The Hanbali School’s Theology on Allah’s Attributes

by
Bassam Zawadi

Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 4
Did the Salaf Al-Salih Know the Meaning of Allah’s Attributes, or Did They Do
Tafweedh of Their Meanings? .......................................................................................... 5
Reason #1: The Salaf outright said that they know the meanings. ................................. 5
Reason #2: The Salaf believed that the attributes were meant to be understood
according to the Arabic language by the masses............................................................. 5
Reason #3: The Salaf outright explained the attributes................................................... 7
Reason #4: The Salaf would use synonyms of attributes to demonstrate that they knew
their meanings. ................................................................................................................ 7
Reason #5: The Salaf drew connections between different attributes, which entails that
they knew their meanings. ............................................................................................... 8
Reason #6: The Salaf would freely conjugate (do tasreef of) attributes, indicating that
they knew the meaning. ................................................................................................... 8
Reason #7: The Salaf discussed the implications and connotations of attributes,
highlighting that they knew their core meaning. ............................................................. 9
Being Wary of Terminological and Phraseological Nuances Relevant to the Subject
........................................................................................................................................... 10
Regarding Denying Knowing the “Meaning” of Allah’s Attributes ............................. 10
Regarding the Phrase, “Pass Them Along as They Have Come” ................................. 13
Regarding Statements on Not Making Tafsir of Passages on Sifat ............................... 15
Regarding the Sifat Being Ambiguous (Mutashabih) ................................................... 15
Regarding the Word “Muhdath” ................................................................................... 18
Regarding the Word “Qadeem” (Eternal) ..................................................................... 20
The Stance of Pre-Ibn Taymiyyah Hanbalis on Allah’s Speech and Volitional
Attributes in General ...................................................................................................... 23
The Kalami Influence on Hanbalis Who Came Later ................................................... 29
The Aqeedah of Hanbali Scholars:................................................................................ 31
Imam Ahmad (d. 241 A.H.) ........................................................................................ 31
Evidence That Imam Ahmad Affirmed the Meanings of the Attributes ................... 31

1
 Addressing an Argument That Imam Ahmad Was a Muffawwidh ............................ 33
The Aqeedah of the Earliest Followers of Imam Ahmad: ....................................... 34
Imam Harb Al-Karmani (280 A.H.) .......................................................................... 34
Abdul Wahhab al-Warraq (d. 251 A.H.) ................................................................... 36
Abu Ishaq b. Shaaqla (d. 369 A.H.)........................................................................... 36
Ibn Battah al-Akbari (387 A.H.) ................................................................................ 37
Ibn Hamid (403 A.H.)................................................................................................ 39
The Escalated Division of Hanbalis – Kalam-Influenced vs. Strict Atharism ....... 40
The Kalam-Influenced Hanbalis: .............................................................................. 40
Al-Qadi Abu Ya’la (d. 458 A.H.) .............................................................................. 40
Abul Faraj al-Shirazi (d. 486 A.H.) ........................................................................... 48
Ibn Aqeel (d. 513 A.H.) ............................................................................................. 49
Ibn Al-Zaghouni (d. 527 A.H.) .................................................................................. 50
Ibn Al-Hanbali (d. 536 A.H.) .................................................................................... 52
The Strict Athari Hanbalis:........................................................................................ 53
Muhammad b. Ishaq b. Mandah (395 A.H.) .............................................................. 53
Abdul Rahman b. Mandah (470 A.H.) ...................................................................... 54
Abu Ismail al-Harawi (481 A.H.) .............................................................................. 54
Abdul Ghani al-Maqdisi (d. 600 A.H.) ...................................................................... 55
Ibn Qudamah (d. 620 A.H.) ....................................................................................... 57
A General Glimpse of Hanbali Aqeedah Prior to Ibn Taymiyyah ......................... 66
The Aqeedah of Hanbali Scholars Immediately Succeeding Ibn Taymiyyah ....... 68
Ibn Abdul Hadi (d. 744 A.H.) .................................................................................... 68
Ibn Qadi Al-Jabal (d. 771 A.H.) ................................................................................ 69
Abu Mudhfir Yusuf al-Sarmari (d. 776 A.H.) ........................................................... 69
Ibn Rajab (d. 795 A.H.) ............................................................................................. 69
Al-Jamal Al-Maqdisi (d. 798 A.H.) ........................................................................... 70
Ibrahim Ibn Muflih (d. 884 A.H.) .............................................................................. 70
The Aqeedah of Latter-Day Hanbali Scholars ......................................................... 71
‘Alaa’ al-Din al-Mardawi (d. 885 A.H.) .................................................................... 72
Ibn Al-Mibrad (d. 909 A.H.) ..................................................................................... 73
Ibn al-Najjar al-Fattouhi (d. 972 A.H.) ...................................................................... 74

2
 Mar’ee al-Karmi (d. 1033 A.H.) ................................................................................ 75
Ibn Balban (1083 A.H.) ............................................................................................. 76
Uthman al-Najdi (d. 1097 A.H.) ................................................................................ 77
Ibn Abdul Baqi (d. 1126 A.H.) .................................................................................. 77
Al-Saffaarini (1188 A.H.) .......................................................................................... 78
Ahmad Al-Ba’li (d. 1189 A.H.) ................................................................................. 79
Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 80

3
Introduction
This article aims to answer the following questions, specifically in relation to Allah’s
attributes:

- What was the aqeedah of Imam Ahmad?

- What was the aqeedah of prominent Hanbali jurists1 who lived contemporaneously with
Imam Ahmad and succeeded him until today?
- Did Ibn Taymiyyah depart from the aqeedah of Imam Ahmad, with particular emphasis
and focus when it comes to the following three subtopics:
1) Should we make tafweedh of the meaning of Allah’s attributes?2
2) Should we affirm that Allah has volitional attributes (sifat ikhtiyariyyah)3
interlinked with His Will that could be enacted temporally over time, or must we
affirm that Allah is strictly timeless and does not speak or act except pre-
eternally?
3) Should we believe that the Arabic Qur’an is eternal, or should we hold that it
was spoken by Allah temporally at a certain point while still affirming that it is
uncreated?
Ibn Taymiyyah’s responses to the above three questions would be 1) no, 2) we should
affirm that Allah has volitional attributes,4 and 3) Allah spoke the uncreated Qur’an at a
certain point.
The entire article will primarily revolve around these subtopics.
A significant portion of the research in this article was conducted by myself, but even a
more considerable amount was conducted by respected scholars and academics whom I
have consulted. I have thus, relied heavily on secondary research to the point of

1
Even though several scholars from different juristic madhabs strove to follow the aqeedah of Imam
Ahmad, this article will only focus on examining the theological views of scholars who also adopted the
Hanbali juristic school. Moreover, this paper is not meant to be an exhaustive study of all Hanbali jurists, as
several of them undisputedly digressed from the theology of Imam Ahmad. Dr. Khalid Kabir ‘Alal attempts
to list some examples of Hanbali scholars whom he contends got influenced by Ash‘arism, Mu‘tazilism,
philosophy, Shi‘ism, etc. in his book al-Harakah al-‘Ilmiyyah al-Hanbaliyyah wa-Atharuha fi al-Mashriq
al-Islami, p. 531 onward.
2
In other words, should we claim not to know the meaning of Allah’s attributes and only relegate its
knowledge to Allah?
3
Also referred to as attributes of action (sifat fi’liyyah).
4
For example, Allah descends, gets angry, speaks, etc. according to His will at certain points in time during
specific circumstances.

4
summarizing/paraphrasing from other authors, some of who have been cited in this paper.
Nevertheless, I still verified the primary sources for most of the citations.
The overwhelming majority of the citations remain untranslated in Arabic, but I have
summarized and described the essential points being conveyed. The Arabic texts have
been provided so that students of knowledge who know Arabic would have the ability to
verify what is being attributed to the scholars being cited. I have also tried my best to
keep the points as succinct as possible to reduce the article’s length.

Did the Salaf Al-Salih Know the Meaning of Allah’s Attributes, or Did
They Do Tafweedh of Their Meanings?
Before delving into the Hanbali position in specific, it would be helpful to get a general
idea of where the Salaf, in general, stood on this issue.
We have several good reasons for thinking that they did not adopt the position of
tafweedh of the meanings of attributes.
Reason #1: The Salaf outright said that they know the meanings.

Scholars such as Imam al-Tabari (d. 310 A.H.) plainly said that we know the meanings of
Allah’s attributes.5
Reason #2: The Salaf believed that the attributes were meant to be understood
according to the Arabic language by the masses.

Whether we are speaking about istiwa or the attributes of hands (yadayn), it was
presumed by the scholars that the masses who know Arabic would understand them.6

5
Imam al-Tabari says in al-Tabseer fi Ma’alim al-Deen, vol. 1, pp. 140-146:

:‫إن قال لنا قائل‬

‫ وجاء ببعضها رسول هللا‬،‫ وجاء ببعضها كتاب هللا ووحيه‬،‫فما الصواب من القول في معاني هذه الصفات التي ذكرت‬
.‫ﷺ‬

‫ كما نفى ذلك عن‬،‫ أن نثبت حقائقها على ما نعرف من جهة اإلثبات ونفي التشبيه‬،‫ الصواب من هذا القول عندنا‬:‫قيل‬
...﴾‫ ﴿ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصير‬:‫ فقال‬-‫نفسه –جل ثناؤه‬

‫ وننفي‬،‫فنثبت كل هذه المعاني التي ذ كرنا أنها جاءت بها األخبار والكتاب والتنزيل على ما يعقل من حقيقة اإلثبات‬
...‫عنه التشبيه‬

‫ فما أنت قائ ٌل في معنى ذلك؟‬:‫فإن قال لنا منهم قائل‬

‫ يوم‬-‫ يجيء ربنا –ﷻ‬:‫ فنقول‬،‫ وليس عندنا للخبر إال التسليم واإليمان به‬، ‫ معنى ذلك ما دل عليه ظاهر الخبر‬:‫قيل له‬
.‫ ويهبط إلى السماء الدنيا وينزل إليها في كل ليلة‬،‫القيامة والملك صفًا صفًا‬
6
Ibn Battah al-Hanbali (387 A.H.) in his al-Ibanah al-Kubra, vol. 7, p. 164, reports Yazeed b. Harun (206
A.H.) as saying:

ِ ‫على خِ الفِ ما يُقَ ُّر فِي قُلُو‬

‫ب العا َّم ِة فَ ُه َو َجهْمِ ي‬ َ ]٥ ‫على العَرْ ِش ا ْستَوى﴾ [طه‬ َّ َّ‫ع َم أن‬
َ َ‫﴿الرحْ َمن‬ َ َ‫َمن ز‬

5
‫‪Ibn Qutaybah (d. 276 A.H.) said in his Al-Ikhtilaf fi al-Lafdh wal-Radd ‘ala al-Jahmiyyah, pp. 41-42:‬‬

‫فإن قال لنا‪ :‬ما اليدان ههنا قلنا هما اليدان اللتان تعرف الناس…‬

‫فنحن نقول كما قال هللا تعالى وكما قال رسوله وال نتجاهل وال يحملنا ما نحن فيه من نفي التشبيه على أن ننكر ما‬
‫وصف به نفسه‪ ،‬ولكنا ال نقول‪ :‬كيف اليدان؟‬

‫‪and on p. 44:‬‬

‫ألن الواجب علينا أن ننتهي في صفات هللا حيث انتهى في صفته أو حيث انتهى رسوله صلى هللا عليه وسلم وال نزيل‬
‫اللفظ عما تعرفه العرب وتضعه عليه ونمسك عما سوى ذلك‬

‫‪Al-Darimi (d. 280 A.H.) states in his Radd ‘ala al-Marrisi (not present in all manuscripts):‬‬

‫وال يجوز الكالم في آيات الصفات وأحاديث اإلثبات لها ونفي المثلية لها واإليمان بها إال بما يعرف من اللغة العربية‬
‫على سياق الكالم ومالزمته‬

‫‪Ibn Khuzaymah (d. 311 A.H.) says in his Kitab al-Tawheed, p. 200:‬‬

‫ش ِهدَ أنَّ ِ َّ ِ‬
‫ّلِل‬ ‫«ما مِ ن قَ ْلب اإال وه َُو َبيْنَ إ ْ‬
‫ص َب َعي ِْن مِ ن أصا ِب ِع َربا ِ العالَمِ ينَ »‪ ،‬فَإذا كانَ هَذا ِع ْندَهُ ثا ِبتًا يُحْ تَ ُّج ِبهِ‪ ،‬فَقَدْ أقَ َّر و َ‬
‫أصابِ َع‪ِِ ،‬لنَّ َم ْفهُو ًما فِي اللُّغَ ِة‪:‬‬

‫‪Imam al-Tabari states in his Qur’anic commentary, vol. 1, p. 457:‬‬

‫علَ ْي ِهنَّ وارْ تَ َف َع َفدَب ََّرهُنَّ بِقُد َْر ِت ِه‬

‫عال َ‬ ‫س اواهُنَّ ﴾ [البقرة ‪َ ]٢٩‬‬ ‫َّللا َج َّل ثَنا ُؤهُ‪﴿ :‬ث ُ َّم ا ْستَوى إلى السَّماءِ َف َ‬ ‫وأولى ال َمعانِي بِقَ ْو ِل َّ ِ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ِفاع ه ََربًا‬ ‫ت‬ ‫رْ‬ ‫واال‬
‫ِ‬ ‫و‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ل‬‫ُ‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ال‬ ‫نى‬‫ع‬‫ْ‬ ‫م‬
‫َ‬ ‫ب‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ُو‬
‫َ‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ذ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ل‬‫ا‬ ‫…‬ ‫ب‬‫ِ‬ ‫ر‬
‫َ‬ ‫ع‬
‫َ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫الم‬
‫ِ‬ ‫َ‬
‫ك‬ ‫ن‬ ‫مِ‬ ‫م‬
‫َ‬ ‫ُو‬
‫ه‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ف‬ ‫م‬
‫َ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ْنى‬ ‫ع‬ ‫م‬
‫َ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫َر‬
‫َ‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ن‬ ‫أ‬ ‫نْ‬ ‫م‬
‫َّ‬ ‫مِ‬ ‫َب‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ج‬ ‫ع‬
‫َ‬ ‫وال‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫وات‬ ‫م‬
‫َ‬ ‫س‬
‫َ‬ ‫ع‬
‫َ‬ ‫ب‬
‫ْ‬ ‫س‬
‫َ‬ ‫نَّ‬ ‫ه‬
‫ُ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ل‬‫خ‬‫َ‬ ‫و‬
‫ِ‬
‫أن ت ََّأولَهُ‬‫أن كانَ تَحْ تَها‪ ،‬إلى ْ‬ ‫عال وارْ تَفَ َع بَ ْعدَ ْ‬ ‫أن ي ُْل ِز َمهُ بِزَ عْمِ ِه إذا ت ََّأولَهُ بِ َم ْعناهُ ال ُم ْف ِه ِم َكذَلِكَ ْ‬
‫أن يَ ُكونَ إنَّما َ‬ ‫ِع ْندَ نَ ْف ِس ِه مِ ن ْ‬
‫بِال َمجْ ُهو ِل مِ ن تَأ ْ ِوي ِل ِه ال ُم ْستَ ْنك َِر‬

‫‪Ibn ‘Abdul Barr (463 A.H.) states in his al-Tamheed, vol. 7, p. 131:‬‬

‫ب فِي َم ْعهُو ٍد‬ ‫ب اإال ِبما تَ ْف َه ُمهُ العَ َر ُ‬ ‫أن يُخاطِ َ‬‫ع ْن ْ‬ ‫َّللاُ َ‬ ‫ت و َج َّل َّ‬‫ش ْيء مِ نَ العِبارا ِ‬ ‫جاز ِل ُك ِال ُمدَّع ما ثَبَتَ َ‬ ‫غ اداِعا ُء ال َم ِ‬ ‫و َل ْو سا َ‬
‫على ال َّ‬
‫ش ْيءِ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ع‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ِفا‬ ‫ت‬ ‫رْ‬ ‫واال‬
‫ِ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ل‬
‫َ ُ ُّ‬‫ع‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ُو‬ ‫ه‬‫و‬ ‫وم‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ف‬
‫َ ُ‬ ‫م‬ ‫و‬ ‫ة‬‫ِ‬ ‫غ‬
‫َ‬ ‫ُّ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫وم‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ل‬‫ع‬ ‫م‬ ‫ء‬
‫ُ َ ْ‬ ‫ِوا‬ ‫ت‬ ‫س‬
‫ْ‬ ‫واال‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ََ‬ ‫ِين‬
‫ع‬ ‫س‬
‫اامِ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫د‬
‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ن‬ ‫ع‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ه‬‫ْنا‬
‫ع‬ ‫م‬
‫ا ِ َ ُ‬ ‫ح‬‫ُّ‬ ‫َص‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬ ‫مِ‬ ‫ِها‬ ‫ُمخا َطبات‬
‫ط َبنا َُّ‬
‫َّللا‬ ‫رار فِي العُلُ ا ِو و ِب َهذا خا َ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ق‬ ‫ت‬‫س‬ ‫اال‬
‫ِ ْ ُ ِ ِْ ُ‬ ‫ء‬‫ِوا‬ ‫ت‬ ‫س‬ ‫اال‬ ‫ِ‪...‬‬‫ه‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ُ‬
‫ن‬ ‫ُّ‬
‫ك‬ ‫م‬
‫َ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ت‬‫وال‬ ‫واال ْس ِت ْق ُ‬
‫رار‬ ‫ِ‬

‫‪Al-Sijizzi (d. 444 A.H.) says in his al-Radd 'ala man Ankara al-Harf wal-Sawt, pp. 227-228:‬‬

‫الواجب أن يعلم أن هللا تعالى إذا وصف نفسه بصفة هي معقولة عند العرب‪ ،‬والخطاب ورد بها عليهم بما يتعارفون‬
‫بينهم ولم يبين سبحانه أنها بخالف ما يعقلونه‪ ،‬وال فسرها النبي ﷺ لما أداها بتفسير يخالف الظاهر فهي على يعقلونه‬
‫ويتعارفونه‪.‬‬

‫‪Abu Uthman al-Sabuni (d. 449 A.H.) states in his ‘Aqeedatul Salaf Ashab al-Hadeeth, p. 3:‬‬

‫بل ينتهون فيها إلى ما قاله هللا ‪-‬تعالى‪ ،-‬وقاله رسوله ‪-‬صلى هللا عليه وسلم‪ ،-‬من غير زيادة عليه‪ ،‬وال إضافة إليه‪،‬‬
‫وال تكييف له وال تشبيه وال تحريف وال تبديل وال تغيير‪ ،‬وال إزالة للفظ الخبر عما تعرفه العرب وتضعه عليه‪،‬‬
‫بتأويل منكر مستنكر‪ ،‬ويجرونه على الظاهر‪ ،‬ويكلون علمه إلى هللا ‪ -‬وتعالى‪ ،-‬ويقرون بأن تأويله ال يعلمه إال هللا‪،‬‬
‫الرا ِس ُخونَ فِي ْالع ِْل ِم يَقُولُونَ آ َمنَّا ِب ِه ُكل مِ ْن ِع ْن ِد‬
‫كما أخبر هللا عن الراسخين في العلم أنهم يقولونه في قوله‪-‬وتعالى‪َ :-‬و َّ‬
‫َر ِبانَا َو َما يَذَّ َّك ُر ِإ َّال أُولُو ْاأل َ ْلبَا ِ‬
‫ب‬

‫‪Imam adh-Dhahabi (673 A.H.) states in his Ithbat Sifat al-Yad, p. 36:‬‬

‫ويقال أيضًا نعلم باالضطرار أن الصحابة والتابعين ومن بعدهم قد كان فيهم األعرابي واألمي والمرأة والصبي‬
‫والعامة ونحوهم ممن ال يعرف التأويل وكانوا مع هذا يسمعون هذه اآليات واالحاديث في الصفات وحدث بها األئمة‬
‫من الصحابة والتابعين على رؤوس األشهاد ولم يؤولوا منها صفة واحدة يو ًما من الدهر وإنما تركوا العوام على‬
‫فطرهم وفهمهم‬

‫‪6‬‬
‫‪Reason #3: The Salaf outright explained the attributes.‬‬

‫‪They would explicitly interpret Allah’s istiwa,7 compassion,8 astonishment,9 etc.‬‬

‫‪Reason #4: The Salaf would use synonyms of attributes to demonstrate that they‬‬
‫‪knew their meanings.‬‬

‫‪They did this with attributes such as anger,10 etc.‬‬

‫‪7‬‬
‫‪Ibn Qutaybah said in his Ta’weel Mukhtalaf al-Hadeeth, p. 394:‬‬

‫ستَقَ َّر؛‬ ‫على ال ُحلُو ِل َم َع قَ ْو ِلهِ‪َّ :‬‬

‫﴿الرحْ َم ُن َ‬
‫على العَرْ ِش ا ْستَوى﴾ ‪ ،١‬أيِ‪ :‬ا ْ‬ ‫ْف يَسُوغُ ِأل َحد ْ‬
‫أن يَقُولَ‪ :‬إنَّهُ بِ ُك اِل َمكان َ‬ ‫و َكي َ‬
‫‪Al-Karaji al-Qassab (d. 360 A.H.) said in his Nukat al-Qur’an, vol. 1, pp. 426-427:‬‬

‫علَى ْال َعرْ ِش} حجة على الجهمية؛‬

‫ض فِي ِست َّ ِة أَيَّام ث ُ َّم ا ْست ََوى َ‬‫ت َو ْاألَرْ َ‬ ‫اوا ِ‬ ‫َّللاُ الَّذِي َخلَقَ ال َّ‬
‫س َم َ‬ ‫قوله – تعالى –‪ِ ﴿ :‬إنَّ َربَّ ُك ُم َّ‬
‫علَى ا ْلعَ ْر ِش} أي‪ :‬استقر عليه‪ ،‬فهو بما استقل‬ ‫ست ََوى َ‬ ‫ِلن االستواء في هذا الموضع هو االستقرار‪ ،‬فقوله‪﴿ :‬ث ُ َّم ا ْ‬
‫العرش منه – جل جالله – له حد عند نفسه‪ ،‬ال بحد يدركه خلقه‪ ،‬والمحيط باألشياء علمه – سبحانه–‬

‫‪Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his Al-Matalib al-‘Aliyah, vol. 12, p. 570, says that Al-Bukhari in his Saheeh‬‬
‫‪relays from Abu al-Aliyah (93 A.H.) and Mujahid (d. 104 A.H.) that istiwa means to elevate:‬‬

‫ي في صحيحه في التوحيد (‪ )٤٠٣ /١٣‬باب‪ :‬وكان عرشه على الماء‪.‬‬

‫وأورده البخار ُّ‬
‫قال أبو العالية‪ :‬استوى‪ :‬ارتفع فسواهن‪ :‬خلقهن‪ .‬وقال مجاهد‪ :‬استوى‪ :‬عال على العرش‪.‬‬

‫‪Many from amongst the Salaf are reported to have held this view such as Ibn Abbas, Mujahid, ar-Rabi b.‬‬
‫‪Anas, Al-Kalib, Muqatil, Ahmad b. Hanbal, etc.‬‬
‫‪8‬‬
‫‪Imam al-Tabari states in his commentary, vol. 15, p. 475:‬‬

‫اختَلَ َ‬
‫ف أ ْه ُل‬ ‫ورحْ َمةً مِ ناا و َم َحبَّةً لَهُ آتَيْناهُ ال ُح ْك َم َ‬
‫ص ِبيًّا‪ .‬وقَ ِد ْ‬ ‫وقَ ْولُهُ‪﴿ :‬و َحنانًا مِ ن لَدُناا﴾ [مريم ‪ ]١٣‬يَقُو ُل تَعالى ِذ ْك ُرهُ‪َ :‬‬
‫وو َّجهُوا الكَال َم إلى نَحْ ِو ال َمعْنى الَّذِي و َّجهْناهُ إلَ ْي ِه‬ ‫الرحْ َمةُ‪َ ،‬‬ ‫الت َّأ ْ ِوي ِل فِي َمعْنى الح ِ‬
‫َنان‪ ،‬فَقا َل بَ ْع ُ‬
‫ض ُه ْم‪َ :‬معْناهُ‪َّ :‬‬
‫‪9‬‬
‫‪Imam al-Tabari states in his commentary, vol. 19, pp. 513-514:‬‬

‫ض ِ ام التااءِ مِ ن َ‬
‫ع ِجبْتَ ‪ ،‬بِ َمعْنى‪َ :‬ب ْل‬ ‫ت القُ ارا ُء فِي قِرا َءةِ ذَلِكَ ‪ ،‬فَقَ َرأتْهُ عا َّمةُ قُ اراءِ ال ُكوفَةِ‪( :‬بَلْ َ‬
‫ع ِجبْتُ ويَ ْسخ َُرونَ ) بِ َ‬ ‫اختَلَفَ ِ‬
‫ْ‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫عظ َم ِعندِي و َكبِ َر اتاِخاذهُ ْم لِي ش َِريكًا‪ ،‬وتَ ْكذِيبُ ُه ْم تَن ِزيلِي وهُ ْم يَ ْسخ َُرونَ وق َرأ ذلِكَ عا َّمة ق اراءِ ال َمدِينَ ِة والبَص َْرةِ وبَ ْع ُ‬
‫ض‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫َ‬
‫ع ِجبْتَ أ ْنتَ يا ُم َح َّمدُ ويَ ْسخ َُرونَ مِ ن هَذا القُرْ ِ‬
‫آن‪.‬‬ ‫ع ِجبْتَ ﴾ [الصافات ‪ ]١٢‬بِفَتْحِ التااءِ بِ َم ْعنى‪ :‬بَلْ َ‬ ‫قُ اراءِ ال ُكوفَ ِة ﴿بَلْ َ‬

‫ئ فَ ُم ِ‬
‫صيب‪.‬‬ ‫القار ُ‬ ‫تان فِي قُ اراءِ األ ْم ِ‬
‫صار‪ ،‬فَبِأيَّتِ ِهما قَ َرأ ِ‬ ‫ور ِ‬‫تان َم ْش ُه َ‬ ‫والصَّوابُ مِ نَ القَ ْو ِل فِي ذَلِكَ ْ‬
‫أن يُقالَ‪ :‬إنَّ ُهما قِرا َء ِ‬
‫ف َم ْعنَياهُما فَ ُك ُّل واحِ ٍد مِ ن‬
‫اختَلَ َ‬
‫وإن ْ‬ ‫ِالف َم ْعنَيَي ِْهما؟ قِيلَ‪ :‬إنَّهُما ِ‬‫اخت ِ‬ ‫ئ بِ ِهما َم َع ْ‬ ‫ْف يَكُو ُن ُم ِصيبًا ِ‬
‫القار ُ‬ ‫فَإنْ قا َل قائِلٌ‪ :‬و َكي َ‬
‫ب َربُّنا مِ ن عَظِ ِيم ما‬ ‫اَّلل‪ ،‬وقَ ْد ع َِج َ‬ ‫س َخ َر مِ نهُ أ ْه ُل ال ا‬
‫ش ِْركِ بِ َّ ِ‬ ‫َّللاُ مِ نَ الفَ ْ‬
‫ض ِل‪ ،‬و َ‬ ‫َم ْعنَيَ ْي ِه صَحِ يحٌ‪ ،‬قَ ْد ع َِج َ‬
‫ب ُم َح َّم ٌد مِ اما أعْطاهُ َّ‬
‫سخ ََر ال ُم ْش ِر ُكونَ ِبما قالُوهُ‪،‬‬ ‫قالَهُ ال ُمش ِْركُونَ فِي َّ ِ‬
‫َّللا‪ ،‬و َ‬
‫‪10‬‬
‫‪Makki b. Abi Talib (d. 437 A.H.) in his al-Hidayah ila Bulugh al-Nihayah, vol. 10, p. 6679 has it from‬‬
‫‪several from the Salaf:‬‬

‫قوله تعالى‪﴿ :‬فَلَ َّمآ آ َ‬

‫سفُونا انتقمنا مِ ن ُه ْم﴾ ‪ -‬إلى قوله ‪ِ :-‬‬
‫﴿صراط ُّم ْستَقِيم﴾ أي‪ :‬فلما أغضبونا حلت بهم العقوبة فأغرقوا في‬
‫البحر ‪ /‬أجمعين‪.‬‬

‫قال مجاهد وقتادة والسدي وابن زيد‪ :‬آسفونا‪ :‬أغضبونا‪.‬‬

‫وعن ابن عباس‪« :‬آسفونا‪ :‬أسخطونا»‪ .‬وعنه‪ :‬أغضبونا‪.‬‬

‫‪7‬‬
Reason #5: The Salaf drew connections between different attributes, which entails
that they knew their meanings.

Imam Ahmad used one attribute to argue for the existence of another. One of Imam
Ahmad’s proofs for us seeing Allah on the Day of Judgment is that Allah communicated
that He would be coming in Surah 2:210 and Surah 89:22.11 How did he use these as
proofs? He used them as proofs because he clearly understood these passages to entail
that Allah will literally come in His essence and have a literal presence that would
facilitate others to see Him.12
Likewise, Ishaq b. Rahawayh (d. 238 A.H.) was once asked how Allah descends, and he
merely cited Surah 89:22 about Allah’s coming on the Day of Judgment. Based on this,
he contended that since Allah is coming on the Day of Judgment, no one can prevent Him
from coming today either.13 Ishaq would not have drawn the connection between descent
and coming if he had absolutely no clue what either of them meant.
Reason #6: The Salaf would freely conjugate (do tasreef of) attributes, indicating
that they knew the meaning.

For example, the Salaf would deduce from the Qur’an that since Allah did istiwa on the
Throne, He is in a state of istiwa (mustawin) on the Throne.14 Those who do not know the
meanings of these attributes would not do such a thing, as conjugation could change the
meanings of words.

.‫ أجمعين‬/ ‫حلت بهم العقوبة فأغرقوا في البحر‬

.‫ أغضبونا‬:‫ آسفونا‬:‫قال مجاهد وقتادة والسدي وابن زيد‬

.‫ أغضبونا‬:‫ وعنه‬.»‫ أسخطونا‬:‫ «آسفونا‬:‫وعن ابن عباس‬

11
Ibn Battah in his al-Ibanah al-Kubra, vol. 7, p. 53 relays this narration:

‫ ﴿وجا َء‬،]٢١٠ ‫َمام وال َمالئِ َكةُ﴾ [البقرة‬

ِ ‫ظلَل مِ نَ الغ‬ َّ ‫أن يَأْتِيَ ُه ُم‬
ُ ‫َّللاُ فِي‬ ُ ‫ ﴿ َهلْ يَ ْن‬:‫َّللا تَعالى‬
ْ ‫ظ ُرونَ اإال‬ ِ َّ ‫ قَ ْو ُل‬:‫َّللا‬
ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬
َ ‫وقا َل أبُو‬
َ َ
‫ فقدْ َكف ََر‬،‫َّللا ال يُرى‬ َ
َ َّ َّ‫ إن‬:َ‫ ف َمن قال‬،]٢٢ ‫صفا﴾ [الفجر‬ ًّ َ ‫صفا‬ًّ َ ُ‫َربُّكَ وال َملَك‬
12
Even al-Qadi Abu Ya’la conceded that Imam Ahmad’s report, when taken on its apparent reading,
suggests a literal coming of Allah in His Essence on the Day of Judgment; he states in his Ibtal al-
Ta’weelat, p. 158:

‫على جواز رؤيته إذا كان‬

َ ‫ وإنما يحتج بذلك‬،‫على جواز رؤيته‬
َ ‫ ألنه احتج بذلك‬،‫وظاهر هَذا أن أحْ َمد أثبت مجيء ذاته‬
‫اإلتيان والمجيء مضافا إلى الذات‬
13
Al-Sabuni relays this in his ‘Aqeedat al-Salaf Ashabul Hadeeth:

: ‫ قال هللا‬:‫فقال إسحاق‬. ‫ أُثبته فوق‬:‫فقال الرجل‬. ‫ أثبته فوق حتى أصف لك النزول‬:‫ كيف ينزل؟ فقال له إسحاق‬:‫قال‬
‫ أعز هللا‬:‫ فقال إسحاق‬.‫ يا أبا يعقوب هذا يوم القيامة‬:‫ فقال األمير عبد هللا‬. ٢٢‫﴿وجاء ربك والملك صفا صفا﴾ الفجر‬
‫ ومن يجيء يوم القيامة من يمنعه اليوم؟‬،‫األمير‬
14
For example, Ibn Khuzaymah states in his Kitab al-Tawheed, p. 240:

َ ‫وقَدْ أ ْعلَ َمنا َج َّل و‬

َ ‫عال أنَّهُ ُم ْستَو‬
‫على عَرْ ِش ِه‬

8
For example, it is not necessarily the case that if someone does an action like eating for
example, that he remains in the state of eating. I could say that Khaled ate, but not
believe that he is currently eating.
However, the Salaf did not only say that Allah did istiwa, as the Qur’an states, but they
also said that He remains in a state of istiwa (mustawin) on the Throne. But nowhere in
the Qur’an and Sunnah do we see it stated explicitly that Allah is mustawin on the
Throne. So on what basis did the Salaf say this? Well, clearly, they deduced this from
their understanding of other passages that Allah did istiwa on the Throne and remains on
the Throne. It would have been highly unlikely of them to have made this deduction if
they did not know the meanings of these passages.15
In short, the morphology of words could influence their meanings. Just as there is a
difference in meaning between “ate” and “eating,” there is also a difference in meaning
between istawa (past tense of istiwa) and mustawin (present state of istiwa). The Salaf
would not have used the word mustawin by themselves unless they were sure of its
meaning. Thus, they could not have been true mufawwidhs.
Reason #7: The Salaf discussed the implications and connotations of attributes,
highlighting that they knew their core meaning.

The Salaf debated and discussed whether Allah’s descent entails that He leaves His
Throne.16 They also disagreed on whether we should say that Allah comes/descends/does
istiwa Himself in His Essence (bi-dhaahiti or bi-nafsihi) or not.17 They also disagreed
over whether Allah could be ascribed with movement (harakah)18 because of their
affirmation for Him that He descends and comes.
We can clearly deduce from these discussions that the Salaf knew the core meaning of
these attributes but disagreed with how far one can go in affirming terms for Allah not
found in the Qur’an and Sunnah. Moreover, some were concerned that some of these

15
Even the famous Ashari Imam al-Ghazali warned against conjugating attributes, as he clearly saw the
problems with conjugation of ‘unknowable’ words from the paradigm of a mufawwidh, since changing the
morphology of a word could also change the meaning of the word itself. He says in his Iljam al-‘Awam, p.
312:

:‫ "استوى" فال ينبغي أن يقال‬:‫ ومعناه أنه إذا ورد قوله تعالى‬،‫ التصريف‬، ‫ الذي" يجب اإلمساك عنه‬:‫التصرف الثالثا‬
.‫ ِلن المعنى يجوز أن يختلف‬،‫مستو ويستوي‬
16
Consider the following authentic narration to Ishaq b. Rahawayh in Mukhtasar al-‘Uluww:

:‫ حدثنا إسحاق قال‬،‫ حدثنا علي بن خشرم‬،‫ حدثنا أحمد بن علي األبار‬:‫قال النجاد‬

‫ رواها الثقات الذين‬،‫ نعم‬:‫ ما هذه األحاديث؟ تروون أن هللا ينزل إلى السماء الدنيا؟ قلت‬:‫دخلت على ابن طاهر فقال‬
‫ فلم تتكلم‬:‫ قلت‬.‫ نعم‬:‫ يقدر أن ينزل من غير أن يخلو منه العرش؟ قال‬:‫ ينزل ويدع عرشه؟ فقلت‬:‫ فقال‬،‫يروون األحكام‬
‫في هذا؟‬
17
See some relevant citations here.
18
We will see some examples shortly inshallah.

9
affirmations (e.g., affirming movement for Allah) stepped into the modality (kayfiyyah)
of these attributes, while others saw “movement” as an integral part of the core meaning.
One thing is for sure, though; one cannot debate the implications of a term when one
has absolutely no idea what that term means!

Being Wary of Terminological and Phraseological Nuances Relevant to

the Subject
In this discussion concerning Hanbali aqeedah on Allah’s attributes, some common
phrases and terms get thrown around, and it is essential to take note of their divergent
nuanced understandings across different scholars.
Regarding Denying Knowing the “Meaning” of Allah’s Attributes

It is essential to understand the word “meaning” itself in different contexts. There are
different gradations of meaning. You can have fully encompassing definitions that clearly
explicate the nature and essence of what is being defined, while you can also have lower-
level connotative meanings that indicate the essential core meaning while not providing a
fully immersive conception of what is being defined.

The denotative definition (‫ )التعريف بالحد‬is more of a precise or dictionary definition of the
term, while the connotative definition (‫ )التعريف بالرسم‬connotes additional meanings or
attributes related to the defined term, which signify an overall core meaning (‫)أصل المعنى‬
of the term. There need not be any knowledge of the description of the essence or
substance of the defined term in the connotative definition.19
When it comes to the attributes of Allah, we could only discuss its connotative definitions
since no one knows the Essence of Allah except for Allah Himself, which is something
that even Asharis themselves acknowledge for the attributes that they affirm.20

19
Especially if it’s an incomplete one (‫)الرسم الناقص‬.
20
For example, Imam al-Bayjuri said in regards to Allah’s attribute of Power after giving its definition in
his commentary on Jawharatul Tawheed::

‫وهذا رسم الحد حقيقي وهكذا سائر التعاريف المذكورة للصفات ألنه ال يعلم كنه ذاته وصفاته أي حقيقة ذلك إال هو‬

“And this is a connotative definition and not a literal denotative definition. The same
applies to all the definitions of the attributes, for no one knows the substance of His
Essence and Attributes (i.e., the reality of it), except Him.”
Al-Dusuqi said in his commentary on Umm al-Baraheen.:

‫واعلم أن تعريف المصنف لهذه الصفات رسوم مفيدة لتمييز بعضها عن بعض ال حدود بذاتياتها ألن العقول محجوبة‬
‫عن كنه ذاته وصفاته تعالى‬

“And know that the definitions provided by the author for these attributes are only
beneficial connotations that distinguish one attribute from the other. They are not
denoting the precise definition of their Essence, for the minds are veiled from knowing
the substance of His Essence and Attributes.”

10
For example, what do we mean when we say that Allah has Knowledge? What comes to
mind when we think of this term? Do we think of a common attribute or factor (‫)قدر مشترك‬
which helps us relate to the meaning of this attribute of Allah, or do we believe that the
“Knowledge” of Allah is simply nothing more than a homonym (‫)لفظ مشترك‬, whereby it is
simply a word we are familiar with, yet with a completely different and unknown
meaning?

There is no shadow of a doubt that the Salaf believed that it is a common factor (‫قدر‬
‫ )مشترك‬we are familiar with (i.e., knowledge is conception and cognizance of the known),
for this core and generic definition applies to both the creation and to Allah.
The common factor (‫ )قدر مشترك‬is merely the conceptual meaning (‫ )المعنى الكلي الذهني‬that
the word alludes to before it is ascribed to anyone (be it creation or the Creator) or delved
into in describing its specific features. It alludes to the core meaning (‫ )أصل المعنى‬or the
core reality (‫ )أصل الحقيقة‬of that term.
However, when it comes to the distinctive factors (‫ )القدرات المميزة‬which differentiate
Allah’s Knowledge from that of the creation, then we have entered the unseen realm of
which we must not speculate.
Those distinctive factors feature in the denotative definition/meaning of words, which
incorporate the modality (kayfiyyah) of the word in question. Thus, when some deny
knowing the meaning, what they really have in mind is denying knowing the
modality/essence element of the denotative definition and not the connotative meaning of
the term.21

Imam al-Ghazali, in his book al-Mankhul min Ta'liqat al-Usul, said regarding knowledge:

‫وعجزنا عن التحديد ال يدل على جهلنا بنفس العلم كما إذا سئلنا عن حد رائحة المسك عجزنا عنه لكون العبارة عنها‬
‫صريحة وال يدل ذلك على جهلنا‬

“Our inability to provide a denotative definition does not entail that we are ignorant of
what knowledge is. It is similar to our inability to define exactly the scent of musk, for
that does not entail that we are ignorant of it.”

21
Imam Ismail al-Asbahani (d. 535 A.H.) reports in his al-Hujjah fi Bayan al-Mahajjah, p. 209, how when
one asked regarding the meaning of the hadeeth, “you will see Allah as clearly as you see the moon,” the
person responded by saying that no one knows how (kayf) that would occur, which indicates that the kind
of “meaning” being inquired about is the denotative kind:

‫ يا أبا خالِد ما‬:‫ فَقا َل رجل فِي َمجْ لِسه‬،»‫ظرون إلى القَ َمر لَ ْيلَة البَدْر‬ ُ ‫ظرون إلى رب ُكم كَما ت ْن‬ ُ ‫إنكم ت ْن‬-: « ‫ ﷺ‬- ‫الرسُول‬ َّ ‫قَول‬
َ ‫ ويلك من يد ِْري ك‬،ِ‫ ما أشبهك بصبيغ وأحوجك إلى مثل ما فعل ِبه‬:َ‫ وقال‬،‫معنى هَذا ال َحدِيث؟ فَغَضب وحرد‬
‫َيف هَذا؟‬
‫ واستخف‬،‫ش ْيء من ت ِْلقاء نَفسه إال من سفه نَفسه‬ َ ‫ومن يجوز لَهُ أن يُجاوز هَذا القَ ْول الَّذِي جا َء ِب ِه ال َحدِيث أو يتَ َكلَّم فِي ِه ِب‬
‫ وإن‬،‫ فإنكم إن اتبعتموه ولم تماروا فِي ِه سلمتم‬،ِ‫ وال تبتدعوا فِيه‬،ُ‫فاتَّبعُوه‬- ‫ ﷺ‬- ‫عن َرسُول هللا‬ َ ‫سمِ ْعت ُ ْم ال َحدِيث‬
َ ‫ إذا‬،ِ‫ِبدِي ِنه‬
.‫لم تَفعلُوا هلكتم‬

Also, Ibn Taymiyyah in his al-Tis’eeniyyah, vol. 2, pp. 422-424, citing Ishaq b. Rahawayh, brings out the
distinction between “meanings” that we do not know, which seek to have a full encompassing knowledge

11
‫‪Thus, we must ascertain what a particular scholar means when he says that he does not‬‬
‫‪know the meaning of an attribute.‬‬
‫‪For example, what would be the connotative definition of Allah’s yad (hand)? It could be‬‬
‫‪articulated as follows:‬‬

‫صفة ذاتية أزلية يتأتى بها اإلمساك والقبض والخلق‪ ،‬كما دلت النصوص‬

‫‪An eternal attribute subsisting in the essence of Allah that performs‬‬

‫‪functions such as grasping, seizing, creating, etc., which scriptural texts‬‬
‫‪allude to.‬‬

‫‪The way this definition is framed is very similar to how Ash’aris defined Allah’s‬‬
‫‪Power.22‬‬
‫‪To go beyond this meaning by delving into a more precise conceptualization of Allah’s‬‬
‫‪nature would be speculating about Allah’s Essence and how (kayf) His being is. This is‬‬
‫‪completely forbidden.‬‬

‫‪Tafweedh of the meaning, however, involves not merely denying knowledge of the‬‬
‫‪denotative meaning, but the connotative meaning as well. It would, for instance, deny‬‬

‫‪of Allah’s attributes, in contrast with knowing the meaning connoted by the mere description Allah chose‬‬
‫‪to assign His attributes:‬‬

‫شيخ األصبهاني في كتاب السنة له (‪ )١‬قال‪ :‬وفيما أجاز لي (‪ )٢‬جدي ‪ -฀-‬قال‪ :‬قال إسحاق بن راهوية إن‬ ‫وذكر أبو ال َّ‬
‫هللا ‪-‬تبارك وتعالى‪ -‬وصف نفسه في (‪ ) ٣‬كتابه بصفات استغنى الخلق كلهم عن أن يصفوه بغير ما وصف به نفسه‪،‬‬
‫ي ‪ -‬ﷺ ‪ -‬معنى إرادة هللا ‪-‬تبارك وتعالى‪ -‬قال هللا في كتابه حيث ذكر عيسى بن مريم‬ ‫وأجمله في كتابه‪ ،‬فإناما فسر النَّب ُّ‬
‫ض‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫األرْ‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬
‫َ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ت‬
‫ِ‬ ‫َّماوا‬
‫س‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬
‫َ‬ ‫ِقَ‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ص‬
‫َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ف‬‫﴿‬ ‫كتابه‬ ‫محكم‬ ‫في‬ ‫وقال‬ ‫)‬ ‫‪٤‬‬ ‫(‬ ‫﴾‬ ‫ِكَ‬‫س‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ف‬ ‫ن‬
‫َ‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ما‬ ‫فقال‪﴿ :‬تَ ْعلَ ُم ما فِي نَ ْفسِي وال أ ْعلَ ُم‬
‫ط ِوياات ِبيَمِ ي ِنهِ﴾ (‪ ،)٦‬وقال‪َ ﴿ :‬بلْ َيدا ُه‬‫ضتُهُ َي ْو َم القِيا َم ِة والسَّماواتُ َم ْ‬
‫َ‬ ‫ب‬
‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ا‬‫ع‬
‫ض َ مِ ً‬
‫ي‬ ‫ج‬ ‫َّللاُ﴾ (‪﴿ )٥‬واألرْ ُ‬ ‫إال َمن شا َء َّ‬
‫ير﴾‬
‫ص ُ‬ ‫ي﴾ (‪ )٩‬وقال في آيات كثيرة ﴿وه َُو السَّمِ ي ُع البَ ِ‬ ‫تُ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬
‫َّللا ف ْوقَ أ ْيدِي ِه ْم﴾ (‪ )٨‬وقال ﴿ َخلق بِيَدَ َّ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫َّ‬
‫تان﴾ (‪ ،)٧‬وقال‪﴿ :‬يَدُ ِ‬ ‫ط ِ‬ ‫َم ْبسُو َ‬
‫ع ْينِي﴾ (‪ )١١‬وكل ما وصف هللا به نفسه من الصفات التي ذكرناها م اما هي موجودة في‬ ‫على َ‬
‫صنَ َع َ‬ ‫ُ‬
‫(‪ )١٠‬وقال ﴿و ِلت ْ‬
‫القرآن‪ ،‬وما لم تذكار فهو كما ذكر‪ ،‬وإناما يلزم العباد االستسالم لذلك والتعبد‪ ،‬ال نزيل صفة م اما وصف هللا بها (‪)١٢‬‬
‫نفسه‪ ،‬أو وصف الرسول عن جهته‪ ،‬ال بكالم وال بإرادة‪ ،‬إناما يلزم (‪ )١‬المسلم األداء‪ ،‬ويوقن بقلبه أن ما وصف به‬
‫الربا ‪-‬‬ ‫نفسه في القرآن إناما هي صفاته‪ ،‬وال يعقل نبي مرسل وال ملك مقرب تلك الصفات اإال باألسماء التي عرفهم َّ‬
‫تبارك وتعالى‪ ،-‬فأما أن يدرك أحد من بني آدم معنى تلك الصفات فال يدركه أحد‪ ،‬وذلك أن هللا تعالى إناما وصف من‬
‫صفاته قدر ما تحتمله (‪ ) ٢‬عقول ذوي األلباب‪ ،‬ليكون إيمانهم بذلك‪ .‬ومعرفتهم بأنه الموصوف بما وصف به نفسه‪،‬‬
‫وال يعقل أحد منتهاه وال منتهى صفاته‪ ،‬وإناما يلزم المسلم أن يثبت معرفة صفات هللا باالتباع واالستسالم كما جاء‪،‬‬
‫فمن جهل معرفة ذلك حت اى يقول‪ :‬إنما أصف ما قال هللا وال أدري (‪ )٣‬ما معاني ذلك‪ ،‬حت اى يفضي إلى أن يقول بمعنى‬
‫قول الجهمية‪ :‬يده (‪ )٤‬نعمة‪ ،‬ويحتج بقوله‪﴿ :‬أ ْيدِينا أ ْنعا ًما﴾ (‪ )٥‬ونحو ذلك فقد ضل سواء (‪ )٦‬السبيل‪ ،‬هذا محض كالم‬
‫الجهمية حيث يؤمنون بجميع ما وصفناه (‪ )٧‬من صفات هللا‪ ،‬ثم يحرفون معنى الصفات عن جهتها التي وصف هللا‬
‫ير﴾ (‪ )٨‬معنى السميع هو‪ :‬البصير‪ ،‬ومعنى البصير هو السميع‪ ،‬ويجعلون‬ ‫ص ُ‬ ‫بها نفسه‪ ،‬حتاى يقولوا‪ :‬معنى ﴿السَّمِ ي ُع البَ ِ‬
‫اليد يد نعمة‪ ،‬وأشباه ذلك يحرفونها عن جهتها‪ ،‬ألنهم هم (‪ )١‬المعطلة‪.‬‬
‫‪22‬‬
‫‪Al-Bayjuri states:‬‬

‫صفة أزلية قائمة بذاته تعالى يتأتى بها إيجاد كل ممكن وإعدامه على وفق اإلرادة‬

‫‪An eternal attribute subsisting in the essence of Allah, which enables the ability to bring‬‬
‫‪into existence everything possible and cause it to become extinct in accordance with the‬‬
‫‪Will of Allah.‬‬

‫‪12‬‬
explicit acknowledgment that Allah’s hand is an actual independent attribute in its own
right whose conceptual core meaning is relatable to our understanding.

Regarding the Phrase, “Pass Them Along as They Have Come”

Regarding the passages on sifat, many classical scholars famously said to “pass them
along as they have come,” but what did they mean by this? Did they mean, “We have no
idea what these mean; just pass the words along simply trusting that these words have a
meaning only Allah knows”?
That cannot be the case in an absolute sense since such a phrase was also applied to
matters whose meaning, at a basic and foundational level, we do know, such as the
ahadith on seeing Allah and Israa’ wal-Mi’raaj23 or even ahadith such as “The one who
commits zina is not a believer at the time of committing zina.”24 Nobody can claim that
we have no idea what these ahadith mean, despite there being dimensions about them that
we are uncertain of.
Moreover, some scholars who uttered this phrase did not appear to distinguish between
the different kinds of sifat either,25 which means that they did not distinguish between
seeing and hearing from hands and descent. Yet, no one would claim that they made
tafweedh of the meaning of the attributes of seeing and hearing.

23
Al-Aajurree (d. 360 A.H.) in his Kitab al-Sharee’ah, vol. 3, p. 1154 relays the following
narration from Imam Ahmad:

‫ث الَّتِي‬
ِ ‫ع ِن األحادِي‬ َ ฀ ‫َّللاِ أحْ َمدَ ْبنَ َح ْنبَل‬ َ ‫س ْألتُ أبا‬
َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬ َ :َ‫ي قال‬ ُّ ‫ نا أبُو بَ ْكر ال َمرْ َو ِز‬:َ‫ي قال‬
‫َحدَّثَنا أبُو نَصْر ُم َح َّمدُ ْب ُن ُكرْ ِد ا‬
‫سلَّ ُم‬
َ ُ ‫ ت‬،‫ «قَدْ تَلَقَّتْها العُلَما ُء ِبالقَبُو ِل‬:َ‫ص َّح َحها وقال‬َ َ ‫ف‬ ‫؟‬ ‫ش‬
ِ ْ‫ر‬ ‫ع‬
َ ‫ال‬ ‫ة‬ِ ‫ص‬
َّ ‫ق‬
ِ ‫و‬ ‫ة‬
ِ ‫ي‬
َ ْ‫ؤ‬‫والر‬
ُّ ‫س‬
ِ‫ْراء‬ ‫واإل‬ ‫ت‬ ِ ‫صفا‬ ‫يَ ُردُّها ال َجهْمِ يَّةُ فِي ال ِ ا‬
» ْ‫بار كَما جا َءت‬ ْ
ُ ‫األخ‬
24
Imam al-Lalakaa’iee (418 A.H.) reports in his Sharh Usul ‘Itiqad Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jama’ah, vol. 5, p.
1055:

‫ وال‬:َ‫ قال‬،‫ ال‬:َ‫ع َمل؟ قال‬ َ ‫ي‬ ْ ،ِ‫على أ َحد مِ ن أ ْه ِل ال ِق ْبلَة‬

َّ ‫وإن عَمِ َل أ‬ َ َ‫صالة‬ َّ ‫ « َهلْ نَدَعُ ال‬:‫ي‬ َّ ‫األوزا ِع‬ ْ ُ‫س ْألت‬ َ ‫ و‬: َ‫قا َل أبُو إسْحاق‬
ْ ُ
ُ‫ وال أثبِت‬،‫ض ْعف‬ ِ ‫ف‬ ْ
َ ‫ف أل‬ ْ َ
َ ‫َّللا ْأوث ُق مِ ناِي بِعَذابِ ِه أل‬ ْ
ِ َّ ‫وألنا ِألبِي بَكر بِ َرحْ َم ِة‬ َ ،ِ‫َّللا ﷺ أنَّهُ فِي ال َجنَّة‬ ِ َّ ‫على أ َحد بَ ْعدَ َرسُو ِل‬ َ ُ‫أ ْش َهد‬
َ ُ‫ض ْعف وال أُثْبِت‬
‫علَ ْي ِه‬ ِ ‫ف‬ َ ‫ف ْأل‬َ ‫َّللا ْأل‬
ِ َّ ‫علَ ْي ِه مِ اما أرْ ُجو مِ ن َرحْ َم ِة‬ َ ‫ف‬ ُ ‫أخ َو‬ ْ ‫َّللا‬ِ َّ ‫ب‬ ِ ‫وألنا ِألبِي ُم ْسلِم بِعَذا‬ َ ،َ‫شهادَة‬ َّ ‫علَ ْي ِه ال‬
َ
‫أن يَ ُكونَ ُمنافِقًا َحتاى‬ ْ ‫َف‬ ْ ‫ع َم َر لَ ْم يَخ‬ُ َّ‫ إن‬: َ‫ إنَّ ُه ْم يَقُولُون‬: ُ‫ قُ ْلت‬، َ‫على نَ ْف ِس ِه الناِفاق‬ َ ‫ب‬ ِ ‫َطا‬ ‫ع َم ُر ْب ُن الخ ا‬ ُ ‫خاف‬ َ ْ‫ وقَد‬:َ‫ قال‬،َ‫شهادَة‬ َّ ‫ال‬
‫ي ِ حِ ينَ ذَ َك َر‬ ُّ ‫ وقَدْ قُ ْلتُ ل‬:َ‫ قال‬،‫َع‬
‫ِلز ْه ِر ا‬ ِ ‫ هَذا قَ ْو ُل أ ْه ِل البِد‬:َ‫ قال‬، َ‫أن يَ ُموت‬ ْ ‫أن يُ ْبتَلى بِذَلِكَ قَ ْب َل‬ ْ ‫خاف‬ َ ‫يَسْأ َل ُحذَ ْيفَةَ ولَك ِْن‬
‫ فَأ ْنك ََر ذَلِكَ وك َِر َه‬:َ‫إن لَ ْم يَ ُك ْن ُمؤْ مِ نًا ما ه َُو؟ قال‬ ْ َ‫ ف‬: َ‫ أ ْنت ُ ْم تَقُولُون‬،»‫ «ال ي َْزنِي الزا انِي حِ ينَ ي َْزنِي وه َُو ُمؤْ مِ ٌن‬: َ‫ال َح ِديث‬
‫َّللا ﷺ كَما‬ ِ َّ ‫ع ْن َرسُو ِل‬ َ ‫ث‬ ِ ‫ وإنَّما كانُوا يُ َح ِداثُونَ ِباألحادِي‬:َ‫ قال‬،ُ‫ظ ُر ما يَقُول‬ ُ ‫أردْتُ أ ْن‬ َ ‫ ولَك ِْن‬، ُ‫ع َر ْفت‬ َ ْ‫ وقَد‬:َ‫ قال‬،ُ‫ع ْنه‬ َ ‫َمسْألَتِي‬
‫ُوب ُك ْف ًرا وال شِرْ ًكا‬ َ ‫ن‬ُّ ‫ذ‬ ‫ال‬ َ‫ُّون‬ ‫د‬ ‫ع‬
ُ َ ‫ي‬ ‫وال‬ ِ َّ
‫َّللا‬ ‫ت‬
ِ ‫ما‬ ُ ُ ً ‫جا َءتْ تَع‬
‫ر‬ ‫ح‬ ‫ل‬
ِ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬ ‫ي‬ ِ‫ْظ‬
25
Al-Aajurree in his Kitab al-Sharee’ah, vol. 3, p. 1146 relays the following narration:

‫ نا‬:َ‫خار َجةَ قال‬ ُ ‫ نا أبُو َح ْفص‬:َ‫سعِيد أحْ َمدُ ْب ُن ُم َح َّم ِد ب ِْن ِزياد قال‬
ِ ‫ َحدَّثَنا ال َه ْيثَ ُم ْب ُن‬:َ‫ع َم ُر ْب ُن ُمد ِْرك القاصُّ قال‬ َ ‫َحدَّثَنا أبُو‬
‫صفاتُ ؟‬ َّ
‫ث التِي فِيها ال ِ ا‬ ِ ‫ ع َِن اِلحادِي‬:‫س ْعد‬ َّ
َ َ‫ والليْثَ بْن‬،‫ ومالِكَ بْنَ أنَس‬،‫ي‬ َّ
َّ ‫ والث ْو ِر‬،‫ي‬ ْ ُ‫سألت‬
َّ ‫األوزا ِع‬ ْ َ :َ‫الولِيدُ ْب ُن ُم ْسلِم قال‬
َ
»‫ «أمِ ُّروها كَما جا َءتْ بِال تَ ْفسِير‬:َ‫فَ ُكلُّ ُه ْم قال‬

13
‫)‪Imam Ahmad said that Allah spoke with a sound to Prophet Musa (peace be upon him‬‬
‫‪and that we ought to “pass these ahadith along,”26 yet nobody would say that Imam‬‬
‫‪Ahmad did not know the basic meaning of Allah speaking through sound.27‬‬
‫‪Some scholars, such as Ibn al-Hubaira al-Hanbali (d. 560 A.H.), would say that we‬‬
‫‪should “pass along” these passages on sifat, only to assert that we do know their‬‬
‫‪meanings immediately after.28‬‬
‫‪Nevertheless, some who did say “pass them along as they come” did intend tafweedh of‬‬
‫‪the meaning. The Maliki scholar, Imam ‘Abdul Jalil al-Qasri (608 A.H.), states that the‬‬
‫‪scholars differed over what they intended by this phrase, with some intending tafweedh of‬‬
‫‪the meaning; however, he pointed out that the majority of scholars and Ahlus Sunnah,‬‬
‫‪despite uttering the phrase, still knew and affirmed the meanings of the divine‬‬
‫‪attributes.29‬‬

‫‪26‬‬
‫‪Abdullah b. Ahmad (d. 290 A.H.) in his al-Sunnah, vol. 1, p. 280:‬‬

‫ص ْوت فَقا َل أبِي‪« :‬بَلى إنَّ َربَّكَ تَ َكلَّ َم بِ َ‬

‫ص ْوت َه ِذ ِه األحاد ُ‬
‫ِيث‬ ‫َّللاُ ُموسى لَ ْم يَتَ َكلَّ ْم بِ َ‬ ‫س ْألتُ أبِي ‪َ ฀‬‬
‫ع ْن قَ ْوم‪ ،‬يَقُولُونَ ‪ :‬لَ اما َكلَّ َم َّ‬ ‫َ‬
‫نَ ْر ِويها كَما جا َءتْ »‬
‫‪27‬‬
‫‪It is well known that Speech is considered a clear (muhkam) attribute in the Hanbali school, despite this‬‬
‫‪statement from Imam Ahmad. This demonstrates that the phrase, “pass them along as they come” does not‬‬
‫‪necessarily connote tafweedh of the meaning.‬‬
‫‪28‬‬
‫‪He states in his al-Ifsah fi Ma’ani as-Sihah, vol. 2, p. 14:‬‬

‫مذهب أهل الحديث إمراره كما جاء‪ ،‬ولغة العرب معلومة فيه…‬

‫قولنا‪ :‬نمرها كما جاءت أي نرويها كما سمعناها‪ ،‬ونمتنع أن نقول بجهلها على ظاهرها‪.‬‬
‫‪29‬‬
‫‪He states in his Sharh Mushkal al-Hadeeth:‬‬
‫ا‬
‫معطل للذات من الصفات‪ ،‬ومشباه لباريه‬ ‫أن الناس انقسموا في المشكل على أقسام ترجع بالحصر إلى أربعة‪ :‬مبطل‬
‫ومتأول لها على حسب ما وهب له الوهااب‪ ،‬ومُمِ ار لها كما جاءت من غير تشبيه وال‬
‫ا‬ ‫بخلقه في الجوارح واألدوات‪،‬‬
‫تعطيل‪.‬‬

‫(أمروها كما جاءت) يحتمل معنيين‪:‬‬

‫ا‬ ‫وهذا القسم األخير هو اعتقاد الج ام الغفير‪ .‬إال أن قولهم‪:‬‬

‫أحدهما‪ :‬يعت ِق ُد إثباتها من غير تفهم لها‪.‬‬

‫واآلخر‪ :‬إثباتها كما جاءت مع فهمها‪ ،‬أي‪ :‬يفهم الشيء على ما هو عليه‪ ،‬وهذا الغاية القصوى في الفهم والتوفيق لمن‬
‫أُعطيه من أهل اإلنابة والتحقيق‪ .‬وقد نطق اِلئمة الذين أُمروا بإمرارها كما جاءت بذلك في أقوالهم كمالك في‬
‫االستواء حيث قال ‪-‬مجيبًا للسائل عن االستواء‪( :-‬االستواء معلوم‪ ،‬والكيف غير معقول)‪ .‬فأخبر أن االستواء معلوم‪،‬‬
‫والمعلوم مفهوم بال شكا ‪ .‬وكذلك األوزاعي قد أجاب في حديث النزول أيضًا جوابًا يُنبئ عن فهمه له‪ ،‬واعتقاده فيه‪.‬‬
‫وقال أبو عيسى الترمذي ‪ :‬قال أهل العلم في حديث الصفات مثل ما ورد في حديث النزول‪ ،‬وذكر الرجل‪ ،‬والقدم‪،‬‬
‫واليدين‪ ،‬وما أشبهه‪ :‬يُؤ َمن بهذا كله‪ ،‬وال يُتوهَّم‪ ،‬وال يُقال كيف‪ ،‬وال لم‪ ،‬مع اعتقاد التمجيد والتنزيه عن التمثيل‬
‫والتشبيه‪ ،‬وينسبون من أنكرها إلى الجهمية؛ ألن جه ًما رداها‪ ،‬والصحيح إمرارها كما جاءت‪ ،‬وبه قال الفقهاء مالك‬
‫والشافعي وسفيان الثوري وابن عيينة وابن المبارك‪ ،‬وإلى ذلك ذهب البخاري وجميع المح ادِثين‪ ،‬وأهل العلم من‬
‫السنة والجماعة من السلف والخلف رحمة هللا عليهم ‪ ،‬إال أن الظن بهؤالء أنهم فهموها على ما هي عليه‪ .‬وفهم‬
‫(أمروها كما جاءت) نفي التعطيل‪ ،‬ونفي التشبيه‪،‬‬ ‫ا‬ ‫الشيء على ما هو عليه هو الغاية القصوى‪ .‬ويكون معنى قولهم‪:‬‬
‫ونفي التأويل الخارج عن الحق‪ .‬فهذه ثالثة أقسام مذمومة‪ ،‬والقسم الرابع هو الحق هو اإلمرار لها كما جاءت‪.‬‬

‫‪14‬‬
Thus, such a phrase alone cannot sufficiently demonstrate that the person who uttered it
believes in tafweedh of meaning. More information would be required regarding the
scholar’s stance on the matter before ascribing to him a position.
Regarding Statements on Not Making Tafsir of Passages on Sifat

There are several statements from classical scholars about not making tafsir of the
passages on sifat. Those who adopt the tafweedh of meaning stance contend that this
demonstrates that these scholars were mufawwidhs just like them.
However, there is a big misunderstanding about such statements made by these scholars,
as much of the time, what they really mean is that one should not make tafsir without
scholarly precedent,30 and at other times they mean that one should avoid adopting the
tafsirs espoused by the Jahmiyyah.31 What they essentially mean here is avoiding delving
into explaining the modality of the attributes.32 Thus, we need to be careful and ensure
we contextualize these statements properly.33 We need to ensure we examine all the
respective scholars’ statements on the subject matter to ensure we have understood them
correctly.
Regarding the Sifat Being Ambiguous (Mutashabih)

If a certain scholar states that he considers the sifat to be mutashabih, does that
necessarily imply that he is pleading ignorance of their meanings and is thus, espousing
tafweedh of the meaning of the sifat?

30
Ibn Battah al-Hanbali, in his al-Ibanah al-Sughra, p. 88 adds an important qualification after stating that
we do not make tafsir of the passages on sifat, namely, “except what Allah’s Messenger did tafsir of, or a
scholar from the ummah…”:

‫ ويَ ْلقاها بِالقَبُو ِل وال‬- ‫ ﷺ‬- ‫َّللا‬ ِ َّ َ ‫ع ْن َرسُو ِل‬ ِ ‫صدِي ُق بِ ُك اِل ما َر َوتْهُ اَ ْلعُلَما ُء ونَ َقلَهُ اَل ِث اقاتُ أ ْه ُل اَ ْآل‬
َ ‫ثار‬ ْ َّ ‫ث ُ َّم اَ ْإليما ُن وال َقبُو ُل والت‬
ُ ‫يس وال يُ ْع َم ُل لَها اَلتَّفاس‬
‫ِير اإال ما‬ ْ
ُ ِ‫على اَل َم ْعقُو ِل وال تُض َْربُ لَها اَل َمقاي‬ ْ َ ‫ْف وال تُحْ َم ُل‬ َ ‫يض وال يُقا ُل ل َِم و َكي‬ ِ ‫عار‬ِ ‫ت ُ َردُّ بِال َم‬
.‫والرؤْ يَ ِة‬
ُّ ‫ث الصفات‬ ِ ‫علَماءِ اَ ِْل ُ َّم ِة مِ َّم ْن قَ ْولُهُ شِفاء و ُحجَّة مِ ثْ ُل أحادِي‬ ُ ‫ ْأو َر ُج ٌل مِ ن‬- ‫ ﷺ‬- ِ‫َّللا‬ َّ َ ‫سو ُل‬
ُ ‫س َرهُ َر‬ َّ َ‫ف‬
31
Imam al-Tirmidhi (d. 279 A.H.) in his Sunan, vol. 2, p. 44 says that the Jahmiyyah made tafsir of the
sifat such as hand, hearing, seeing, etc. in a manner different from the tafsir of scholars (thus implying
that the scholars did make tafsir of them):

َّ َ‫غي ِْر ما ف‬
‫س َر‬ ِ ‫ت ال َجهْمِ يَّةُ َه ِذ ِه اآليا‬
َ ‫ت فَفَس َُّروها عَلى‬ ِ َ‫ فَت ََّأول‬،‫ص َر‬ َّ ‫ضع مِ ن كِتاب ِه ال َي َد وال‬
َ ‫س ْم َع وال َب‬ ِ ‫غي ِْر َم ْو‬ َّ ‫وقَدْ ذَك ََر‬
َ ‫َّللاُ فِي‬
ُ.‫ إنَّ َم ْعنى اليَ ِد هاهُنا القُ َّوة‬:‫ وقالوا‬،ِ‫َّللا لَ ْم يَ ْخلُ ْق آد ََم بِيَ ِده‬
ََّ َّ‫ إن‬:‫ وقالُوا‬،‫أ ْه ُل ال ِع ْل ِم‬

Al-Darimi in his response to al-Marrisi, p. 222, states that we do not make tafsir like how they make tafsir:

‫ وال نُفَ ِ ا‬،‫ت ال نُ َكذاِبُ بِها َكتَ ْكذِيبِ ُك ْم‬

‫س ُرها َكباطِ ِل تفسيركم‬ ِ ‫صفا‬ ُ ِ‫فَكَما نَحْ ُن ال نُ َكيا‬
‫ف َه ِذ ِه ال ِ ا‬
32
Ibn Qutaybah states in his Ikhtilaf al-Lafdh wal-Radd ‘ala al-Jahmiyyah wal-Mushabbiha, pp. 41-42 that
the people know the two hands Allah ascribes to Himself, yet we do not delve any further by asking how:

‫ ما اليدان ههنا قلنا هما اليدان اللتان تعرف الناس… ولكنا ال نقول كيف اليدان‬:‫فإن قال لنا‬
33
For several citations demonstrating this, see Muhammad b. Mahmud aal al-Khudayr, Maqalat al-
Tafweedh Bayn al-Salaf wal-Mutakallimeen, pp. 463-471.

