The View of Ahl al Hadith and Their Evidences

Ahl al Hadith held that tasalsul is permissible in the past, just as it is permissible in the future. They used as evidence the Book, the statements of the Salaf, and reason.

Firstly: The Book

They used as evidence His saying:

فعال لما يريد

“He does what He wills.” (al Buruj 16)

The verse indicates several matters.

First: It indicates that He acts by His will and choice.

Second: It indicates that He has always been like that, because He mentioned it in the context of praise and extolling Himself, and that it is from His perfection. It is not permissible that He lacked this perfection at any time. He also said:

أفمن يخلق كمن لا يخلق أفلا تذكرون

“Is the One who creates like the one who does not create? Will you not remember?” (al Nahl 17)

Since this is from the descriptions of His perfection and the qualities of His majesty, it is not something that occurred after not being.

Third: If He wills a thing, He does it. “Ma” is a general relative pronoun, meaning that He does every thing He wills to do. This is in His will connected to His own act. As for His will connected to the act of the servant, that has another matter. If He wills the act of the servant, but He does not will from Himself to help him in it and make him a doer, the act does not occur.

If He wills it such that He wills from Himself to make him a doer, the act occurs. This is the subtle point that was hidden from the Qadariyyah and the Jabriyyah, and they stumbled in the issue of qadr (decree), because they overlooked it. There is a difference between His will that the servant act, and His will to make him a doer.

Fourth: His act and His will are connected. Whatever He willed to do, He did, and whatever He did, He willed it. This is unlike the created being, for he may will what he does not do, and he may do what he does not will. There is no “doer of what he wills” except Allah alone.

Fifth: It affirms multiple wills according to acts, and that every act has a will specific to it. This is what is understood by sound natural sense. His affair, exalted is He, is that He wills continually and does what He wills.

Sixth: Everything that is sound for His will to relate to, His doing it is permissible. So if He wills to descend every night to the lowest heaven, and to come on the Day of Resurrection for judgement, and to let His servants see Him, and to manifest Himself to them as He wills, and to speak to them, and to laugh at them, and other than that from what He wills, His doing it is not impossible for Him. He is the doer of what He wills. The soundness of that depends on the truthful one informing of it. If he informs, then belief becomes necessary. Likewise, He erases what He wills and affirms what He wills. Every day He is upon a matter, exalted is He.

The claim that newly occurring matters have a first beginning requires disabling before that, and that Allah, exalted is He, has always been not acting, then became acting.

Secondly: The Statements of the Salaf

It has been reported from the Salaf what indicates the Lord’s continuing activeness. (Al Kawthari responded in the margin of al Sayf al Saqil p. 80 to all of that by denying some of it and interpreting the rest.)

The Statement of Ibn ʿAbbas رضي الله عنه (d. 68AH)

Al Bukhari (d. 256AH) narrated in his Sahih from Saʿid ibn Jubayr (d. 95AH), from Ibn ʿAbbas (d. 68AH), that a man asked him about His saying:

وكان الله غفوراً رحيماً
“And Allah is Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (al Nisa 96)

وكان الله عزيزاً حكيماً
“And Allah is Mighty, Wise.” (al Nisa 56)

وكان الله سميعاً بصيراً
“And Allah is Hearing, Seeing.” (al Nisa 58)

So it was as if it had been, then passed. Ibn ʿAbbas said about His saying:

وكان الله غفوراً رحيماً

“And Allah is forgiving, most merciful.” (al Nisa 96)

“He named Himself with that, and that is His statement, meaning: He has never ceased to be like that.” (Allah has never ceased to be generous, and Qadi ʿAbd al Jabbar denied that in al Muhit p. 74.) (Sahih al Bukhari 4537)

The wording of Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al Bushanji (d. 291AH), from the shaykh of al Bukhari, which al Barqani (d. 425AH) narrated in his Sahih, is: “Indeed Allah named Himself with that, and no one other than Him assigned it to Him. So His statement, ‘and Allah was’, means: He has never ceased to be like that.” This is how al Bayhaqi (d. 458AH) narrated it from al Barqani.

Al Humaydi (d. 219AH) mentioned its wording: “Indeed Allah made Himself so, and named Himself so, and made Himself so, and no one other than Him assigned it to Him. ‘And Allah was’, meaning: He has never ceased to be like that.”

The wording of Yaʿqub ibn Sufyan (d. 277AH), from Yusuf ibn ʿAdi (d. 232AH), a shaykh of al Bukhari, is: “Indeed Allah named Himself with that, and no one other than Him made it so. ‘And Allah was’, meaning: He has never ceased to be like that.”

So Ibn ʿAbbas informed that the meaning of the Qur’an is that Allah named Himself with these names, and no one other than Him assigned that to Him. His saying “and Allah was” means: “I have never ceased to be like that.”

It is known that what Ibn ʿAbbas said is what the verses indicate. In this there is evidence for the corruption of the statement of the Jahmiyyah (Jahmites) in several ways.

First: If He is mighty, wise, and He has never ceased to be mighty, wise, and wisdom includes His speech and His will, just as mercy includes His will, then this indicates that He has never ceased to be speaking and willing. His saying “forgiving” is stronger, because if He has never ceased to be forgiving, then it is more fitting that He has never ceased to be speaking. With the Jahmiyyah, rather, He was not speaking, nor merciful, nor forgiving, because, with them, this is only by creating matters separate from Him, and only then would He be like that.

Second: Ibn ʿAbbas’s statement, “Indeed Allah named Himself with that”, requires that He is the One who named Himself with these names, not that a created being is the one who named Him with them. Whoever says they are created in a body must then say that body is the one who named Him with them.

Third: His statement, “and no one other than Him assigned it to Him”, and in the other wording, “and no one other than Him made it so.” This becomes clear by “made it so” in the narration, meaning that He is the One who affirmed that for Himself, not other than Him. Whoever makes it created must then say that other than Him is the one who made Him like that and assigned that to Him.

Fourth: Ibn ʿAbbas mentioned this while explaining the meaning of His saying “and Allah is forgiving, most merciful”, “mighty, wise”, “hearing, seeing”, in order to show the wisdom of using the word “was” in this type of wording. So he informed that He is the One who named Himself with that and no one other than Him assigned that to Him.

The suitability of this answer is that if other than Him assigned that to Him, then that would be created by the creation of that other, so it would not be said about Him that He “was” like that. But if He is the One who named Himself with it, then it fits to be said that He was like that and remains like that, because He has never ceased to be, exalted is He. This distinction is only sound if it is not created, so that it is sound to say: since He is the One who named Himself with that, He has never ceased to be like that. End quote from al Tasʿiniyyah by Shaykh al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (2/578).

Imam Jaʿfar al Sadiq رحمه الله (d. 148AH)

Al Thaʿlabi (d. 427AH) narrated in his Tafsir, with his chain, from Jaʿfar ibn Muhammad al Sadiq (d. 148AH), that he was asked about His saying:

أفحسبتم إنما خلقنا كم عبثاً

“Did you think that We only created you for nothing?” (al Muʾminun 115)

He was asked: Why did Allah create creation? He said: “Because Allah was doing good with what never ceased, in what never ceased, to what never ceased. So Allah wanted to pour His goodness upon His creation. He was free of need of them. He did not create them to gain a benefit, nor to repel a harm. Rather, He created them and did good to them, and He sent messengers to them so they would separate truth from falsehood. Whoever does good, He rewards him with Paradise, and whoever disobeys, He rewards him with the Fire.” End quote from the Fatawa of Shaykh al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah

Imam al Darimi رحمه الله (d. 280AH)

He said that action is inseparable from life. Every living being must be acting. Whoever is not acting is not living. Life and action are connected, and neither of them separates from the other in existence. See Sharh Harras (d. 1395AH) on al Nuniyyah (1/170).

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal رحمه الله (d. 241AH)

He said in his refutation of the Jahmiyyah, p. 34:

“We said to the Jahmiyyah: Who is the One who will say on the Day of Resurrection:

يا عيسى ابن مريم أأنت قلت للناس اتخذوني وأمي إلهين من دون الله

“O Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to the people: Take me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?” (al Maʾidah 116)

Is Allah not the One who says it?” They said: “So Allah becomes a thing, and it speaks on behalf of Allah, just as He becomes a thing, and it spoke to Moses.” We said: “So who is the One who says:

فلنسألن الذين أرسل إليهم ولنسألن المرسلين ۝ فلنقصن عليهم بعلم

“Then We will surely question those to whom it was sent, and We will surely question the messengers. Then We will surely relate to them with knowledge.” (al Aʿraf 6–7)

Is Allah not the One who questions?” They said: “All of that is only that He becomes a thing, and it speaks on behalf of Allah.” We said: “You have made a tremendous lie against Allah when you claim that He does not speak. You have likened Him to idols that are worshipped besides Allah, because idols do not speak, do not move, and do not shift from place to place.” When the proof became clear against him, he said: “Allah speaks, but His speech is created.” We said: “The children of Adam, their speech is created too. So you have likened Allah to His creation when you claim His speech is created.

In your madhhab, there was a time when He did not speak until He created speaking. Likewise, the children of Adam were, and they did not speak until Allah created speech for them. So you combined disbelief and resemblance. Allah is far above this description. Rather, we say: Allah has never ceased to be speaking whenever He wills. Do not say: He was, and He did not speak, until He created speech. We do not say: He was, and He had no power, until He created power for Himself. We do not say: He was, and He had no greatness, until He created greatness for Himself.

The Jahmiyyah said to us, when we described Allah with these attributes: If you claim Allah and His light, Allah and His power, Allah and His greatness, then you have said the statement of the Christians when they claimed that Allah has never ceased, and His light has never ceased, and His power has never ceased. We said: We do not say: Allah has never ceased and His power has never ceased, and His light has never ceased. Rather, we say: He has never ceased with His power and His light, not: when did He have power, and not: how did He have power.

They said: You will never be people of tawhid until you say: Allah was and there was nothing. We said: We say: Allah was and there was nothing. But when we say: Allah has never ceased with all His attributes, are we not only describing one God with all His attributes? We gave them an example.

We said: Tell us about this palm tree. Does it not have a trunk, fibre, fronds, leaflets, and heart, while its name is one name, and it is called a palm tree with all its attributes? Likewise Allah, and to Him belongs the highest example, with all His attributes, one God. We do not say that there was a time when He was without power, then He created power, and the one who has no power is helpless. We do not say there was a time when He did not know, then He created knowledge for Himself and so He knew, and the one who does not know is ignorant. Rather, we say: Allah has never ceased to be knowing and powerful, not: when, and not: how.”

Imam Ibn al Mubarak رحمه الله (d. 181AH)

He said: “Allah has never ceased to be speaking whenever He wills.” Shaykh al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728AH) quoted it in Minhaj al Sunnah (2/383).

Imam al Bukhari رحمه الله (d. 256AH)

He said in his book Khalq Afʿal al ʿIbad, p. 107:

Abu ʿAbd Allah said: “Nuʿaym ibn Hammad (d. 228AH) made clear that the speech of the Lord is not created, and that the Arabs do not distinguish the living from the dead except by action. Whoever has action is living, and whoever has no action is dead. He also made clear that the actions of the servants are created. So he was pressured until he passed on his way, and the people of knowledge grieved over what came upon him.

In the agreement of the Muslims there is proof that Nuʿaym, and whoever took his path, is not departing and not an innovator. Rather, innovation and leadership in ignorance is more fitting for others, since they give fatwas by differing opinions in what Allah did not permit.”

Thirdly: Reason

We mentioned earlier that tasalsul (sequencing) may be required, and that is in acts, and it may be permissible, and that is in things acted upon.

As for the evidences for the required sequencing from reason, they are: (al Qawaʿid al Kulliyyah by al Buraykan.)

First: The one described with action is more perfect than the one not described with it. If the Lord, exalted is He, were free of it, He would be free of a perfection that is required for Him, and this is impossible.

Second: Action is from what is inseparable from life. Every living one is acting. Allah is living, so He is acting. His life never separates from Him, ever and from eternity. So it is impossible that action occurs for Him after not being. So its continuation is required, ever and from eternity.

Third: The difference between the living and the dead is action. Allah is living, so it is necessary that He is acting. That He is free of action in one of two times is impossible, because He is living in both, so the continuation of His action is required, from eternity and ever.

Fourth: His saying:

فعال لما يريد

“He does what He wills.” (al Buruj 16)

“Faʿʿal” is the one who acts continually. If he were free of action in one of two times, he would not be “faʿʿal”. So the continuation of action is required, from eternity and ever.

Fifth: The eternity of action prevents its occurrence after not being, so it is continual in eternity and everlastingness.

Sixth: It is also said to them that Allah has never ceased to be established, willing, knowing, living. These four are attributes of His essence, and the doer does not need, in being a doer, other than these four.

These are what completes the act, because they are its pillars without which the act is not realised. If that is so, then why did His act, exalted is He, come later than the existence of the complete cause with all its pillars? If you say: the act came later because it was impossible in eternity, we say: you have lied. Rather, the act has never ceased to be possible, because if it were impossible in eternity, it would not accept existence afterwards, because the impossible does not turn into the possible.

As for the evidences for the permissible sequencing from reason, they are:

First: There is no impossibility for that in reason, because reason does not prevent that Allah creates a creation after a creation, and arranges the existence of the second upon the first, and so on.

Second: This exists in reality. The human and the animal, since his creation, his creation has been arranged upon the creation of his father and mother.

Third: It follows the continuation of the act of creating. If its continuation is required in eternity and everlastingness, then the continuation of what is acted upon is permissible, because it is newly occurring after not being.

Fourth: His saying:

أفعيينا بالخلق الأول بل هم في لبس من خلق جديد

“Were We unable in the first creation? Rather, they are in confusion about a new creation.” (Qaf 15)

He clarified that not being unable in eternity for creating is evidence of not being unable in everlastingness.

So the sequencing affirmed by the Salaf is of two types.

One: Required, and that is sequencing in acts.

Two: Permissible, and that is sequencing in things acted upon and conditions.

They express this as the continuation of Allah’s acts and His things acted upon.

By this presentation, the following matters become clear.

First: Continuation in Allah’s acts represents the second part of the belief of the Salaf in Allah’s acts, which stands upon two elements: affirming the acts themselves, and affirming the continuation of His activeness, exalted is He.

Second: Allah has a perfection in His acts and a perfection in His attributes.

Third: Affirming the continuation of Allah’s acts and His things acted upon.

Fourth: The invalidity of the claim of the one who forbids sequencing without distinction.

Fifth: Continuation in the past is like continuation in the future in its being required and affirmed in Allah’s acts.

Sixth: The sequencing that requires entities affecting entities is what is impossible, whether in doers, acts, or things acted upon. As for acts and things acted upon by the effect of the doer, that is not impossible. If it is in Allah’s acts, it is required. If it is in His things acted upon, it is permissible.

Seventh: Agreement of all groups on the impossibility of sequencing in effectors, doers, and the entities of things acted upon within one another, which indicates the invalidity of the claims of the materialists of the old and the communists of the new.

Eighth: Affirming an eternal creator and a newly occurring created thing is from necessities of reason.

Ninth: The impossibility of assuming a newly occurring thing without a maker, and a created thing without a creator.

Tenth: The contradiction of the materialists and the communists, because the end of their statements is that the created thing is the creator.

Eleventh: The invalidity of the statement of the philosophers, the Muʿtazilah, and the Ashʿariyyah that the act is the thing acted upon. Sequencing of Allah’s act is required, and sequencing of the thing acted upon is permissible, and the required does not become the permissible.

Twelfth: Clarifying the difference between Allah’s act and His thing acted upon in several ways. The act is eternal and the thing acted upon is newly occurring. Continuation of the act is required and continuation of the thing acted upon is permissible. The act is the attribute of the doer and the thing acted upon is its effect. The act affects the thing acted upon when it relates to it, and the thing acted upon is what the act relates to. The attribution of the act to the doer requires being described with it. The attribution of the thing acted upon to the doer requires the effect of His act in it and that it is created by the doer. So the first is the attribution of attributes, and the second is the attribution of created things.

Finally, it is said to the theologians who forbade the sequencing of newly occurring matters out of fear that created things would be alongside Allah, that we say there is sequencing of newly occurring matters, and this statement does not lead to created things being alongside the Creator at all. Whoever says that created things are eternal and alongside Allah is a disbeliever and a polytheist.

But Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728AH) says that Allah continues to be a doer. With us here there are three matters: the doer, and that is the Lord; Allah’s act, and it comes after Him; and the thing acted upon, and it comes after the act. So the doer is earlier, and the thing acted upon is after Him without doubt.

Based on this, it does not follow from saying that newly occurring matters are eternal or that they have no first beginning that they are with Allah or alongside Him. There is no problem in our statement. The problem is to say that the very same created thing continues in the past, meaning that the universe has never ceased to exist. This is disbelief because it requires that it has no creator, even though it is newly occurring from non existence.

Then it is also said to the theologians: Was Allah in eternity able to create or not?

If they say He was not able to create, then He created, that is disabling the Lord, exalted is He, from action.

If they say the act was possible but it came later, we say: is that delay required or permissible? If it is required, then who required it? If it is permissible, then this is the statement of newly occurring matters with no first beginning, because the Lord is eternal, and as long as He is a creator, He is able to create. This is the statement of newly occurring matters with no first beginning, and it is what we say.

Fourthly: The Fitrah

As for the fitrah (innate natural sense), we hear people, in their supplication, their seeking rescue, and their asking Allah for needs, repeatedly saying phrases like: “O One whose doing good has always been”, “O One whose kindness and authority has always been”, “O One whose generosity and favour continues”, and other than that. This is understood to mean that they are naturally formed upon believing this, as an innate natural sense, without one advising another with it or teaching it, and without one objecting to another. End quote from Sharh Harras (d. 1395AH) on al Nuniyyah (1/170).

Qidam al ʿālam wa tasalsul al ḥawādith bayna Shaykh al Islām Ibn Taymiyyah by Kamila Al Kuwari pg 146–158