The Attributes of Allah, Literalism & Figurative Interpretation

 

1) In Fiqh ul Akbar it states "It cannot be said that His hand represents His power or His bestowal of bounty, because such an interpretation would require a negation of an attribute. This is the path taken by the Qadarites and the Mu'tazilites". I know that most of the Salaf preferred not to interpret the Attributes, but didn't the Imam know the tawil of Ibn Abbas concerning the Shin, or of Jafar Sadiq's tawil of the Wajh. What exactly is the truth behind this statement?

Wa `alaykum as-Salam,

A. The text of the Fiqh al-Akbar states: "It cannot be said that His hand IS His power etc."

The explanation is given by Mulla `Ali al-Qari in his Sharh, a little further down, after the phrase bila kayf (without asking how), quoting Fakhr al-Islam [al-Pazdawi in his Usul]:

"The affirmation of the Hand and Face are true and right in our [Maturidi] School but this is known as a matter of principle (ma`lum bi-aslihi) and ambiguous in its description (mutashabih bi-wasfihi). It is not permissible to nullify the principle because of incapacity to attain a modal description (dark al-wasf bil-kayf)."

Then al-Qari cites Imam al-Sarakhsi to the same effect. So the Maturidi position is indeed to preclude figurative interpretation, whether such is done in categorical terms that nullify the principle [such as the Mu`tazila did] or in non-categorical terms as a possible explanation [such as Ash`aris do]. Al-Qari himself does the latter at times as one can ascertain from his comments on the Attributes in the Mirqat, Sharh al-Shama'il, and elsewhere.

Q.2) As I understand it, an attribute is uncreated. So therefore Allah Ta'ala did not create His Hand or His Eye, but some interpretations imply createdness of the attributes, e.g. Hasan al Basri's interpretation of Qadam as being those whom Allah has sent forth into the fire. Yet those who are in the fire are created, does this mean the the Qadam of Allah does not refer to an attribute?

A. Al-Hasan al-Basri's above interpretation does not imply createdness of the Attributes at all. The attribution of the qadam to Allah in his interpretation is not one of the same order as that of Hand or Face but one of createdness and command.

To say otherwise is exactly the position of Christians when they argue that the OF in "the Ruh OF Allah" is an attribute of the same order as Hand or Face; hence their worship of it as a so-called hypostasis of the Divinity or same-substanced person. Cf. Imam Ibn al-Jawzi in Daf` Shubah al-Tashbih, beginning.

Note: Some of Ahl al-Hadith crossed bounds and accused al-Hasan of Mu`tazilism because of the above interpretation of the qadam.

Q.3) The Wahhabis claim that Imam Ahmad did not interpret the Coming of Allah to mean the coming of His Order. They say the isnad is a singular one containing Abu Amr bin Sammak, who is declared unknown by Imam Dhahabi. How can we counter this argument, especially since we know Imam Ahmad was usually against tawil?

A. Abu `Amr `Uthman ibn al-Sammak was not declared unknown by al-Dhahabi but he only said: "Tukullima fihi" - he has been criticized (Mizan). However, he does not consider him weak since he does not retain him in al-Mughni fil-Du`afa'. Al-Bayhaqi said of this chain that it is free of defects and Ibn Kathir confirmed it. It is also questionable that Imam Ahmad was against all types of ta'wil to begin with. Further, if we know that Imam Ahmad was against ta'wil it is through the very same type of proofs as this report provides and there are also other proofs from him.

Q.4) Sheikh Nuh mentions in one of his articles a quote from Imam Ahmad from a book entitled al-Sunnah by Imam Khallal. However, this book allegedly contains anthropomorphist statements. Was Imam Khallal an anthropomorphist?

A. Definitely, as was his Hanbali peer Abu Muhammad al-Barbahari. The latter never sat to teach except he mentioned that Allah seats the Prophet (saws) "next to Him" on the Throne, and the former said in al-Sunna that whoever denies such a belief is a "Jahmi Kafir Zindiq." This is not to detract from al-Khallal's stature as the earliest major codifier of the Hanbali Madhhab. And Allah knows best.

Hajj Gibril
--
GF Haddad
Qasyoun@ziplip.com