15
‫‪This has to be examined on a case-by-case basis since there are scholars who have stated‬‬
‫‪that they consider the passages on sifat to be mutashabih yet were known to not have‬‬
‫‪adopted tafweedh of the meaning as their interpretive method.‬‬
‫‪For such scholars, when they state that the sifat are mutashabih, they mean that we do not‬‬
‫‪have a fully conceptualized definition and understanding of Allah’s Essence and‬‬
‫‪attributes. They do not mean that we do not know the connotative meanings of these‬‬
‫‪attributes. Hanbali scholars such as Ibn Muflih, Al-Mardawi, Ibnul Najjar, etc., agree‬‬
‫‪with Ibn Taymiyyah that an ayah being mutashabih entails that we at least have a generic‬‬
‫‪level understanding of it, as opposed to a detailed one.34 It does not mean that we have no‬‬
‫‪clue what it means.‬‬
‫‪Even Ibn Taymiyyah himself says that the ayah on istiwa is mutashabih,35 but that is‬‬
‫‪because we do not fully comprehend its modality (kayfiyyah) as we strive to negate the‬‬
‫‪similarity between Allah and His creation. Similarly, the Shafi Imam Ismail al-Asbahani‬‬
‫‪describes the ayah on istiwa as being from the mutashabih, while shortly after, he defines‬‬
‫‪its meaning as elevation.36 The same goes for Imam al-Baghawi (516 A.H.), who in his‬‬
‫‪commentary claims that the passages on sifat are from the mutashabih, yet literally, just a‬‬
‫‪few lines earlier cited scholars who defined istiwa as elevation.37‬‬

‫‪34‬‬
‫‪Ibn Taymiyyah said the following in his Musawaddah, which latter Hanbali verifiers approved:‬‬

‫ُ‬
‫بحث أصحابنا يقتضى أنه يفهم على سبيل الجملة ال‬ ‫مسألة‪ :‬يجوز أن يشتمل القرآن على ما ال يفهم معناه عندنا ‪ ...‬ثم‬
‫على سبيل التفصيل‬
‫‪35‬‬
‫‪Ibn Taymiyyah said in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 17, pp. 378-379:‬‬

‫صار ُمتَشابِهًا‪ .‬و َكذَ ِلكَ قَ ْولُهُ‪﴿ :‬ث ُ َّم‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ّلِل؛ َف ِلهَذا‬ ‫يرهُ ثابِتًا ِ َّ ِ‬ ‫أن يَ ُكونَ نَظِ ُ‬ ‫وز ْ‬ ‫ق ال َم ْخلُوقِينَ ال يَ ُج ُ‬ ‫فال َم ْعنى الَّذِي يُرادُ بِ ِه هَذا فِي َح ا ِ‬
‫على سُوقِهِ﴾ وقالَ‪﴿ :‬فَإذا ا ْست ََويْتَ أ ْنتَ و َمن‬ ‫يِ﴾ وقالَ‪﴿ :‬فا ْستَوى َ‬ ‫على ال ُجو ِد ا‬ ‫ستَوى عَلى العَ ْر ِش﴾ فَإنَّهُ قَدْ قالَ‪﴿ :‬وا ْست ََوتْ َ‬ ‫ا ْ‬
‫علَ ْي ِه وأنَّهُ لَ ْو‬ ‫ض َّم ُن حا َجةَ ال ُم ْستَ ِوي إلى ال ُم ْستَوى َ‬ ‫ورهِ﴾ فَ َهذا ِاال ْستِوا ُء ُكلُّهُ يَتَ َ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ه‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ُ‬
‫ظ‬ ‫لى‬ ‫ع‬
‫َ‬ ‫وا‬ ‫َو‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ت‬‫س‬‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ل‬
‫ِ‬ ‫﴿‬ ‫َ‪:‬‬ ‫ل‬ ‫وقا‬ ‫﴾‬ ‫كِ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ل‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ال‬ ‫لى‬ ‫ع‬
‫َ‬ ‫كَ‬ ‫ع‬
‫َم َ‬
‫ش وقَدْ‬ ‫َ ُ‬ ‫رْ‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ة‬‫َ‬ ‫ل‬‫م‬ ‫ح‬ ‫و‬ ‫ش‬
‫َ َ ََ‬ ‫رْ‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ُ‬
‫ل‬ ‫مِ‬ ‫حْ‬ ‫ي‬
‫َ‬ ‫ه‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ت‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ْر‬
‫ِ َ‬‫د‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ن‬
‫َ‬ ‫ْحا‬ ‫ب‬ ‫س‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ُو‬
‫َ‬ ‫ه‬ ‫لْ‬ ‫ب‬
‫َ‬ ‫ء‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ش‬
‫َ‬
‫ِ ْ‬ ‫ا‬
‫ل‬ ‫ُ‬
‫ك‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ن‬ ‫ع‬
‫َ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ش‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫رْ‬ ‫ع‬
‫َ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫ع‬
‫َ‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ن‬‫غ‬‫َ‬ ‫َعالى‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫َ‬
‫وَّللا‬ ‫َر‬
‫َّ‬ ‫خ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ه‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ت‬ ‫َحْ‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬
‫ع َ َ‬ ‫ِم‬
‫د‬ ‫َ‬
‫ستِواءِ ُمتَشا ِبهًا َي ْلزَ ُمهُ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫اال‬‫ِ‬ ‫ُ‬
‫ظ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ف‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫صار‬
‫َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫َّ‬
‫ّلِل‬
‫ِ ِ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ا‬‫ب‬ ‫إال‬ ‫ا‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ة‬‫و‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫وال‬ ‫ل‬
‫َ‬ ‫و‬
‫َْ‬‫ح‬ ‫ال‬ ‫وا‪:‬‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ل‬‫و‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ي‬
‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫أن‬ ‫م‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ر‬
‫َرْ ِ ا َ َ ْ‬‫م‬ ‫أ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ش‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ل‬
‫َ‬ ‫م‬‫َْ‬ ‫ح‬ ‫وا‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ق‬‫أطا‬ ‫ما‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ن‬ ‫إ‬ ‫م‬
‫ي ُْ‬
‫ه‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ن‬‫أ‬ ‫‪:‬‬ ‫ُر ِو َ‬
‫اختَصَّ ِبها‬ ‫واال ْعتِدالُ؛ لَ ِكنْ ال نَ ْعلَ ُم ال َك ْي ِفيَّةَ الَّتِي ْ‬ ‫ع ْنها‪ .‬فَنَحْ ُن نَ ْعلَ ُم َمعْنا ُه وأنَّهُ العُلُ ُّو ِ‬ ‫ق ال َم ْخلُوقِينَ َمعانِي يُن ََّزهُ‪َّ .‬‬
‫َّللاُ َ‬ ‫فِي َح ا ِ‬
‫ُ‬ ‫َ‬
‫ش ْيء ُمحْ تاج إل ْي ِه مِ ن ك اِل وجْ ه‬ ‫ُ‬
‫غي ِْر افتِقار مِ نهُ إلى العَرْ ِش بَ َم َع حا َج ِة العَرْ ِش وك ُّل َ‬‫لْ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫ب التِي يَكو ُن بِها ُم ْستَ ِويًا مِ ن َ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫الر ُّ‬ ‫َّ‬
‫‪36‬‬
‫‪He states in his book al-Hujjah fi Bayan al-Mahajjah, vol. 2, pp. 273-275:‬‬

‫قال أهل السنة‪ :‬اإليمان بقوله تعالى‪{ :‬الرحمن على العرش استوى} واجب‪ ،‬والخوض فيه بالتأويل بدعة‪ ،‬قالوا‪ :‬وهو‬
‫من اآليات المتشابهات التي ذكرها هللا تعالى في كتابه ور اد علم تأويلها إلى نفسه‪ ،‬وقال‪{ :‬وما يعلم تأويله إال هللا‬
‫والراسخون في العلم يقولون آمنا به كل من عند ربنا}‪ ،‬فأوجب اإليمان بقوله‪{ :‬الرحمن على العرش استوى}‬
‫وباآليات التي تضارع هذه اآلية‪ ،‬ومدح الراسخين في العلم بأنهم يؤمنون بمثل هذه اآليات‪ ،‬وال يخوضون في علم‬
‫كيفيتها‪ ،‬ولهذا قال مالك بن أنس ‪-‬رحمة هللا عليه‪ -‬حين سئل عن قوله‪{ :‬الرحمن على العرش استوى}‪ ،‬قال‪ :‬االستواء‬
‫معلوم‪ ،‬والكيف مجهول‪ ،‬واإليمان به واجب‪ ،‬والسؤال عنه بدعة… ‪-‬إلى أن قال‪ -:‬فمن خالف موضوع اللغة فقد‬
‫ي‪ ،‬ولو كان االستواء على العرش بمعنى االستواء إلى العرش لقال تعالى‪( :‬إلى‬ ‫خالف طريقة العرب‪ ،‬والقرآن عرب ا‬
‫العرش استوى)‪ .‬قال أهل السنة‪ :‬االستواء هو العلو ‪ ،‬قال هللا تعالى‪{ :‬فإذا استويت أنت ومن معك على الفلك}‪ ،‬وليس‬
‫لالستواء في كالم العرب معنى إال ما ذكرنا‪،‬‬
‫‪37‬‬
‫‪He states in his commentary, vol. 3, pp. 235-236:‬‬

‫ت ال ُم ْعت َِزلَةُ ِاال ْستِوا َء بِ ِاال ْستِيالءِ ‪ ،‬وأ اما‬

‫وأولَ ِ‬
‫صعَدَ‪َّ .‬‬ ‫ستَوى عَلى العَ ْر ِش﴾ قا َل الك َْلبِ ُّ‬
‫ي و ُمقاتِل‪ :‬ا ْستَقَ َّر‪ .‬وقا َل أبُو ُ‬
‫عبَ ْيدَةَ‪َ :‬‬ ‫﴿ث ُ َّم ا ْ‬
‫ْ‬
‫الر ُج ِل اإليما ُن بِهِ‪ ،‬ويَ ِك ُل العِل َم فِي ِه إلى‬ ‫على َّ‬ ‫ّلِل تَعالى‪ ،‬بِال َكيْف‪ ،‬يَ ِجبُ َ‬ ‫صفَة ِ َّ ِ‬
‫على العَرْ ِش ِ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ُ‬
‫سنَّ ِة فَيَقولونَ ‪ِ :‬اال ْستِوا ُء َ‬
‫أ ْه ُل ال ُّ‬

‫‪16‬‬
‫‪But if these scholars do not do tafweedh of the meaning of sifat, then on what basis do‬‬
‫‪they declare them to be mutashabih then? They do so because there is a significant‬‬
‫‪dimension to them that is unknown to us, namely their essence and modality (kayfiyyah).‬‬
‫‪This is why Abu Bakr al-Ismaili (d. 277 A.H.) says that the mutashabih element of sifat‬‬
‫‪concerns their kayfiyyah.38 Ibn Abdul Baqi al-Hanbali (d. 1126 A.H.) says the virtually‬‬
‫‪same exact statement,39 and he clearly states, in agreement with Ibn Taymiyyah, that‬‬
‫‪ignorance of the kayfiyyah does not entail ignorance of the core foundational meaning.40‬‬
‫‪When discussing the notion of mutashabih, Imam al-Tabari mentions how according to‬‬
‫)‪one opinion, some matters are mutashabih, such as when Prophet Isa (peace be upon him‬‬
‫‪will come back, the timing of the Day of Judgment, etc.,41 yet in no way would anybody‬‬
‫‪claim that we do not know the basic meaning of these notions.‬‬
‫‪Ibn Qudamah does not consider Allah’s Speech from those attributes that are mutashabih.‬‬
‫‪This is because he sees that the Qur’an and Sunnah provide sufficient explanation that‬‬
‫‪Allah’s Speech is composed of letters and sounds.42 But, of course, this in no way entails‬‬

‫أط َرقَ َرأْ َ‬

‫سهُ َم ِليًّا‪،‬‬ ‫ْف ا ْستَوى؟ فَ ْ‬ ‫على ال َعرْ ِش ا ْستَوى) [ َ‬
‫طهَ‪َ ،]٥-‬كي َ‬ ‫ع ْن قَ ْو ِلهِ‪َّ :‬‬
‫(الرحْ َم ُن َ‬ ‫سأ َل َر ُجل مالِكَ بْنَ أنَس َ‬ ‫َّ ِ‬
‫َّللا ‪ .฀‬و َ‬
‫وعَال ُه‪...‬‬

‫علَماءِ ال ُّ‬
‫سنَّ ِة‬ ‫َّللا ب ِْن ال ُمبا َركِ و َ‬
‫غي ِْر ِه ْم مِ ن ُ‬ ‫عيَ ْينَةَ و َ‬
‫ع ْب ِد َّ ِ‬ ‫س ْفيانَ ب ِْن ُ‬
‫س ْعد و ُ‬ ‫ي ِ واللَّ ْي ِ‬
‫ث ب ِْن َ‬ ‫واألوزا ِع ا‬
‫ْ‬ ‫س ْفيانَ الث َّ ْو ِر ا‬
‫يِ‬ ‫ع ْن ُ‬
‫ي َ‬ ‫ور ِو َ‬
‫ُ‬
‫ت ال ُمتَشابِ َه ِة‪ :‬أ َم ُّروها كَما جا َءتْ بِال َكيْف‪.‬‬ ‫صفا ِ‬ ‫ت التِي جا َءتْ فِي ال ِ ا‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫فِي َه ِذ ِه اآليا ِ‬
‫‪38‬‬
‫‪Abu Uthman al-Sabuni relays these words in his ‘Aqeedat a-Salaf Ashab al-Hadeeth, p. 192:‬‬

‫وقرأت في رسالة الشيخ أبي بكر اإلسماعيلي إلى أهل جيالن أن هللا سبحانه ينزل إلى السماء الدنيا على ما صح به‬
‫ظلَل مِ نَ الغ ِ‬
‫َمام﴾ [البقرة‪ ،]٢١٠:‬وقال‪:‬‬ ‫أن يَأْتِيَ ُه ُم َّ‬
‫َّللاُ فِي ُ‬ ‫الخبر عن الرسول ﷺ‪ ،‬وقد قال هللا ‪َ ﴿ :฀‬هلْ يَن ُ‬
‫ظ ُرونَ اإال ْ‬
‫صفًّا﴾ [الفجر‪ ،]٢٢:‬ونؤمن بذلك كله على ما جاء بال كيف‪ .‬فلو شاء سبحانه أن يبين لنا‬ ‫صفًّا َ‬
‫﴿وجا َء َربُّكَ وال َملَكُ َ‬
‫كيفية ذلك فعل‪ ،‬فانتهينا إلى ما أحكمه‪ ،‬وكففنا عن الذي يتشابه‪،‬‬
‫‪39‬‬
‫‪He states on page 61 of his book al-‘Ayn wal-Athar fi ‘Aqaid Ahlul Athar, ed. al-Qal’aji, 1st ed.:‬‬

‫ونؤمن بذلك بال كيف‪ .‬فلو شاء سبحانه أن يبين لنا كيفية ذلك فعل‪ ،‬فانتهينا إلى ما أحكمه‪ ،‬وكففنا عن الذي يتشابه‪،‬‬
‫‪40‬‬
‫‪He states on p. 111:‬‬

‫إن هذا تفسير لم يقل به أحد من السلف من سائر المسلمين من الصحابة والتابعين‪ ،‬بل أول من قال ذلك الجهمية‬
‫والمعتزلة كما قاله أبو الحسن األشعري في كتاب ((المقاالت))‪ ،‬وكتاب ((اإلبانة))‪ ،‬فإنه كان معلوما للسلف علما‬
‫ظاهرا ‪ ،‬فيكون التفسير المحدث باطال‪ ،‬ولهذا قال مالك‪ :‬االستواء معلوم‪ ،‬وأما قوله‪(( :‬والكيف مجهول)) فالجهل‬
‫بالكيف ال ينفي علم ما قد علم أصله ‪ ،‬كما نقر باهللا ونؤمن به‪ ،‬وال نعلم كيف هو‪ ،‬أشار إلى ذلك الشيخ ابن تيمية ‪-‬‬
‫رحمه هللا تعالى ‪ -‬في بعض رسائله‪ ،‬وهللا أعلم‪.‬‬
‫‪41‬‬
‫‪He states in his commentary, vol. 5, p. 199:‬‬

‫ف العُلَما ُء تَأ ْ ِويلَهُ‪ ،‬وفَ ِه ُموا َم ْعناهُ وتَ ْفس َ‬

‫ِيرهُ؛ وال ُمتَشا ِبهُ‪ :‬ما لَ ْم يَ ُك ْن ِأل َحد‬ ‫ع َر َ‬
‫آن‪ :‬ما َ‬ ‫وقا َل آخ َُرونَ ‪ :‬بَ ِل ال ُمحْ َك ُم مِ ن آي ِ القُرْ ِ‬
‫وع‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ل‬‫ط‬‫ُ‬ ‫ت‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ق‬ ‫وو‬ ‫‪،‬‬ ‫م‬
‫ِ َ َ َ‬ ‫ي‬
‫َ‬ ‫رْ‬ ‫م‬ ‫ْن‬‫ب‬‫ا‬ ‫ِيسى‬‫ع‬ ‫ج‬ ‫ر‬
‫َ َ ِ‬ ‫خ‬‫ْ‬ ‫م‬ ‫ت‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ق‬ ‫و‬ ‫ن‬‫ْ‬ ‫ع‬
‫ِ َ‬‫ر‬ ‫ب‬
‫َ‬ ‫خ‬
‫َ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫و‬
‫ُ‬ ‫َحْ‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ل‬
‫ِكَ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ذ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ِ‪،‬‬‫ه‬ ‫ق‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫َل‬‫خ‬ ‫ُونَ‬ ‫س ِبيل مِ اما ا ْستَأْثَ َر َّ‬
‫َّللاُ ِبع ِْلمِ ِه د‬ ‫إلى ع ِْلمِ ِه َ‬
‫عةِ‪ ،‬وفَناءِ الدُّ ْنيا‪ ،‬وما أ ْش َب َه ذَلِكَ ‪ ،‬فَإنَّ ذَلِكَ ال َي ْعلَ ُمهُ أ َحد‪،‬‬ ‫َ‬ ‫اا‬
‫س‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ِيام‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫و‬ ‫ها‪،‬‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ش ْم ِس مِ ن َ ِ ِ‬
‫ر‬ ‫غ‬ ‫م‬ ‫ال َّ‬
‫‪42‬‬
‫‪He says in his al-Siraat al-Mustaqeem:‬‬
‫الرابع‪ :‬أننا نحن لن نفسر هذا إنما فسره الكتاب والسنة كما تقدم‪.‬‬
‫وأما قوله‪ :‬إنكم فسرتم هذه الصفة‬
‫قلنا‪ :‬إنما ال يجوز تفسير المتشابه الذي سكت السلف عن تفسيره وليس كذلك الكالم؛ فإنه من المعلوم بين الخلق ال‬
‫شبهة فيه‪ ،‬وقد فسره الكتاب والسنة‪.‬‬

‫‪17‬‬
that Ibn Qudamah thinks that he has fully conceptualized how Allah speaks either,
obviously not. That is not necessary for an attribute to be muhkam/clear. Rather,
ambiguity involves that specific dimension of the attribute that we cannot fully grasp. For
example, Imam al-Mardawi would say that we do not know the reality of the essence of
ruh (soul) and ‘aql (intellect),43 but that does not mean that we have no idea what they
mean and refer to.
Am I suggesting that every single scholar who deemed the sifat to be mutashabih only
did tafweedh of the modality (kayfiyyah)? No, I am not saying that this is necessarily the
case. What I am saying, however, is that a scholar deeming the sifat to be mutashabih is
not sufficient proof to declare that he did tafweedh of the meanings of the sifat and that
we must examine each scholar on a case-by-case basis, lest we make false hasty
presumptions of what his stance is.
Regarding the Word “Muhdath”

Some scholars distinguish between muhdath (that which temporally originates/emerges)

and makhluq (that which is created), while others claim that there is essentially no
difference by insisting that everything that temporally originates (muhdath) is created.
Scholars such as Ibn Taymiyyah famously disagreed and argued that temporal acts
performed by Allah cannot be considered to be created; however, such a distinction was
undoubtedly not Ibn Taymiyyah’s invention.
Imam Al-Bukhari, in his Saheeh, said that the hadath of Allah is unlike the hadath of His
creatures.44 Later commentators of Saheeh Al-Bukhari, who ascribed to Ash’arism, were
evidently uncomfortable with Al-Bukhari’s stance and understood his words to entail the
temporal origination of Allah’s actions and speech.45

‫ وال‬،‫ وهم فسروه بما لم يرد به كتاب وسنة‬،‫ جاء ب ه الكتاب والسنة‬:‫تفسيرا‬
ً ‫إننا نحن فسرناه بحمله على حقيقته‬: ‫الثاني‬
.‫ وال يجوز نسبته إلى هللا تعالى‬،‫يوافق الحقيقة‬
43
He said in his al-Tahbeer:
َّ ‫ْئان ال‬
‫يطلع على كنه حقيقتهما اإال هللا تَعالى‬ ِ ‫شي‬ َ ‫العقل والروح‬
44
He said:

َ‫ِث بَ ْعد‬ َ َّ ‫ (لَعَ َّل‬:‫ ( ُك َّل يَ ْوم ه َُو فِي شَأْن) َو ( َما يَأْتِي ِه ْم مِ ْن ِذ ْكر مِ ْن َرباِ ِه ْم ُمحْ دَث) َوقَ ْو ِل ِه تَعَالَى‬:‫َّللا تَعَالَى‬
ُ ‫َّللا يُحْ د‬ ِ َّ ‫باب قَ ْو ِل‬
َ‫َث ا ْل َم ْخلُوقِين‬ ْ ُ‫ذَلِكَ أَ ْم ًرا) َوأَنَّ َح َدثَهُ الَ ي‬
َ ‫شبِهُ َحد‬
45
For example, Badr Al-Deen Al Aini said:

‫ واستدالله‬،‫ َهذَا مِ ْنهُ عَظِ يم‬:‫ َوقَا َل ابْن التاِين‬،‫صفَاته‬ ِ ِ‫س ْب َحانَهُ َوتَ َعالَى ِب َجم‬
ِ ‫يع‬ ُ ‫صفَاته َولم يزل‬ ِ ‫فَأثْبت أَنه ُمحدث َوه َُو من‬
‫يع ِصفَاته َوه َُو قديم فَكيف تكون صفته محدثة َوه َُو لم يزل بهَا؟ ِإ َّال أَن ي ُِريد أَن‬ ِ ِ‫َم‬‫ج‬ ‫ب‬
ِ ‫يزل‬ ‫علَ ْي ِه ِِلَنَّهُ ِإذا كَانَ لم‬
َ ‫يرد‬
‫ َوأَن َحدثهُ َال يشبه حدث‬:َ‫ْث قَال‬ ُ ‫ َحي‬،‫ي‬ ‫َار‬
‫ُ ِ ا‬ ‫خ‬ ‫ب‬‫ال‬ ‫م‬ َ
‫َال‬ ‫ك‬ ‫اهر‬ َ
‫ظ‬ ‫ُو‬
َ َ‫ه‬‫و‬ ،‫تبعه‬ ‫من‬ ‫و‬ ‫ي‬
َ ِ‫َ خ‬ ْ
‫ل‬ ‫ب‬ ْ
‫ال‬ ‫وله‬ ُ ‫ق‬ ‫ي‬
َ َ‫ا‬‫م‬ َ
‫ك‬ ] ،‫وق‬ ُ ‫ل‬‫خ‬ ْ ‫م‬
َ ْ
‫ال‬ ‫غير‬ ‫حدث‬ ‫ْال ُم‬
َّ َ َ َ َ َ
‫عائِشَة ((ولشأني أحْ قر من أن يتكلم هللا فِي‬ َ
َ ‫ي نَحْ و َما ذكره فِي شرح قول‬ َ َ
‫ ث َّم قا َل الدَّاو ِد ا‬.[‫المخلوقين فأثبت أنه ُمحدث‬ ْ َ
.‫ بِخِ َالف بعض قَول النَّاس أَنه لم يتَ َكلَّم‬،‫عائِشَة حِ ين أنزل فِي َها‬ َ ‫ فِي ِه أَن هللا تَعَالَى تكلم بِبَ َرا َءة‬:‫ي‬ ‫يَأْمر يُتْلَى)) قَا َل الدَّاو ِد ا‬
ْ ً َ ْ َ
،‫ي عَظِ يم ِألنَّهُ يلزم مِ ْنهُ أن يكون هللا متكلما بِك ََالم َحادث فَتحل فِي ِه ال َح َوادِث‬ ‫ َهذَا من الدَّاو ِد ا‬:‫َوقَا َل ابْن التاِين أَيْضا‬

18
‫‪Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani argued that there is no difference between muhdath and makhluq‬‬
‫‪according to custom and rationality and, as a result, also dismissed that Al-Bukhari‬‬
‫‪intended such a distinction.46 However, Imam Anwar al-Kashmiri (1353 A.H.) responded‬‬
‫‪to Ibn Hajar. He pointed out that Ibn Hajar did not properly look into how classical‬‬
‫‪scholars distinguished between these two terminologies, in that makhluq is what is‬‬
‫‪externally muhdath to the agent in question. Thus, we do not say that Zayd created his‬‬
‫‪sitting because his act of sitting temporally originated; rather, we simply say that Zayd‬‬
‫‪sat. Hence, a temporally originated action performed intrinsically by the very agent‬‬
‫‪himself is said to be muhdath and not makhluq.47‬‬
‫‪Likewise, when it is said that Allah descends, it does not entail that Allah’s act of descent‬‬
‫‪is created.48 Imam Ahmad,49 Ishaq bin Rahawayh,50 and al-Darimi51 reasoned the same‬‬
‫)‪way when it came to Allah’s Speech, for even though it temporally came out (kharajah‬‬

‫‪And Ibn Battal said:‬‬

‫صفَهُ ِب ْالخ َْل ِ‬

‫ق َوأَ َجازَ‬ ‫ص ِف ِه ِبأَنَّهُ ُمحْ دَث‪] ،‬فَأ َ َحا َل َو ْ‬ ‫ي ِ ْالفَرْ ُق َبيْنَ َوصْفِ ك ََال ِم َّ ِ‬
‫َّللا تَ َعالَى ِبأَنَّهُ َم ْخلُوق َو َبيْنَ َو ْ‬ ‫ض ْالبُخ ِ‬
‫َار ا‬ ‫غ ََر ُ‬
‫َ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ض ال ُم ْعت َِزل ِة َوأه ِل الظاهِر ِ‪َ ،‬وه َُو َخطأ‪...‬‬ ‫َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬
‫على اآليَةِ‪َ ،‬و َهذا ق ْو ُل بَ ْع ِ‬‫ث[ ا ْعتِ َمادًا َ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫صفَهُ بِال َحدَ ِ‬
‫َو ْ‬

‫‪46‬‬
‫‪Ibn Hajar said in Fathul Bari, vol. 13, p. 497:‬‬

‫ِب إِلَ ْي ِه إِذْ َال فَرْ قَ بَيْنَ َم ْخلُوق‬ ‫ي َال يَ ْق ِ‬

‫صدُ ذَلِكَ َو َال يَرْ َ‬
‫ضى بِ َما نُس َ‬ ‫ظر ِألَنَّ ْالبُخ ِ‬
‫َار َّ‬ ‫ب فَفِي ِه نَ َ‬‫ع ِن ْال ُم َهلَّ ِ‬
‫طال َ‬ ‫َوأما َما نَقله بن بَ َّ‬
‫ع ْق ًال َو َال نَ ْق ًال َو َال عُرْ فاً‬
‫َو َحادِث َال َ‬
‫‪47‬‬
‫‪Al-Kashmiri said in Faydh al-Bari, vol. 6, p. 589:‬‬

‫َصلُ‪ ،‬أ َّما إذا كان قائ ًما‬ ‫وهذا إنما نَشَأ من عدم اطالعه على اصطالح القدماء‪ ،‬فإن المخلوقَ عندهم هو ال ُمحْ د ُ‬
‫َث ال ُم ْنف ِ‬
‫القيام‪ ،‬و َخ َلقَ‬
‫َ‬ ‫زيد‬ ‫قَ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ل‬‫خ‬‫َ‬ ‫ُ‪:‬‬
‫ل‬ ‫تقو‬ ‫وال‬ ‫لفاعله‪ ،‬فال يُقَا ُل له‪ :‬إنه مخلوق‪ .‬وهذا عي ُن اللغة‪ ،‬فإنك تقولُ‪ :‬قام زيد‪ ،‬وقَعَدَ عمرو‪،‬‬
‫القيام والقعودَ‪ ،‬وإن كانا َحادثَيْن‪َّ ،‬إال أنهما ليسا منفصلين عن زيد وعمرو‪ ،‬فالشي ُء إذا قام‬ ‫َ‬ ‫عمرو القعودَ‪ ،‬وذلك ألن‬
‫ي‪ ،‬فإن بين اللفظين بَ ْونًا‬ ‫ُّ‬ ‫الجل‬ ‫ح‬
‫ُ‬ ‫االصطال‬ ‫هذا‬ ‫عليه‬ ‫ِي‬‫ف‬ ‫خ‬
‫َ‬ ‫حيث‬ ‫الحافظ‬ ‫من‬ ‫جب‬ ‫والع‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫مخلوق‬ ‫غير‬
‫بفاعله‪ ،‬فهو حادث ُ‬
‫بعيدًا‪.‬‬
‫‪48‬‬
‫‪He said in vol. 2, p. 566‬‬

‫وصرح أنَّ هللا تعالى‬

‫َّ‬ ‫البخاري رضي هللا تعالى عنه‪،‬‬
‫ُّ‬ ‫ق له‪ .‬وإليه َجنَح‬
‫ف بالنزول وال يقال‪ :‬إنه َخال ٌ‬ ‫إنَّ َّ َ‬
‫َّللا تعالى ُمت َِّص ٌ‬
‫ُ‬
‫أولوا كالمه‪.‬‬ ‫ت حادثةٍ‪ ،‬غير أنَّ الشارحين َّ‬ ‫ف بصفا ٍ‬ ‫ُمت َِّص ٌ‬
‫‪49‬‬
‫‪Al-Khallal, in his Sunnah, ed. Aal Hamdan, vol. 2, p. 72, reports Imam Ahmad as saying:‬‬

‫ألستَ مخلوقا؟ فقال‪ :‬نعم‪ ،‬فقال‪ :‬أليس كل شيء منك مخلوقا؟ فقال‪ :‬نعم‪ ،‬فقال أحمد‪ :‬فكالمك أليس هو منك‪ ،‬وهو‬
‫مخلوق؟ فقال‪ :‬نعم ‪ ،‬فقال‪ :‬فكالم هللا أليس هو (منه)؟ فقال‪ :‬نعم» فأجابه أحمد بصيغة سؤال اإلنكار‪ :‬فيكون (من هللا)‬
‫شيء مخلوق؟‬
‫‪50‬‬
‫‪Adh-Dhahabi reports in an authentic report in his Kitab al-‘Uluww:‬‬

‫قال ابن أبي حاتم‪ :‬حدثنا أحمد بن سلمة النيسابوري‪ :‬سمعت إسحاق بن إبراهيم الحنظلي يقول‪ :‬ليس بين أهل العلم‬
‫اختالف أن القرآن كالم هللا ليس بمخلوق‪ ،‬فكيف يكون شيء خرج من الرب مخلوقًا؟‬
‫‪51‬‬
‫‪Al-Darimi states in his response to al-Marrisi, vol. 1, p. 211:‬‬

‫وإنه ال يقا س روح هللا وبيت هللا وعبد هللا المجسمات المخلوقات القائمات المستقالت بأنفسهن الالتي كن بكالم هللا‬
‫وأمره لم يخرج شيء منها من هللا ككالمه الذي خرج منه ألن هذا المخلوق قائم بنفسه وعينه وحليته وجسمه ال يشك‬
‫أحد في شيء منها أنه غير هللا وأنه ليس شيء منها هلل صفة‬

‫‪19‬‬
from Allah, the Speech is still uncreated because of its interlinking with Allah’s
uncreated essence.
Ibn Qutaybah similarly distinguished between muhdath and makhluq,52 as did Al-
Qassab,53 al-Sijizzi,54 and others.

In summary, knowing how stringent scholars such as Al-Bukhari and Ibn Qutaybah were
in following the Salaf, we could only deduce that they indeed represented the mainstream
stance of the righteous Salaf accordingly on this topic at its core when it comes to the
affirmation of volitional attributes; nevertheless, the Salaf differed with each other when
it comes to articulating their stance whereby some avoided certain terminologies such as
huduth to refer to these volitional attributes, while others did not shy away from its use.
Thus, we must examine on a case-by-case basis what each scholar means when he uses
the term muhdath.
Regarding the Word “Qadeem” (Eternal)

We need to consider how different categories of scholars used the word qadeem to
describe Allah’s attributes.

Scholars such as Ibn Taymiyyah would look at Allah’s attributes in a threefold manner:

52
He said on pages 38-39 of his book, Al-Ikhtilaf fi al-Lafdh wal-Radd ‘ala al-Jahmiyyah:

‫ ﴿ما يأتيهم‬:‫ ﴿إنا جعلناه قرآنا عربيًا﴾ والجعل بمعنى الخلق وألنه قال‬:‫وقالوا في كالم هللا أنه مخلوق ألن هللا تعالى قال‬
‫ ﴿كلم هللا موسى تكلي ًما﴾ أوجد كال ًما‬:‫ ﴿كلم هللا﴾ أوجد كال ًما و‬:‫من ذكر من ربهم محدث﴾ وكل محدث مخلوق وأن معنى‬
‫ وترحم هللا أتى بالرحمة من‬،‫ ِلن معنى تكلم هللا أتى بالكالم من عنده‬،‫سمعه فخرجوا بهذا التأويل من اللغة والمعقول‬
…،‫ وتشجع أتى بالشجاعة من نفسه‬،‫ كما يقال تخشع فالن أتى بالخشوع من نفسه‬،‫عنده‬

‫ {لعل هللا يحدث بعد ذلك‬:‫ فإن أنكروا ذلك فليقولوا في قول هللا‬، ‫وكذلك المحدث ليس هو في موضع بمعنى مخلوق‬
‫ والمعنى يجدد عندهم ما‬.ً‫ يحدث لهم القرآن ذكرا‬:‫ {لعلهم يتقون أو يحدث لهم ذكرا} أي‬:‫ وكذلك قوله‬،‫أمراً} أنه يخلق‬
.‫لم يكن‬

.‫ ﴿ما يأتيهم من ذكر من ربهم محدث﴾ أي ذكر حدث عندهم لم يكن قبل ذلك‬:‫وكذلك قوله‬
53
Al-Qassab states in his Nukat, vol. 1, pp. 428-429 that Allah’s act of istiwa temporally originated after
creating the Throne, thus distinguishing between the two:

‫ ألنه جل وتعالى قاهر‬،‫ فال يجوز أن يكون في هللا حادثًا‬،‫ أن االستيالء إذا كان اسما واقعا على الغلبة والقهر‬:‫والثانية‬
َ ‫ (ث ُ َّم ا ْستَوى‬:‫ فقوله‬،‫ واالستواء يجوز أن يحدثه بعد خلق العرش‬،‫غالب في األول‬
‫على ال َعرْ ِش) يبين أن االستواء بعد‬
.‫خلق السموات واألرض‬
54
Ibn Taymiyyah in vol. 2, pp. 88 of his Dar’ reports Al-Sijizzi affirming the temporal origination of some
of Allah’s Speech as He speaks:

‫ وأنه إذا‬،‫ كن‬:‫ فبين ﷻ أنه قال آلدم بعد أن خلقه من تراب‬،)٨٢ :‫﴿إنما أمره إذا أراد شيئا أن يقول له كن فيكون﴾ (يس‬
‫ لما قام من الدليل على انتفاء‬،‫ ولم يقتض ذلك حدوثًا وال خلقًا بعد حدوث نوع الكالم‬،‫ كن فيكون‬:‫أراد شيئًا يقول له‬
.‫الخلق عن كالم هللا تعالى‬

20
1) Essential attributes (sifat dhatiyyah): These attributes are necessarily interlinked with
Allah’s essence from eternity, such as Knowledge, Life, Power, etc.
2) Attributes of volition (sifat ikhtiyariyyah):55 These are attributes that are interlinked
with Allah’s will (i.e., volitional attributes) and are enacted temporally when Allah wills,
such as istiwa, descent, coming, etc.
3) Attributes that are both essential and volitional: The standard example is Allah’s
Speech. Ibn Taymiyyah would state that Allah has eternally had the attribute of Speech
and speaks whenever He wills temporally. As an essential attribute, Ibn Taymiyyah
would describe Allah’s Speech as qadeem al-naw’ (eternal in its genus), yet the
individual instances of speech are hadith al-ahad (temporally originated).
Many of Ibn Taymiyyah’s opponents, especially those inclined to ‘ilmul Kalam, strongly
disagree with the idea that Allah has attributes of action that temporally originate. Some
would either affirm them as qadeem (eternal) or deny that He has attributes of action
altogether. For them, anything that is muhdath is created, and Allah can have no created
attributes.
On the other hand, Ibn Taymiyyah would agree with the line of reasoning that Anwar al-
Kashmiri articulated, which I cited in the earlier section, which is that any actions
performed by Allah cannot be labeled as created by default, even though they originated
temporally.
Other scholars, such as al-Darimi, used the word qadeem differently. He used it to mean
“uncreated.” Nobody disputes that al-Darimi was ‘taymiyyan’ in his theology on sifat and
affirmed that Allah has volitional attributes, yet he still described Allah’s volitional
attributes as qadeem,56 but what he meant by qadeem was simply uncreated. He did not
mean by the term that they are eternal.
Similarly, Ismail al-Asbahani states that Allah spoke the Qur’an in specific from pre-
eternity (fi al-qidam),57 yet he adopts an explicit ‘taymiyyan’ stance on Allah’s attribute

55
Also referred to as attributes of action (sifat fi’liyyah).
56
In his response to al-Marrisi, he states:

‫ وقد أجمعنا على أن ال َح َركَة والنُّ ُزول وال َم ْشي والهرولة واالستواء على‬.‫ ُمطلق المفعوالت مخلوقة‬،‫ ال نسلم‬:ُ‫قل لَه‬
،‫ وهِي قدي َمة‬،‫ والمقت كلها أفعال فِي الذاات للذات‬،‫ضب والحب‬ َ َ‫ والفرح والغ‬،‫ والرضى‬،‫ وإلى السَّماء قديم‬،‫ال َعرْ ش‬
.‫ وكل ما كانَ من فعل الذاات فَه َُو قديم وهللا أعلم‬.‫»كن«فَه َُو حادث‬:‫فَكل ما خرج من قَول‬
57
He says in his al-Hujjah fi Bayan al-Mahajjah, vol. 1, p. 430:

َّ ‫ أي ُمحدث الت َّ ْن ِزيل؛ ِألن‬:‫ فال َجواب‬،﴾‫ ﴿ما يَأْتِي ِه ْم مِ ن ِذ ْكر مِ ن َرباِ ِه ْم ُمحدث اإال استمعوه‬:‫فَإن احْ تَجُّوا بقوله تَعالى‬
‫َّللا‬
،ِ‫علَ ْيه‬
َ ُ‫أنزله‬- ‫ ﷺ‬- ‫ فَلَ اما بعث ُم َح َّمدًا‬،‫تَعالى تكلم بِ ِه فِي القدَم‬

21
‫‪of Speech by recognizing that what is eternal is Allah’s attribute (i.e., the genus of‬‬
‫‪Speech) that never leaves Him, even though He speaks sequentially (i.e., temporally).58‬‬
‫‪Likewise, Ibn Hamid al-Hanbali (d. 403 A.H.) states that Allah’s Speech is qadeem, yet‬‬
‫‪he very likely meant the same thing that Ibn Taymiyyah did in that the genus of speech is‬‬
‫‪eternal.59 The evidence for this is that Ibn Hamid has another statement attributed to him‬‬
‫‪by his student al-Qadi Abu Ya’la (d. 458 A.H.), where he makes it clear that Allah’s act‬‬
‫‪of istiwa is not eternal, and he analogized that to Allah’s speaking and descent. 60 This‬‬
‫‪clearly shows that he believed in the temporal origination of these actions. It is also‬‬
‫‪possible that he believes that the Qur’an is literally eternal as an exception but remains‬‬
‫‪open to the possibility that Allah can still repeat speaking the Qur’an and speak other‬‬
‫‪things temporally by His will.‬‬
‫‪Other scholars pointed out how qadeem was used in ways to mean other than eternal.61‬‬

‫‪58‬‬
‫‪He states in vol. 2, pp. 203-204:‬‬

‫صفة الكَالم‪ ،‬وإذا كانَ َكذَلِك‪ ،‬كانَ القُرْ آن كَالم هللا وكانَت‬ ‫تَقول ال َع َرب‪ :‬زيد ُمتَكَلم‪ ،‬فالمتكلم صفة لَهُ‪ ،‬اإال أن َحقِيقَة َه ِذ ِه ال ا‬
‫ُفارقهُ لم يكن للمتكلم اإال كلمة واحِ دَة‪،‬‬ ‫ي‬
‫كانَ ِ‬ ‫و‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫أنه‬ ‫م‪،‬‬‫ا‬ ‫ل‬ ‫َ‬
‫ك‬ ‫على أن الكَالم ال يُفارق ال ُمتَ‬ ‫الز َمة لَهُ أزلية‪ .‬والدَّلِيل َ‬
‫صفة ِ‬
‫َه ِذ ِه ال ا‬
‫ِيرة بعد كلمة‪ ،‬د ال عَلى أن ال َكلِمات فروع لكَالمه‬ ‫ا‬ ‫َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫َ‬
‫فَإذا تكلم بها لم يبْق لهُ كَالم‪ ،‬فل اما كانَ ال ُمت َكلم قاد ًِرا عَلى َكلِمات َكث َ‬
‫الَّذِي ه َُو صفة لَهُ ُمالز َمة‪.‬‬
‫‪59‬‬
‫‪Ibn Taymiyyah offers this plausibility right before citing Ibn Hamid in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 6, p. 162:‬‬

‫َالم إذْ َل ْم يَزَ لْ يَتَ َكلَّ ُم إذا‬

‫ع الك ِ‬ ‫ث وال ُمحْ دَث؛ َفي ُِريدُونَ ن َْو َ‬ ‫ْس بِحا ِد ِ‬ ‫وأصْحابُ هَذا القَ ْو ِل‪ :‬قَدْ يَقُولُونَ ‪ :‬إنا كَال َمهُ قَدِيم وأنَّهُ لَي َ‬
‫على أنَّهُ‬ ‫ِث فَقَدْ ي ُِريدُ بِ ِه هَذا ال َم ْعنى‪ .‬بِنا ًء َ‬‫ستْ تَحِ ُّل ذاتَه ال َحواد ُ‬‫ي يَتَ َكلَّ ُم بِ ِه إذا شا َء و َمن قالَ‪ :‬لَ ْي َ‬ ‫شا َء؛ ْ‬
‫وإن كانَ الكَال ُم العَ ْينِ َّ‬
‫صدِي ُق أنَّ َّ َ‬
‫َّللا‬ ‫صو ِلهِ» ومِ اما يَ ِجبُ اإليما ُن بِ ِه والت َّ ْ‬‫َّللا ْب ُن حامِ د فِي «أ ُ ُ‬ ‫َالم فِي َك ْي ِفيَّ ِة ذاتِهِ‪ .‬وقا َل أبُو َ‬
‫ع ْب ِد َّ ِ‬ ‫لَ ْم يَحْ د ْ‬
‫ُث ن َْوعُ الك ِ‬
‫غي ُْر ُمحْ دَث كالع ِْل ِم والقُد َْرةِ‬
‫صوفًا وكَال ُمهُ قَدِيم َ‬ ‫يَتَ َكلَّ ُم؛ وأنَّ كَال َمهُ (قَدِيم وأنَّهُ لَ ْم يَزَ لْ ُمتَ َك ِلا ًما فِي ُك ِال ْأوقاتِ ِه ِبذَلِكَ َم ْو ُ‬
‫‪60‬‬
‫‪See ar-Riwayatayn wal-Wajhayn, ed. Al-Khalaf, p. 60, where he states:‬‬

‫فذهب شيخنا أبو عبد هللا ‪-‬يعني ابن حامد‪ -‬إلى أنه نزول انتقال‪ ،‬وقال‪ :‬ألن هذا حقيقة النزول عند العرب‪ ،‬وهذا نظير‬
‫قوله في االستواء‪ ،‬يعني قعد‪ ،‬وهذا على ظاهر حديث عبادة بن الصامت‪ ،‬وألن أكثر ما في هذا أنه من صفات الحدث‬
‫في حقنا‪ ،‬وهذا ال يوجب كونه في حقه محدثًا‪ ،‬كما االستواء على العرش‪ ،‬هو موصوف به مع اختالفنا في صفته‪ ،‬وإن‬
‫كان هذا االستواء لم يكن موصوفًا به في القدم‪ ،‬وكذلك نقول تكلم بحرف وصوت‪ ،‬وإن كان هذا يوجب الحدث في‬
‫صفاتنا‪ ،‬وال يوجبه في حقه‪ ،‬كذلك النزول‬
‫‪61‬‬
‫‪al-Qadi Abu Ya’la states in his al-Irshad:‬‬

‫وأرى الناس في زماننا هذا قد أ ُ ُ‬

‫غروا بلفظة "قديم" ‪ ،‬فمهما أرادوا إكرامه قالوا‪ :‬قديم‪).‬ثم يعلل ذلك بقوله‪( :‬فإما جهال‬
‫منه بمعنى القديم‪ ،‬وأنه ما ال أول لوجوده‪ ،‬أو يظن بمعنى عتيق‬

‫‪Abu Al-Faraj al-Shirazi (d. 486 A.H.) used it in his at-Tabsira to refer to precedence:‬‬

‫وجواب آخر هو أن حد القديم موجود في الكالم مع كونه مرتبا‪ ،‬ألن حد القديم ما كان متقدما على غيره‬

‫‪The Mu’tazilite scholar, Mahmud al-Khawarizmi (d. 536 A.H.), in his al-Fa’iq fi Usul ad-Din said that he‬‬
‫‪majority of the Ahlul Hadeeth did not actually properly abide by the term qadeem as entailed eternality:‬‬

‫وذهب أصحاب الحديث والحنابلة إلى أن هذا القرآن هو كالم هللا تعالى وأنه قديم غير مخلوق وال محدث) ثم يقول‪:‬‬
‫صلون معنى القديم‪ ،‬وأنه هو الذي ال أول لوجوده‬
‫قال أصحابنا‪ :‬إن أكثر أصحاب الحديث ال يح ا‬

‫‪22‬‬
Thus, once again, we need to be careful and assess what each scholar means on a case-
by-case basis what they are truly trying to communicate when they use the word qadeem.
Are they using it in a ‘taymiyyan’ manner to refer to the eternality of the genus of the
attribute, or are they using it like al-Darimi to emphasize the uncreatedness of the
attribute, or are they being straightforward with their usage and are just simply trying to
say that the attribute, along with its manifestations and actualizations, is eternal? This
needs to be ascertained when dealing with every individual scholar.

The Stance of Pre-Ibn Taymiyyah Hanbalis on Allah’s Speech and

Volitional Attributes in General
Because of how well-established Imam Ahmad’s position was regarding the affirmation
that Allah speaks in sounds and letters, it was too hard for those in the Ahlul Hadeeth
camp who were inclined toward ilmul kalam to deny it. Thus, those who denied Allah’s
Speech as a volitional attribute fell into two camps: 1) The Salimiyyah and the Hanbalis
that followed them, and 2) The Kullabiyyah and the Asharis that followed them.
Nevertheless, the dominant stance among the earliest Hanbalis and Ahlul Hadeeth, even
according to enemy testimony,62 appears to have been that Allah’s Speech is also a
volitional attribute.

62
Al-Jahiz (d. 255), who is a very early source who lived contemporary with Imam Ahmad and his earliest
students, complains about the naabita (a denigrating term he used to label Imam Ahmad and his followers)
and how they would state that the Qur’an temporally originated, yet remains uncreated. We read in al-
Rasail lil-Jahiz, vol. 2, pp. 18-19:

‫ واإلنجيل‬،‫والزبور غير اإلنجيل‬ َّ ،‫الزبور‬ َّ ‫ وأنا التَّوراة غير‬،‫ و ُحجَّة وبرهان‬،‫ثم زعم أكثرهم أنا كالم هللا حسن وبياِن‬
‫ وأناه لو شاء أن يزيد فيه‬،‫ وجعله برهانه على صدق رسوله‬،‫ وأنا هللا تولاى تأليفه‬،‫ والبقرة غير آل ع ْمران‬،‫غير القرآن‬
،‫ وأناه أنزله تنزيال‬،‫ ولو شاء أن ينسخه كلَّه بغيره نسخه‬،‫ ولو شاء أن يبداِله بدَّله‬،‫ ولو شاء أن ينقص منه نقص‬،‫زاد‬
‫ فأعطوا جميع‬.‫ غير أنا هللا مع ذلك كلَّه لم يخل ْقه‬،‫ وال يقدر عليه إال هو‬،‫ وأناه باهلل كان دون غيره‬،‫صله تفصيال‬ َّ ‫وأناه ف‬
ْ ‫أنا‬
‫ وكذلك‬،‫ والعجب الخَللق عند العرب إنما هو التقدير نفسه؛ فإذا قالوا خلق كذا وكذا‬.‫صفات الخلق ومنعوا اسم الخلق‬ ْ
َّ ‫الطين كهيئة‬
‫ صنعه وجعله وقدَّره‬:‫الطيْر» فقالوا‬ ‫ «وإذْ تخلُ ُق من ِ ا‬:‫قال «أحسن الخالقين» وقال «ت َْخلُقُون إ ْف ًكا» وقال‬
.‫ ومنعوا َخلَقه‬،‫صله وأحدثه‬ َّ ‫ وف‬،‫وأنزله‬

23
Ibn Khuzaymah63 declared himself innocent of some of his students who adopted this
stance. He harshly declared those that denied that Allah could speak after He had already
spoken as ignoramuses who do not understand the book of Allah64 and as Jahmis.65
Abu Ismail al-Harawi al-Hanbali (481 A.H.) spoke about the fitnah that arose during the
time of Ibn Khuzaymah, whereby some denied that Allah repeatedly speaks because they
alleged that it entails that Allah’s speech is created. Al-Harawi spoke about how Ibn
Khuzaymah responded to this fitnah, and he asked Allah to reward Ibn Khuzaymah for
doing so.66
Al-Hakim an-Nisapuri and Ibn Taymiyyah spoke about Ibn Khuzaymah’s disputes with
those who denied that Allah could speak whenever He wills. Many of those who held this
stance were not immediately identified by Ahlul Hadeeth scholars such as Ibn
Khuzaymah because they outwardly appeared to agree with Ahlul Hadeeth; however, the
Mu’tazilites knew that their stance entailed that Allah’s speech is only eternal and that He

Also, Ibn Burhan al-Baghdadi (d. 518 A.H.) states in his book, Al-Wusul fil Usul, pp. 60-61:

‫ اتفقوا أن الحروف قديمة وهم في ذلك‬،‫قالوا ف نحن نرى طوائف المشبهة وهم أقوام ال يحويهم بلد وال يحصيهم عدد‬
. ‫جاحدون للضرورات العقلية‬

‫سئلوا عن الحروف متى ابتدئ بها ومتى ختمت؟ قالوا‬ ُ ‫ اعلم أن المشبهة ما اتفقوا على جحد الضرورة فإنهم إذا‬: ‫قلنا‬
‫ ألنهم ظنوا أن في ذلك‬،‫ وإن استعفوا من إطالق اسم الحدوث عليها‬،‫ وهذا تصريح منهم بالحدوث‬،‫في الوقت الفالني‬
‫ وهذا عذرهم في المنع سواء صح او فسد‬،‫نقصا في حق هللا‬
63
And as we will see later, the Hanbalis that came later treated Ibn Khuzaymah’s theology as authoritative.
Thus, Ibn Khuzaymah, despite being Shafi, was viewed to have been loyal to Imam Ahmad’s aqeedah
according to later Hanbalis.
64
Imam adh-Dhahabi in his Tadhkirat al-Huffaadh, vol. 2, p. 211 states:

‫ زعم بعض هؤالء الجهلة أن هللا ال يكرر الكالم فال يفهمون‬:‫سمعت محمد بن أحمد بن بالويه سمعت ابن خزيمة يقول‬
‫ي ِ آالءِ َرباِ ُكما‬
‫ أن هللا قد أخبر في مواضع أنه خلق آدم وكرر ذكر موسى وحمد نفسه في مواضع وكرر ﴿فَبِأ ا‬،‫كالم هللا‬
ِ ‫ت ُ َكذا‬
.‫ِبان﴾ ولم أتوهم مسلما يتوهم أن هللا ال يتكلم بشيء مرتين‬

Ibn Taymiyyah also reports this in his Dar’ Ta’arud al-Aql wal-Naql, vol. 2, p. 79-80.
65
Ibid.:

‫ إن القرآن كالم هللا ووحيه وتنزيله غير‬:‫سمعت أبا سعيد عبد الرحمن ابن أحمد المقرئ سمعت ابن خزيمة يقول‬
‫ أو يقول إن أفعاله تعالى‬،‫ إن هللا ال يتكلم بعد ما تكلم به في اِلزل‬:‫ أو يقول‬،‫ شيء منه مخلوق‬:‫مخلوق ومن قال‬
،‫ أو يقول إن القرآن محدث فهو جهمي‬،‫مخلوقة‬
66
He states in his Manaqib al-Imam Ahmad, as reported by Ibn Taymiyyah in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 6,
pp. 177-178:

‫صي ُح‬ِ ‫طار ِلت ِْلكَ ال ِفتْنَ ِة ذاكَ اإلما ُم أبُو َب ْكر؛ َف َل ْم َيزَ لْ َي‬َ َ‫ ف‬...‫ ال َيتَ َكلَّ ُم َب ْع َد ما تَ َكلَّ َم؛ فَ َي ُكو ُن كَال ُمهُ حا ِدثًا‬: ْ‫ث ُ َّم جا َءتْ طا ِئفَة فَقالَت‬
‫ش فِي‬ َ
َ ‫ب ونَق‬ َّ َ
ِ ‫ِف فِي َرداِها؛ كَأنَّهُ ُم ْنذ ُِر َجيْش َحتاى د ََّونَ فِي الدَّفات ِِر وتَ َمكنَ فِي السَّرائ ِِر؛ ولقنَ فِي الكَتاتِي‬
َّ ُ ‫صنا‬
َ ُ‫بِتَ ْش ِوي ِهها وي‬
ِ ‫ع ْن نُص َْرةِ دِينِ ِه وت َْوق‬
‫ِير‬ َ ُ
َ ‫اإلمام وأولئِكَ النَّف ََر الغُ َّر‬
َ َّ ‫س َكتَ ؛ فَ َجزى‬
َ‫َّللاُ ذاك‬ َّ
َ ‫َّللا ُمتَ َك ِل ٌم إنْ شا َء تَ َكل َم وإنْ شا َء‬ ‫ا‬ َ َّ َّ‫ أن‬:‫ب‬ِ ‫حاري‬ ِ ‫ال َم‬
.‫نَبِياِ ِه َخي ًْرا‬

24
‫‪cannot speak whenever He Willed, and they revealed this to Ibn Khuzaymah, who in turn‬‬
‫‪ascribed them to the Kullabiyyah camp.67‬‬
‫‪Ibn Taymiyyah cites Ghulam al-Khallal (d. 363 A.H.) from his book, Kitab al-Sunnah fi‬‬
‫‪al-Muqni‘, where he states that the early companions of Imam Ahmad fell into two‬‬
‫‪camps when it comes to Allah’s Speech. One camp compared Allah’s Speech with the‬‬
‫‪essential attribute of His Knowledge, thus entailing the eternality of all of Allah’s‬‬
‫‪Speech. The second camp, Ghulam states, compared Allah’s Speech with His volitional‬‬
‫‪attribute of creation, which entails that Allah could speak at times while does not do so‬‬
‫‪during others.68‬‬

‫‪67‬‬
‫‪Al-Hakim an-Nisapuri said, as reported by Ibn Taymiyyah in his Dar’, vol. 2 pp. 78-79:‬‬

‫فحدثني أبو بكر أحمد بن يحيى المتكلم قال‪ :‬اجتمعنا ليلة عند بعض أهل العلم‪ ،‬وجرى ذكر كالم هللا‪ :‬أقديم لم يزل‪ ،‬أو‬
‫يثبت عند اختياره تعالى أن يتكلم به؟ فوقع بيننا في ذلك خوض‪.‬‬

‫قال جماعة منا‪ :‬إن كالم الباري قديم لم يزل‪ ،‬وقال جماعة‪ :‬إن كالمه قديم‪ ،‬غير أنه ال يثبت إال باختياره لكالمه‪.‬‬

‫‪Ibn Taymiyyah said in his Dar’, vol. 2, pp. 8-10:‬‬

‫فبكرت أنا إلى أبي علي الثقفي‪ ،‬وأخبرته بما جرى‪ ،‬فقال‪ :‬من أنكر أنه لم يزل فقد اعتقد أنه محدث‪ ،‬وانتشرت هذه‬
‫المسألة في البلد‪ ،‬وذهب منصور الطوسي في جماعة معه إلى أبي بكر محمد بن إسحاق وأخبروه بذلك‪ ،‬حتى قال‬
‫منصور‪ :‬ألم أقل للشيخ إن هؤالء يعتقدون مذهب الكالبية‪ ،‬وهذا مذهبهم‪ ،‬جمع أبو بكر أصحابه‪ ،‬وقال‪ :‬ألم أنهكم غير‬
‫مرة عن الخوض في الكالم‪ ،‬ولم يزدهم على هذا في ذلك اليوم‪ ،‬وذكر أنه بعد ذلك خرج على أصحابه‪ ،‬وأنه صنف‬
‫في الرد عليهم‪ ،‬وأنهم ناقضوه‪ ،‬ونسبوه إلى القول بقول جهم في أن القرآن محدث‪ ،‬وجعلهم هو كالبية‪.‬‬

‫ولما كان اإلثبات هو المعروف عند أهل السنة والحديث كـ البخاري وأبي زرعة وأبي حاتم ومحمد بن يحيى الذهلي‬
‫وغيرهم من العلماء الذين أدركهم اإلمام محمد بن إسحاق بن خزيمة‪ ،‬كان المستقر عنده ما تلقاه عن أئمته‪ :‬من أن هللا‬
‫تعالى لم يزل متكل ًما إذا شاء‪ ،‬وأنه يتكلم بالكالم الواحد مرة بعد مرة‪.‬‬

‫وكان له أصحاب كـ أبي علي الثقفي وغيره تلقوا طريقة ابن كالب‪ ،‬فقام بعض المعتزلة وألقى إلى ابن خزيمة سر قول‬
‫هؤالء‪ ،‬وهو أن هللا ال يوصف بأنه يقدر على الكالم إذا شاء‪ ،‬وال يتعلق ذلك بمشيئته‪ ،‬فوقع بين ابن خزيمة وغيره‬
‫وبينهم في ذلك نزاع‪ ،‬حتى أظهروا موافقتهم له فيما ال نزاع فيه‪ ،‬وأمر والة األمر بتأديبهم لمخالفتهم له‪ ،‬وصار الناس‬
‫حزبين‪ ،‬فالجمهور من أهل السنة وأهل الحديث معه‪ ،‬ومن وافق طريقة ابن كالب معه‪ ،‬حتى صار بعده علماء‬
‫نيسابور وغيرهم حزبين‪ ،‬فـ الحاكم أبو عبد هللا وأبو عبد الرحمن السلمي وأبو عثمان النيسابوري وغيرهم معه وكذلك‬
‫يحيى بن عمار السجستاني وأبو عبد هللا بن منده وأبو نصر السجزي وشيخ اإلسالم أبو إسماعيل األنصاري وأبو‬
‫القاسم سعد بن علي الزنجاني وغيرهم معه‪ ،‬وأما أبو ذر الهروي وأبو بكر البيهقي وطائفة أخرى فهم مع ابن كالب‪.‬‬
‫‪68‬‬
‫‪Ibn Taymiyyah states in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 6, p. 158:‬‬

‫سألُوهُ إنا ُك ْم إذا قُ ْلت ُ ْم لَ ْم َيزَ لْ ُمتَ َك ِلا ًما كانَ‬

‫سنَّ ِة فِي ال ُم ْقن ِِع» ‪ -‬لَ اما َ‬
‫ب ال ُّ‬ ‫يز ‪ -‬فِي ال ُج ْزءِ َّ‬
‫األو ِل مِ ن «كِتا ِ‬ ‫وقا َل أبُو َب ْكر َ‬
‫ع ْبدُ ال َع ِز ِ‬
‫الن‪:‬‬ ‫و‬
‫ِ ْ ِ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫نا‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ْحا‬ ‫ص‬ ‫أل‬‫ِ‬ ‫ع َبثًا‪ .‬فَقالَ‪:‬‬
‫ذَلِكَ َ‬

‫ضدَّ الع ِْل ِم ال َج ْهلُ‪ .‬قالَ‪ :‬ومِ ن أصْحابِنا َمن قا َل قَدْ أثْبَتَ‬ ‫س كَما أنَّ ِ‬ ‫َالم الخ ََر ُ‬ ‫ضدَّ الك ِ‬ ‫أ َحدُهُما‪َ :‬ل ْم يَزَ لْ ُمتَ َك ِال ًما كالع ِْل ِم؛ ِألنَّ ِ‬
‫أن يَ ْخلُقَ ْ‬
‫وإن لَ ْم يَ ُك ْن خا ِلقًا فِي‬ ‫ت إرادَتِ ِه ْ‬‫أن يَ ُكونَ خا ِلقًا فِي ُك اِل حال؛ بَلْ قُ ْلنا إناهُ خالِق فِي و ْق ِ‬ ‫ِلنَ ْف ِس ِه أنَّهُ خالِق ولَ ْم يَ ُج ْز ْ‬
‫أن يَ ُكونَ ُمتَ َك ِلا ًما؛ بَلْ ه َُو ُمتَ َكلاِم خالِق‬
‫طلْ ْ‬‫وإن لَ ْم يَ ُك ْن ُمتَ َك ِلا ًما فِي ُك اِل حال لَ ْم يَ ْب ُ‬
‫أن يَ ُكونَ خا ِلقًا؛ َكذَلِكَ ْ‬ ‫طلْ ْ‬ ‫ُك اِل حال ولَ ْم يَ ْب ُ‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ا‬
‫وإن لَ ْم يَ ُك ْن خا ِلقًا فِي ك اِل حال وال ُمتَ َك ِل ًما فِي ك اِل حال‪.‬‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ْ‬

‫‪Ibn Taymiyyah continues to quote al-Qadi Abu Ya’la’s objection to those Hanbalis who held Allah’s‬‬
‫‪Speech as a volitional attribute. Al-Qadi stated that they likely based their opinion on Imam Ahmad’s‬‬
‫‪statement, “He is always speaking if He wills,” while al-Qadi admits he made ta’weel of Imam Ahmad’s‬‬
‫‪statement:‬‬

‫‪25‬‬
The important question we need to ask here is whether Ghulam is reporting a
disagreement among the Hanbalis regarding whether Allah has volitional attributes in
general or whether this is a particular disagreement about the divine attribute of
Speech. There is good reason to believe that it is the latter for the following reasons:
1) Ghulam said that the Hanbalis differed over whether Allah’s Speech should be
compared to volitional attributes such as creation or essential attributes such as
knowledge. This entails that the Hanbalis already conceded that Allah does have
volitional attributes such as creation; otherwise, it would have been futile and senseless to
debate whether Speech is similar to Allah’s attribute of creation.
2) Ibn Hamid similarly reports the difference of opinion regarding Allah’s Speech only
and does not report a difference of opinion regarding the other attributes.69
3) Complete denial of Allah’s volitional attributes is clearly a stance that can only be
adduced purely through kalami deductions and inquiry, and everyone agrees that Imam
Ahmad and his earliest followers did not establish aqeedah purely through kalami
deductions.
But if they did not adopt the kalami stance that Allah does not have volitional attributes at
all, why then did some of the earliest Hanbalis hold an exceptional view that Allah’s
Speech is an essential and not a volitional attribute?
This is primarily due to statements from Imam Ahmad where he apparently treats Allah’s
Speech the same way Allah’s Knowledge (an essential attribute, not a volitional one)
should be treated.70 But why did Imam Ahmad say this? Was it for philosophical/kalami

‫ نَقُو ُل إناهُ لَ ْم‬:َ‫سؤا َل فَقال‬ ُّ ‫علَ ْي ِه هَذا ال‬ َ ‫آن « لَ اما ْأو َر َد‬ ِ ‫َيان فِي َمسْألَ ِة القُ ْر‬ ِ ‫إيضاح الب‬ِ » ‫ب‬ ِ ‫القاضي أبُو يَعْلى فِي كِتا‬ ِ ‫قا َل‬
‫ع ْن‬ َ ‫أن ذَك ََر‬ ْ ‫َالم إلى‬َ ‫ك‬ ‫ل‬‫ا‬ َ‫وساق‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ب‬
َ ْ
‫ن‬ ‫ح‬
َ ‫ة‬ِ ‫ي‬
َ ‫وا‬ ‫ر‬
ِ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ُ ‫د‬ ‫م‬
َ ْ‫أح‬ ‫ه‬
ِ ‫ي‬
ْ َ ‫ل‬‫ع‬َ َّ‫َص‬ ‫ن‬ ‫؛‬ ‫ناه‬ ‫وال‬ ‫ر‬ ِ‫آم‬ ‫وال‬ ‫ب‬ َ
‫ط‬ ‫خا‬ ‫م‬
ُ ‫وال‬ ‫م‬
ِ َّ ‫ل‬‫ك‬َ ‫م‬
ُ ‫ب‬
ِ ‫ْس‬
َ ‫ي‬ َ ‫ل‬ ‫و‬ ‫ا‬‫م‬ً ‫ا‬ ‫ل‬ ِ َ
‫ك‬ َ ‫ت‬‫م‬ُ ْ‫ل‬ َ‫يَز‬
‫َّللا «لَ ْم‬ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬َ ‫ لَ َع َّل هَذا القائِ َل مِ ن أصْحا ِبنا يَذْهَبُ إلى قَ ْو ِل أحْ َمدَ ب ِْن َح ْنبَل فِي ِروايَ ِة‬:َ‫أ ِبي بَ ْكر ما َحكاهُ فِي ال ُم ْقن ِِع ث ُ َّم قال‬
‫َالم أحْ َمدَ َيتَ َكلَّ ُم إذا شا َء فِي َّأو ِل ال َمسْألَ ِة وال‬ َ ‫آن وقَدْ ت ََّأو ْلنا ك‬ ِ ْ‫ث القُر‬ِ ‫ والقائِ ُل ِب َهذا قائِل ِب ُحدُو‬:َ‫ قال‬.»‫َيزَ لْ ُمتَ َك ِلا ًما إذا شا َء‬
‫أن تُقَد ََّر فِيها ذَلِكَ ؛ وذَلِكَ ِألنَّنا لَ ْو قَدَّرْ نا ُو ُجودَ ال ِف ْع ِل فِيما لَ ْم‬ ْ ُ‫ت َي ِجب‬ ِ ‫صفا‬ ‫ق؛ ِألنَّ ت ِْلكَ ال ِ ا‬ِ ‫والر ْز‬
‫ق ِا‬ ِ ‫صفَهُ ِبالخ َْل‬ ْ ‫يُ ْش ِبهُ هَذا و‬
ْ
.‫يَزَ لْ أ ْفضى إلى قِد َِم العال ِم فأ اما الكَال ُم ف ُه َو كالعِل ِم‬
َ َ َ

‫سواء كانَتْ ُم ْشتَقَّةً مِ ن فِ ْعل‬ َ ‫ت قَدِي َمة‬

ِ ‫صفا‬‫ورا بَيان أنَّ َجمِ ي َع ال ِ ا‬ ً ُ ‫غف‬َ ْ‫ لَ ْم يَزَ ل‬:َ‫ قَ ْو ُل أحْ َمد‬:ِ‫أو ِل ال َمسْألَة‬ َّ ‫القاضي فِي‬ ِ ‫وقا َل‬
َ ‫ قُ ْلت و‬.ُ‫أن يَ ْس َمعَه‬
ُ‫ط ِريقَة‬ ‫ا‬
ْ ‫ َم ْعناهُ إذا شا َء‬:‫ لَ ْم يَزَ لْ ُمتَ َك ِل ًما إذا شا َء‬:ُ‫ وقَ ْولُه‬.ً‫ق ْأو لَ ْم تَ ُك ْن ُم ْشتَقَّة‬
ِ ‫والر ْز‬
‫ق ِا‬ ِ ‫ران والخ َْل‬ ِ ‫كالغُ ْف‬
‫ب‬
ِ ‫ث مِ ن أصْحا‬ ِ ‫ وأ اما أ ْكثَ ُر أ ْه ِل ال َحدِي‬.‫غونِي‬ ‫عقِيل واب ِْن ا‬
ُ ‫الزا‬ َ ‫ كاب ِْن‬:‫غي ِْر ِه ْم‬َ ‫ط ِريقَةُ أصْحابِ ِه وأصْحابِ ِه ْم و‬ َ ‫ِي‬
َ ‫القاضي َه ِذ ِه ه‬
ِ
َ‫َالم أ ْيضًا فَيُخا ِلفُونَهُ فِي ذَلِك‬ ِ ‫غي ِْر ِه ْم و َكثِير مِ ن أ ْه ِل الك‬ َ ‫أحْ َمدَ و‬
69
He states, as reported by Ibn Taymiyyah in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 6, p. 162:

‫صوفًا‬ُ ‫َّللا يَتَ َك َّل ُم؛ وأنَّ كَال َمهُ (قَدِيم وأنَّهُ لَ ْم يَزَ لْ ُمتَ َك ِلا ًما فِي ُك اِل ْأوقاتِ ِه ِبذَلِكَ َم ْو‬
َ َّ َّ‫صدِي ُق أن‬ ْ َّ ‫ومِ اما يَ ِجبُ اإليما ُن ِب ِه والت‬
ُ ‫صفَةَ ُمتَ َكلاِم لَ ْم يَزَ لْ َم ْو‬
َ‫صوفًا ِبذَلِك‬ ِ ُ ‫م‬ ‫َال‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ال‬ َ‫ون‬ ُ
‫ك‬ ‫ي‬
َ ْ
‫أن‬ ‫ب‬
ِ ‫ه‬
َ ْ ‫ذ‬ ‫م‬
َ ‫ال‬ ‫لى‬‫ع‬ ‫ء‬
َ ُ ِ‫ي‬ ‫ج‬ ‫ي‬
َ ْ ‫د‬ َ ‫ق‬‫و‬ ‫ة‬
ِ ‫ْر‬
َ ‫د‬ُ ‫ق‬ ‫وال‬ ‫م‬ ْ
ِ ‫غي ُْر ُمحْ دَث كال‬
‫ِل‬ ‫ع‬ َ ‫وكَال ُمهُ قَ ِديم‬
‫و ُمتَ َك ِلا ًما ُكلَّما شا َء وإذا شا َء‬
70
Ibn Battah in his al-Ibanah al-Kubrah, vol. 6, p. 34 reports Imam Ahmad as saying that the Qur’an was
always with Allah just as Allah’s Knowledge has always been:

‫ وعلم‬،‫كان هللا وال علم؟ !فالعلم من هللا وله‬: ‫ كان هللا وال قرآن؟ فقلت له مجيبًا‬:‫ وقال لي عبد الرحمن‬:‫قال أبو عبد هللا‬
‫ فهذا الكفر البياِن الصراح‬،‫ وزعم أن هللا مخلوق‬،‫ إنه مخلوق؛ فقد كفر باهلل‬:‫ فمن قال‬،‫ والعلم غير مخلوق‬،‫هللا منه‬

26
reasons? No, he based this reasoning on scriptural texts such as Surah 2:120, 2:145, and
3:61, which appear to state that the Qur’an is from Allah’s Knowledge.71
However, is it clear from Imam Ahmad’s statements that he is equating the Qur’an to
Allah’s Knowledge in every single way to the point that the Qur’an is eternal in its
Arabic form, and subsequently, Allah’s attribute of Speech, more generally, is only an
essential attribute? No, the primary point Imam Ahmad is making here is that just like
Allah’s essential attributes of Knowledge, Power, etc. Allah’s Speech is uncreated and
eternal as an attribute.72 However, this does not entail that Allah cannot speak temporally
as well.
This understanding is supported by other statements made by Imam Ahmad, such as:
- Imam Ahmad comparing Allah’s eternal attribute of Speech to His being eternally
Knowledgeable and Forgiving,73 yet no sinners existed from pre-eternity whom Allah
was forgiving. Allah’s acts of forgiveness are volitional, yet Imam Ahmad compared His
attribute of Speech to it as well.

He also reports in vol. 6, p. 69 that Imam Ahmad said that to claim the Qur’an is created is equivalent to
claiming that Allah’s Knowledge is created:

‫ وأنه لم يكن له‬،‫ ومن زعم أن القرآن مخلوق فقد كفر؛ ِلنه يزعم أن علم هللا مخلوق‬،‫القرآن كالم هللا ليس بمخلوق‬
‫علم حتى خلقه‬

Similarly, in vol. 6, p. 249, he reports Imam Ahmad as stating that Allah’s Knowledge is the Qur’an:

‫ علم‬:‫ قلت‬،‫ القرآن مخلوق‬:‫ ليس شيء أشدا عليهم مما أدخلت على من قال‬،‫ يا أبا طالب‬:‫ قال لي أحمد‬:‫قال أبو طالب‬
..‫فإن علم هللا هو القرآن‬: ‫ قلت‬،‫ ال‬:‫هللا مخلوق؟ !قالوا‬

We also read in Masai’l ibn Hani’, no. vol. 1, p. 417, narration no. 1858, that Imam Ahmad said that the
Qur’an is knowledge from among the knowledge of Allah:

‫ فمن زعم أن علم هللا مخلوق فهو كافر‬،‫القرآن عِلم من علم هللا‬
71
Ibn Battah in his al-Ibanah al-Kubra, vol. 6, p. 138 has the following narration attributed to Imam
Ahmad:

‫ القُرْ آ ُن‬:َ‫ « َمن قال‬:ُ‫سمِ ْعتُ أبِي يَقُول‬ َ :َ‫ قال‬،‫َّللا ْب ُن أحْ َمدَ ب ِْن َح ْنبَل‬
ِ َّ ُ‫ع ْبد‬َ ‫ نا‬:َ‫س ْلمانَ الناِجادُ قال‬ َ ‫َحدَّثَنا أبُو بَ ْكر أحْ َمدُ ْب ُن‬
ُ ْ
ُ ‫ العِل ُم َم ْخلوق فَ ُه َو كافِر ِألنَّهُ يَ ْز‬:ُ‫الر ُجل‬
ُ‫ع ُم أنَّه‬ َّ ‫ فَإذا قا َل‬،‫َّللا‬
ِ َّ ‫َّللا وفِي ِه أسْما ُء‬ ْ
ِ َّ ‫ فَ ُه َو ِع ْندَنا كافِر ِألنَّ القرْ آنَ مِ ن عِل ِم‬،‫َم ْخلُوق‬
ُ
‫َّللاُ تَعالى‬ ْ
َّ ‫] وقا َل‬٦١ ‫ ﴿فَ َمن حاجَّكَ فِي ِه مِ ن بَ ْع ِد ما جا َءكَ مِ نَ العِل ِم﴾ [آل عمران‬: ُ‫َّللا‬ َّ ‫ وقَدْ قا َل‬،ُ‫لَ ْم يَ ُك ْن لَهُ ع ِْلم َحتاى خ َْلقَه‬
َّ َّ
ِ َّ ‫ع ْنكَ اليَ ُهودُ وال النَّصارى َحتاى تَتَّبِ َع مِ لتَ ُه ْم قُلْ إنَّ هُدى‬
‫َّللا ه َُو ال ُهدى ولَئِ ِن اتَّبَعْتَ أ ْهوا َءهُ ْم بَ ْعدَ الذِي‬ َ ‫﴿ولَ ْن تَرْ ضى‬
‫ِتاب بِ ُك اِل آيَة ما‬ َ ‫] وقا َل تَعالى ﴿ولَئ ِْن أتَيْتَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الك‬١٢٠ ‫َصير﴾ [البقرة‬ ِ ‫ي وال ن‬ ِ َّ َ‫جا َءكَ مِ نَ الع ِْل ِم ما لَكَ مِ ن‬
‫َّللا مِ ن و ِل ا‬
‫ض ُه ْم ِبتا ِبع قِ ْبلَةَ بَ ْعض ولَئ ِِن اتَّبَعْتَ أ ْهوا َءهُ ْم مِ ن بَ ْع ِد ما جا َءكَ مِ نَ الع ِْل ِم إنَّكَ إذًا‬ ُ ‫تَ ِبعُوا قِ ْبلَتَكَ وما أ ْنتَ ِبتا ِبع قِ ْبلَتَ ُه ْم وما بَ ْع‬
،]١٤٥ ‫الظالِمِ ينَ ﴾ [البقرة‬ ‫ِل َم ِن ا‬
72
He states in his Radd ‘ala al-Jahmiyyah, p. 139:

‫ إنه قد كان ال يعلم حتى‬:‫ وال نقول‬.‫ إنه كان وال يتكلم حتى خلق الكالم‬:‫ إن هللا لم يزل متكل ًما إذا شاء وال نقول‬:‫بل نقول‬
،‫ إنه قد كان وال قدرة له حتى خلق لنفسه القدرة‬:‫ وال نقول‬،‫خلق عل ًما فعلم‬
73
Al-Ghulam al-Khallal in his Zaad al-Musafir, vol. 1, p. 304 reports Imam Ahmad as saying:

َ ،‫َّللاُ ُمتَ َك ِلا ًما عا ِل ًما‬

ً ُ ‫غف‬
‫ورا‬ َّ ‫ولَ ْم يَزَ ِل‬

27
- Imam Ahmad saying that the Qur’an came out (kharajah) from Him when He spoke
it.74 The act of “coming out” is a temporal one, thus indicating that Imam Ahmad
affirmed that Allah speaks at certain times.
- Imam Ahmad being reported to have interpreted the word “made” (‫ )جعلناه‬in Surah 43:3,
“Certainly, We have made (‫ )جعلناه‬it a Quran in Arabic…” to refer to a specific action by
Allah that made the Qur’an into Arabic.75 This is extremely important since what Imam
Ahmad is saying here is that he does not believe that the Qur’an in its Arabic form as we
know it existed eternally but rather became Arabic at a certain point in time.
- Imam Ahmad stating that Allah speaks at specific times, like on the Day of Judgment
when He judges people76 and in paradise.77
Bringing all of Imam Ahmad’s statements together, we can conclude that he believed that
the Qur’an is eternal in the form of Allah’s Knowledge but became Speech at the time
Allah spoke it.
Even if, for the sake of argument alone, it is granted that Imam Ahmad believed that the
Qur’an is eternal in its letters and sounds, this does not mean that he negated Allah’s
Speech as a volitional attribute whereby He can say new things over time or even

74
Ibn Battah in his al-Ibanah al-Kubrah, vol. 6, p. 36 has the following narration to Imam Ahmad:

ُ :َ‫ ذَ َك َر أبُو بَ ْكر األ ْعيُ ُن قال‬:َ‫ قال‬،َ‫َّللا ْب ُن أحْ َمد‬

‫سئِ َل أحْ َمدُ ْب ُن َح ْنبَل‬ َ ‫ َحدَّثَنا‬:َ‫ قال‬،ُ‫ َحدَّثَنا أحْ َمد‬:َ‫ قال‬،‫أخبَ َرنِي أبُو القاس ِِم‬
ِ َّ ُ‫ع ْبد‬ ْ
»ُ‫ وإلَ ْي ِه يَعُود‬،‫ج ه َُو ال ُمتَ َك ِلا ُم بِ ِه‬
َ ‫ «مِ نهُ َخ َر‬:ُ‫ج وإلَ ْي ِه يَعُودُ؟ قا َل أحْ َمد‬ ِ ‫ع ْن تَ ْفس‬
ِ َّ ‫ " القُ ْرآ ُن كَال ُم‬:ِ‫ِير قَ ْو ِله‬
َ ‫َّللا مِ نهُ َخ َر‬ َ
75
He said in his al-Radd ‘ala al-Jahmiyyah, p. 105:
ً ‫ كان ذلك‬-‫ﷺ‬- ‫فلما جعل هللا القرآن عربيًّا ويسره بلسان نبيه‬
‫ جعل القرآن به عربيًّا‬-‫تبارك وتعالى‬- ‫فعال من أفعال هللا‬
.‫ أنزلناه بلسان العرب‬:‫ وليس كما زعموا معناه‬،‫ هذا بيان لمن أراد هداه هللا مبينًا‬:‫يعني‬
76
In his Dar’, vol. 2 pp. 37-38, Ibn Taymiyyah says that Al-Khallal report in his Sunnah:
ً
‫ (من زعم أن هللا لم يكلم‬:‫ سمعت أبا عبد هللا يقول‬:‫حنبال حدثهم قال‬ ‫ (أخبرني علي بن عيسى أن‬:‫وقال الخالل في السنة‬
‫ فإن تاب وإال ضربت‬،‫ يستتاب من هذه المقالة‬،‫ ورد على رسول هللا ﷺ أمره‬،‫ وكذب القرآن‬،‫موسى فقد كفر باهلل‬
(.‫عنق‬

‫ ثم قال تعالى‬،‫) فأثبت الكالم لموسى كرامة منه لموسى‬١٦٤ :‫ ﴿وكلم هللا موسى﴾ (النساء‬:‫ (وسمعت أبا عبد هللا قال‬:‫قال‬
(١٦٤ :‫ ﴿تكليما﴾ (النساء‬:‫يؤكد كالمه‬

‫ هللا‬،‫ فمن يقضي بين الخالئق إال هللا ؟ يكلم عبده ويسأله‬،‫ نعم‬:‫ ( هللا يكلم عبده يوم القيامة؟ قال‬:‫قلت ألبي عبد هللا‬

.(‫ وأنى شاء‬،‫ كيف شاء‬،‫ وليس به عدل وال مثل‬،‫ لم يزل هللا يأمر بما يشاء ويحكم‬،‫متكلم‬
77
In his Dar’, vol. 2 p. 29, Ibn Taymiyyah says that Al-Khallal report in his Sunnah:

‫ أهل‬:‫ قيل له‬- ‫ يعني أحمد بن حنبل‬- ‫وقال أبو بكر الخالل في كتاب السنة (أخبرني يوسف بن موسى أن أبا عبد هللا‬
.)‫ كيف شاء وإذا شاء‬،‫ ويكلمهم ويكلمونه‬،‫ ينظر وينظرون إليه‬،‫ نعم‬:‫الجنة ينظرون إلى ربهم ويكلمونه ويكلمهم؟ قال‬

Ibn Battah reports the same in his al-Ibanah al-Kubra, vol. 3, p. 53:no

َ َّ َّ‫ إِن‬:َ‫ َو َم ْن قَال‬: ُ‫قَا َل أَحْ َمد‬

،‫ فَ ُه َو َجهْمِ ي َوقَدْ َكف ََر‬،ِ‫َّللا َال ي َُرى فِي ْاآلخِ َرة‬

َ ‫ َويُ َك ِلا ُم ُه ْم َكي‬،ُ‫ َويُ َك ِلا ُمونَه‬،‫ظ ُر إِلَ ْي ِه ْم‬

‫ َوإِذَا شَا َء‬،‫ْف شَا َء‬ ُ ‫يَ ْن‬: ‫َوقَا َل‬
ُ ‫ َويَ ْن‬،‫ظ ُرونَ إِلَى َرباِ ِه ْم‬

28
possibly speak the Qur’an again. As shown earlier, this possibility appears to be the
understanding of Ibn Hamid al-Hanbali.
The Kalami Influence on Hanbalis Who Came Later

Al-Qadi Abu Ya’la, Abu Al-Faraj al-Shirazi, Ibn al-Zaghouni (527 A.H.), and other
Hanbalis denied Allah’s volitional attributes altogether, and not only Speech. In an
attempt to ensure that they do not come across as having abandoned the theology of
Imam Ahmad, scholars such as al-Qadi felt compelled to make ta’weel of some of Imam
Ahmad’s apparent statements that affirmed Allah’s volitional attributes.
One popular example concerns Imam Ahmad’s famous statement, “He speaks if He
wills.”78 Imam Ahmad here says that Allah’s speaking is interlinked with His will since
the subjunctive, if (‫)إذا‬, connotes that Allah’s speaking is contingent upon His will. This,
however, proved problematic for al-Qadi Abu Ya’la, as he was influenced by kalami
arguments, which forbade that Allah could perform acts temporally.
Another kalami argument, specific to Allah’s speech, that the Asharis posed against
Hanbalis such as al-Qadi Abu Ya’la who granted that God could only be timeless and not
act temporally, is that affirming that Allah spoke the Qur’an in letters is problematic
since letters are arranged in succession (i.e., the letter Alif comes before Laam, which
comes before Meem), and speaking in succession entails speaking temporally. Thus, the
Asharis pushed the kalami-influenced Hanbalis into a tight corner for simultaneously
trying to affirm that Allah speaks in eternal letters and sounds yet is strictly timeless.

78
This statement is found in Imam Ahmad’s al-Radd ‘ala al-Jahmiyyah wal-Zanadiqa, vol. 1, p. 139:

‫ إن هللا لم يزل متكل ًما إذا شاء‬:‫بل نقول‬

There have been many arguments in modern times suggesting that this work has been falsely attributed to
Imam Ahmad. These have been sufficiently refuted by Nasir Aal Mut’ib in his book Daf’ al-Shukuk wal-
Awham ‘an Nisbat Kitab al-Radd. I do not wish to digress from the topic by diving into this matter. It
suffices to note that all major Hanbali scholars in the madhab affirm this book’s attribution to Imam
Ahmad, along with this statement.

Moreover, different variations of the same statement have been attributed to Imam Ahmad, such as in Ibn
Battah’s al-Ibanah al-Kubra, vol. 7, p. 53:

َ ‫ ويُ َك ِلا ُم ُه ْم َكي‬،ُ‫ ويُ َك ِلا ُمونَه‬،‫ظ ُر إلَ ْي ِه ْم‬

‫ وإذا شا َء‬،‫ْف شا َء‬ ُ ‫ يَ ْن‬:َ‫وقال‬
ُ ‫ ويَ ْن‬،‫ظ ُرونَ إلى َرباِ ِه ْم‬

And al-Ghulam al-Khallal in his Zaad al-Musafir, vol. 1, p. 301:

‫ ث ُ َّم قا َل‬،‫َالم ِل ُموسى كَرا َمةً مِ نهُ ِل ُموسى‬ َ ‫ َفأثْبَتَ الك‬،]١٦٤ ‫َّللاُ ُموسى تَ ْكلِي ًما﴾ [النساء‬ َّ ‫ «﴿و َكلَّ َم‬:َ‫ قال‬،‫َّللا‬ ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬
َ ‫سمِ ْعتُ أبا‬
َ ‫و‬
‫َّللاُ؟ يُ َك ِلا ُم‬ ِ ‫ضي بَيْنَ الخ َْل‬
َّ ‫ق اإال‬ َ ‫ يُ َك ِلا ُم‬:‫َّللا‬
ِ ‫ فَ َمن يَ ْق‬،‫ نَعَ ْم‬:َ‫ع ْبدَهُ يَ ْو َم القِيا َمةِ؟ قال‬ َ ‫ قُ ْلتُ ِألبِي‬:]١٦٤ ‫﴿تَ ْكلِي ًما﴾ [النساء‬: َ‫بَ ْعد‬
ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬
‫ وأناى شا َء‬،‫ْف شا َء‬ َ ‫ َكي‬،‫ْس له ِعدْل وال مِ ثْل‬ َ ‫ َلي‬،‫ له ْال َح ُك ُم‬،‫َّللاُ يَأ ْ ُم ُر بِما يشا َء‬ َّ ‫ لَ ْم يَزَ ِل‬،‫َّللاُ ُمتَ َكلاِم‬
َّ ،ُ‫ع ْبدَهُ ويَسْألُه‬ َّ
َ ُ‫َّللا‬
Thus, even without the attribution of al-Radd ‘ala al-Jahmiyyah wal-Zanadiqa to Imam Ahmad, it is settled
in the Hanbali madhab that Imam Ahmad uttered and affirmed this statement in terms of its meaning.

29
In response, Al-Qadi, finding himself having to remain loyal to the aqeedah of Imam
Ahmad while simultaneously trying to evade what he deemed to be troubling kalami
arguments, ended up doing two things:
1) He made ta’weel of Imam Ahmad’s statement, “He speaks whenever He Wills,” to
mean: “If He wills us to hear [His speech”].79 In other words, al-Qadi interpreted Imam
Ahmad’s statement to mean that Allah has spoken from pre-eternity but merely ‘unveils’
His pre-eternal Speech at specific points in time to certain people if He wills. With this
interpretation of Imam Ahmad’s words, al-Qadi can evade any potential charge that he
has departed from Imam Ahmad’s aqeedah while simultaneously eluding any
confrontation with the kalami argument that insists that Allah does not act/speak
temporally.
2) al-Qadi asserted that Allah’s speech is eternal, with Allah not speaking in succession.
Of course, other Hanbalis explicitly responded to al-Qadi’s attempt to depart from the
apparent words of Imam Ahmad80 and even rebutted the idea of Allah not speaking in

79
Ibn Hamdan al-Hanbali (d. 695 A.H.) reports this from al-Qadi in his Nihayat al-Mubtadi’een, p. 26:

‫ إذا شاء أن يسمعنا‬:‫وقال القاضي‬

80
In his work, al-Radd ‘ala man Radd ‘ala Shaykh al-Islam fi Mas’alat al-Hawadith, Ibn Qadi Al-Jabal al-
Hanbali (d. 771 A.H.) challenges al-Qadi Abu Ya’la’s attempt to make ta’weel of Imam Ahmad’s
statement that Allah speaks whenever He wills:

‫ على مشيئة اإلسماع بناء على أن الكالم صفة نفسية ال يتعلق‬،‫وتأول القاضي أبو يعلى المشيئة في قوله إذا شاء‬
‫ فقيل عليه هذا باطل لثالثة أوجه أحدهما أن رد المشيئة إلى مشيئة اإلسماع‬،‫بالمشيئة بل هو نعت ذاتي كالحياة والعلم‬
‫ الثالث‬،‫ الثاني أنه يلزم منه قِدم السامع ألن قوله لم يزل عبارة مستغرقة‬،‫تأويل الكالم وخروج عن ظاهره بغير دليل‬
،‫أن اإلمام أحمد قال فيما رده على الجهمية في قوله تعالى "إنا جعلنا قرآنا عربيا" أي صيرناه على فعل من أفعالنا‬
..‫وهذا يخالف تأويل من تأول الجعل بمعنى التسمية‬

Similarly, Ibn al-Mibrad (909 A.H.) addresses al-Qadi’s attempt to interpret Imam Ahmad’s words away
from its apparent meaning by stating in his book Tuhfat al-Wusul ‘ila ‘Ilm al-Usul ‘ala Madhab Ahlus Sunnah
wal-Jama’ah, pp. 106-107:

‫ وهذا ليس له‬،‫ القرآن كالم هللا قديم‬:‫ األول‬:‫ وأن األمر في ذلك على شيئين‬،‫وعندي أن األمر على غير ما ذكره القاضي‬
‫ وال‬،‫ وأن هللا عز وجل لم يزل متكلما‬،‫ أن كالم هللا عز وجل بالقرآن وتعبير القرأن قديم‬:‫الثاني‬...‫مدخل في كالم أحمد‬
.‫ الكالم صفة حدثت له = فهو لم يزل متكلما من حيث الجملة من غير نظر إلى شيء‬:‫نقول‬

‫ وأنه إذا‬،‫ مع أن كالمه الذي هو ضد ما لم يتكلم قديم‬،‫ متى شاء أن يتكلم بشيء تكلم به‬:‫ ((متى شاء)) يعني‬:‫وقول أحمد‬
‫ مع أن وصفه‬،‫ بل إذا شاء الكالم تكلم‬،‫ وأن كالمه ليس بمتصل منه في سائر اِلوقات‬،‫ وإذا شاء لم يتكلم‬،‫شاء تكلم‬
‫ وأما ما قالوه؛ يلزم منه أنه متكلم في كل وقت من‬،‫ وإذا شاء تكلم بغيره‬،‫ وأنه إذا شاء تكلم بشيء‬،‫بأنه متكلم قديم‬
.‫ وهذا يرده النقل والعقل‬،‫ وأن كالمه متصل مستمر على سائر األوقات‬،‫األوقات‬

‫ (إذا تكلم هللا بالوحي؛ سمع أهل السماء للسماء صلصلة كجر السلسلة على‬:‫وأيضًا فإن قول النبي صلى هللا عليه وسلم‬
‫ وقولهم‬،‫ مع أن وصفه بأنه متكلم قديم‬،‫ وأنه ال يتكلم إال إذا شاء‬،‫ هذا يدل على أن له أوقات ًا ال يتكلم فيها‬،)‫الصفوان‬
‫ بل يتكلم بشيء ينتهي ويأتي غيره‬،‫ وليس اِلمر كذلك‬،‫يلزم منه إذا تكلم بكلمة ال يزال يقولها‬

30
succession.81 Nevertheless, Al-Qadi’s views did survive in the school and were adopted
by Hanbalis who came after him, especially those influenced by ‘ilmul kalam.
However, as we read on and examine the stances of various Hanbali scholars, we will
come to see that al-Qadi’s thought was not the prevailing and dominant one among
Hanbalis.

The Aqeedah of Hanbali Scholars:

This is not an exhaustive list, but most of the important figures have been included. We
will primarily move in chronological order commencing with Imam Ahmad himself and
some of his major early followers.
Followed by this, we will look at the split that occurred in the Hanbali school between
those heavily influenced by ‘ilmul kalam versus those who remained strict Atharis with
an aversion to permitting kalam to primarily influence the establishment of any creeds.
Imam Ahmad (d. 241 A.H.)

What was Imam Ahmad’s aqeedah when it came to sifat? Did he do tafweedh of the
meanings or affirm them? The answer is the latter. I will start by laying out the proofs for
this, then address arguments for the former position.
Evidence That Imam Ahmad Affirmed the Meanings of the Attributes

Imam Ahmad pointed to his fingers to affirm fingers as a divine attribute. It is reported
that when discussing the hadith about Allah placing the creation on His Fingers, Imam
Ahmad pointed to each individual finger of his to emphasize the affirmation of this divine
attribute.82 It would not have been odd for Imam Ahmad to do so, considering seeing that

81
Ibn ‘Aqeel (d. 513 A.H.) states in his al-Radd ‘ala al-Asha’ira, ed. Makdisi, p. 76:

‫ إن المانع من أن يكون كالم هللا تعالى بحروف هو أن الثاني من الحروف متأخر واألول متقدم والقديم ال‬:‫فإن قيل‬
‫ هذا يبطل عليكم بقول هللا‬:‫ قيل‬،‫يجوز أن يسبق بعضه بعضا فثبت أن الحروف مخلوقة ألنها مترتبة في الوجود‬
‫ ((كن)) في األزل‬:‫ إنما قال آلدم ولعيسى‬:‫ فإن قيل‬،‫ ومعلوم أن آدم خلق قبل عيسى‬،))‫ ((كن‬:‫سبحانه آلدم ولعيسى‬
!‫ ولم يتقدم القول بعضه على بعض‬،‫بقدم الوجود آلدم قبل عيسى‬

‫ ((إنما قولنا لشيء إذا أردناه أن نقول له كم فيكون)) وال يخلو أن يكون جميع ما في‬:‫ هذا باطل؛ لقوله تعالى‬:‫قيل‬
‫ ويثبت أن جميع ما في‬،‫ فإن دليل الشرع والعقل يمنع ذلك‬،‫ فإن كان شيئا واحدا‬،‫ أو أشياء كثيرة‬،‫الدارين شيئا واحدا‬
‫ الذي يقول‬- ))‫ وال بد أن يخلق شيئا بعد شيء!! فيكون ((كن‬،))‫ ((كن‬:‫ وكل شيء منها قال هللا له‬،‫الدارين أشياء عدة‬
…‫ وذلك يمتنع في حالة واحدة وساعة واحدة‬،‫لكل شيء – منفردا من القول للشيء اآلخر‬

‫ وإن كانت غير متوالية فيعكسونها‬،‫ فإن كانت متوالية بطل ما قالوه‬،‫وال يخلو أن تكون حروفا متوالية أو غير مت والية‬
‫ وإن لم تكن‬،‫ ((صعيهك)) وهذا إن بلغوا إليه كفروا؛ ألنها إن كانت قرآنا لم يجز تغييرها‬:‫في القرآن وذلك أن يقولوا‬
.‫قرآنا عندهم كفروا‬
82
It is reported in Abdullah b. Ahmad’s al-Sunnah, vol. 1, p. 264:

َ ،‫َّللا‬
‫ع ِن‬ َ ‫ع ْن‬
ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬ ُ ‫ع ْن‬
َ ،َ‫عبَ ْيدَة‬ َ ‫ع ْن إبْراه‬
َ ،‫ِيم‬ َ ،‫صور‬ ُ ‫ع ْن َمن‬َ ،‫ع ِن األ ْع َم ِش‬َ َ‫س ْفيان‬
ُ ‫ث‬ِ ‫ ِب َحدِي‬،‫سعِيد‬ َ ‫ ثنا يَحْ يى ْب ُن‬، ‫ي‬ َ ‫سمِ ْعتُ أ ِب‬ َ
ْ ُ ‫على أ‬
َ ‫ َج َع َل يَحْ يى يُ ِشي بِأصابِ ِع ِه وأرانِي أ ِبي َكي‬:‫صبُع» قا َل أبِي‬
‫ْف‬ َ ‫ت‬ ِ ‫َّللا يُ ْمسِكُ السَّماوا‬َ َّ َّ‫ «أن‬:‫ي ِ ﷺ‬ ‫النَّبِ ا‬
‫صبُعًا َحت اى أتى عَلى آخِ ِرها‬ ْ ُ ‫صبُعًا أ‬
ْ ُ ‫ض ُع أ‬ ْ ُ ‫َجعَ َل يُشِي ُر بِأ‬
َ َ‫صبُ ِع ِه ي‬

31
the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself is reported to have clenched and opened his
fingers when relaying the same. Such a gesture entails recognition of the basic core
meaning of the attribute.
Moreover, Imam Ahmad used one attribute to argue for the existence of another. One of
Imam Ahmad’s proofs for us seeing Allah on the Day of Judgment is that Allah
communicated that He would be coming in Surah 2:210 and Surah 89:22.83 How did
Imam Ahmad use these as proofs? He used them as proofs because he clearly understood
these passages to entail that Allah will literally come in His essence and have a literal
presence that would facilitate others to see Him.84
So not only does Imam Ahmad clearly understand the meaning of these passages in order
to deduce from them that we can see Allah in the afterlife, but he also clearly affirmed
their temporality, which entails that Imam Ahmad also affirmed volitional attributes for
Allah.
Moreover, Imam Ahmad appealed to the Qur’anic passages on Allah’s “coming” as proof
that Allah exists with a limit (hadd)85 between Him and the creation.86

Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani also reports this in his Fathul Bari, vol. 13, p. 397, through al-Khallal’s transmission
from Abu Bakr al-Marudhi (d. 275 A.H.):

‫ص َبع َحتاى أتى‬ ْ ‫على إ‬ َ ‫ص َب ًعا‬

ْ ‫ض ُع إ‬
َ ‫ص َب ِع ِه َي‬
ْ ‫ِير ِبإ‬
ُ ‫سعِيد وقا َل و َج َع َل َيحْ يى يُش‬ َ ‫ع ْن َيحْ يى ب ِْن‬ َ ‫س َّن ِة‬
ُّ ‫ب ال‬ ِ ‫أخ َر َجهُ أحْ َمدُ ْب ُن َح ْن َبل فِي كِتا‬ْ
‫َّللا يُشِير بأصبع أصْبع‬ ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬ ْ‫َن‬
َ ‫سن ِة ع أبِي بَك ٍْر المروزي ع أحْ َم َد وقا َل َرأيْتُ أبا‬ ْ‫َن‬ َّ ُّ ‫ب ال‬ ‫ا‬ َ
ِ ‫ورواهُ أبُو بَك ٍْر الخال ُل فِي ِكتا‬ َ ‫على آخِ ِرها‬ َ
َ ‫ْف تَقُو ُل يا أبا القاس ِِم إذا و‬
َّ ‫ض َع‬
ُ‫َّللا‬ َ ‫ي َحداِثْنا فَقا َل َكي‬ ُّ ‫ي ِ ﷺ فَقا َل يا يَ ُهو ِد‬‫ي ِ َم َّر يَ ُهودِي بِالنَّبِ ا‬‫عبااس ِع ْندَ التاِرْ مِ ِذ ا‬َ ‫ووقع فِي َحدِيث بن‬ َ
‫وأشار أبُو َج ْعفَر يَ ْعنِي أ َحدَ ُرواتِ ِه‬
َ ‫على ِذ ِه‬ َ ‫ق‬ ِ ‫على ِذ ِه وسائ َِر الخ َْل‬ َ ‫والجبا َل‬
ِ ‫على ِذ ِه‬ َ ‫على ِذ ِه والما َء‬ َ َ‫ضين‬ ِ ْ‫على ِذ ِه واألر‬ َ ‫ت‬ ِ ‫السَّماوا‬
َ ‫صر َّأو ًال ث ُ َّم تابَ َع َحتاى بَلَ َغ اإلب‬
‫ْهام‬ َ ‫بِخِ ْن‬
83
Ibn Battah in his al-Ibanah al-Kubra, vol. 7, p. 53 relays this narration:

‫ ﴿وجا َء‬،]٢١٠ ‫َمام وال َمالئِ َكةُ﴾ [البقرة‬

ِ ‫ظلَل مِ نَ الغ‬ َّ ‫أن يَأْتِيَ ُه ُم‬
ُ ‫َّللاُ فِي‬ ُ ‫ ﴿ َهلْ يَ ْن‬:‫َّللا تَعالى‬
ْ ‫ظ ُرونَ اإال‬ ِ َّ ‫ قَ ْو ُل‬:‫َّللا‬
ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬َ ‫وقا َل أبُو‬
‫ فَقَدْ َكف ََر‬،‫َّللا ال يُرى‬ َ َّ َّ‫ إن‬:َ‫ فَ َمن قال‬،]٢٢ ‫صفًّا﴾ [الفجر‬ َ ‫ا‬ًّ ‫ف‬ ‫ص‬
َ ُ‫ك‬ َ‫َربُّكَ وال َمل‬
84
Even al-Qadi Abu Ya’la conceded that Imam Ahmad’s report, when taken on its apparent reading,
suggests a literal coming of Allah in His Essence on the Day of Judgment; he states in his Ibtal al-
Ta’weelat, vol. 1, p. 158

‫على جواز رؤيته إذا كان‬

َ ‫ وإنما يحتج بذلك‬،‫على جواز رؤيته‬
َ ‫ ألنه احتج بذلك‬،‫وظاهر هَذا أن أحْ َمد أثبت مجيء ذاته‬
‫اإلتيان والمجيء مضافا إلى الذات‬

For more on Imam Ahmad’s stance on ascribing Allah with a hadd, see Nasir Aal Mut’ib, Daf’ al-Shukuk
85

wal-Awham ‘an Nisbat Kitab al-Radd, pp. 116-120.

86
Al-Khallal has it in his Sunnah, ed. Aal Hamdan, vol. 2, p. 341:

، ِ‫بارك‬
َ ‫ع ِن اب ِْن ال ُم‬َ ،‫شقِيق‬ َ ‫ي ْب ُن ال َح‬
َ ‫س ِن ب ِْن‬ َ -]١٥٩[- ‫ لَهُ َروى‬،‫ وقِي َل‬،‫َّللا‬
ُّ ‫ع ِل‬ ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬
َ ‫سمِ ْعتُ أبا‬
َ :َ‫ قال‬،‫ي‬ ُّ ‫ثنا أبُو بَ ْكر ال َم ُّرو ِذ‬
ُ ْ
َ‫ ﴿ َهلْ يَنظ ُرون‬:‫َّللا‬
ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬ ُ
َ ‫ ث َّم قا َل أبُو‬،ُ‫عنهُ وأ ْع َجبَه‬ ْ َ َ
َ َ‫ بَلغَنِي ذلِك‬:َ‫ فَقال‬،‫على العَرْ ِش بِ َحدا‬ َ َّ ‫ف‬
َ :َ‫َّللا؟ قال‬ ُ ‫ْف نَ ْع ِر‬َ ‫ َكي‬:ُ‫أنَّهُ قِي َل لَه‬
]٢٢ ‫صفا﴾ [الفجر‬ ًّ َ ‫صفا‬ ًّ َ ُ ُ
َ ُ‫ ﴿وجا َء َربُّكَ وال َملك‬:َ‫ ث َّم قال‬،]٢١٠ ‫َمام وال َمالئِ َكة﴾ [البقرة‬ َ ُ
ِ ‫َّللاُ فِي ظلل مِ نَ الغ‬ َّ ‫أن يَأْتِيَ ُه ُم‬
ْ ‫اإال‬

32
Similarly, Imam Ahmad is reported to have appealed to Allah’s speaking and descent as
proof that He would be seen in the afterlife87 since a being that literally speaks and
descends can also be seen. This, once again, clearly implies that Imam Ahmad
understood the meaning of descent. Otherwise, how could he have deduced from a word
whose meaning he allegedly does not know that Allah could be seen?
Al-Khallal reports that the madhab of Imam Ahmad affirms the literal meaning of face as
attested by Surah 28:88 and that we must not change the meaning of the ayah.88
Addressing an Argument That Imam Ahmad Was a Muffawwidh

A popular argument put forth to try to demonstrate that Imam Ahmad was a mufawwidh
concerns a narration in which he states regarding scriptural texts on sifat such as descent
and seeing Allah, that we believe in them “without modality and without meaning.”89
Some would argue that since Imam Ahmad mentioned both modality and meaning, one
cannot argue that he merely did tafweedh of the modality.
Assuming that the phrase is authentic, another narration with an added qualifying phrase
clarifies what is meant. In another narration found in Ibn Battah’s al-Ibanah al-Kubra,
vol. 7, p. 58, we find the added qualifier: “without modality, and without meaning,
except that which Allah described Himself with.”90
With this critical added qualifier, we learn two things:
1) Imam Ahmad forbade describing Allah with terms that implied meanings, which Allah
Himself did not describe Himself as such.

87
Ibn Battah reports Imam Ahmad’s remarks in vol. 7, p. 326 of his al-Ibanah al-Kubra:

َ َّ َّ‫ هَذا ُكلُّهُ يَ ُد ُّل عَلى أن‬،ِ‫علَ ْيه‬

‫َّللا‬ َ ‫ْع َكنَ ِف ِه‬ َ ،ِ‫ ونُزُو ٍل و ُخلُ ا ِو ِه ِب َع ْب ِد ِه َي ْو َم القِيا َمة‬،‫سهُ مِ ن كَالم‬
ِ ‫ووض‬ َ ‫ف ِب ِه نَ ْف‬ َ ‫وال ن ُِزي ُل ما و‬
َ ‫ص‬
،‫يُرى فِي اآلخِ َر ِة‬
88
Al-Khallal states in Al-‘Aqīdah lil-Imām Aḥmad, vol. 1, p. 103:

‫ أن هلل وجها ال كالصور المصورة واألعيان المخططة بل وجهة وصفه بقوله‬฀ ‫ومذهب أبي عبد هللا أحْ مد بن َح ْنبَل‬
َ ‫ش ْيء هالك اإال وجهه﴾ ومن غير َمعْناهُ فقد ألحد‬
‫عنهُ وذَلِكَ ِع ْنده وجه فِي ال َحقِيقَة دون المجاز ووجه هللا باق ال‬ َ ‫﴿كل‬
‫سد ِع ْنده‬َ ‫ْس معنى وجه معنى َج‬َ ‫يبْلى وصفَة لَهُ ال تفنى ومن اداعى أن وجهه نَفسه فقد ألحد ومن غير َمعْناهُ فقد كفر ولَي‬
‫ورة وال تخطيط ومن قا َل ذَلِك فقد ابتدع‬
َ ‫ص‬ ُ ‫وال‬
89
In his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat, Al-Qadi Abu Ya’al relays the following narration through Hanbal b. Ishaq:

َّ »‫َّللا تبارك وتعالى ينزل إلى سماء الدنيا‬

‫ وأنه‬،‫وَّللا يُرى‬ َّ ‫َّللا في األحاديث التي تروى «إن‬
َّ ‫ قال أبو عبد‬:‫قال حنبل‬
‫ ونعلم أن ما قاله الرسول ﷺ‬،‫ وال نرد شيئًا منها‬،‫ وال كيف وال معنى‬،‫ نؤمن بها ونصدق بها‬:‫يضع قدمه وما أشبه بذلك‬
.‫حق إذا كانت بأسانيد صحاح‬
90
The report states:

َ ‫ وال َم ْعنًى اإال عَلى ما وص‬،‫ ونُمِ ُّرها كَما جا َءتْ بِال َكيْف‬،‫ث فِي هَذا ونُق ُِّرها‬
‫َف بِ ِه‬ ِ ‫ ونَحْ ُن نُؤْ مِ ُن بِاألحادِي‬:‫َّللا‬
ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬
َ ‫قا َل أبُو‬
َ ُ
َ ‫على ك اِل‬
- ‫ش ْيء قدِير‬ َّ َّ ‫ب وال‬
َ ُ‫ش ِاك إنه‬ َ َّ
ِ ،‫اّلِل مِ نَ الزل ِل‬
ِ ‫واالرْ تِيا‬ ُ
ِ َّ ِ‫ ونَعُوذ ب‬،ِ‫َّللا السَّال َمةَ فِي الدُّ ْنيا واآلخِ َرة‬
َ َّ ‫ نَسْأ ُل‬،‫سهُ تَعالى‬ َ ‫نَ ْف‬
-]٥٩[

33
2) Imam Ahmad knew the meaning of what Allah described Himself with since he made
an exception for the acceptance of those meanings.
Thus, his phrase “without modality” is meant to refute anthropomorphists, while his
phrase “without meaning” refutes negators of Allah’s attributes.
Furthermore, the actual narration alludes to seeing Allah, and everyone agrees that the
Hanbalis did not make tafweedh of the meaning of this. It is impossible to assert that
Imam Ahmad denied knowing the meaning of scriptural texts on seeing Allah, given
everything else he said about the matter.
The Aqeedah of the Earliest Followers of Imam Ahmad:

Some of the earliest followers of Imam Ahmad might have been criticized for some
errors in affirming attributes that they should not have. However, generally speaking,
their foundational approach aligned with Imam Ahmad’s. They affirmed Allah’s
volitional attributes and knew the meanings of the attributes, even though they avoided
using the term huduth (temporal origination), given that their terminological use of it
equated to creation.
Imam Harb Al-Karmani (280 A.H.)

Imam Harb Al-Karmani affirmed that istiwa means sitting (julus), which is proof that he
did not do tafweedh of the meaning here.91

91
We read in Kitab as-Sunnah: Min Masaa’il Harb b. Ismail al-Handhali al-Karmani, vol. 3, pp. 1117-
1118:

‫ وقد كتبت‬،‫ وليس هذا الرباطي‬،‫ هذا أحمد بن سعيد الدارمي خراساني‬:‫ قال أبو محمد‬- ‫سمعت أبا جعفر أحمد بن سعيد‬
‫ وال‬،‫ ال تنكحوا إليهم‬،‫ الجهيمة كفار‬:‫ سمعت خارجة بن مصعب يقول‬:‫ سمعت أبي يقول‬:‫ يقول‬- ‫عن الرباطي أيضًا‬
،‫ أنهن ال يحللن ألزواجهن‬،‫ وبلغوا نسائهم أنهن طالق‬،‫ وال تشهدوا جنائزهم‬،‫ وال تعودوا مرضاهم‬،‫تنكحوهم‬

َ ‫﴿الرحْ َم ُن‬
‫] وهل‬٥ ‫على العَرْ ِش ا ْستَوى﴾ [طه‬ َ ‫ ﴿طه * ما أنزَ ْلنا‬:‫ثم قرأ‬
َّ :‫] إلى قوله‬٢ - ١ ‫علَيْكَ القُرْ آنَ ِلتَ ْشقى﴾ [طه‬
.‫يكون االستواء إال الجلوس‬

34
Also, Al-Karmani,92 similar to Imam al-Darimi,93 affirmed movement for Allah by
contending that the distinction between the living and dead is movement.94
Ibn Taymiyyah reports that some from the Salaf, such as Nu’aym b. Hammad, Al-
Bukhari, Ibn Khuzaymah, and others avoided the word “movement” and instead
described it as “action” in order to relay the same point that volitional attributes are to be
affirmed for Allah.95
It must be stressed that opposition to the use of the word “movement” was primarily
spurred by a desire to avoid affirming and negating that which Allah did not do so

92
He said in his book Al-Sunnah, p. 50:

،‫ حفيظ ال ينسى‬،‫ حليم ال يعجل‬،‫ جواد ال يبخل‬،‫ عليم ال يجهل‬،‫ بصير ال يرتاب‬،‫وهللا تبارك وتعالى سميع ال يشك‬
…‫ ويسمع ويبصر‬، ‫ يتكلم ويتحرك‬،‫ رقيب ال يغفل‬،‫يقظان ال يسهو‬

93
He in said in his Naqdh ‘ala al-Marrisi, p. 215:

َّ‫ِس إذا شا َء؛ ِِلن‬ ُ ‫س‬

ُ ‫ط و َيقُو ُم و َيجْ ل‬ ُ ‫ وينقبض و َي ْب‬،‫ ويهبط ويرتفع إذا شا َء‬،‫ُّوم َي ْف َع ُل ما َيشا ُء و َيتَح ََّركُ إذا شا َء‬
َ ‫ي القَي‬
َّ ‫ِألنَّ ال َح‬
َّ
. َ‫ت التح َُّرك‬ ِ ِ‫أمارةُ ما بَ ْي ال َح اي ِ وال َميا‬
َ‫ن‬ َ

.َ‫ُك ُّل َح اي ٍ ُمتَح ِ اَركٌ ال َمحالَة‬

94
Imam Al-Bukhari did not use the word “movement” but “action” instead when affirming it necessarily to
Allah as proof that He is living. He said in his Khalq Af’al al-‘Ibad, p. 85:

‫ فَ َمن كانَ لَهُ فِ ْعل‬،‫ت اإال بِال ِف ْع ِل‬ َ ‫ وأنَّ العَ َر‬،‫ْس بِخ َْلق‬
ُ ‫ب ال تَع ِْر‬
ِ ِ‫ف ال َح َّي مِ نَ ال َميا‬ َ ‫الربا ِ لَي‬ َ ‫و َل َق ْد بَيَّنَ نُعَ ْي ُم ْب ُن َح اماد أنَّ ك‬
َّ ‫َالم‬
‫فَ ُه َو َحي و َمن لَ ْم يَ ُك ْن لَهُ فِ ْعل فَ ُه َو َم ِيات‬
95
He said in his Dar’, vol. 2, p. 8:

‫ وغيرهم كـ أبي‬،‫وطائفة أخرى من السلفية كـ نعيم بن حماد الخزاعي والبخاري صاحب الصحيح وأبي بكر بن خزيمة‬
ً ‫ ويسمون ذلك‬،‫ يثبتون المعنى الذي يثبته هؤالء‬:‫عمر بن عبد البر وأمثاله‬
‫ ومن هؤالء من يمتنع عن‬،‫فعال ونحوه‬
.‫إطالق لفظ الحركة لكونه غير مأثور‬

‫ كـ أبي بكر عبد العزيز وأبي عبد هللا بن بطة وأمثالهما‬،‫وأصحاب أحمد منهم من يوافق هؤالء‬

35
Himself, as reported by Imam Ahmad;96 nevertheless, some Hanbalis still used the word
“movement.”97
Abdul Wahhab al-Warraq (d. 251 A.H.)

Imam Ahmad spoke highly of him to the extent that he was asked whom the people
should ask after Imam Ahmad, and he replied, “Ask Abdul Wahhab.”98
Abdul Wahhab believes that Allah’s istiwa meant that He sat (qa’ada),99 which indicates
that he not only affirmed a meaning for istiwa but also affirmed volitional attributes for
Allah, as “sitting” is a temporal act.
Abu Ishaq b. Shaaqla (d. 369 A.H.)

Al-Qadi Abu Ya’la in his Tabaqat al-Hanabila, e.d. Al-Faqi, vol. 2, page 128 onwards
relays the story of Ibn Shaaqla’s exchange with a Mutakallim. Some things worthy of
note are:
- Page 129 – Ibn Shaaqla explicitly implies that we should believe in the dhahir
(apparent) meanings of the nusus (texts from the Qur’an and Sunnah) on Sifat, unlike his
opponent. In fact, he went further by refuting his interlocutor who denied that Allah
touched Adam (peace be upon him) by stating that if that were so, then he (i.e., the

96
Ibn Taymiyyah states in vol. 1, p. 72 of his Istiqamah:

‫عنهُ إثْبات لفظ ال َح َركَة وإن أثبت أنواعا قد يدرجها ال ُمثبت فِي‬ َ ‫عن اإلمام أحْ مد إ ْنكار نفي ذَلِك ولم يثبت‬َ ‫صوص‬ ُ ‫وال َمن‬
‫جنس ال َح َركَة فَإنَّهُ لما سمع شخصا يرْ وى َحدِيث النُّ ُزول ويَقُول ينزل بِغَيْر َح َركَة وال ا ْنتِقال وال بِغَيْر حال أنكر أحْ مد‬
‫ذَلِك وقا َل قل كَما قا َل َرسُول هللا ﷺ فَ ُه َو كانَ أغير على ربه مِ نك‬

He also states in vol. 5, p. 577 of Majmu’ al-Fatawa:

‫على أنَّهُ قَ ْو ُل أ ْه ِل‬ َ ُ‫ص َره‬ َ َ‫على ِب ْشر المريسي ون‬ َ ُ‫ضه‬َ َ‫سعِيد الدارمي فِي إثْباتَ لَ ْفظِ ال َح َر َك ِة في كِتاب نَق‬ َ ‫وذَك ََر عُثْما ُن ْب ُن‬
ً‫ث قاطِ بَة‬ َّ
ِ ‫سن ِة وال َحدِي‬ ْ ْ
ُّ ‫عن أه ِل ال‬ َ َّ
َ ‫سن ِة واألث ِر‬ ْ
ُّ ‫َب أه ِل ال‬ ْ َ
َ ‫ ل اما ذك ََر َمذه‬:‫ث وذَك ََرهُ َحرْ بُ ْبن إسْماعِي َل الكرماني‬
َ ُ ِ ‫سنَّ ِة وال َحدِي‬ ُّ ‫ال‬
.‫صور‬ ُ ‫سعِيدَ ْبنَ َمن‬ ُّ
َ ‫َّللا بْنَ الزبَي ِْر الحميدي و‬ ِ َّ َ‫ع ْبد‬ ْ
َ ‫ أحْ َمد بْنَ َحنبَل وإسْحاقَ بْنَ راه ََويْه؛ و‬: َ‫على ذلِك‬ َ َ ‫ِي مِ ن ُه ْم‬ َ ‫وذَك ََر مِ َّم ْن لَق‬
‫ظ‬ ْ ‫صحِ يح لَك ِْن ال ي‬
ُ ‫ُطلَ ُق هَذا اللَّ ْف‬ َ ‫ ال َم ْعنى‬:ُ‫سنَّ ِة يَقُول‬ ُّ ‫ث وال‬ِ ‫ و َكثِير مِ ن أ ْه ِل ال َحدِي‬.ِ‫غي ِْره‬ ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬
َ ‫َّللا ب ِْن حامِ د و‬ َ ‫وه َُو قَ ْو ُل أبِي‬
‫ِلعَد َِم َم ِجيءِ األثَ ِر بِ ِه‬
97
This could possibly explain the Ashari scholar Ibn Asakir’s (d. 571 A.H.) comments in his Tabyeen
Kadhb al-Muftari, p. 150 where he alleges that the ‘anthropomorphists’ claim that God descends by moving
from one place to another:

‫وقالت المشبهة والحشوية النزول نزول ذاته بحركة وانتقال من مكان إلى مكان‬
98
It is relayed in the Wara‘ li-Ahmad through the transmission of al-Marudhi, p. 7:

َ َ‫أن يُحْ سِنَ الخِ الفَة‬

‫علَيْنا‬ َ َّ ُ‫ض ِه الَّذِي ماتَ فِي ِه ادْع‬
ْ ‫َّللا‬ ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬
ِ ‫َّللا فِي َم َر‬ َ ‫ح َيقُول ِأل ِبي‬ َ ‫َحدَّثَنا أبُو َب ْكر‬
ِ ْ‫سمِ ْعتُ فَتْ َح بْنَ أ ِبي الفَت‬
‫ب‬ِ ‫الوهاا‬
َ ‫ع ْب َد‬
َ ‫س ْل‬َ ‫ فقا َل‬، َ‫بَ ْعدَكَ وقا َل لَهُ َمن نَسْأ ُل بَ ْعدَك‬
َ
99
Al-Qadi Abu Ya’la on page 592 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat reported this from Al-Khallal:

!‫ قعد‬:‫ قال‬،‫ استوى‬:‫ عبد الوهاب الوراق أنه قال‬:‫فروى أبو بكر الخالل عن‬

36
Mutakallim) equated Adam with the rest of creation. This shows that Ibn Shaaqla affirms
that Allah literally touched Adam.
- Page 135: Ibn Shaaqla explicitly states that we should believe in the dhahir meanings,
and he clarifies to his opponent that tashbeeh is an explicit likening of Allah’s attributes to
the creation.
Also, in the work, Abu Ishaq ibn Shaaqla al-Hanbali…Hayatahu wa-Aaraa’ahu al-
‘Ilmiyyah, by Muhammad al-Ibad, we read on page 35 the quote of Abu Ya’la in his
Ibtaal al-Ta’weelat where he cites Ibn Shaaqla disputing Hanbal ibn Ishaq’s narration of
Imam Ahmad allegedly making ta’weel of Allah’s coming. Ibn Shaaqla insists that Imam
Ahmad went with the dhahir in that it is the essence (‫ )ذات‬of Allah that comes.
Thus, not only was Ibn Shaaqla clearly not a mufawwidh, but he also quite clearly
affirmed Allah’s volitional attributes as well.
Ibn Battah al-Akbari (387 A.H.)

In his Al-Ibanah al-Kubra, specifically in the book on refuting Jahmites, Ibn Battah gives
several clear indications that he is not a mufawwidh and affirms the volitional attributes.
In volume 2 of the book,100 we read on page 178 that after citing Surah 16:40, “If We
ever will something ˹to exist˺, all We say is: “Be!” And it is!” Ibn Battah explicitly states
that Allah’s saying of “Be” precedes the existence of the thing that emerges into
existence. This undoubtedly demonstrates that Ibn Battah believed in the temporality of
Allah’s actions and speech.
Again on page 197, Ibn Battah talks about how Allah’s will precedes His saying of
“Be!”.
On pages 200-201, Ibn Battah stresses that Allah does not create His own Speech, as that
would entail the creation of His knowledge and power, but just as Allah always existed
with knowledge, He also always existed speaking.
In the third volume of the book,101 there are also several relevant points worthy of
mention:
- Narration 56, page 61. In the context of speaking about the ahadith of seeing Allah,
Ibn Battah relays a narration from Al-Qassim bin Sallam (d. 224 A.H.) that we should not
make tafseer about such statements and that we should just pass them along. However, it
is very clear that Ibn Battah did not understand such phrases to entail tafweedh of the

100
For the references that immediately follow, see volume 2 of the third book in the Ibanah, entitled, Ar-
Radd ‘ala al-Jahmiyyah, accessible here. For access to all the volumes of the book, refer here. This volume
is the sixth volume in the entire series.
101
For the references that immediately follow, see volume 3 of the third book in the Ibanah, entitled, Ar-
Radd ‘ala al-Jahmiyyah, accessible here. For access to all the volumes of the book, refer here. This volume
is the seventh volume in the entire series.

37
meaning since Ibn Battah relayed this narration in his section on proving that Allah can
be seen (with our own eyes, too; see the title of his section on page 1). Thus, suggesting
that Ibn Battah did not know the meaning of all the ahadith he relayed would be senseless
and absurd.
- Page 91. When discussing Allah’s attribute of laughter, Ibn Battah emphasizes that we
do not ask “how?” and “why?” when it comes to such scriptural texts. If he were a
mufawwidh of the meaning, he would have been expected to say, “Do not ask what this
means.” He does the same thing on page 201 when discussing Allah’s descent.
- Pages 131-132: Ibn Battah explicitly says that we know the meaning of astonishment
when ascribed to Allah (see Surah 37:12). This is definitive proof that he was not a
mufawwidh of the meanings of the attributes of Allah.
- Page 206. Ibn Battah cites in approval a narration from Yahya b. Ma’een (233 A.H.)
stating that if the Jahmite asks, “How did He descend?” that you respond in turn, “How
did He elevate?” This is explicit proof that the meaning of descent is known since its
antonym, elevation, was referred to in order to counter the Jahmite.
- Pages 239-240. If we see the excellent hypothetical exchange Ibn Battah has with the
Jahmite who negates descent for Allah because (according to the Jahmite) it would entail
Allah disappearing from one location and reappearing in another, we clearly see that Ibn
Battah is not a mufawwidh given the way he responds to the Jahmite.
Ibn Battah affirms Allah’s descent but refuses to describe it and limit it and submits that
Allah’s descent should not be compared to the creation’s. However, if Ibn Battah did
tafweedh of the meaning of descent, then this kind of response would be entirely
unnecessarily, as it would have been sufficient to respond to the Jahmite by saying, “Stop
assuming that descent here means the idea of moving from top to bottom as you are
accustomed. We have no idea what this word means, so you have no justification in
making ta’weel of this narration.”
Instead, Ibn Battah simply stresses to the Jahmite that he should not limit God by
comparing Him to His creation. All this presumes that Ibn Battah and others know very
well what descent means at its core but plead ignorance to its modality.
- Page 244. Once again, Ibn Battah emphasizes that we do not ask “how?” and “why?”
He also says that we should not delve into their tafsir and meanings, but he also makes
an important qualification: we should stop “where our Imams and Shaykhs
stopped.” This is an important qualification, as he stresses not making any baseless and
unprecedented interpretations of the meanings of the attributes, not unconditionally.
Similarly, in his Ibanah al-Sughra, he makes this point even more explicit on page 88.
This, once again, demonstrates that he knows the meaning of the sifat; otherwise, an
appeal to precedent on any proposed meaning is senseless.
- Page 270, and narration no. 210 on page 278: By seeing the title of the section on
affirming Allah’s fingers without modality, in addition to the narration stressing that we

38
do not delve into the nature and modality of Allah’s fingers, there can be no doubt that
the meaning is presumably known.
- Pages 319-321: Ibn Battah shows that he makes no distinction in how he approaches
Allah’s attributes, be it Allah’s Hearing, Seeing, Knowledge, Hand, etc.
On page 517 of volume 7,102 Ibn Battah clearly demonstrates that he knows the meaning
of Allah’s grasp (qabdah).
Overall, just by pondering the narrations Ibn Battah relays in his book, it becomes evident
to the reader that he knows the meaning of the scriptural texts he uses as he builds his
case.
There is only one statement of Ibn Battah that mufawwidhs could try to use to their
advantage on page 118 of his Ibanah al-Sughra, where he states that the path of the
scholars is to not delve into their meanings; however, given everything else presented, it
would be dishonest for them to override everything with this vague statement. As
discussed and shown, Ibn Battah clearly refers to unsubstantiated meanings without
precedent and purely based on conjecture.
Ibn Hamid (403 A.H.)

Ibn Hamid was one of the greatest students of Abu Bakr al-Khallal.103 He was excessive
in his affirmation of the attributes, even going as far as saying that Allah makes contact
with the Throne and that His descent entails movement.104 He held that istiwa means to
sit.105

102
Accessible here.
103
Imam adh-Dhahabi in said in vol. 13, p. 18 of his Siyar ‘Alam an-Nubala:

.‫بن َمرْ وانَ … ه َُو أ ْكبَ ُر تَالَمذَةِ أبِي بَ ْكر غالم الخالل‬
ِ ِ‫ي‬ َ ‫س ُن ب ُن حامِ د بن‬
‫ع ِل ا‬ َ ‫ أبُو‬،‫ و ُمفتي ُهم‬،‫ش ْي ُخ ال َحنابِلَة‬
َ ‫ ال َح‬،ِ‫ع ْب ِد هللا‬ َ
104
Ibnul Jawzi in his Daf’ ash-Shubah, ed. Al-Kawthari, p. 49, reports Ibn Hamid as saying:

‫ وينتقل‬،‫ وينزل من مكانه الذي هو فيه‬،‫هو على العرش بذاته مماس له‬
105
Al-Qadi Abu Ya’la in his ar-Riwayatayn wal-Wajhayn, ed. Al-Khalaf, pp. 52-53 relays that Ibn Hamid
said:

:‫ قال شيخنا أبو عبدهللا‬.‫ وهو قول عبدالوهاب‬.‫ االستواء بمعنى المماسة وأنه قاعد على عرشه‬:‫وقال شيخنا أبو عبدهللا‬
‫ وذلك أن إطالق االستواء في لغة العرب هو ما ذكرنا فيجب أن يحمل‬،‫ هو إمام‬:‫ وقال‬،‫أحمد قد أثنى على عبدالوهاب‬
‫عليه‬

39
Ibn Hamid also said that Allah’s coming on the Day of Judgement is like His descent.106
This is explicit proof that he viewed Allah’s coming and descent as being similar in terms
of their shared implied ‘movement’ of Allah from his perspective.107
Moreover, al-Qadi Abu Ya’la relays an important statement from Ibn Hamid where he
makes it clear that Allah’s act of istiwa is not eternal, and he analogized that to Allah’s
speaking and descent, all clearly showing that he believed in the temporal origination of
these actions.108
In conclusion, Ibn Hamid was undoubtedly not a muffawidh, and he affirmed Allah’s
volitional attributes.
The Escalated Division of Hanbalis – Kalam-Influenced vs. Strict Atharism

The division among Hanbalis eventually began to sharpen. A segment of Hanbalis

gravitated toward ‘ilmul kalam and started adopting stances such as denying the
volitional attributes of Allah. This camp has al-Qadi Abu Ya’la as its center figurehead,
even though the views of this camp are not monolithic, as we will see later.
Concurrently, there continued a stream of strict Athari Hanbalis who remained committed
to the aqeedah of Imam Ahmad and his earliest followers.
We will first take a look at al-Qadi and his followers, who were influenced by ‘ilmul
kalam.
The Kalam-Influenced Hanbalis:

Al-Qadi Abu Ya’la (d. 458 A.H.)

106
Ibn Taymiyyah in Majmu’, vol. 6, p. 166 reports Ibn Hamid as saying:

َ ‫ َم ِجيئُهُ إلى ال َح ْش ِر َي ْو َم القِيا َم ِة ِب َمثا َب ِة ن ُُزو ِل ِه إلى‬:‫والرضا‬

‫سما ِئ ِه‬ ْ َّ ‫ومِ اما َي ِجبُ الت‬
‫صدِي ُق ِب ِه ِ ا‬
107
This is certainly not Ibn Hamid’s invention, as Ishaq b. Rahawayh was once asked how Allah descends,
and he merely cited Surah 89:22 about Allah’s coming on the Day of Judgment. Based on this, he
contended that since Allah is coming on the Day of Judgment, no one can prevent Him from coming today
either:

:‫ قال هللا‬:‫فقال إسحاق‬. ‫ أُثبته فوق‬:‫فقال الرجل‬. ‫ أثبته فوق حتى أصف لك النزول‬:‫ كيف ينزل؟ فقال له إسحاق‬:‫قال‬
‫ أعز هللا‬:‫ فقال إسحاق‬.‫ يا أبا يعقوب هذا يوم القيامة‬:‫ فقال األمير عبد هللا‬. ٢٢‫﴿وجاء ربك والملك صفا صفا﴾ الفجر‬
‫ ومن يجيء يوم القيامة من يمنعه اليوم؟‬،‫األمير‬
108
See ar-Riwayatayn wal-Wajhayn, ed. Al-Khalaf, p. 60, where he states:

‫ وهذا نظير‬،‫ ألن هذا حقيقة النزول عند العرب‬:‫ وقال‬،‫ إلى أنه نزول انتقال‬-‫يعني ابن حامد‬- ‫فذهب شيخنا أبو عبد هللا‬
‫ وألن أكثر ما في هذا أنه من صفات الحدث‬،‫ وهذا على ظاهر حديث عبادة بن الصامت‬،‫ يعني قعد‬،‫قوله في االستواء‬
‫ وإن‬،‫ هو موصوف به مع اختالفنا في صفته‬،‫ كما االستواء على العرش‬،‫ وهذا ال يوجب كونه في حقه محدثًا‬،‫في حقنا‬
‫ وإن كان هذا يوجب الحدث في‬،‫ وكذلك نقول تكلم بحرف وصوت‬،‫كان هذا االستواء لم يكن موصوفًا به في القدم‬
‫ كذلك النزول‬،‫ وال يوجبه في حقه‬،‫صفاتنا‬

40
Al-Qadi Abu Ya’la is a figure whose works must be approached with caution. He is
arguably the first Hanbali who intended, in a very major way, to use ‘ilmul kalam to
defend Hanbali theology. Given that he had no shoulders to stand on in this challenging
endeavor, it was inevitable that he would fall into errors, which he himself conceded
repeatedly.
A positive thing about al-Qadi was that he was always receptive to being corrected and
retracting his errors, but at the same time, his approach left serious gaping holes that
resulted in severe internal inconsistencies in his method.
Al-Qadi was deemed an anthropomorphist by the Asharis for his excessive affirmation of
the attributes, especially in his book Ibtal al-Ta’weelat.109 Some like Ibn Taymiyyah tried
to lessen the allegations against al-Qadi by stating that al-Qadi failed to distinguish
between authentic and inauthentic reports, thus falling into exaggerating the affirmation
of divine attributes for Allah such as teeth, arms, chest, thighs, etc., as could be seen in
Al-Qadi’s book Ibtal al-Ta’weelat.
Nevertheless, what was Al-Qadi’s overall approach to sifat? Was he a mufawwidh of the
meanings of the attributes, or not? Unfortunately, Al-Qadi’s approach is convoluted to
the point that we cannot unconditionally answer this question.
Proof Showing al-Qadi was a Mufawwidh

Al-Qadi makes statements that one could appeal to in order to demonstrate that he was a
mufawwidh. For example:
- Al-Qadi states that the meanings of the attributes of Allah can not be known according
to the Arabic language.110
- Al-Qadi denied that we should interpret istiwa to either refer to elevation or
domination.111

109
Ibn Athir states in his Al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh, vol. 8, p. 209:

‫ض‬ ِ ‫على التَّجْ س‬

ِ ْ‫ِيم ال َمح‬ َ ‫أتى فِي ِه بِ ُك اِل‬
َ ‫ وتَرْ تِيبُ أبْوابِ ِه يَدُ ُّل‬،‫ع ِجيبَة‬
110
He states in Ibtal al-Ta’weelat, p. 66:

ِ ‫شتِغا ُل بِتَأ ْ ِويلِها وتَ ْفس‬

‫ِيرها‬ ْ َ‫ف‬
ْ ‫ص ٌل فِي الدَّاللَ ِة عَلى أنَّهُ ال يَجُو ُز اال‬

‫ وقِسْم ه َُو ُمتَشابِه ال يَ ْع َل ُم‬.ِ‫ أ َحدُهُما ُمحْ كَم تَأ ْ ِويلُهُ تَ ْن ِزيلُهُ يُ ْف َه ُم ال ُمرادُ مِ نهُ بِظاه ِِره‬:‫ْمان‬ ِ ‫ب قِس‬ ِ ‫ أنَّ أي الكِتا‬:‫مِ ن ُو ُجوه أ َحدُها‬
‫﴿والرا ِس ُخونَ فِي‬
‫ا‬ َّ ‫ ﴿وما يَ ْعلَ ُم تَأ ْ ِويلَهُ إال‬:‫ ِبدَلِي ِل قَ ْو ِل ِه تَعالى‬،‫ب‬
:ِ‫َّللاُ﴾ وقَ ْو ِله‬ ِ ‫على َم ْعناهُ ِبلُغَ ِة ال َع َر‬ ُ َ‫ وال يُوق‬،ُ‫َّللا‬
َ ‫ف‬ َّ ‫تَأ ْ ِويلَهُ إال‬
.ً‫ستْ عاطِ فَة‬ َ ‫فالواو َه ُهنا لِال ْستِئْنافِ ولَ ْي‬
ُ ﴾ِ‫الع ِْل ِم يَقُولُونَ آ َمناا ِبه‬

َ ‫جار َية هَذا ال َمجْ رى و ُمن ََّزلَة‬

...‫على هَذا الت َّ ْن ِزي ِل‬ ِ ،‫ ﷺ‬،‫الرسُو ِل‬
َّ ‫بار‬ ْ َ‫َكذَلِك‬
ُ ‫أخ‬
111
He states in Ibtal al-Ta’weelat, pp. 80-81

َ ‫﴿الرحْ َم ُن‬
‫ كيف غير‬:‫على العَرْ ِش ا ْستَوى﴾ قالت‬ َّ :‫ عن أم سلمة أنها قالت فِي قوله‬:‫فروى أبُو بكر الخالل بإسناده‬
.‫ والجحود به كفر‬،‫ واإلقرار به إيمان‬،‫ واالستواء غير مجهول‬،‫معقول‬

41
‫‪Al-Qadi was also clearly influenced by ‘ilmul kalam when he denied that Allah literally‬‬
‫‪loves.112‬‬

‫‪Ibn Taymiyyah on al-Qadi Abu Ya’la‬‬

‫‪Ibn Taymiyyah states that al-Qadi Abu Ya’la was contradictory in that sometimes he‬‬
‫‪would resort to ta’weel, while at other times he would resort to tafweedh.113 At the same‬‬
‫‪time, he points out that al-Qadi would contradict himself when he states that he resorts to‬‬
‫‪the dhahir meaning of the attributes yet simultaneously makes ta’weel of them at‬‬
‫‪times.114‬‬
‫‪Despite this, we find Ibn Taymiyyah at times describing al-Qadi as an affirmer of Allah’s‬‬
‫‪attributes, despite being excessive in doing so.115 He even described al-Qadi as one who‬‬
‫‪affirmed the meanings of the attributes.116‬‬

‫فقد صرحت بالقول باالستواء غير معقول‪ ،‬وهذا يمنع تأويله عَلى العلو!! وعلى االستيالء‪.‬‬
‫‪112‬‬
‫‪He states in his Mukhtasar al-Mu’tamad, p. 218:‬‬

‫والمحبة هلل تعالى هي اإلرادة لما يفعل بنا من المنافع والنعم‪ ،‬ألن ذلته تعالى ووجوده ال تميل إليه النفوس‪ ،‬وال تنفر‬
‫عنها‪ ،‬بل النفوس المحدثة ال تميل إال إلى المنافع‪ ،‬وال تنفر إال عن المضار‪...‬يبين صحة هذا أن الجمادات لما لم يوجد‬
‫منها المنافع لم توصف بالمحبة‪.‬‬
‫‪113‬‬
‫‪He said on vol. 7, pp. 34-35 of his Dar’:‬‬

‫ونوع ثالث سمعوا األحاديث‪ ،‬واآلثار‪ ،‬وعظموا مذهب السلف‪.‬‬

‫وشاركوا المتكلمين الجهمية في بعض أصولهم الباقية‪ ،‬ولم يكن لهم من الخبرة بالقرآن والحديث واآلثار‪ ،‬ما ألئمة‬
‫السنة والحديث‪ ،‬ال من جهة المعرفة والتمييز بين صحيحها وضعيفها‪ ،‬وال من جهة الفهم لمعانيها‪.‬‬
‫وقد ظنوا صحة بعض األصول العقلية للنفاة الجهمية‪ ،‬ورأوا ما بينهما من التعارض‪.‬‬
‫وهذا حال أبي بكر بن فورك‪ ،‬والقاضي أبي يعلى‪ ،‬وابن عقيل وأمثالهم‪.‬‬

‫ولهذا كان هؤالء تارة يختارون طريقة أهل التأويل‪ ،‬كما فعله ابن فورك وأمثاله في الكالم على مشكل اآلثار‪.‬وتارة‬
‫يفوضون معانيها‪ ،‬ويقولون‪ :‬تجري على ظواهرها‪ ،‬كما فعله القاضي أبو يعلى وأمثاله في ذلك‪.‬‬
‫‪114‬‬
‫‪He said on vol. 1, p. 16 of his Dar’:‬‬

‫ومنهم من يقول‪ :‬بل تجري علي ظاهرها‪ ،‬وتحمل علي ظاهرها‪ ،‬ومع هذا فال يعلم تأويلها إال هللا‪ ،‬فيتناقضون حيث‬
‫ً‬
‫تأويال يخالف ظاهرها‪ ،‬وقالوا ‪ -‬مع هذا ‪ -‬إنها تحمل علي ظاهرها‪ ،‬وهذا ما أنكره ابن عقيل على شيخة‬ ‫أثبتوا لها‬
‫القاضي أبي يعلى في كتاب ذم التأويل‪.‬‬
‫‪115‬‬
‫‪He said on vol. 6, p. 52 in Majmu’ al-Fatawa:‬‬
‫سلَكَ َ‬
‫ط ِريقَهُ صاحِ بُهُ‬ ‫ت ال َخبَ ِريَّةِ؛ و َ‬
‫صفا ِ‬ ‫َّللا ْب ُن حامِ د قَ ِوي فِي اإلثْبا ِ‬
‫ت جاد فِي ِه يَ ْن ِزعُ ِل َمسائِ ِل ال ِ ا‬ ‫ع ْب ِد َّ ِ‬‫أ اما ال َح ْنبَ ِليَّةُ فَأبُو َ‬
‫الزيا َد ِة فِي اإلثْباتِ‪.‬‬
‫القاضي أبُو َي ْعلى؛ لَ ِكنَّهُ أ ْل َي ُن مِ نهُ وأ ْب َع ُد عَنْ ِ ا‬ ‫ِ‬
‫‪116‬‬
‫‪He said on vol. 6, p. 337 in Al-Fatawa al-Kubra:‬‬

‫ت َمعانِيها‪ ،‬وتَ ْق ِر ُ‬
‫ير‬ ‫ت واألحا ِديثَ ‪ ،‬وتَ َكلَّ ُموا فِي إثْبا ِ‬ ‫َالم والت َّ َ‬
‫ص ُّوفِ َه ِذ ِه اآليا ِ‬ ‫ث وال ِف ْق ِه والك ِ‬ ‫َج َم َع العُلَما ُء مِ ن أ ْه ِل ال َحدِي ِ‬
‫ي‪ ،‬وأحْ َمدُ‬ ‫يز الكِنانِ ُّ‬ ‫ع ْبدُ العَ ِز ِ‬ ‫َ‬
‫ِيب لهُ‪ ،‬كَما فَعَ َل َ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ُ‬
‫عتْ ال َجهْمِ يَّة َجحْ دَ ذلِكَ والتكذ َ‬ ‫َ‬
‫وص‪ ،‬ل اما ا ْبتَدَ َ‬
‫ص ُ‬ ‫َّللا دَلَّتْ َ‬
‫علَيْها َه ِذ ِه النُّ ُ‬ ‫ت َّ ِ‬‫صفا ِ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫َّللا ْب ُن‬ ‫َ‬
‫ي و ُم َح َّمدُ ْب ُن إسْحاقَ ب ِْن ُخزَ ْي َمة‪ ،‬وأبُو َ‬
‫ع ْب ِد َّ ِ‬ ‫سعِيد الد ِاارمِ ُّ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ْب ُن َح ْنبَل‪ ،‬وإسْحا ُق ْب ُن را ْه َو ْيهِ‪ ،‬وكَما فَعَ َل عُثما ُن ْب ُن َ‬
‫والقاضي أبُو يَعْلى‬
‫ِ‬ ‫حامِ د‪،‬‬

‫‪42‬‬
In light of this, it appears that Ibn Taymiyyah did not view al-Qadi to be a pure
mufawwidh while acknowledging al-Qadi’s inconsistent methodology. He vividly
highlighted that al-Qadi would affirm the dhahir meanings but would still claim that only
Allah knows the ta’weel!117 Ibn Taymiyyah was not alone in pointing out this self-
contradiction, as Ibnul Jawzi did the same.118
Ibn Taymiyyah also says that sometimes al-Qadi appears to agree that Allah’s volitional
attributes should be affirmed, while at other times, he negates them.119
Al-Qadi’s Affirmation of Attributes

It is difficult to state that al-Qadi was an outright mufawwidh based on some statements
of his. If we insist that he was a pure mufawwidh, then we would also be forced to state
that he did tafweedh of attributes such as hearing and seeing since he compared them to
the attributes of face and hands “whose meanings we do not comprehend.”120 But surely,
no one would say that al-Qadi had no idea about the meaning of the divine attributes of
seeing and hearing.
There are several indications in Al-Qadi’s works demonstrating that he affirmed the
attributes in a manner that indicates that he is not a full-fledged mufawwidh:
- al-Qadi affirmed that we should take the nusus on Allah’s fingers based on their dhahir
by believing that they are interlinked with Allah’s Essence, and he also believed that we
could point to our fingers in order to emphasize the literalness of this affirmation. He also
does so by appealing to traditions from Imam Ahmad, who did the same.121

117
He said on vol. 17, p. 413 in Majmu’ al-Fatawa:

‫ظوا ِه ِرها وال ي َِزيدُونَ عَلى‬ َ ‫على‬ َ ‫وص تَجْ ِري‬ُ ‫ص‬ ُ ُّ‫يَقُولُونَ الن‬...‫س َّن ِة ِبغَي ِْر خِ ب َْرة تا َّمة ِبها‬ ُّ ‫سبُوا إلى ال‬ َ َ‫َفجا َء بَ ْعدَ ُه ْم َق ْوم ا ْنت‬
ً ‫ظاه َِر و َيقُولُونَ َم َع هَذا إنا لَهُ تَأ ْ ِو‬
‫يال ال‬ ‫الظاه َِر ويُق ُِّرونَ ال َمعْنى ال ا‬ ‫ف ا‬ ُ ِ ‫ل‬ ‫ُخا‬ ‫ي‬ ‫يل‬ ‫و‬
ِ ْ ‫َأ‬ ‫ت‬ َّ
‫ل‬ ُ
‫ك‬ َ‫ون‬ ُ ‫ل‬ ِ‫ظاه ِِر مِ نها ِ َ ْط‬
‫ب‬ُ ‫ي‬ ‫ذا‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ل‬‫و‬ ‫ال َمعْنى ال ا‬
‫ظاه َِر‬ ‫ِف ا‬
‫الظاه َِر وقَ ْد قَ َّر َر َمعْنا ُه ال ا‬ ُ ‫ل‬ ‫ُخا‬ ‫ي‬ ‫يل‬‫و‬ِ ْ ‫َأ‬ ‫ت‬ ُ ‫ه‬َ ‫ل‬ ُ
‫ن‬ ‫و‬ ُ
‫ك‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ْف‬
َ َ ‫ي‬‫ك‬َ َ ‫ف‬ ‫ِر‬
َ ‫ه‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ا‬
‫الظ‬ ‫ِض‬ُ ‫ق‬‫ُنا‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ما‬ ‫م‬ ُ
ْ َ ِ ‫ه‬ ‫د‬ ْ
‫ن‬ ‫ع‬ ُ
‫ل‬ ‫ي‬‫و‬ِ ْ ‫أ‬َّ ‫ت‬ ‫وال‬ ُ ‫َي ْعلَ ُمهُ اإال‬
َّ
‫َّللا‬
118
He says on pp. 9-10 of his Daf’ Shubah al-Tashbeeh:

.‫ ثم قالوا نحملها على ظواهرها‬.‫قالوا هذه األحاديث من المتشابه الذي ال يعلمه إال هللا تعالى‬

‫ وهل ظاهر االستواء إال القعود؟ وظاهر النزول إال االنتقال؟‬،‫فواعجبا! ال يعلمه إال هللا تعالى أي ظاهر له‬
119
He said on vol. 1, p. 19 of his Dar’:

.‫وإن كان في كالم القاضي ما يوافق هذه تارة وهذا تارة‬

120
He said on p. 287 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:

‫ وإن لم نعقل معناه‬،‫ كما أثبتنا صفة الوجه واليدين والسمع والبصر‬،‫بل نثبت ذَلِكَ صفة‬
121
He said on p. 369-370 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:

‫ وأنه تجوز اإلشارة فيها بيده‬،‫ وأن اإلصبع صفة ترجع إلى الذات‬،‫على ظاهره‬
َ ‫إعلم أنه غير ممتنع حمل الخبر‬

،‫على إصبع‬ َ ‫ «يضع السموات‬:‫عن حديث الحبر‬ َّ ‫ سئل أبُو عبد‬:‫علَ ْي ِه أحمد فِي رواية أبِي طالب‬
َ ‫َّللا‬ َ ‫ نص‬- ٣٠٦
َّ ‫ فَقا َل أبُو عبد‬،‫ أي يشير‬،‫على إصبع» يقول إال شار بيده هكذا‬
‫ رأيت يَحْ يى يحدث‬:‫َّللا‬ َ ‫ والجبال‬،‫على إصبع‬ َ ‫واألرضين‬

43
‫‪- al-Qadi interpreted some of the attributes. For instance, he had no issues affirming‬‬
‫‪jealousy for Allah since, according to al-Qadi, jealousy entails hating something, and‬‬
‫‪Allah having hatred is already established. 122 This demonstrates that al-Qadi, at the very‬‬
‫‪least, knew the meaning of hatred when ascribed to Allah. He refuted those who‬‬
‫‪interpreted jealousy with a different meaning.123‬‬
‫‪Also, al-Qadi equated in meaning between the two synonyms for Allah’s coming (jaa’a‬‬
‫‪in Surah 89:22 and ya’teehim in Surah 2:210),124 which, once again, highlights that he‬‬
‫‪knew the meaning of each word in order for him to have been able to equate them with‬‬
‫‪each other.‬‬
‫‪- al-Qadi tried to argue that the one who came down closer (tadalla) in Surah 53:8 is‬‬
‫‪Allah Himself. To further bolster his case, he appealed to Allah’s coming in Surah 89:22‬‬
‫‪and 2:210, in addition to the hadeeth on Allah’s descent, to demonstrate that this is‬‬
‫‪something that Allah does.125 All this is explicit proof that al-Qadi knew the meaning of‬‬

‫على رأس كل‬

‫على إصبعه الرابعة‪ ،‬من أسفل إلى فوق َ‬ ‫بهذا الحديث ويضع إصبعا إصبعا‪ ،‬ووضع أبُو عبد َّ‬
‫َّللا اإلبهام َ‬
‫على ذلك‬
‫إصبع‪ " .‬فقد نص َ‬

‫‪ - ٣٠٧‬وذَك ََر هبة بْن منصور الطبري فِي كتاب السنة‪ ،‬فَقالَ‪ :‬سمعت أبا محمد الحسن بْن عثمان بْن جابر‪ ،‬قا َل سمعت‬
‫ض‬ ‫علَ ْي ِه رجل‪﴿ :‬وما قَد َُروا َّ َ‬
‫َّللا َح َّق قَد ِْر ِه واألرْ ُ‬ ‫أبا نصر أحمد بْن يعقوب بْن زاذان قالَ‪ :‬بلغني أن أحمد بْن حنبل قرأ َ‬
‫َّللا وحرد وقام‪.‬‬ ‫س َمواتُ َم ْ‬
‫ط ِوياات بِيَمِ ينِهِ﴾ ث ُ َّم أومى بيده‪ ،‬فَقا َل أحمد‪ :‬قطعها َّ‬ ‫ضتُهُ يَ ْو َم القِيا َم ِة وال َّ‬
‫َجمِ يعًا قَ ْب َ‬
‫‪122‬‬
‫‪He said on p. 198 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:‬‬

‫سبْحانَهُ‪ ،‬ألنه ليس فِي ذَلِكَ ما يحيل صفاته وال يخرجها عما تستحقه‪،‬ء ألن الغيرة‬ ‫أما الغيرة فغير ممتنع إطالقها عليه ُ‬
‫هي الكراهية للشيء‪ ،‬وذلك جائز فِي صفاته قا َل تَعالى‪﴿ :‬ولَك ِْن ك َِر َه َّ‬
‫َّللاُ ا ْن ِبعاثَ ُه ْم﴾‬
‫‪123‬‬
‫‪He said on p. 199 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:‬‬

‫سبْحانَهُ لم يمتنع‬
‫على هللا ُ‬
‫قيل‪ :‬هَذا يؤكد ما ذهبنا إليه ألنه إذا كان معناها الزجر وذلك مما يجوز َ‬
‫من إطالق لفظ يتضمن ذَلِكَ ‪ ،‬وعلى أن الخبر يقتضي أن تكون الغيرة علة فِي الزجر بقوله‪« :‬ولهذا حرم» يعني ألجل‬
‫َه ِذ ِه الغيرة حرم‪ ،‬وعلى ما قالوه ال يقتضي أن تكون الغيرة علة فِي الزجر‪ ،‬بل يكون الزجر نفسه علة لنفسه وهذا ال‬
‫يصح‬
‫‪124‬‬
‫‪He said on p. 310 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:‬‬

‫فقد صرح أحْ َمد بالقول إن العرش ال يخلوا منه‪ ،‬وهكذا القول عندنا فِي قوله‪﴿ :‬وجا َء َربُّكَ وال َملَكُ ﴾ والمراد به مجيء‬
‫على وجه االنتقال‪.‬‬ ‫ذاته ال َ‬

‫على وجه االنتقال‪.‬‬ ‫ظلَل مِ نَ الغ ِ‬

‫َمام﴾ المراد به مجيء ذاته‪ ،‬ال َ‬ ‫أن يَأْتِيَ ُه ُم َّ‬
‫َّللاُ فِي ُ‬ ‫وكذلك قوله‪َ ﴿ :‬هلْ يَ ْن ُ‬
‫ظ ُرونَ إال ْ‬
‫‪125‬‬
‫‪He said on pp. 149-150 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:‬‬

‫قوله تَعالى‪﴿ :‬ث ُ َّم دَنا فَتَدَلاى﴾ هل الكناية فِي التدلي عن هللا ُ‬
‫سبْحانَهُ أم عن جبريل؟ فذكر أبُو بكر فِي كتاب التفسير فِي َه ِذ ِه‬
‫اآلية قولين‪ :‬أحدهما‪ :‬أنه جبريل عن مجاهد والحسن فِي رواية>‬

‫سبْحانَهُ‪ ،‬حكاه عن ابن عباس وعطاء وعكرمة والحسن‪ ،‬واختار هَذا القول‪ ،‬والوجه فيه‪ :‬أن‬ ‫‪ - ١١١‬والثاني‪ :‬أنه هللا ُ‬
‫ْ‬
‫رؤيته لجبريل قد سبقت مرارا ال تحصى‪ ،‬فال فائدة فِي إثباتها فِي تِلكَ الليلة‪ ،‬إذ كان المقصود بذلك حصول الفضيلة له‬
‫وعلو المنزلة‪ ،‬وألنه قا َل تَعالى‪﴿ :‬فَ ْأوحى إلى َ‬
‫ع ْب ِد ِه ما ْأوحى﴾ والوحي إنما يكون من هللا تَعالى فقوله‪" :‬فأوحى" كناية‬
‫عمن تقدم ذكره وهو المتدلي‪ ،‬فعلم أن المتدلي هو الذي يوحي وهو هللا تَعالى‪ ،‬وقد شهد الكتاب والسنة لما قاله أبُو‬

‫‪44‬‬
these terms; otherwise, it would have been senseless and baseless for him to appeal to
words in separate ayahs whose meaning he did not know to support his argument!
Clearly, he saw a common factor present in these different terms that helped him build
his argument.
- al-Qadi affirmed that Allah has two eyes. Other than appealing to the relevant Qur’anic
verses (11:37 & 54:14), he also appealed to the hadeeth where the Prophet (peace be
upon him) said that Allah is not one-eyed like the dajjal.126 Thus, from Al-Qadi’s point of
view, this hadeeth proves that Allah’s perfection demands that He has two eyes even
though it did not explicitly state so. This shows that al-Qadi understood the common
factor involved in the eye ascribed to the dajjal and eyes ascribed to Allah, despite
negating Allah’s eyes being organs like ours.
- al-Qadi recognized the validity of interpreting istiwa as sitting.127
- al-Qadi took the hadeeth whose authenticity is disputed, “I saw my Lord in the image of
a beardless young man,” literally, and affirmed that even these are attributes for Allah.
Despite going overboard in his affirmation, al-Qadi adamantly defended his stance.128

ِ َ‫ظلَ ٍل مِ نَ الغ‬
،‫ «ينزل هللا‬:‫ ﷺ‬،‫مام﴾ وبقول النبي‬ َّ ‫ظ ُرونَ إال أنْ يَأْتِيَ ُه ُم‬
ُ ‫َّللاُ فِي‬ ُ ‫ ﴿وجا َء َربُّكَ ﴾ وقوله ﴿ َه ْل يَ ْن‬:‫بكر قا َل تَعالى‬
»‫ إلى سماء الدنيا‬،‫َباركَ وتَعالى‬ َ ‫ت‬
126
He said on p. 392 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:

‫ ليستا‬،‫على البصر والرؤية‬ َ ‫ فِي إثبات (عينين) هما صفتان زائدتان‬،‫على ظاهره‬ َ ‫اعلم أنَّهُ غير ممتنع حمل الخبر‬
‫على‬ ْ ُ ‫ ﴿و ِلت‬:‫ ﴿تَجْ ِري بِأ ْعيُنِنا﴾ وقا َل تَعالى‬:‫َّللا تَعالى وصف نفسه بذلك بقوله تَعالى‬
َ ‫صنَ َع‬ َّ ‫ والوجه فِي ذلك أن‬،‫بجارحتين‬
ْ ‫صن َِع الفُ ْلكَ ِبأ ْعيُنِنا﴾ ﴿وا‬
‫ «الدجال أعور وإن ربكم ليس‬:‫ص ِبرْ ِل ُح ْك ِم َر ِباكَ فَإنَّكَ ِبأ ْعيُنِنا﴾ وقول النبي ﷺ‬ ْ ‫ ﴿وا‬:َ‫ع ْينِي﴾ وقال‬
َ
‫بأعور‬
127
He said on p. 174 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:

‫أن يَ ْب َعثَكَ َربُّكَ َمقا ًما‬

ْ ‫عسى‬
َ ﴿ :‫ وكما روي فِي تفسير قوله‬،‫على العرش‬
َ ‫وهذا غير ممتنع كما لم يمتنع وصفه بالجلوس‬
.‫على العرش‬َ ‫ يقعده‬:َ‫َمحْ ُمودًا﴾ قال‬
And he said on p. 585 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:

).‫ ال على وجه االعتماد والمماسة وثقل الجثة‬، ‫(وال يمتنع أيضًا أن يحصل للكرسي أطيط بجلوس ذاته عليه‬
128
He said on pp. 175-176 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:

:‫ قيل‬،‫على خالف ما هو به‬

َ ‫ والشيء قد يرى فِي المنام‬،‫ فهذه األخبار منام‬:‫فإن قيل‬
‫على خالف ما‬َ ‫ فإذا حمل‬،‫ قصد بذلك بيان كرامته من ربه وقرب منزلته منه‬،‫ ﷺ‬،‫ أن النبي‬:‫ أحدها‬:‫هَذا غلط لوجوه‬
‫ وإذا كان‬،‫ شرع اعتقادها‬،‫ وألن ما يخبر به شرع فهو معصوم فيه وصفات هللا عز وجل‬،‫أخبر زال المقصود‬
‫ ألن رؤية األنبياء تجري مجرى الوحي‬،‫معصوما استوى فيه المنام واليقظة‬

‫ ِلن مثل‬،‫ هَذا غلط‬:‫سبْحانَهُ ِلنها من صفات المخلوقين المحدثين قيل‬

ُ ‫ َه ِذ ِه الصفات ال تليق بصفات هللا‬:‫… فإن قيل‬
‫هَذا موجود فِي إثبات الوجه واليدين والعين‬

45
- al-Qadi cites Muqatil b. Sulayman, who is deemed to be a controversial
anthropomorphist by many, as affirming a right shin for Allah.129
Al-Qadi’s Inconsistencies and Retractions

- At one point, al-Qadi agreed with the Asharis that creation, when ascribed as an act to
Allah, actually equates to the created entity itself.130 This is because the act of creation is
temporal, something scholars of kalam wish to negate for Allah. Thus, they do not affirm
that Allah performs an actual act of creating per se.131 Yet, al-Qadi retracted this stance
later in his book ‘Uyun al-Masa’il and affirmed that creation is an actual act of Allah.132
When it comes to volitional attributes, it appears that al-Qadi negates these for Allah
because he does not affirm temporal acts for Him.133 Nevertheless, al-Qadi elsewhere
appears to say the exact opposite and states that attributes related to action, such as

129
He said on p. 193 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:

‫ نا عثمان بن أحْ َمد بن عبد هللا بن‬،‫ نا أبُو الحسين علي بن ُم َح َّمد بن عبد هللا بن بشران‬:َ‫ قال‬،‫وأخرج إلى أبُو القسم‬
:‫سلَيْمان‬
ُ ‫ قا َل مقاتل بن‬:َ‫ قال‬،‫ َحدَّثَنِي الهذيل بن حبيب الدنداني‬:َ‫ قال‬،‫ َحدَّثَنِي أ ِبي‬:‫ قا َل‬،‫ نا عبد هللا بن ثابت‬:َ‫ قال‬،‫السماك‬
،‫ع ْن ساق﴾ يعني عن ساقه اليمين فيضيء من نور ساقه األرض‬ ُ ‫ ﴿يَ ْو َم يُ ْكش‬:฀ ،‫قا َل عبد هللا بن مسعود فِي قوله‬
َ ‫َف‬
‫ يعني نور ساقه اليمين‬،﴾‫ُور َر ِباها‬ ِ ‫ض ِبن‬ ِ َ‫ ﴿وأ ْش َرق‬:‫فذلك قوله‬
ُ ْ‫ت األر‬
130
He said on p. 132 of his al-Mu’tamad fi Usul al-Din:

‫ المخلوق خلق بخلق‬:‫ خالفا ألبي الهذيل والكرامية في قولهم‬، ‫ والخلق هو المخلوق‬،‫والمخلوق مخلوق ال بخلق‬
131
This is despite the fact that Imam al-Bukhari attributes such an opinion to the Jahmiyyah and affirms
that the stance of the scholars is that creation is an actual act performed by Allah. He said on page 213 of
his Khalq Af’al al-‘Ibad:

ِ َّ ‫ الت َّ ْخلي ُق فِ ْع ُل‬:‫ وقا َل أ ْه ُل الع ِْل ِم‬،‫ لَك ِْن َم ْخلُوق‬:‫ لذلكَ قالُوا‬،‫ ال ِف ْع ُل وال َم ْفعو ُل واحِ د‬:ُ‫ت ال َجهْمِ يَّة‬
،‫َّللا‬ ِ ‫وقال‬
132
Ibn Taymiyyah reported this in vol. 6, pp. 270-271 in Majmu’ al-Fatawa:

ُ‫ق ِصفَةٌ قائِ َمةٌ بِذاتِ ِه وال َم ْخلُو ُق ه َُو ال َم ْو ُجود‬

ُ ‫وق فال َخ ْل‬ َ ‫ق‬
ِ ُ‫غ ْي ُر ال َم ْخل‬ ُ ‫ َمسْألَة وال َخ ْل‬:‫ُون ال َمسائِ ِل‬
ِ ‫عي‬ ُ ‫القاضي فِي‬ ِ ‫قا َل‬
‫ال ُم ْخت َِرعُ ال يَقُو ُم بِذاتِ ِه‬
133
He said in his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:

‫واعلم أنا وإن أثبتنا الحروف واألصوات فال نقول إن هللا يتكلم كالما بعد كالم ألن ذلك يوجب حدث الكالم الثانى‬

He also said in his al-Mu’tamad fi Usul al-Din, p. 55:

‫ خالق ورازق ومحيي‬:‫ ألنهم قالوا‬،‫ وهذا قساس قول أصحابنا‬،‫ موصوف بها فيما لم يزل‬،‫واالستواء من صفات الذات‬
.‫ موصوف بها فيما لم يزل‬،‫ومميت‬

He also said in his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:

‫فعلى هذا لم يزل غضبان مريدا تعذيب من علم أنه يعذبه بعقوبته في النار من‬...‫إن الرحمة والغضب من صفات ذاته‬
.‫ ولم يزل راحما مريدا تنعيم من علم أنه ينعمه بكرامته في الجنة من المؤمنين‬،‫الكافرين‬

46
istiwa, descent, etc., could be renewed depending on changing circumstances,134 which
implies temporality.
When it comes to affirming a direction for Allah, al-Qadi states that despite mentioning
in several places in his book that one should not affirm a direction for Allah, he still
believes that the correct opinion is that it is permissible to do so!135
There are other matters where al-Qadi appeared to retract from his stance, such as
whether to affirm a limit (hadd) for Allah, the first obligation for a mukallaf (accountable
person) is, etc., but we will not discuss them here.
Why Did al-Qadi Err Greatly on These Matters?

Al-Qadi had a noble cause, namely to defend the Athari school against rational objections
from scholars of kalam. He played a significant role in defending the Hanbali school, and
he is a giant in the sphere of fiqh. Nevertheless, his attempts to use kalam to defend
Athari beliefs had many shortcomings, especially since there were no serious prior efforts
he could build upon.136 He was influenced into kalam by Abu Muhammad b. Al-Labban,

134
He said on pp. 696-698 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:

‫ ووضع‬،‫ والمجيء في ظالل من الغمام‬،‫ والنزول إلى السماء‬،‫والصفات المتعلقة بالفعل نحو اإلستواء على العرش‬
‫ ال يمتنع‬،‫ إلى أمثال ذلك‬،‫ والخلق والرزق‬،‫ والضحك‬،‫ والغضب والرضا‬،‫ ووضع السموات على إصبع‬،‫القدم في النار‬
... ‫ تتجدد له بتجدد أسبابها‬،‫أن نقول إنها صفات ذات‬

‫ ألنه لو كان مدركا فيما لم يزل اقتضى وجود‬،‫ وال نقول هو مدرك فيما لم يزل‬،‫هو موصوف باإلدراك فيما لم يزل‬
...‫ وال يجوز ألنه يفضي إلى القول بقدم األشياء‬،‫مدرك فيما لم يزل‬
.‫ وقدم السماء‬،‫ ألنه يفضي إلى قدم العرش‬،‫ وهو جائي فيما لم يزل‬،‫وال تقول هو مستوى فيما لم يزل‬
135
He said on pp. 595-596 of his Ibtal al-Ta’weelat:

‫ وقد منعنا في كتابنا هذا في غير موضع إطالق‬،‫ وهو على عرشه‬،‫ والعرش في جهة‬،‫فإذا أثبت أنه على العرش‬
‫ وأثبت أنه‬،‫ والصواب جواز القول بذلك؛ ألن أحمد قد أثبت هذه الصفة التي هي االستواء على العرش‬،‫الجهة عليه‬
.‫ وابن منده األصبهاني المحدث‬،‫ وهم أصحاب ابن كرام‬،‫ وكل من أثبت هذا أثبت الجهة‬،‫في السماء‬

.‫ فاقتضى أنه في جهة‬،‫ وقد ثبت بنص القرآن أنه مستو عليه‬،‫ أن العرش في جهة بال خالف‬:‫والداللة عليه‬

.‫ وفي هذا كفاية‬،‫ إذا دعا فإنما يرفع يديه ووجهه إلى نحو السماء‬،‫وألن كل عاقل من مسلم أو كافر‬

‫ وقائل هذا بمثابة من قال‬،‫ وال خارجا منها‬،‫ ليس هو في جهة‬:‫وألن من نفى الجهة من المعتزلة واألشعرية يقول‬
!‫ وال يكون وجود أحدهما قبل وجود اآلخر وال بعده‬،‫بإثبات موجود غيره‬

.‫ طلبته فإذا هو معدوم‬:‫ وبين قوله‬،‫ طلبته فلم أجده في موضع ما‬:‫وألن العوام ال يفرقون بين قول القائل‬

‫ وجاءت السنة‬،‫ وأنه في السماء‬،‫ بأنه لما نطق القرآن بأن هللا تعالى على العرش‬،‫وقد احتج ابن منده على إثبات الجهة‬
.‫ فدل على أنه في مكان‬،‫ وهذه األشياء أمكنة في أنفسها‬،‫ وأنه في ذلك‬،‫ وبأن الجنة مسكنه‬،‫بمثل ذلك‬
136
One example of an egregious theological mistake that Al-Qadi made, and in turn influenced a few other
Hanbalis such as Ibn al-Zaghouni and others to adopt a similar stance, is when Al-Qadi affirmed that some
of the human recitations of the Qur’an are eternal (qadeem)! See: ‘Alaa Hassan Ismail, Dirasat al-Sifat al-
Ilahiyyah fi al-Awriqa al-Hanbaliyyah, pp. 168-176.

47
the student of the Ashari scholar, al-Baqillani, whom he used to learn from at his
home.137
Moreover, al-Qadi was not as strong in the hadeeth sciences and, as a result, relied on
inauthentic ahadeeth for some of his opinions.138
Abul Faraj al-Shirazi (d. 486 A.H.)

Al-Shirazi does deny Allah’s volitional attributes and affirms that Allah spoke the Qur’an
from pre-eternity; however, he appears to agree with the bulk of Atharis in affirming the
meanings of attributes.
In his Al-Tabsira fi-Usul al-Din, ed. Al-Sim’ani, we observe the following:
- On page 95, he states that having similar names does not entail similarity in essence and
modality. He gives the example of how Allah and human beings being alive and existent
does not entail a shared modality and essence. No one would say that Al-Shirazi was
making tafweedh of the meaning of “life” and “existence” here for Allah, and thus al-
Shirazi’s methodology for the remainder of the attributes becomes clear to us.
- On page 130 and subsequent pages, he clarifies that we know the meaning of istiwa.
- On pages 147-148, he makes it clear that the Sifaat are mutashabih in the sense that we
do not know their modality (kayfiyyah) and essence, not basic core meaning.

137
Ibn Asakir states in his Tabyin Kadhb al-Muftari, p. 262:

‫شيْخي ال َحنا ِبلَة كانا يقرآن على أ ِبي ُم َح َّمد بن اللبان‬

َ ‫وسمعت ِب َب ْغدادَ من َيحْ كِي أن أبا يعلي بن الفراء وأبا ُم َح َّمد التَّمِ يمِ ي‬
‫صول فِي داره‬ ُ ُ ‫األ‬
Al-Sijizzi talks about how Ibn al-Labban authored a book distorting the teachings of Imam
Ahmad. This may very well explain how al-Qadi was influenced to do the same with some of
Imam Ahmad’s teachings. Al-Sijizzi says in his al-Radd 'ala man Ankara al-Harf wal-Sawt, pp.
357-358:

‫ وسماها ((بشرح‬،‫ وهو حي بعد فيما بلغني‬٣‫فلقد وقفت على رسالة عملها رجل من أهل أصبهان يعرف بابن اللبان‬
‫مقالة اإلمام األوحد أبي عبد هللا أحمد بن محمد بن حنبل)) وذكر فيها مذهب األشعري المخالف ألحمد (أعطى) منها‬
‫ قد شرح مقالته‬،‫ ويقولون هذا إمام من أئمة (أصحاب) أحمد رحمة هللا عليه‬،‫نسخا إلى جماعة يطوفون بها في البالد‬
،‫ وأُخرج هذا الرجل من بغداد بهذا السبب وعاد إلى أصبهان‬.‫ليكتبها العوام ويظنوا صدق الناقل فيقعوا في الضاللة‬
.‫وهو من أصحاب أبي بكر بن الباقالني‬
138
Imam adh-Dhahabi states in his Tarikh al-Islam, vol. 30, p. 323:

‫ فاحت َّج بأحاديث كثيرة واهية في األصول والفُروع لعدم‬،‫برة بعلل الحديث وال برجاله‬
َ ِ‫لم ي ُكن للقاضي أبي يَ ْعلى خ‬
.‫والرجال‬ َ ‫بصره‬
‫باألسانيد ِ ا‬
Adh-Dhahabi also states on vol. 18, p. 90 of his Siyar ‘Alam an-Nubala:

،‫علَ ْي ِه لما فِي ِه مِ نَ الواهِي وال َم ْوضُوع‬ ‫و َج َم َع كِتاب (إبطال تَأْويل ال ِ ا‬

َ ‫صفات) فَقا ُموا‬

48
In his Juz’ fihi Imtihan al-Sunni min al-Bid’i, ed. Al-Muqrin, we see:

- On page 226, he clearly knows the meaning of “anger” (ghadab) ascribed to Allah since
he appealed to its synonym in 43:55 to prove that anger should be affirmed as an
attribute. He would not have appealed to its synonym if he did not know the meaning of
ghadab to begin with when ascribed to Allah.
- On the same page, al-Shirazi affirms pleasure (rida) for Allah. He cites the hadeeth “My
Mercy overcomes my wrath” as proof of it. If al-Shirazi had no idea what pleasure meant
when ascribed to Allah, he would not have appealed to a hadeeth affirming Allah’s mercy
as proof for it. This entails that al-Shirazi must have known the basic core meanings of
pleasure and mercy as divine attributes in order for him to have argued for the affirmation
of Allah’s pleasure based on Allah’s mercy. This would be impossible if he were a
mufawwidh.
Ibn Aqeel (d. 513 A.H.)

Ibn Aqeel was influenced for a certain stage of his life by Mu’tazilite kalam. He
described the passages on sifat as mutashabih and would either take the Mut’azilite
stance of negating them or resorting to tafweedh.139 He eventually repented before al-
Sharif Abi Ja’far (470 A.H.), a leading Hanbali authority of his time and other Hanbalis.
Despite this, Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (d. 795 A.H.) states that some of that negative
influence remained with him until he died.140 On the other hand, Ibn Taymiyyah states
that he eventually adopted the stance of the “pure Sunnah”141 and that Ibn Aqeel settled

139
Ibn Aqeel states in his al-Wadih fi Usul al-Fiqh, vol. 1, p. 168:

‫ فكيف يَت ََرددُ بين الشيئَي ِْن؟‬،‫ض ْع لشيء واحد‬ َ ‫ فإذا لم يُو‬،‫ فضالَ عن شيئي ِْن‬،‫ض ْع لشيءِ ُمعَي َِّن‬ َ ‫لم يُو‬
:‫وبانَ انه أرادَ به األو َل من قولِه‬، ] ٧٢ ‫هار﴾ [ آل عمران‬ ِ َّ‫ ﴿وجْ هَ الن‬:‫ كقوله‬،‫ فقد يُعَب َُّر به عن األو ِل‬:ِ‫الوجْ ه‬ َ ‫في‬ ُ ‫د‬ ‫َرد‬ ‫فأما الت‬
:‫ب‬ِ ‫َض‬ ‫غ‬ ‫وال‬ ... ِ‫الحائط‬ ‫ه‬
ِ ‫ووج‬ ، ‫ب‬
ِ ْ ‫الثو‬ ‫ه‬
ِ ‫كوج‬ ،ِ‫ه‬ ‫د‬
ِ ‫و‬
َ ْ‫وأج‬ ِ‫الشيء‬ ‫يار‬
ِ ِ‫خ‬ ‫عن‬ ‫به‬ ‫َّر‬
ُ ‫ب‬‫ُع‬ ‫ي‬ ‫قد‬ ‫و‬ ، ] ٧٢ ‫عمران‬ ‫آل‬ [ ﴾ ‫ه‬‫ر‬
ُ َ ِ‫آخ‬ ‫وا‬ ُ ُ‫﴿وا ْكف‬
‫ر‬
.‫ق‬
ِ ْ
‫َل‬ ‫خ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫من‬ ‫عنه‬ ‫صدر‬
ُ ‫ي‬
َ ‫من‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ض‬
َ ‫غ‬
َ ‫على‬ ‫يدل‬ ‫الذي‬ ‫واالنتقام‬
ِ ‫ب‬ِ ‫َعذي‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ال‬ َ‫ِ وبين‬ ، ‫لالنتقام‬ ‫ًا‬ ‫ب‬ َ ‫ل‬‫ط‬َ ‫ب‬
ِ ‫القل‬ ‫دم‬ ‫َليان‬
ِ ‫بين غ‬
‫وصف‬
ُ ُ
‫والنص على نَفي ماال يليق به مما هو‬ ْ َ ْ ُ َ
‫ فقامت دَاللة العَق ِل‬، ِ‫وعلى هذا االشتبا ِه جمي ُع ما يَجي ُء من األوصاف‬
‫ ويَبْقى‬:ُ‫ فيكو ُن معناه‬،ِ‫س الذات‬ ُ ‫ وهو نَ ْف‬:‫ق إال أ َح ُد َمذهبَي ِْن‬ َ ‫ ولم يَ ْب‬،ُ‫ط والجارحة‬ ُ ‫األو ِليَّةُ والت َّ ْخطِ ي‬
َّ ‫ وهو‬،ِ‫األجسام ال ُمحْ دَثَة‬ ِ
.)١( ‫ إِل هُو‬:‫ ]والمرا ُد به‬٨٨ ‫ ﴿و ُك ُّل ش َْيءٍ ها ِلكٌ اإال وجْ َههُ﴾ [ القصص‬:‫ وكذلك قولُه‬، َ‫َربُّك‬
)٢( ‫بالوقوف عن التفسير والتأويل‬ ِ ‫أو قول أصحابنا‬
140
He states in vol. 1, p. 322 of his Dhayl Tabaqat al-Hanabila:

‫ وكان يقرأ عليهما‬.‫ وابن التبان شيخي المعتزلة‬،‫وذلك أن أصحابنا كانوا ينقمون على ابن عقيل تردده إلى ابن الوليد‬
‫ ولم يزل فيه‬،‫ وتأول لبعض الصفات‬،‫ ويظهر منه في بعض األحيان نوع انحراف عن السنة‬،‫في السر علم الكالم‬
.‫بعض ذلك إلى أن مات‬
141
He states in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 4, p. 164:

‫ فَقَ ْد‬.ِ‫علَ ْيه‬ ِ ‫أن يَمِ ي َل إلى الت َّ َج ُّه ِم‬

َ َ‫واال ْعتِزا ِل فِي َّأو ِل أ ْم ِرهِ؛ بِخِ الفِ آخِ ِر ما كان‬ ْ ‫سنَّ ِة‬ َ ‫علَ ْي ِه إذا خ ََر َج‬
ُّ ‫ع ْن ال‬ َ ُ‫عقِيل الغالِب‬َ َ‫ابْن‬
َ ْ‫سنَّ ِة ال َمح‬
.‫ض ِة‬ َ ‫َخ َر‬
ُّ ‫ج إلى ال‬

49
‫‪on his stance in his later book, al-Irshad, where he affirms the divine attributes, though at‬‬
‫‪times excessively.142‬‬
‫‪Ibn Aqeel also appears to have eventually affirmed Allah’s volitional attributes by‬‬
‫‪affirming istiwa as an attribute that occurred temporally after the creation of the heavens,‬‬
‫‪same with Allah’s descent.143 Similarly, he affirmed that Allah’s speech is connected to‬‬
‫‪His will to speak at different times.144‬‬
‫)‪Ibn Al-Zaghouni (d. 527 A.H.‬‬

‫‪Despite denying Allah’s volitional attributes, Ibn Al-Zaghouni was not a mufawwidh and‬‬
‫‪affirmed the meanings of divine attributes. At times, he was even excessive in doing so,‬‬
‫‪going as far as explicitly affirming a place and direction for Allah.145‬‬

‫‪Al-Zaghouni also appeals to the Arabic language and what is customarily known in the‬‬
‫‪discourse of Arabs to prove that “hands” for Allah must be attributed to His essence.146‬‬

‫‪142‬‬
‫‪Ibn Taymiyyah states in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 6, p. 54:‬‬

‫اان المعتزليين؛ و ِل َهذا‬ ‫الولِي ِد وأ ِبي القا ِس ِم ب ِْن التَّب ِ‬ ‫ي ِ ب ِْن َ‬

‫ع ِل ا‬
‫شيْخِ ِه أ ِبي َ‬ ‫ب َ‬ ‫سبَ ِ‬‫عقِيل إناما وقَ َع فِي َكالمِ ِه المادَّة ُ ال ُم ْعت َِز ِليَّةُ ِب َ‬ ‫فا ْب ُن َ‬
‫علَ ْي ِه‬
‫س ٌن و َ‬ ‫ح‬
‫َ‬
‫ٌ َ‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ث‬ ‫َ‬
‫ك‬ ‫م‬‫ٌ‬ ‫َال‬
‫ك‬ ‫ت‬
‫ِ‬ ‫با‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫ث‬ ‫اإل‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ه‬‫َ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫نْ‬ ‫ك‬ ‫َ‬
‫ِ ِ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ه‬
‫ِ‬ ‫و‬ ‫َحْ‬ ‫ن‬‫و‬ ‫المريسي‬ ‫َالم‬
‫َ‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ه‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ُضا‬ ‫ي‬ ‫َالم‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ه‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ْر‬‫ِ‬ ‫ي‬‫غ‬‫َ‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬‫و‬ ‫ِ»‬ ‫ه‬‫ي‬ ‫ز‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ن‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ت‬‫ال‬ ‫ت‬
‫ِ‬ ‫با‬‫ْ‬ ‫«إث‬ ‫لَهُ فِي ِ ِ‬
‫ه‬ ‫ب‬‫ِتا‬‫ك‬
‫ت‬
‫ِ‬ ‫با‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫ث‬ ‫اإل‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫د‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ي‬ ‫َز‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ْ‬
‫د‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ه‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ن‬ ‫أ‬ ‫ع‬
‫َ َ‬ ‫م‬ ‫ِ»‬ ‫د‬ ‫شا‬ ‫«اإلر‬
‫ْ‬ ‫ب‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ِتا‬
‫ك‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ستَقَ َّر أ ْم ُر ُ‬
‫ه‬ ‫ا ْ‬
‫‪143‬‬
‫‪Ibn Aqeel states in al-Irshad, pp. 161-162:‬‬

‫وكذلك قولهم‪ :‬مستو على عرشه‪ ،‬معلوم أنه ال يجوز منه دعوى القدم؛ ِلنه سبحانه أخبر بحدث هذه الصفة‪...‬فصفة‬
‫االستواء على العرش حدثت بعد خلق السماوات‪ ،‬ال يجوز غير ذلك بظاهر العقل ونص القرآن‪ ،‬ألنه لو كان لم يزل‬
‫سبحانه مستويا كان إخباره بأنه استوى بعد خلقها إخبارا على سبيل المحال تعالى عن ذلك‪ ،‬فكان يفضي إلى قدم‬
‫المستوى عليه وهو العرش‪ ،‬وثبت بإجماع األمة حدث العرش‪...‬إلى أن قال‪ :‬قولنا‪ :‬ينزل إلى السماء الدنيا وما أشبه‬
‫ذلك كان بعد أن لم يكن‪ ،‬والداللة على أنها صفة تجددت أنه قال‪ :‬في كل ليلة ‪ ،‬وال يحسن أن يقال‪ :‬إنه في األزل نازل‪.‬‬
‫‪144‬‬
‫‪He states in his al-Radd ‘ala al-Asha’ira, ed. Makdisi, p. 76:‬‬

‫فإن قيل‪ :‬إن المانع من أن يكون كالم هللا تعالى بحروف هو أن الثاني من الحروف متأخر واألول متقدم والقديم ال‬
‫يجوز أن يسبق بعضه بعضا فثبت أن الحروف مخلوقة ألنها مترتبة في الوجود‪ ،‬قيل‪ :‬هذا يبطل عليكم بقول هللا‬
‫سبحانه آلدم ولعيسى‪(( :‬كن))‪ ،‬ومعلوم أن آدم خلق قبل عيسى ‪ ،‬فإن قيل‪ :‬إنما قال آلدم ولعيسى‪(( :‬كن)) في األزل‬
‫بقدم الوجود آلدم قبل عيسى‪ ،‬ولم يتقدم القول بعضه على بعض!‬

‫قيل‪ :‬هذا باطل؛ لق وله تعالى‪(( :‬إنما قولنا لشيء إذا أردناه أن نقول له كم فيكون)) وال يخلو أن يكون جميع ما في‬
‫الدارين شيئا واحدا‪ ،‬أو أشياء كثيرة‪ ،‬فإن كان شيئا واحدا‪ ،‬فإن دليل الشرع والعقل يمنع ذلك‪ ،‬ويثبت أن جميع ما في‬
‫الدارين أشياء عدة‪ ،‬وكل شيء منها قال هللا له‪(( :‬كن))‪ ،‬وال بد أن يخلق شيئا بعد شيء!! فيكون ((كن)) ‪ -‬الذي يقول‬
‫لكل شيء – منفردا من القول للشيء اآلخر‪ ،‬وذلك يمتنع في حالة واحدة وساعة واحدة‪.‬‬
‫‪145‬‬
‫‪He states in his al-Idah fi Usul al-Din, ed. Mahmud, p. 334:‬‬

‫ومما يقوي هذا ويحققه أن تعدي (استوى) بحرف (على)‪ ،‬إما يراد به المكان والجهة أو القهر والغلبة على ما ينا‪،‬‬
‫ومحال أن يراد بقوله‪(( :‬ثم استوى على العرش)) القهر والغلبة من جهة أن المغالب ما عز في نفسه‪ ،‬وصعب في‬
‫تمنعه‪ ،‬والعرش باإلضافة إلى الباري جلت قدرته ال غلبة له وال قوة‪ ،‬ألنه صنعه ومفعوله‪ ،‬فإضافة الغلبة والقهر إليه‬
‫بعيد أن يضاف إليه‪ ،‬فبقي أنه أراد الجهة والمكان ال غير‪.‬‬
‫‪146‬‬
‫‪He states in his al-Idah, p. 284:‬‬

‫‪50‬‬
‫)‪He stresses that this is the method of determining what the dhahir147 and haqeeqi (real‬‬
‫‪meanings are.148‬‬
‫‪Al-Zaghouni even criticizes the Ash’aris for making tafweedh of istiwa149 while being‬‬
‫‪perfectly comfortable affirming it based on its dhahir and confirming its implications‬‬
‫‪(according to him) of ascribing Allah with the direction of elevation (jihat al-‘uluww).150‬‬

‫والداللة على كونهما‪-‬يعني اليدين‪ -‬صفتين يزيدان على النعمة وعلى القدرة أنا نقول ‪ :‬القرآن نزل بلغة العرب‪ ،‬واليد‬
‫المطلقة في لغة العرب وفي معارفهم وعاداتهم المراد بها إثبات صفة ذاتية للموصوف‪ ،‬لها خصائص فيما يقصد‬
‫بها‪ ،‬وهي حقيقية في ذلك‬
‫‪147‬‬
‫‪He states in his al-Idah, p. 281:‬‬

‫الظاهر ما كان متلقى من اللفظ عن طريق المقتضى‪ ،‬وذلك مما يتداوله أهل الخطاب بينهم‪ ،‬حتى ينصرف مطلقه عند‬
‫الخطاب إلى ذلك عند من له أدنى ذوق ومعرفة بالخطاب العربي واللغة العربية‪.‬‬

‫‪And on page 288:‬‬

‫قلنا‪ :‬قد أبطلنا وجه الحاجة إلى التأويل‪ ،‬إذ الوجه الموجب اعتراض سبب مانع من إثبات الكالم على أصله وحقيقته‪،‬‬
‫وما يبدر إليه الفهم والتعارف في عادة أهل الخطاب‪.‬‬
‫‪148‬‬
‫‪He states in his al-Idah, p. 414:‬‬

‫األصل في كالم العرب الحقيقة والمجاز عارض بسبب‪ .‬فال ينتقل عن األصل ما أمكن المقام على الحقيقة‪ .‬ووجه‬
‫الحقيقة فيه أنه في بيانه على صورة المصدر والمصادر ال تقع إال على سبيل الحقيقة؛ ألن المصادر أسماء األفعال كما‬
‫أن األسماء أسماء‪.‬‬
‫‪149‬‬
‫‪He states in his al-Idah, p. 299:‬‬

‫وذهبت المعتزلة واألشعرية إلى أن لفظة االستواء ال يحمل على ظاهره؛ ألنه يؤدي إلى إثبات الجهة‪ ،‬ويُسأأل عنه بأين‬
‫الدالة على الجهة والمكان‪ ،‬وتأولوه باالستيالء‪ ،‬وقد كانت طائفة من اِلشعرية يثبتون لفظه (!) ‪ ،‬ويمتنعون من‬
‫تأويله‪ ،‬وال يثبتون مقتضاه !! فأما اللفظ فال سبيل إلى دفعه‪ ،‬ألنه ثابت في القرآن‪ ،‬وأما حمله على ظاهره فممكن‪.‬‬

‫”‪Some allude to another statement made by al-Zaghouni in his Idah where he states that the “direction‬‬
‫‪assigned to Allah does not entail Him being in a place where He would be encompassed:‬‬

‫وامتنع كثير من أصحابنا أن يطلقوا القول أنه في جهة ألن لفظة في تقتضي الظرفية والبارئ تعالى منزه عما يوجب‬
‫له الظرفية‪ ،‬وقد أجاز قوم من أصحابنا أن يقولوا إن البارئ في جهة ‪ ..‬إال أنهم أثبتوا ذلك لفظا فأما معنى بمعنى أنها‬
‫جهة محيطة توجب إحاطة الظرف بالمظروف فامتنعوا عن ذلك‬

‫‪Of course, Ibn Taymiyyah would not disagree with this. We read in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 5, pp. 264-‬‬
‫‪265:‬‬

‫إطالقَ هَذا اللَّ ْفظِ‬ ‫ْس فِي َكالمِ ي ْإثباتُ هَذا ال َّل ْفظِ ِألنَّ ْ‬ ‫َّللا والت َّ َحي ُِّز‪ :‬فَلَي َ‬‫ع ْن َّ ِ‬
‫الج َه ِة َ‬ ‫ي ِ‬ ‫أن يَ ْعتَ ِقدَ نَ ْف َ‬‫ُطلَبُ مِ نهُ ْ‬‫أ اما قَ ْو ُل القائِ ِل‪ :‬ي ْ‬
‫ت‬ ‫س َموا ِ‬ ‫إن أرادَ قائِ ُل هَذا القَ ْو ِل‪ :‬أنَّهُ لَي َ‬
‫ْس فَ ْوقَ ال َّ‬ ‫علَ ْي ِه األ ُ َّمةُ‪ .‬فَ ْ‬‫سنَّةُ واتَّفَقَ َ‬ ‫عة وأنا لَ ْم أقُلْ اإال ما جا َء بِ ِه الكِتابُ وال ُّ‬ ‫نَ ْفيًا بِدْ َ‬
‫ماع‬
‫ِ‬ ‫جْ‬ ‫إل‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ِف‬ ‫ل‬‫خا‬ ‫م‬‫ُ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫باطِ‬ ‫ذا‬ ‫ه‬
‫َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫؛‬ ‫ض‬
‫ُ‬ ‫حْ‬ ‫م‬
‫َ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫م‬
‫ُ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫د‬ ‫ع‬
‫َ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ا‬
‫إال‬ ‫م‬
‫ِ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ل‬‫العا‬ ‫قَ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫وما‬ ‫ه‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ب‬
‫ا‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ر‬
‫َ‬ ‫إلى‬ ‫ه‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ب‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ج‬
‫ْ‬ ‫ر‬‫َ‬ ‫ع‬
‫ْ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ي‬ ‫م‬
‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ًا‬ ‫د‬ ‫م‬
‫َّ‬ ‫ح‬
‫َ‬ ‫م‬‫ُ‬ ‫وأنَّ‬ ‫ه‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫إ‬ ‫ش‬
‫ِ‬ ‫رْ‬ ‫ع‬
‫َ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫قَ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫وال‬ ‫َرب‬
‫سلَفِ األ ُ َّم ِة‪.‬‬ ‫َ‬

‫ت فَهَذا َم ْذكُو ٌر ُمص ََّر ٌ‬

‫ح ِب ِه فِي َكالمِ ي؛ فَإناِي‬ ‫وإنْ أرا َد ِبذَ ِلكَ أنَّ َّ َ‬
‫َّللا ال تُحِ ي ُ‬
‫ط ِب ِه َم ْخلُوقاتُهُ وال َيكُو ُن فِي ج َْو ِ‬
‫ف ال َم ْوجُودا ِ‬
‫قا ِئلُهُ فَما الفا ِئدَة ُ فِي تَجْ دِي ِدهِ؟‬
‫‪150‬‬
‫‪Refer back to page 299 and read it all.‬‬

‫‪51‬‬
Some allude to a statement made by Ibn Taymiyyah where he states that Ibn al-Zaghouni
made tafweedh of the meaning of istiwa;151 however, Ibn Taymiyyah does not provide the
precise statement made by Ibn al-Zaghouni that he has in mind here. Moreover, as we
just saw from Ibn al-Zaghouni’s own work, he condemns the Ash’aris for not affirming a
meaning for istiwa, and he also knows enough of the meaning to the point of contending
that it connotes a direction of elevation for Allah.
However, it is plausible that what Ibn Taymiyyah has in mind here is that Ibn al-
Zaghouni, just like al-Qadi Abu Ya’la, made tafweedh of istiwa in a manner that only
negated it being a temporal act, as could be inferred by another related statement Ibn
Taymiyyah made,152 and not that Ibn Taymiyyah is suggesting that Ibn al-Zaghouni has
no idea what istiwa means. Otherwise, in the absence of some proof provided by Ibn
Taymiyyah, we need to stick to Ibn al-Zaghouni’s own words.
Ibn Al-Hanbali (d. 536 A.H.)

His name was ‘Abdul Wahhab ibn ‘Abdul Waahid b. Muhammad b. Ali al-Ansari ash-
Shirazi. He was commonly referred to as Ibn al-Hanbali. He is the son of Abul Faraj al-
Shirazi (d. 486 A.H.).
In his book, al-Risala al-Wadiha fi al-Radd ‘ala al-Asha’ira, ed. al-Shabl, we find:
- Ibn al-Hanbali indicates that he knows the meaning of anger (ghadab) as attributed to
Allah since he equated it to one of its synonyms (harad).153
- On page 520, Ibn al-Hanbali insinuates that the wajh (face) and love of Allah should be
affirmed just like hearing, seeing, will, speech, etc., and we know for certain that he does
not deny knowing the meanings of all these attributes.
- On page 537, despite denying volitional attributes in general, Ibn al-Hanbali still
described the initiation of creation as being from the attributes of action, which

151
He states in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 17, p. 361:

ُ‫غونِي و َمن وافَقَه‬ ُ ‫س ِن بْن الزا ا‬َ ‫ كَأبِي ُم َح َّم ِد ب ِْن ُك االب وأبِي ال َح‬:ِ‫ت العَ ْق ِليَّة‬ ‫و َمن أثْبَتَ العُلُ َّو بِالعَ ْق ِل و َجعَلَهُ مِ ن ال ِ ا‬
ِ ‫صفا‬
‫ت ال َخبَ ِريَّ ِة الَّتِي يَقُولُونَ ال‬
ِ ‫صفا‬ ُ ْ
ْ ‫ أثبَتُوا العُل َّو و َجعَلُوا ِاال‬:‫وكالقاضي أبِي يَ ْعلى فِي آخِ ِر قَ ْولَ ْي ِه وأبِي ُم َح َّمد‬
‫ستِوا َء مِ ن ال ِ ا‬ ِ
َّ ‫يَ ْعلَ ُم َمعْناها اإال‬
" ُ‫َّللا‬
152
He states in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 16, pp. 406-407:

َ‫على ظاه ِِر ِه فَقَ ْولُ ُه ْم فِي ذَلِك‬ َ ‫يان‬ ِ ْ‫رار ال َم ِجيءِ واإلت‬ ِ ‫وإن كانُوا يَقُولُونَ ِبإ ْم‬ ْ ‫والقاضي أبُو يَ ْعلى ونَحْ ُوهُما‬ ِ ‫غونِي‬ ُ ‫وا ْب ُن الزا ا‬
‫ت ال َخب َِريَّ ِة‬ِ ‫صفا‬ ‫يان وال َم ِجيءِ ويَجْ عَلُهُ مِ ن ال ِ ا‬ ِ ْ ‫ت‬ ‫واإل‬ ‫ل‬ِ ‫و‬ ُ
‫ز‬ ُّ ‫ن‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ل‬
َ ‫ي‬ ‫و‬
ِ ُ ْ ‫َأ‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ن‬
َ ‫م‬
ْ ‫ي‬
َ ‫ًا‬
‫ض‬ ‫ي‬
ْ ‫أ‬ ُ ‫ه‬ َّ ‫ن‬‫إ‬ َ ‫ف‬ . ‫ي‬ ‫ر‬
ِ‫َ ِ ا‬ ‫ع‬ ْ
‫ش‬ ‫واأل‬ ‫ِالب‬ ‫ك‬ ِ ِ ْ َ‫مِ ن ِج ْن ِس ق‬
‫ْن‬‫ب‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ل‬ ‫و‬
‫ع وفِي‬ ‫و‬ َّ ‫ن‬‫ال‬ ‫ذا‬ ‫ه‬
َ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ن‬ ‫و‬ ُ
‫غ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ا‬
‫الز‬ ‫ْن‬
‫ب‬ ‫ا‬ ‫م‬‫َال‬‫ك‬ ‫و‬ . ‫سام‬ ْ‫األج‬ ‫ْر‬ ُ ‫ي‬‫غ‬َ ‫ها‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ص‬ ‫ُو‬ ‫ي‬ ْ‫ل‬ ‫ب‬
َ َ‫سام‬ ْ‫األج‬ ‫م‬ ‫ز‬ ْ
‫َل‬ ‫ت‬‫س‬ْ َ ‫ت‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ل‬ َ ‫عا‬ ‫ف‬ْ ‫األ‬ ‫ إنا َه ِذ ِه‬:ُ‫و َيقُول‬
ِ ْ ِ ُ ِ ِ ُ َ ُ ِ
.‫الواردَ ِة فِي َه ِذ ِه األ ْفعا ِل‬ ِ ‫ة‬ ‫ي‬
َّ
ِ َِ ‫ر‬ ‫ب‬ ‫خ‬
َ ‫ال‬ ‫ت‬
ِ ‫فا‬ ‫ص‬‫ِا‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫م‬ ‫ه‬
ُْ ُْ ‫ل‬ ‫و‬ َ ‫ق‬ ‫َذا‬ ‫ه‬ .ِ ‫ه‬ ‫س‬
ِ ْ
‫ف‬ ‫ن‬
َ ‫ن‬ ‫س‬
ِ َ َ ‫ح‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ب‬‫أ‬ ‫ل‬
ِ ِ ْ ِ ‫و‬ َ ‫ق‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ِق‬ ‫ف‬‫وا‬ ‫م‬ ‫ُو‬
ُ َ ِ ْ‫َر‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ش‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ال‬ ‫لى‬ ‫ع‬
َ ِ ‫الربا‬ َّ ِ‫ا ْستِواء‬
153
He states:

‫ والحرد‬،‫ فقلنا كما قال‬،‫ ألن الغضب نطق به القرآن‬،‫ وهما واحد‬،‫ وال نصفه بالحرد‬،‫إننا نصف هللا تعالى بالغضب‬
.‫ فلهذا لم يجز أن يوصف هللا تعالى به‬،‫ ولم يذكره رسول هللا‬،‫ليس ينطق به القرآن‬

52
indicates that some more clarity is required regarding his position on the divine volitional
attributes.
The Strict Athari Hanbalis:

Muhammad b. Ishaq b. Mandah (395 A.H.)

There are relevant things to note from his Kitab al-Tawheed, ed. Al-Wuhaibi & Al-
Ghosn:

- On page 440, he says that the sifat of Allah were understood by the Arabs without
requiring any ta’weel (‫)مفهوما عند العرب غير محتاج إلى تأويل‬. This is an explicit negation of
tafweedh of the meaning.
- On page 446, he equates hearing, seeing, and Allah’s Right Hand (‫)يمين‬. Also, see page
451, where he equates them with Allah’s two hands (‫)يدين‬. Obviously, Ibn Mandah knew
the meaning of hearing and seeing when affirmed for Allah, which entails that he also
knew the meaning of Allah’s hands.
There is also very good reason to believe that he affirmed volitional attributes for Allah
just by simply looking at how he titled some of the chapter headings in his Kitab al-
Tawheed. Consider the below, for example:
‫ت‬ َّ ‫سمِ َعهُ أ َ ْه ُل ال‬
ِ ‫س َم َاوا‬ َ ‫علَى أَ َّن هللا عز وجل ِإذَا تَ َكلَّ َم ِب‬
َ ‫الوحْ ي‬ َ ‫َب َيان آخ َُر َيدُ ُّل‬

Another pronouncement that attests that when Allah the high and exalted
speaks with His revelation, those in the heavens hear it"

َّ ‫سال ُم ل َّما أَتَى ال‬

‫شج ََرةَ َو َكلَّ َمهُ ل َّما جَا َء‬ َّ ‫علَ ْي ِه ال‬
َ ‫سى‬َ ‫علَى أَ َّن هللا عز وجل َكلَّ َم ُمو‬
َ ‫بَيَان آخ َُر يَدُ ُّل‬
‫ور األ َ ْي َم ِن‬
ِ ‫ط‬ُّ ‫ال‬ ‫جانب‬ َ‫ن‬ ِ‫م‬ ‫وجل‬ ‫ت هللا عز‬ ِ ‫لِمِ يقَا‬

"Another pronouncement that attests that Allah spoke to Musa ‘alayhis

salam when he reached the tree and that He (also) spoke to Him when
he came to Allah’s appointed time from the right side of Mount Tūr"

َ ‫علَى أَ َّن هللا عز وجل يُ َك ِلا ُم‬

‫ع ْب َدهُ يَ ْو َم ال ِقيَا َم ِة‬ َ ‫بيَان آخ َُر يَدُ ُّل‬

"Another pronouncement that attests that Allah will speak to His servant
on the Day of Judgement."

ِ ‫علَى أَ َّن هللا عز وجل َكلَّ َم َملَكَ ال َم ْو‬

‫ت َويُ َك ِلا ُمهُ إِذَا شَا َء‬ َ ‫بَيَان آخ َُر يَدُ ُّل‬

"Another pronouncement that attests that Allah spoke to the angel of death
and that He speaks to Him when He so wills."

‫الرحِ َم َكلَّ َمه‬

َّ ‫ق‬َ َ‫علَى أَ َّن هللا تَ َعالَى ل َّما َخل‬
َ ‫َب َيان آخ َُر َيدُ ُّل‬

53
 "Another pronouncement that attests to Allah speaking to the womb
when He created it"

If we look at Ibn Mandah’s Radd ‘ala al-Jahmiyyah, ed. Al-Faqihi, we find more
evidence of Ibn Mandah not being a mufawwidh.
Looking at how he titled some of his sections, we could see that he knew the meanings of
the nusus related to sifat. Consider the titles of these two sections from his book:
‫ذكر خبر آخر يدل على ما تقدم من معنى قوله لما خلقت بيدي‬
Mentioning another report indicating what has passed regarding the
meaning of His statement, “what I created with My Own Hands” [38:75]
‫في ذكر ما ثبت عن النبي ﷺ مما يدل على معنى قول هللا جل وعز وقالت اليهود يد هللا مغلولة‬
‫غلت أيديهم ولعنوا بما قالوا بل يداه مبسوطتان ينفق كيف يشاء‬
Mentioning what is established from the Prophet (peace be upon him),
which indicates the meaning of Allah’s statement, “the Jews said, “Allah
is tight-fisted.”1 May their fists be tied and they be condemned for what
they said. Rather, He is open-handed, giving freely as He pleases.” [5:64]
On pages 102-103, he speaks about the meaning of Allah’s face.
So clearly then, Ibn Mandah was not a mufawwidh.
For good additional evidence for his affirmation of volitional attributes and Allah’s acting
temporally, see Shaykh Kareem Helmy’s Naseehat al-Naqideen, p. 64.
Abdul Rahman b. Mandah (470 A.H.)

Abdul Rahman b. Mandah is the son of Muhammad b. Ishaq b. Mandah (395 A.H.). He
was excessive in his affirmation of the divine attributes, to the point where he took a
strong stance insisting that Allah’s descent entailed His leaving the throne. He even
authored a book to refute those who disagreed with this stance.154
The correctness of his opinion aside, it clearly demonstrates that he affirmed Allah’s
volitional attributes.
Abu Ismail al-Harawi (481 A.H.)

Imam al-Harawi was one of the most consistent Hanbalis on the topic of sifat.

154
Ibn Taymiyyah states in Sharh Hadeeth al-Nuzul, vol. 1, p. 43:

‫ وقد صنف أبو القاسم عبد الرحمن بن أبي عبد هللا بن محمد بن منده مصنفًا في‬،‫ بل يخلو منه العرش‬:‫ومنهم من يقول‬
‫ وعلى من زعم أن هللا‬،‫ [الرد على من زعم أن هللا في كل مكان‬:‫ وسماه‬،‫ ال يخلو منه العرش‬:‫اإلنكار على من قال‬
.]‫ وعلى من تأول النزول على غير النزول‬،‫ليس له مكان‬

54
‫‪He criticizes the Ash’aris for their tafweedh and states that the condemned form of tafsir‬‬
‫‪is delving into the modality.155 He also appears to have affirmed for Allah the literal‬‬
‫‪divine attribute of a foot, as he commented on the hadeeth about Allah placing His foot in‬‬
‫‪hell and said that it does not harm Him. He would not have said this unless he understood‬‬
‫‪the meaning of the hadeeth.156‬‬
‫‪He also affirms Allah’s volitional attributes by affirming that Allah speaks whenever He‬‬
‫‪wills and praises Ibn Khuzaymah’s attempts at refuting those who held the contrary‬‬
‫‪stance.157‬‬
‫)‪Abdul Ghani al-Maqdisi (d. 600 A.H.‬‬

‫‪Abdul Ghani al-Maqdisi was known to have affirmed the meanings of the attributes along‬‬
‫‪with the volitional attributes of Allah.‬‬
‫‪In his book, al-Iqtisad fil ‘Itiqad, ed. al-Ghamidi, he makes some important remarks:‬‬
‫‪- On page 80, he only mentions that the modality (kayfiyyah) of attributes should not be‬‬
‫‪delved into.‬‬
‫)‪- On page 94, he condemns those who deny the direction of elevation (jihat al-‘uluww‬‬
‫‪for Allah by saying that their rejection is tantamount to the rejection of the Sunnah.‬‬
‫‪- On page 98, he says that the attribute of the face must be affirmed and treated like the‬‬
‫‪rest of the attributes.‬‬

‫‪155‬‬
‫‪He states in Dhamm al-Kalam, vol. 5, pp. 137-138:‬‬

‫ولم يثبتوا شيئا ولم ينفوا موجودا ولم يفرقوا بين التفسير والعبارة باأللسنة فقالوا‪ :‬ال نفسرها نجريها عربية كما وردت‪،‬‬
‫وقد تأولوا تلك التأويالت ال خبيثة أرادوا بهذه المخرقة أن يكون عوام المسلمين أبعد غيابا وأعيا ذهابا منها ليكونوا‬
‫أوحش عند ذكرها وأشمس عند سماعها وكذبوا‪ ،‬بل التفسير أن يقال‪ :‬وجه ثم يقال‪ :‬كيف؟ وليس (كيف) في هذا الباب‬
‫من مقال المسلمين‪ ،‬فأما العبارة فقد قال هللا تعالى (وقالت اليهود يد هللا مغلولة)‪ ،‬وإنما قالوا هم بالعبرانية فحكاها‬
‫عنهم بالعربية‪ ،‬وكان يكتب رسول هللا صلى هللا عليه و سلم كتابه بالعربية فيها أسماء هللا وصفاته‪ ،‬فيعبر باأللسنة‬
‫عنها ويكتب إليه بالسريانية فيعبر له زيد بن ثابت رضي هللا عنه بالعربية‪ ،‬وهللا تعالى يدعى بكل لسان بأسمائه‬
‫فيجيب‪ ،‬ويحلف بها فيلزم‪ ،‬وينشد فيجار‪ ،‬ويوصف فيعرف‪.‬‬
‫‪156‬‬
‫‪Ibn Rajab in his Dhayl, vol. 1, p. 130 states:‬‬

‫وذكر الرهاوي ‪ :‬أن الحسين بن محمد الكتبي ذكر في ((تاريخه))‪ :‬أن مسعود بن محمود بن سبكتكبن قدم (هراة) سنة‬
‫ثالثين وأربعمائة‪ ،‬فاستحضر شيخ اإلسالم ‪-‬يعني الهروي‪ ،-‬وقال له‪ :‬أتقول‪ :‬إن هللا يضع قدمه في النار ؟ فقال‪ :‬أطال‬
‫هللا بقاء السلطان ال ُمعظم‪ ،‬إن هللا عز وجل ال يتضرر بالنار‪ ،‬والنار ال تضره ‪ ،‬والرسول ال يكذب عليه‪ ،‬وعلماء هذه‬
‫األمة ال يزيدون فيما يروون عنه‪ ،‬ويسندون إليه‪ ،‬فاستحسن جوابه‪.‬‬

‫‪In his Dar’, vol. 2, pp. 76-78, Ibn Taymiyyah states that al-Harawi says in his book, Manaqib al-Imam‬‬
‫‪157‬‬

‫‪Ahmad:‬‬

‫وجاءت طائفة فقالت‪ :‬ال يتكلم بعد ما تكلم‪ ،‬فيكون كالمه حادثًا… فطار لتلك الفتنة ذلك اإلمام أبو بكر فلم يزل يصيح‬
‫بتشويهها‪ ،‬ويصنف في ردها كأنه منذر جيش‪ ،‬حتى دون في الدفاتر‪ ،‬وتمكن في السرائر‪ ،‬ولقن في الكتايب‪ ،‬ونقش في‬
‫المحاريب‪ ،‬أن هللا متكلم‪ :‬إن شاء تكلم‪ ،‬وإن شاء سكت‪ ،‬فجزى هللا ذلك اإلمام وأولئك النفر الغر عن نصرة دينه‬
‫خيرا‬
‫وتوقير نبيه ً‬

‫‪55‬‬
‫‪- On pages 112-123, when discussing Allah’s two hands, he once again stresses that we‬‬
‫‪should not make ta’weel and that they should be treated like the rest of the attributes,‬‬
‫‪and he mentions several examples. If you look at the examples of attributes he compares‬‬
‫‪them to, such as will (iradah),158 you know very well that he knows the meaning of these‬‬
‫‪words.‬‬
‫‪- On pages 222-223, Abdul Ghani mentions the three dominant, opposing stances on‬‬
‫‪divine attributes. He refers to tafweedh of the meaning as the third and deems it much‬‬
‫‪more harmful than the other two.159‬‬
‫‪When it comes to his affirmation of the volitional attributes, Ibn Rajab reports that‬‬
‫‪Abdul-Ghani went through a trial where he was charged with attributing a place and‬‬
‫‪movement to Allah because he affirmed Allah’s literal descent. Ibn Rajab speaking in‬‬
‫‪defense of Abdul-Ghani’s stance, states that movement is not a necessary implication of‬‬
‫‪Allah’s literal descent and that Abdul Ghani’s stance on literal descent is based on‬‬
‫‪affirming Allah’s volitional attributes.160‬‬

‫‪158‬‬
‫‪He says:‬‬

‫وكل ما قال هللا في كتابه وصح عن رسوله بنقل العدل عن العدل مثل المحبة والمشيئة‪ ،‬واإلرادة‪ ،‬والضحك‪،‬‬
‫والفرح‪ ،‬والعجب‪ ،‬والبغض‪ ،‬والسخط‪ ،‬والكره‪ ،‬والرضا‪ ،‬وسائر ما صح عن هللا ورسوله وإن نبت عنها أسماع بعض‬
‫الجاهلين واستوحشت منها نفوس المعطلين‪.‬‬
‫‪159‬‬
‫‪He states:‬‬

‫واعلم رحمك هللا أن اإلسالم وأهله أتوا من طوائف‪« ٣‬ثالث»‪ ٤‬فطائفة ردت أحاديث الصفات وكذبوا رواتها فهؤالء‬
‫ضررا من الطائفة‬
‫ً‬ ‫ضررا على اإلسالم وأهله من الكفار‪ .‬وأخرى قالوا بصحتها وقبولها ثم تأولوها فهؤالء أعظم‬
‫ً‬ ‫أشد‬
‫األولى‪ ،‬والثالثة‪ :‬جانبوا القولين اِلولين وأخذوا بزعمهم ينزهون وهم يكذبون فأداهم ذلك إلى القولين اِلولين‪.‬‬
‫ضررا من الطائفتين اِلولتين‪.‬‬
‫ً‬ ‫وكانوا أعظم‬
‫‪160‬‬
‫‪Ibn Rajab states in Dhayl Tabaqat al-Hanabilah, vol. 3, pp. 33-35:‬‬

‫َّللا وال مكان‪ ،‬وليس ه َُو‬ ‫علَ ْي ِه مواضع‪ ،‬منها قَ ْوله‪ :‬وال أنزهه تنزيها ينفي حقيقة النزول‪ .‬ومنها قَ ْوله‪ :‬كانَ َّ‬ ‫أخذوا َ‬
‫اليوم عَلى ما كانَ ‪ .‬ومنها‪ :‬مسألة الحرف والصوت‪ ،‬فَقالُوا لَهُ‪ :‬إذ لَ ْم يكن َ‬
‫على ما قَدْ كانَ ‪ ،‬فَقَدْ أثبت لَهُ المكان‪ ،‬وإذا ل ْمَ‬
‫عن إمامك الَّذِي‬ ‫علَ ْي ِه االنتقال‪ .‬وأ اما الحرف والصوت‪ ،‬فَإنَّهُ لَ ْم يصح َ‬ ‫تنزهه تنزيها تنفي حقيقة النزول‪ ،‬فَقَدْ أجزت َ‬
‫غيْر مخلوق‪ ،‬وارتفعت األصوات‪ ،‬فَقا َل لَهُ صارم‬ ‫َّللا عز وجل َ‬ ‫ع ْنهُ‪ :‬إنه كَالم َّ‬ ‫تنتمي إلَ ْي ِه فِي ِه َ‬
‫ش ْيء‪ ،‬وإنما المنقول َ‬
‫ق؟ قالَ‪ :‬نعم‪.‬‬ ‫على ال َح ا ِ‬
‫على ضالل‪ ،‬وأنت َ‬ ‫الدين‪ُ :‬كل َه ُؤالءِ َ‬
‫‪...‬‬

‫ع ْنهُ‪ ،‬فَ ُه َو حق‪ ،‬وه َُو كقول القائل‪ :‬ال أنزهه تنزيها‬
‫وأ اما قَ ْوله‪« :‬وال أنزهه تنزيها ينفي حقيقة النزول» فَإن صح هَذا َ‬
‫ينفي حقيقة وجوده‪ْ ،‬أو حقيقة كالمه‪ْ ،‬أو حقيقة علمه‪ْ ،‬أو سمعه وبصره‪ ،‬ونحو ذَلِكَ ‪.‬‬

‫وأ اما المكان‪ :‬ففيه نزاع وتفصيل‪ .‬وفِي الصحيحين‪ :‬إثبات لفظ المكان‪.‬‬

‫وأ اما االنتقال‪ :‬ففيه جوابان‬

‫عة من األئمة‪ :‬أنَّهُ ينزل‪ ،‬وال يحلو منه‬

‫عن َجما َ‬ ‫أحدهما‪ :‬ال نسلم لزومه‪ ،‬فَإن نزوله لَي َ‬
‫ْس كنزول المخلوقين‪ ،‬ولهذا نقل َ‬
‫العرش‪.‬‬

‫‪56‬‬
‫)‪Ibn Qudamah (d. 620 A.H.‬‬

‫‪Ibn Qudamah’s theology on Sifat must be deduced from an exhaustive inductive reading‬‬
‫‪of all his relevant statements spanning across all his works (even if those works that are‬‬
‫‪not primarily theological yet contain relevant statements and sections), such as:‬‬
‫‪-‬‬ ‫‪Rawdhat al-Naadhir‬‬
‫‪-‬‬ ‫‪Lum’at al-Itiqad‬‬
‫‪-‬‬ ