Summary

Tashbih And Its Real Meaning

Tashbih (likening Allah to creation) is not the same as affirming Allah’s attributes. True tashbih is to describe Allah with the special qualities of created beings. Ahl al Sunnah affirm what Allah affirmed for Himself, while denying any likeness between Allah and creation. This is the balanced Athari way in al asma wa al sifat (Allah’s names and attributes): affirmation without taʿtil (negation), takyif (asking how), or tamthil (making Allah like creation).

The Athari Difference Between Affirmation And Likening

The Salaf clearly separated correct affirmation from false likening. Isḥaq ibn Rahawayh (d. 238AH) said tashbih occurs when someone says, “A hand like a hand,” or “Hearing like hearing.” As for affirming hand, hearing, and sight as Allah mentioned them, without asking how and without likening them to creation, this is not tashbih. al Tirmidhi, hadith 662. Imam Ahmad (d. 241AH) said that whoever says, “A sight like my sight, a hand like my hand, and a foot like my foot,” has likened Allah to creation. (Ibtal al Taʾwilat, Abu Yaʿla 1/43)

Side Note: This topic is key to discuss with interlocuters of our creed, since many of the opposers of the Athari creed, cannot define tashbih from the early imams, and can only rely upon a definition from their own scholars. I would advise the Atharis to challenge them on what they mean by tashbih, since they love to spew false accusations of us being mushabbiha, when this is far from reality, and it is actually them (like the Jahmiyyah) who have become the mushabbiha, by likening Allah to an idol, since they believe Allah does not see, hear, create or speak, as is reported by Imam Al Bukhari in the beginning of his book Khalq Afaal Al Ibaad. The reality of their creed is like that of the Jahmiyyah, but is is less explicit and rather implied through their beliefs of denying temporality for Allah. Those who deny temporality for Allah cannot even say that Allah will create in the future or he created in the past, or heard or saw anything because this is a type of change, and for them this is totally impermissible. 

The Mistake Of The Mushabbihah

The Mushabbihah affirmed Allah’s attributes, but they went wrong by adding the special qualities of creation to Allah. Their mistake was not merely saying that Allah has attributes. Their mistake was claiming, openly or by implication, that Allah’s attributes resemble the attributes of created beings. Ibn Taymiyyah explained that the forbidden tashbih is making the Creator similar to creation in the special qualities of creation, or making creation equal to Allah in something specific to Him. (al Safadiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah 1/100)

The False Accusation Used Against Atharis

The Muʿattilah (negators of Allah’s attributes) changed the meaning of tashbih. For them, anyone who affirmed real attributes for Allah became a Mushabbih. Because of this, they labelled the imams of the Salaf, and even other groups that affirmed some attributes, as Mushabbihah. Al Zamakhshari (d. 538AH) treated the affirmation of seeing Allah in the Hereafter, even with the wording “without asking how,” as tashbih. (al Kashshaf 2/147)

How Some Later Groups Expanded The Charge

The Ashʿaris and Maturidis also widened the label of tashbih, especially against those who affirmed the khabariyyah attributes (reported attributes), such as hand, face, and eye, and the ikhtiyariyyah attributes (attributes connected to Allah’s will and action). Ibn Jahbal attacked Ibn Khuzaymah’s Kitab al Tawhid and called it a book of tashbih, although its purpose was to affirm Allah’s attributes according to the Athari approach. (Radd Ibn Jahbal ʿala al Fatwa al Hamawiyyah, p. 112)

The Main Forms Of Real Tashbih

Real tashbih appeared in two main ways. The first was open tashbih, found among some early extreme Rafidah, who said statements such as, “Allah’s hand is like our hands,” and “Allah’s hearing is like our hearing.”

The second was implied tashbih, found among the Karramiyyah, who denied open likening but entered into takyif (asking how), especially concerning istiwa (Allah’s rising over the Throne). Some of their statements described how Allah is over the Throne, which entered into the nature of the attribute and therefore led to tashbih.

The Root Error Behind Their View

The root error of the Mushabbihah was qiyas al ghaʾib ʿala al shahid (judging the unseen by the seen). They assumed that because Allah used words known to creation, the reality of the attributes must be like what is known in creation. This is false. Sharing a name or a general meaning does not require sharing the same reality. Created beings themselves may share a name while being very different, so the Creator and creation are even more different.

The Athari Principle

The correct Athari principle is to affirm the attributes as they came in the Qur’an and Sunnah, while denying likeness, equality, and created qualities from Allah. The same revelation that affirms Allah’s hearing and seeing also says, “There is nothing like Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (al Shura: 11). Ahl al Sunnah do not reject the attributes, and do not liken them to creation. They affirm without taʿtil, and they deny likeness without rejecting what Allah affirmed.

Sultan Al Umayri’s Words Translated

The Place Of Tashbih In Early Aqidah

Tashbih (likening Allah to creation) was one of the earliest mistaken views in the subject of al asma wa al sifat (Allah’s names and attributes).

Taʿtil (negating Allah’s attributes) appeared first, at the beginning of the second century.

Tashbih came after it, also in the early second century, although slightly later.

The view of tashbih was never as widespread as taʿtil. It was weaker in proof and less organised. Because of this, there was hardly ever a clear and stable group that fully represented it, especially in later times. Even when some forms of tashbih existed in earlier centuries, they were not built upon a strong and consistent method.

A distinction is made between two meanings. The first is likening the creation to the Creator. This appeared earlier, near the end of the time of the Sahabah, through extreme groups connected to the Sabaʾiyyah, who went beyond the limit concerning ʿAli ibn Abi Talib. The second is likening the Creator to creation. This is the meaning intended in the subject of Allah’s names and attributes, and it appeared later, in the second Hijri century.

The Correct Meaning Of Tashbih

Tashbih is not merely affirming the attributes of Allah. The sound definition is that tashbih means describing Allah with something from the special qualities of created beings. This definition is important because it separates false tashbih from the correct affirmation of Allah’s attributes.

There is a shared general meaning between names and attributes, and this is necessary in language, existence, and reason. For example, Allah is described as hearing, and creation may also be described as hearing. The shared general wording does not mean that Allah’s hearing is like the hearing of creation. The forbidden tashbih is affirming created qualities for Allah, not affirming what Allah affirmed for Himself in the manner that befits Him.

The Mushabbihah (those who liken Allah to creation) are therefore the theological direction that affirms attributes for Allah in a way that makes them resemble the special qualities of created beings. They agree with Ahl al Sunnah wa al Jamaʿah in the basic act of affirming the attributes, but they oppose them by adding the special qualities of creation to Allah. This gives tashbih two main elements: affirming the attributes, and then wrongly affirming created qualities for Allah.

The attached aqidah primer gives the same general rule for Tawhid al Asma wa al Sifat (singling Allah out in His names and attributes): affirming what Allah affirmed for Himself and what His Messenger ﷺ affirmed for Him, in a way that befits Allah, without taḥrif (distortion), taʿtil (negation), takyif (asking how), or tamthil (making Allah like creation).

How The Salaf Distinguished Affirmation From Likening

The imams of the Salaf made a clear difference between affirming the attributes and likening Allah to creation. Isḥaq ibn Rahawayh (d. 238AH) said that tashbih occurs when someone says, “A hand like a hand,” or, “A hand similar to a hand,” or, “Hearing like hearing,” or, “Hearing similar to hearing.” As for saying what Allah said, such as hand, hearing, and sight, without saying how and without saying that it is like the hearing of creation, then this is not tashbih. (al Tirmidhi, hadith 662)

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241AH) was asked about the Mushabbihah. He said that whoever says, “A sight like my sight, a hand like my hand, and a foot like my foot,” has likened Allah to creation. (Ibtal al Taʾwilat, Abu Yaʿla 1/43)

Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728AH) explained the same meaning by saying that the forbidden tashbih is when the Creator is made similar to creation in something from the special qualities of creation, or when creation is made equal to Him in something from the special qualities of the Creator. (al Safadiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah 1/100)

Why The Word Tashbih Became Ambiguous

Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728AH) often said that the word tashbih became an unclear term because different groups used it in different ways. This does not mean that the word was unclear in its original meaning or in the early usage of the imams of the Salaf. Rather, later groups gave it meanings that were not the same as the meaning used by Ahl al Sunnah.

The imams of the Salaf did not make a strict difference between tashbih and tamthil when rejecting false likening. Al Shafiʿi (d. 204AH) affirmed Allah’s attributes and rejected tashbih, using the verse, “There is nothing like Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (al Shura: 11). (Ithbat Sifat al ʿUluw, Ibn Qudamah, p. 181). Isḥaq ibn Rahawayh (d. 238AH) also used this verse to reject tashbih. This shows that early imams used the rejection of tamthil to reject tashbih, and the rejection of tashbih to reject tamthil.

The reason the word became unclear is that the Jahmiyyah used it against everyone who affirmed Allah’s attributes. Later, some people from the side of affirmation, including some extreme narrators and some Rafidah, went beyond the proper limit and fell into the tamthil rejected by the Qur’an and Sunnah. The later imams of the Sunnah then criticised this false tashbih, but their meaning was very different from the meaning intended by the Jahmiyyah. (Bayan Talbis al Jahmiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah 6/498)

How Opposing Groups Expanded The Label

The Muʿattilah (negators of Allah’s attributes) made tashbih mean the affirmation of any attribute that they denied. Since they rejected the reality of attributes subsisting in Allah’s essence, anyone who affirmed real attributes became, in their view, a Mushabbih. This meant that they labelled the imams of the Salaf, the Ashʿaris, the Maturidis, and the Kullabis as Mushabbihah because all of them affirmed at least some attributes.

Al Zamakhshari (d. 538AH) rejected the believers seeing Allah in the Hereafter and mocked those who affirmed it while saying, “without asking how.” He claimed that this wording was only a cover for tashbih. (al Kashshaf 2/147). The point is that, for the Muʿtazilah, even saying “without asking how” did not remove the accusation of tashbih, because the root of tashbih for them was affirming attributes at all.

The Ashʿaris and Maturidis also widened the label of tashbih, although not as far as the Muʿattilah. They often applied it to those who affirmed the khabariyyah attributes (reported attributes), such as hand, face, and eye, and the ikhtiyariyyah attributes (attributes connected to Allah’s will and action). Ibn Jahbal criticised Ibn Khuzaymah’s book Kitab al Tawhid and called it a book of tashbih, even though it was written to affirm Allah’s attributes. (Radd Ibn Jahbal ʿala al Fatwa al Hamawiyyah, p. 112)

The Main Types Of Mushabbihah

Much of the writing of the Mushabbihah has not reached us, whether from extreme Shiʿi groups or the Karramiyyah. Because of this, much of what is known about them comes through the reports of others, including those who lived near their time and the books of maqalat (statements of sects). Their full structure, principles, and detailed proofs are therefore not completely known.

The Mushabbihah return to two main types. The first type openly affirmed created qualities for Allah. They said things such as, “Allah’s hand is like our hands,” and, “Allah’s hearing is like our hearing.” This appeared among early extreme Rafidah. Among the earliest names connected to this view was Bayan ibn Samʿan, followed by others such as Hisham ibn al Hakam, Hisham ibn Salim al Jawaliqi, and Yunus ibn ʿAbd al Rahman al Qummi.

The second type did not use open tashbih, but entered into details that led to it. This was the case with the Karramiyyah, the followers of Muhammad ibn Karram (d. 255AH). They denied being Mushabbihah, but some of their statements on istiwa (Allah’s rising over the Throne) entered into takyif (asking how). Some said Allah is over the Throne without exceeding it or falling short of it. Others said Allah is over part of the Throne. These statements enter into the nature of the attribute, and this is a form of tashbih by implication.

Some ignorant extremists among the narrators also fell into blameworthy tashbih, as Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728AH) mentioned. He also noted that some later Hanbalis had mistakes in this area, usually through excessive affirmation concerning Allah and excessive denunciation of opponents, sometimes through takfir. (Bayan Talbis al Jahmiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah 6/498. Majmuʿ al Fatawa, Ibn Taymiyyah 20/186)

The attribution of tashbih to Muqatil ibn Sulayman remains a historical matter needing careful study. Some later researchers argued that this accusation should not be affirmed against him, based on a number of evidences and signs. (Maqalat al Tashbih wa Mawqif Ahl al Sunnah Minha, Jabir Idris 1/321–340)

The Root Error Behind Tashbih

The foundation of the Mushabbihah was qiyas al ghaʾib ʿala al shahid (judging the unseen by the seen).

They reasoned that Allah described Himself with words known to human beings. Since those words are known through created examples, they assumed that Allah’s attributes must be affirmed in the same way those attributes are known in creation.

Their mistake was thinking that sharing a name or a general meaning means sharing the same special reality. They believed that if Allah and creation are both described with hearing, sight, hand, or face, then the special qualities must also be the same. This is false. Sharing the general name does not mean sharing the specific reality.

The simple example given is that an elephant has a hand, and a mosquito has a hand. Nobody says that the hand of the elephant is like the hand of the mosquito merely because both share the name hand. If created beings differ so greatly while sharing a general name, then the difference between the Creator and creation is even greater.

Why Their Reasoning Fails

The first answer is that sharing names and general meanings does not require sharing special realities. Every existing thing has qualities specific to it. If this is true among created beings, then it is even more necessary between Allah and creation.

The second answer is that the rule concerning attributes follows the rule concerning the essence. If Allah’s essence is not like the essences of created beings, then His attributes are not like the attributes of created beings. If someone claimed that Allah’s essence is like the essence of creation, he would be asked for proof, because nobody has perceived Allah’s essence or anything equal to Him.

The third answer is that if two things are truly equal, then what is necessary or possible for one would be necessary or possible for the other. If creation were like Allah, then creation would have to possess what belongs to Allah, such as eternal life without death and knowledge not preceded by ignorance. If Allah were like creation, then the ending and weakness of creation would be necessary for Allah. Both results are impossible.

The fourth answer is that the same revelation that affirmed Allah’s attributes also denied that anything is like Him. Therefore, accepting the attributes requires accepting the negation of likeness. The verse brings both together: “There is nothing like Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (al Shura: 11).

Their Use Of The Texts Of The Attributes

Some ulama reported that the Mushabbihah used the verses of the attributes, such as Allah’s two hands, His istiwa over the Throne, and His eye, as proof for their view. The problem is not in the verses. The problem is in their mistaken reading of them.

Their argument was that Allah addressed people in language they understand, and He affirmed attributes that they also know in themselves. Therefore, according to them, those attributes should be affirmed for Allah in the same manner seen in creation. This is a wrong method.

There are two main answers. First, this understanding opposes the way of the Sahabah, the Tabiʿin, and the imams after them. Their understanding of the Qur’an and Sunnah is stronger and more complete. Second, the Mushabbihah selected the texts of affirmation while neglecting the texts that reject likeness, such as, “There is nothing like Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (al Shura: 11), “So do not set up rivals to Allah while having knowledge.” (al Baqarah: 22), and “And there was none equal to Him.” (al Ikhlas: 4).

Ahl al Sunnah wa al Jamaʿah combine both categories of texts. They affirm what Allah affirmed for Himself, and they reject tashbih and tamthil. Their statement is: Allah’s attributes are affirmed without likening them to creation.

Reports Where Gesture Is Mentioned

Several hadiths mention the Prophet ﷺ using a gesture while affirming an attribute of Allah. Abu Hurayrah narrated that the Prophet ﷺ recited the verse, “Indeed, Allah commands that trusts be returned to their owners,” until the words, “Indeed, Allah is Hearing and Seeing,” and Abu Hurayrah said that the Prophet ﷺ placed his thumb on his ear and the finger next to it on his eye. Abu Dawud, hadith 4728, graded authentic by al Albani.

Ibn ʿUmar narrated that the Prophet ﷺ said, “Allah is not hidden from you. Allah is not one eyed,” and he gestured with his hand toward his eye. (al Bukhari, hadith 3057, 3337, 3439, 6175, 7127, 7407. Ibn ʿUmar also narrated the hadith of Allah taking the heavens and the earth in His hand, saying, “I am the King,” while the Prophet ﷺ moved his fingers. al Bukhari, hadith 7412. Muslim, hadith 2788. Anas ibn Malik narrated that the Prophet ﷺ said, “The hearts are between two fingers from the fingers of the Most Merciful,” and he gestured with two fingers. al Tirmidhi, hadith 2140. Ibn Majah, hadith 3834. Ahmad, hadith 12128, graded authentic by al Albani)

These reports do not prove tashbih. They must be understood with the rest of the Qur’an and Sunnah. The purpose of the gesture is to confirm the reality of the attribute, not to explain its nature or liken it to creation. The Prophet ﷺ affirmed the attribute in reality, without giving its kayfiyyah (how it is).

A report from Imam Malik (d. 179AH) appears to prohibit gesturing when speaking about Allah’s attributes. It says that if someone mentioned Allah’s hand or hearing and sight, then gestured to his own body, that part should be cut off because he had likened Allah to himself. (al Tamhid, Ibn ʿAbd al Barr 7/145). This report cannot be used as a decisive proof for prohibition for three reasons. Its chain to Malik is disconnected. It appears to oppose authentic hadiths. A number of imams after him used gestures when narrating these reports.

ʿAbdullah ibn Ahmad narrated that his father, Imam Ahmad (d. 241AH), showed how Yahya gestured with his fingers when narrating the hadith of Allah placing created things upon His fingers. (al Sunnah, ʿAbdullah ibn Ahmad 1/264) Ibn Mandah (d. 395AH) also mentioned that Sufyan al Thawri (d. 161AH) moved his index and middle fingers when narrating the hadith of the hearts being between the fingers of the Most Merciful. (al Radd ʿala al Jahmiyyah, Ibn Mandah, p. 47)

Therefore, if the narration from Malik were authentic, the most that could be said is that the imams differed over gesturing when narrating the attributes. It would not be a foundation of aqidah, but a subsidiary matter connected to how the reports are narrated.

The Report About The Sound Heard By The Angels

Another report that may seem unclear is the hadith of Abu Hurayrah in which the Prophet ﷺ said that when Allah decrees a matter in the heaven, the angels strike their wings in submission to His statement, “as if it were a chain over smooth stone.” (al Bukhari, hadith 4701, 4800, 7481)

Ibn ʿAqil al Hanbali (d. 513AH) thought the apparent meaning involved likening Allah’s voice to the sound of a chain over stone, as Ibn Qudamah (d. 620AH) quoted from him. This understanding is not correct. The first answer is that the likeness is not between Allah’s voice and a chain. Rather, it is between the angels’ hearing of the voice and the hearing of a chain moving over stone. The likeness is in the act of hearing, not in the thing heard. (Tahrim al Nazar fi Kutub al Kalam, Ibn Qudamah, p. 64)

Ibn Qudamah (d. 620AH) compared this to the hadith, “You will see your Lord as you see this moon.”

This does not liken Allah to the moon.

It likens the clarity of seeing to the clarity of seeing the moon. (al Bukhari, hadith 554, 573, 4851, 744, 7435, 7436. Muslim, hadith 633)

A second answer is that the comparison explains the fear and awe that overtakes the angels when they hear Allah’s speech. It is not describing the nature of Allah’s voice. This was the answer chosen by Ibn ʿUthaymin.

The Hadith Of Adam عليه السلام Being Created Upon His Image

The hadith, “Allah created Adam upon His image,” is another report that requires careful explanation. (al Bukhari, hadith 5873. Muslim, hadith 2841)

Another wording says, “If one of you fights, let him avoid the face, for Allah created Adam upon His image.” (Muslim, hadith 2612)

The ulama differed over the pronoun in this hadith. Some said it returns to other than Allah, so the hadith would not mean that Adam عليه السلام was created upon the image connected to Allah. Many others said the pronoun returns to Allah.

Ibn Taymiyyah said that there was no disagreement among the Salaf of the first three generations that the pronoun returns to Allah, and that the later alternative appeared when the Jahmiyyah spread in the third century. (Bayan Talbis al Jahmiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah 6/373, 6/376)

The sound way is to separate two matters. The first is affirming the attribute of image for Allah in the manner that befits Him. This is not stranger than affirming hand, fingers, eye, face, knowledge, and power. Ibn Qutaybah (d. 276AH) said that image is not more surprising than hands, fingers, and eye. The only reason people were more familiar with the other attributes is that they came in the Qur’an, while this came in the Sunnah.

The correct way is to believe in all of it without speaking about how or setting a limit. (Taʾwil Mukhtalif al Hadith, Ibn Qutaybah, p. 322)

The second matter is the meaning of Adam عليه السلام being created upon Allah’s image. This does not give the Mushabbihah any proof. It does not mean that Allah’s face is from the same reality as the human face, nor that Allah shares the special qualities of human beings. It only proves a special shared meaning known through revelation, not through reason alone. Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728AH) said that the wording “created Adam upon His image” proves something more specific than the general shared meaning known by reason between Allah and created existence. This meaning is known through revelation. (Bayan Talbis al Jahmiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah 6/516)

The relationship here is similar to the difference between ʿuluww (Allah’s highness) and istiwa (Allah’s rising over the Throne). Allah’s highness is known by reason and revelation, while istiwa is known through revelation. Likewise, the attribute of image is affirmed, and the specific meaning of Adam عليه السلام being upon Allah’s image is a matter known through revelation. (Bayan Talbis al Jahmiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah 6/517–518)

The texts also show that resemblance in one respect does not mean complete equality. The first group to enter Paradise will have faces like the moon on the night when it is full. This does not mean their faces become the same reality as the moon. It only means they share a quality of beauty and brightness. Muslim, hadith 489. Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728AH) therefore said that the hadith, “created Adam upon His image,” requires only a type of resemblance, not equality in reality or measure. (Bayan Talbis al Jahmiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah 6/532)

Ibn al Qayyim (d. 751AH) explained that the hadith was not intended to liken the Lord to creation. Rather, it affirms the face, hearing, sight, and speech in reality. Mukhtasar al Sawaʿiq al Mursalah, al Musili 1/539. Another possible explanation is that the resemblance concerns beauty and honour, while completely rejecting equality in reality and measure. This makes the hadith a proof for the honour of the human face and its high rank among the children of Adam. (Dirasah Mutawwal Hadith al Surah, Ahadith al Aqidah al Mutawahham Ishkaluha, Sulayman al Dubaykhi, p. 113–174)

Al ʿUqūd al Dhahabiyyah by Sulṭān al ʿUmayrī 1/232–250