said: I have seen these Jahmiyyah attribute the denial of the Throne and the nullification of istiwaʾ to Abu al Hasan al Ashʿari. This is not the first false claim they have made, nor the first lie they have adopted.
For I have read in his book entitled al Ibanah ʿan Usul al Diyanah clear proofs, among what he mentioned, affirming istiwaʾ. He said, among other matters: from the supplications of all the people of Islam, when a calamity befalls them and they turn to Allah in hope, they all say: O Dweller above the Throne. He then said, among their well known expressions: No, by the One who veiled Himself above 7 heavens.
Likewise, Shaykh Nasr al Maqdisi authored a work on foundational matters.
(He is Abu al Fath Nasr ibn Ibrahim ibn Nasr ibn Ibrahim ibn Dawud al Nabulsi al Maqdisi, the leading Shafiʿi jurist of his time in Greater Syria. He travelled in pursuit of knowledge, was born in the year 337 AH in Nablus, and died in Damascus in the year 490 AH. Among his works are al Hujjah ʿala Tarik al Mahajjah in hadith, and al Tahdhib in jurisprudence in 10 volumes, and others. Dr Ali ibn Muhammad al Dakhil Allah mentioned in the marginal notes to al Sawaʿiq al Mursalah by Ibn al Qayyim 4/1285 that a manuscript copy of al Hujjah ʿala Tarik al Mahajjah exists in the library of Shaykh Hammad al Ansari in al Madinah al Nabawiyyah. See Tabaqat al Shafiʿiyyah by al Subki 3/301–353, Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari 286–287, Shadharat al Dhahab 3/395–396, Tabaqat al Shafiʿiyyah by al Istiwai 2/207–208, Mukhtasar al ʿUluw by al Dhahabi 274, and al Aʿlam 20/7.)
He transmitted passages from al Ibanah, and there was a copy of it in his possession as a trust.
Likewise, the jurist Abu al Maʿali Mujalli,(Mujalli ibn Jamiʿ ibn Naja al Mahrami, Abu al Maʿali, the chief judge, author of al Dhakhaʾir and other works. He was among the leading jurists, and legal verdicts in the lands of Egypt returned to him. He was appointed to the judiciary in Egypt in the year 547 AH, then removed before his death. He died in Dhu al Qaʿdah in the year 550 AH. See Tabaqat al Shafiʿiyyah al Kubra 7/277–284, Shadharat al Dhahab 4/157, and Muʿjam al Muʾallifin 8/178.)
The author of al Dhakhaʾir in jurisprudence, and the hadith master Abu Muhammad ibn al Mubarak ibn Ali al Baghdadi, known as Ibn al Tabbakh,(Abu Muhammad ibn al Mubarak ibn Yahya ibn Abi al Hasan ibn Abi al Qasim al Misri, known as Ibn al Tabbakh, was born in the year 587 AH. He was skilled in jurisprudence, well known for it, taught at the Qutbiyyah school in Cairo, sharp minded and highly attentive to al Tanbih. He died in Cairo in the year 667 AH; See al Bidayah wa al Nihayah volume 13 page 256, Tadhkirat al Huffaz volume 4 page 1476, Tabaqat al Shafiʿiyyah by al Subki volume 8 pages 367 to 368, and Shadharat al Dhahab volume 4 page 253) said at the end of al Ibanah: I copied this entire book from a copy that belonged to Shaykh al Faqih Mujalli al Shafiʿi. He brought it out to me in a bound volume, so I copied it and compared my copy against it. He relied upon it and upon what it contained, and he used to say: Allah knows best who authored it. He would debate and argue upon it with those who denied it. He said: He informed me of this and spoke to me directly about it, and he said: This is my belief and this is what I hold.
If it is said: Ibn Furak and his followers did not mention this, it is said in response:
The first answer is that this book and others like it were authored in Baghdad at the end of his life, after his insight into the Sunnah had increased. It is possible that he did not make explicit in some of his earlier books what he made explicit in this book and others like it, even though he did not negate there what he affirmed here in the later works. There is a difference between not stating something, stating it, and stating its negation.
Ibn Furak mentioned, in what he authored regarding the reports of al Ashʿari, his earlier writings. He said: Shaykh Abu al Hasan Ali ibn Ismaʿil al Ashʿari moved from the doctrines of the Muʿtazilah to supporting the doctrines of Ahl al Sunnah wa al Jamaʿah using rational proofs, and he authored books in that regard.
He was from Basrah, from the descendants of Abu Musa al Ashʿari. When Allah granted him success in abandoning the innovations of the Muʿtazilah and guided him to what he spread in support of Ahl al Sunnah wa al Jamaʿah, his affair became manifest and his books spread after the year 300 AH. He remained until the year 324 AH. As for the names of his books that he authored up to the year 320 AH, he mentioned in his book entitled al Samad on the issue of vision the names of most of his books, mentioning al Fusul, al Mujaz, and others.
Then he said: He lived after that until the year 324 AH and authored books during that period, mentioning among them various works.
Ibn ʿAsakir said, after quoting the words of Ibn Furak: This is the last of what Ibn Furak mentioned regarding his writings. However, there came to us additional works that he did not list when naming his compositions.
Among them are the treatise al Hathth ʿala al Bahth, the treatise al Iman wa Hal Yutlaq ʿAlayhi Ism al Khalq, and responses to questions that were written to him by the people of the frontier regions, clarifying what they asked about concerning the doctrines of the people of truth.
He also mentioned, reporting from ʿAziz ibn ʿAbd al Malik, the judge, who said: I heard from someone whom I trust, who said: I saw the catalogues of the books of Imam Abu al Hasan, and I counted them as more than 380 authored works.
The second reason is that Ibn Furak and those associated with him inclined toward negation in the matter of istiwaʾ and similar issues. We have already mentioned, regarding what he transmitted from the words of Ibn Kullab, who was among those who affirmed such matters, how Ibn Furak handled his words in a manner resembling his treatment of the texts that affirm these attributes, as he did in his book Taʾwil Mushkil al Nusus.
His inclination toward negation prevented him from carefully tracing what was transmitted in affirmation from the statements of his imams and others. Likewise, in what he transmitted from the words of al Ashʿari, he added to it and omitted from it, such that what was transmitted amounted to roughly two pages.
It is therefore possible that he also acted similarly in what he transmitted from the words of Ibn Kullab, since we did not find the original copies from which he transmitted, so that it could be known how he handled them. In what he transmitted, there is clear alteration.
His approach in this resembles that of those who attribute their legal rulings and beliefs to the Sunnah and the Prophetic Sharia, believing that this is the truth that cannot be contradicted. Likewise, he thought that what he added or omitted was required by certain foundational principles of Ibn Kullab and al Ashʿari. Otherwise, what appears clearly from their own words would contradict it.
This is a well known principle among many people of theology and jurisprudence. They permit attributing statements to the Prophet ﷺ that conform to what they believe to be from his Sharia, to the extent that some fabricate reports that support that belief and then attribute them to the Prophet ﷺ. Ibn Furak was not among these people. Rather, he belonged to a second category, those who attribute to the imams what they believe to be the truth. This occurs frequently among his group.
As for al Shafiʿi, statements were attributed to him explicitly, and a view was cited that he himself and every scholar knows he never said. The two other judges also transmitted similar claims from Abu Hanifah and from Malik. When that judge was challenged about this and asked, where did this attribution to al Shafiʿi come from, since al Shafiʿi did not say this, he replied: This is the view of rational people, and al Shafiʿi is rational and would not oppose rational people.
I have seen in the writings of some of these groups that they attribute to the imams of Islam views that no one ever transmitted from them, simply because they believe those views to be correct. This is a principle that must be understood.
One of the reasons for this also is that al Ashʿari did not have much widely circulated material explicitly setting out the issue of the Throne and Allah being distinct from creation, unlike his teacher Ibn Kullab. This is because al Ashʿari addressed the issues in which the Muʿtazilah openly displayed disagreement, such as the issue of speech, the vision, denial of divine decree, intercession for those who committed major sins, and similar matters.
As for highness, they did not openly show disagreement over it except among their own circle, because the general body of Muslims rejected that denial. The early generations of the Ummah and its imams knew what the Muʿtazilah concealed in this regard through inference and understanding.
Al Ashʿari therefore took on the task of refuting the innovations that were publicly known among them. Thus, exposing their opposition regarding the Qurʾan and the vision became a defining mark of his approach, matters over which his followers did not dispute, even though they sometimes interpreted them in a way close to the Muʿtazilah.
This was unlike matters in which the Muʿtazilah did not openly show disagreement, since those matters were more firmly rooted in the Sunnah, more established within the Ummah, and more strongly grounded in both revealed guidance and sound reason than those matters in which they openly opposed.
Because of this, even leading philosophers such as Abu al Walid Ibn Rushd acknowledged that the position of the philosophers was to affirm highness above creation, despite the fact that their doctrine interpreted the vision as an increase in knowledge, claimed that the letters of the Qurʾan were created within the Prophet ﷺ, and held similar views.
Al Ashʿari did not specifically take on refuting them in a manner that became widely known, as he did with the Muʿtazilah, because they did not openly display disagreement in this issue in the same way, nor did they publicly expose contradictions that required systematic rebuttal.
For this reason, disagreement over this matter did not become a defining feature of al Ashʿari’s approach. Rather, some of his later followers claimed that certain principles he shared with others necessarily led to denying highness over the Throne, even though al Ashʿari himself and the leading imams among his followers did not say this.
People of knowledge, reason, and insight know that those principles which he agreed upon were actually more strongly connected to the views he openly opposed than to the denial of highness, since opposition in that matter was not widely known from him.
Because of this, the majority of people, whether affirming or denying, regarded those who affirm the vision and divine speech while denying highness over the Throne as among the most internally contradictory of people, in relation to the Sharia, the Sunnah, and sound reasoning. For this reason, those among them who examined matters deeply, such as al Razi and others like him, tended inwardly toward negation even in the issue of the vision and other related matters.
(Bayan Talbis al Jahmiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah 1/143)
Looking at the books that Shaykh Abu al Hasan wrote at the end of his life
Anyone who looks at the books that Abu al Hasan al Ashari wrote in the last part of his life, such as al Ibanah, his letter to the people of the frontier at Bab al Abwab, Maqalat al Islamiyyin and others, will know with certainty that Abu al Hasan al Ashari agreed with what the Salaf were upon in the chapter of the attributes of Allah, glory be to Him. This will be explained in detail in the second section.
The soundness of saying that Abu al Hasan Al Ashari accepted the madhhab of the Salaf in the chapter of the attributes
From what has been mentioned it is clear that Shaykh Abu al Hasan al Ashari, may Allah have mercy on him, moved in the last part of his life to the madhhab of the Salaf in the chapter of the attributes. His later works, such as al Ibanah, Maqalat al Islamiyyin, al Mujaz, and his letter to the people of the frontier, stand as clear witnesses for that. A number of scholars have emphasised this meaning.
Shaykh al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah says: “When al Ashari left the madhhab of the Muʿtazilah, he followed the way of Ibn Kullab and leaned towards the people of Sunnah and hadith and connected himself to Imam Ahmad, as he mentioned in all his books such as al Ibanah, al Mujaz, Maqalat al Islamiyyin and others.
The earlier followers of Ahmad, such as Abu Bakr ibn Abd al Aziz, Abu al Husayn al Tamimi and those like them, mention him in their books as one who agrees with the Sunnah in general, and they praise his refutation of the Muʿtazilah and his uncovering of their contradictions.” (Ijtima al Juyush al Islamiyyah, Ibn al Qayyim 2/284–285)
al Dhahabi says: “I saw four works in the fundamentals by Abu al Hasan, in which he mentions the foundations of the madhhab of the Salaf regarding the attributes. He says in them: these texts are to be passed on as they came. Then he says: and this is what I say and what I hold as religion, and they are not to be interpreted.” (Siyar Alam al Nubala, al Dhahabi 15/86)
Very close to this is the statement of Abu al Qasim Ibn Asakir, who was among the greatest of those who supported Shaykh Abu al Hasan al Ashari. After quoting some of his words in al Ibanah, he said: “Recognise the virtue of Abu al Hasan and know his fairness. Listen to how he describes Ahmad with excellence and how he admits his merit, so that you know that they were agreed in belief and that, in the fundamentals of religion and the madhhab of the Sunnah, they were not divided.” (Tabyin Kadhib al Muftari fima nusiba ila al Ashari, Ibn Asakir p 163)
How Abu al Hasan refuted the belief of the Ashariyyah in the chapter of the attributes
If someone thinks about what Abu al Hasan al Ashari says in his books al Ibanah, Maqalat al Islamiyyin and his letter to the people of the frontier at Bab al Abwab, he will clearly see that Shaykh Abu al Hasan agrees with the belief of the Salaf in the chapter of the attributes of Allah, glory be to Him, and differs from what the Ashariyyah, especially the later ones, are upon.
In what follows there are four topics that clarify this point. In each topic there are a number of points. In every point we will mention first what the later Ashariyyah say, then the consensus of the Salaf, then the words of Shaykh Abu al Hasan al Ashari that agree with the Salaf, then a short conclusion. At times we will mention some doubts and their answers.
The order in which these topics are presented does not follow the order of time. That is deliberate, in order to show clearly how Shaykh Abu al Hasan al Ashari opposes what the Ashariyyah say today regarding the attributes of Allah, glory be to Him. If he were alive he would surely object to their beliefs and would refute them with clear proofs.
Affirming the attributes upon their reality
First point: what the Ashariyyah say
The Ashariyyah believe that the apparent meanings of the texts of the attributes are not intended. Some of them say that whoever believes that the apparent meanings are intended is misguided.
For example, Abu Hamid al Ghazali (d. 505AH), while commenting on the verse:
الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَى
“The Most Merciful rose over the Throne.”
Some of the later Ashariyyah went so far as to consider taking the apparent meaning of the Book and the Sunnah in the attributes to be unbelief. This is what al Sawi mentioned in his marginal notes on Tafsir al Jalalayn when he commented on the verse:
فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاءَ الْفِتْنَةِ
“As for those in whose hearts is deviation, they follow what is unspecific from it, seeking discord and seeking its hidden meaning.” (Surah Aal Imran 7)
Some of them also say that whoever believes that the attributes are affirmed with their real meanings is from the people of tashbih, whom they call “corporealists”.
One of them says: “The problem with the people of tajsim is that they say: we affirm the meanings of the words upon their real senses and attribute them to Allah, exalted is He.” (al Intisar li Ahl as Sunnah wakashf madhhab Adiya as Salafiyyah, Abu al Maali al Azhari p171)
The way of the Salaf in carrying the attributes upon their apparent and real meanings
The people of Sunnah wal Jamaah agreed that the attributes of Allah, exalted is He, must be affirmed upon their apparent and real meanings, not as metaphors. Ibn Abd al Barr (d. 463AH) says:
“Ahlus Sunnah all agree upon acknowledging all the attributes that are mentioned in the Qur’an and the Sunnah, believing in them and carrying them upon their real meanings, not upon metaphor. At the same time they do not ask how and they do not give any limited description for any of that.” (al Tamhid lima fi al Muwatta min al Maani wal Asanid, Ibn Abd al Barr 7/145)
The agreement of Shaykh Abu al Hasan with this consensus of the Salaf
The statement of Shaykh Abu al Hasan al Ashari in this matter agrees with what has just been mentioned. He says:
قيل له: حكم كلام الله تعالى أن يكون على ظاهره وحقيقته، ولا يخرج الشيء عن ظاهره إلى المجاز إلا بحجة.
‘for what I created with My two hands.’” (al Ibanah an Usul ad Diyana, Abu al Hasan al Ashari p139)
He also says: “Ahlus Sunnah agreed that His attributes, exalted is He, do not resemble the attributes of the created, just as His Self does not resemble the selves of the creation.
“They use as evidence that if He did not have these attributes, He would not in reality be described by these descriptions. Someone who does not have life is not truly living. Someone who does not have knowledge is not truly knowing. Someone who does not have power is not truly able. In the same way are the rest of the attributes.
“Do you not see that someone who does not have any action is not in reality an actor, and someone who does not do good is not in reality a doer of good, and someone who does not have speech is not in reality a speaker, and someone who does not have will is not in reality one who wills.
“Someone who is described by one of these descriptions while he does not have the attribute which makes him deserve that description is not truly deserving of that description. His description is either metaphor or a lie.
“Do you not see that when Allah, exalted is He, describes the wall as ‘wanting’ to fall, since in reality it does not have any will, that description is metaphorical. These descriptions are taken from the most specific names of these attributes and point to them. When these attributes that someone is described with are not found, then his description with them is either a figure of speech or a lie.
“Since Allah, exalted is He, is described by all these descriptions in a real way, it is necessary to affirm for Him the attributes which make these descriptions real for Him, otherwise His description with them would be metaphorical, just as His description of the wall as wanting, when in reality it does not have any will, is metaphorical.” (Risalah ila Ahl ath Thaghr bi Bab al Abwab, Abu al Hasan al Ashari 122–123)
Summary regarding carrying the attributes upon their reality
From what has just been mentioned it is clear that the Ashariyyah oppose what Shaykh Abu al Hasan al Ashari was upon. He clearly states that the attributes of Allah, exalted is He, must be affirmed upon their apparent and real meanings.
The Ashariyyah claim that the apparent meanings of the attributes are not intended. After this clear explanation, how can they claim to follow Shaykh Abu al Hasan al Ashari while they differ from him and even declare misguided, or even unbeliever, whoever says what he says?
If they are truthful in their claim to follow him, why do they not follow him and return to the madhhab of the Salaf as their shaykh returned?
The agreement of Shaykh Abu al Hasan with the Salaf continued…
Shaykh Abu al Hasan al Ashari says: “They (Ahlus sunnah) unanimously agreed that He, exalted and glorified, hears and sees, and that He, exalted, has two outstretched hands, and that the earth altogether will be in His grasp on the Day of Resurrection, and the heavens will be folded in His right hand, without this implying bodily limbs, and that His two hands, exalted is He, are not His blessing.
This is shown by His honouring of Adam عليه السلام, as He created him with His hand, and by His rebuking of Iblis for showing arrogance in refusing to prostrate, despite the honour He granted Adam when He said: “What prevented you from prostrating to what I created with My two hands” (Sad 38–75).”
The Muhaqiq (ʿAbd Allah Shakir Muhammad al Junaydi) said: Ashʿari used as evidence for affirming the attribute of the hand for Allah, exalted and glorified, the Qur’an verses he pointed to. Darimi also did the same in his refutation of Bishr al Marisi when Bishr claimed that the hand means blessing. (his book 25, Kitab al Tawhid by Ibn Khuzaymah 53–90, al Asma wa al Sifat by al Bayhaqi 314–341, al Radd ʿala al Jahmiyyah by Ibn Mandah 68–94, Usul Iʿtiqad Ahl al Sunnah by al Lalika’i 2/394)
Ashʿari also refuted in al Ibanah those who held that the hand means blessing, and he explained that they find no proof for this claim, neither from the Arabic language nor from consensus. (al Ibanah 34–38)
Baqillani also addressed them in al Tamhid and refuted them after mentioning their claim. He said: It is said to them: This is false, because His saying “with My two hands” requires affirming two hands as an attribute for Him. If what was meant by this were power, then it would necessarily follow that He has two powers.
The Muslims have unanimously agreed, whether those who affirm the attributes or those who negate them, that it is not permissible to say that He, exalted, has two powers. So what you have said is false. Likewise, it is not permissible to say that Allah, exalted, created Adam with two blessings, because the blessings of Allah upon Adam and upon others cannot be counted. (al Tamhid 209)
Lalika’i said: This is the presentation of what is indicated by the Book of Allah, exalted and glorified, and the Sunnah of His Messenger ﷺ, that among the attributes of Allah, exalted and glorified, are the face, the two eyes, and the two hands.
He then cited what supports this from the Qur’an and the Sunnah. (Sharh Iʿtiqad Ahl al Sunnah 3/412–434) Further discussion on the attribute of the hand follows in the pages after this.
Ashʿari also used this verse as evidence for affirming the attribute of the hand for Allah, exalted and glorified. He explained the way this verse proves the point, as has already been shown.
Ajurri said: It is said to the Jahmi who denies that Allah, exalted and glorified, created Adam with His hand: You have disbelieved in the Qur’an, rejected the Sunnah, and opposed the Ummah. (al Shariʿah 323)
The coming of the verse in this precise wording gives decisive proof for affirming this attribute and shows the falseness of what the people of interpretation claimed regarding it. On this, Ibn al Qayyim said: This wording found in His saying, “I created with My two hands,” refuses to carry the meaning of power.
That is because He attributed the act of creation to Himself, then made the action pass on to the hand, then made it dual, then added the letter ba, which is used in expressions such as, “I wrote with the pen.” This is an explicit wording that does not accept figurative interpretation. (al Sawaʿiq al Mursalah 2/157)
What further supports the affirmation of this attribute, like the rest of the attributes, is the consistent and repeated use of its wording in different contexts. Reflect on the Qur’an verses in which the hand of Allah is mentioned, and likewise in the Sunnah of the Messenger ﷺ, where it is mentioned that the just will be upon pulpits of light at the right of the Most Merciful, and both of His hands are right.
Also consider the hadiths in which shaking, grasping, and taking the offspring from the back of Adam are mentioned, and other reports of the same kind. (Kitab al Tawhid by Ibn Khuzaymah, al Asma wa al Sifat by al Bayhaqi, al Sawaʿiq by Ibn al Qayyim)
Ibn Hajar said: If the hand were to mean power, there would be no difference between Adam and Iblis, since both would share in being created by it, meaning by His power. Iblis could then have said: What virtue does he have over me, when You created me by Your power just as You created him by Your power.
But when he said, “You created me from fire and You created him from clay,” this shows that Adam was singled out by Allah creating him with His two hands. It is not permissible to interpret the two hands as two blessings, because it is impossible for a created being to be created by another created thing, since blessings are created. (Fath al Bari 13/294)
Ibn al Tin said, regarding the saying of the Prophet ﷺ, “And in His other hand is the scale,” that this repels the interpretation of hand here as power.
The same applies to his saying in the hadith of Ibn ʿAbbas: “The first thing Allah created was the pen, then He took it with His right hand, and both of His hands are right.” (Fath al Bari 13/294)
Bukhari also placed a chapter heading in his Sahih for this verse in the Kitab At Tawhid, chapter 19, and under it he mentioned several hadiths that do not accept interpretation at all.
Risalah ila Ahl ath Thaghr, Abu al Hasan al Ashari p127
He also says:“We have been asked: do you say that Allah has two hands? We say: we affirm that without asking how, and the proof for that is His saying, exalted is He:
يَدُ اللَّهِ فَوْقَ أَيْدِيهِمْ
‘The hand of Allah is above their hands.’” (al Ibanah an Usul ad Diyana, Abu al Hasan al Ashari p125)
He also says regarding affirming the attribute of the eye for Allah, exalted is He: “Allah has told us that He has a face and an eye. They are not to be asked about as to how and they are not limited.” (al Ibanah an Usul ad Diyana, Abu al Hasan al Ashari p 121)
He says regarding the attribute of the shin: “They are asked: has not Allah, exalted is He, said:
يَوْمَ يُكْشَفُ عَنْ سَاقٍ وَيُدْعَوْنَ إِلَى السُّجُودِ فَلَا يَسْتَطِيعُونَ
‘On the Day when a shin will be uncovered and they will be called to prostrate, but they will not be able’
Has not Allah, exalted is He, commanded them to prostrate in the next life?” (al Ibanah an Usul ad Diyana, Abu al Hasan al Ashari p 193)
He also says: “The sum of what the people of hadith and the Sunnah are upon is affirming belief in Allah, His angels, His books, and His messengers, and in whatever has come from Allah, and whatever the trustworthy have narrated from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
They do not reject any of that. They affirm that Allah, exalted and glorified, is one God, single and unique, self sufficient, with no god besides Him. He has not taken a companion nor a child. They affirm that Muhammad ﷺ is His servant and His messenger, that Paradise is true, that the Fire is true, that the Hour is surely coming with no doubt, and that Allah will resurrect those who are in the graves.
They affirm that Allah, exalted and glorified, is above His Throne, as He said: “The Most Merciful rose over the Throne” (Surah al Rahman 5).
They affirm that He has two hands without asking how, as He said: “What prevented you from prostrating to what I created with My two hands” (Surah Sad 75),
and as He said: “Rather, both His hands are outstretched” (Surah al Ma idah 64).
They affirm that He has two eyes without asking how, as He said: “It sailed under Our eyes” (Surah al Qamar 14).
They affirm that He has a face, as He said: “And the Face of your Lord will remain, full of majesty and honour” (Surah al Rahman 27).
They affirm that the names of Allah are not said to be other than Allah Himself, as the Mu tazilah and the Khawarij claimed.
They affirm that Allah, exalted and glorified, has knowledge, as He said: “He sent it down with His knowledge” (Surah al Nisa 166), and as He said: “No female conceives nor gives birth except with His knowledge” (Surah Fatir 11).’” (Maqalat al Islamiyyin, Abu al Hasan al Ashari 1/226)
Summary regarding the textual attributes
From what has passed, it is clear that the Ashariyyah oppose their own imam in the textual attributes. He affirms these attributes upon their real meanings without asking how and without denial. He rejects interpreting them and turning them away from their apparent meanings. The Ashariyyah interpret them and turn them away.
It is not only Abu al Hasan al Ashari whom they oppose. Some of his early students were influenced by him and followed his way, such as Abu al Hasan at Tabari and al Qadi Abu Bakr al Baqillani.
Ibn Taymiyyah says: “Al Ashari and the leading ones among his companions, such as Abu al Hasan at Tabari, Abu Abd Allah ibn Mujahid al Bahili and al Qadi Abu Bakr, agree in affirming the textual attributes that are mentioned in the Qur’an, such as rising over the Throne, the face and the hand, and in rejecting interpreting them.
He has no two views on this at all. No one has ever transmitted from al Ashari two views concerning this. All those who transmit the opinions of the people, whether his followers or others, mention that this is his view. However, his followers themselves have two views in this matter.” (Dar Taʿarud al Aql wan Naql, Ibn Taymiyyah 2/17)
Qadi Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn al Tayyib al Basri al Baqillani, who has no equal among the Ashʿari philosophers without exception, said in his book al Ibanah, which he authored: If it is said: What is the proof that Allah has a face? It is said: His saying,
وَيَبْقَى وَجْهُ رَبِّكَ
And the Face of your Lord will remain
(Surah al Rahman 27),
and His saying,
مَا مَنَعَكَ أَنْ تَسْجُدَ لِمَا خَلَقْتُ بِيَدَيَّ
What prevented you from prostrating to what I created with My two hands
(Surah Sad 75).
So He affirmed for Himself a face and a hand.
If it is said: Why do you deny that His face and His hand are bodily limbs, when you do not understand a face or a hand except as a bodily limb? We say: This does not follow, just as it does not follow that everything which is eternal in itself must be a substance.
For we and you have not found, in what we witness, anything eternal in itself except in that manner. The same reply applies to them if they say that His knowledge, His life, His speech, His hearing, His sight, and the rest of the attributes of His essence must be accidents, and they argue from existence.
If it is said: Do you then say that He is in every place? It is said: Allah forbid. Rather, He is established over His Throne, as He informed in His Book. He said,
الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَى
The Most Merciful rose over the Throne
(Surah Ta Ha 5),
and He said,
إِلَيْهِ يَصْعَدُ الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ
To Him ascends the good word
(Surah Fatir 10),
and He said,
أَأَمِنْتُمْ مَنْ فِي السَّمَاءِ
Do you feel secure from the One who is above the heaven
(Surah al Mulk 16).
He said: If He were in every place, then He would be in the belly of a human being, in his mouth, and in filthy places. It would then follow that He increases with the increase of places when places are created that did not previously exist.
It would also be valid to direct desire towards Him from the direction of the earth, and behind us, and to our right and left. The Muslims have unanimously agreed against this, and upon declaring the one who says it to be in error.
Then he said: The attributes of His essence with which He has never ceased and will never cease to be described are life, knowledge, power, hearing, sight, speech, will, face, the two hands, the two eyes, anger, and pleasure.
He said the same meaning in his book al Tamhid.
He also said in his book al Dhabb ʿan Abi al Hasan al Ashʿari: Likewise is our position regarding everything authentically narrated from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ concerning the attributes of Allah, affirming the two hands, the face, and the two eyes.
We say that He will come on the Day of Resurrection in shades of clouds, and that He descends to the lowest heaven, as reported in the hadith, and that He is established over His Throne.
Then he said: We have clarified the religion of the imams and the people of the Sunnah, that these attributes are accepted as they have come, without asking how, without defining, without likening, and without forming images, as has been reported from al Zuhri and from Malik regarding istiwa. Whoever goes beyond this has transgressed, innovated, and gone astray.
Al Dhahabi says: This is the very breath of this imam himself. Where is anyone like him in depth, intelligence, and insight into religions and sects?
The universe has become filled with people who do not know the Salaf and recognise nothing except negation, denying the attributes and rejecting them. They are deaf, mute, blind, and foreign. They call to reason while not adhering to transmitted revelation. To Allah we belong and to Him we return.
Qadi Abu Bakr died in the year 403 AH, while in his seventies. He narrated from al Qatiʿi and Ibn Masi, and his works spread far and wide.
Kitab al Uluw lil Ali al Ghaffar, al Dhahabi p 237–239
Shaykh Shihab ad Din Mahmoud ibn Abd Allah al Alusi (d. 1270AH), in his praise of Shaykh Abu al Hasan al Ashari says
“Among them is Imam Abu al Hasan al Ashari.
The final part of his life was upon that noble madhhab, indeed upon what the Salaf were upon in all matters of belief.
He says in his book al Ibanah, which was his last work after a long discussion: ‘What we say and what we hold as our religion is to hold fast to the Book of Allah, exalted is He, the Sunnah of His Prophet ﷺ and what has been narrated from the companions, the followers and the imams of hadith. By that we cling. We say as Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allah brighten his face, said. Whoever opposes his words we oppose him.’
This clearly shows that his creed was the creed of the Salaf. How should it not be so, when Imam Ahmad is a leader in that. For this reason he mentioned him in particular from among the imams of hadith. From this it is known that what the Ashariyyah are upon is not what their imam ended his life upon, which was following the Salaf. If only they had returned as he returned and followed what he followed.” (Gharaib al Ightirab, al Alusi p385–386)
There is some exaggeration in these words, as Abu Hasan Al Ashari did still have some issues in Al Ibanah An Usool Al Diyanah. The more correct path is to say that Shaykh Abu al Hasan al Ashari is closer to the Sunnah and the Salaf, especially in the chapter of the attributes of Allah, glory be to Him.
The statement of al Alusi however is great when he says: “If only they, meaning the Ashariyyah, had returned as he returned and followed what he followed.”
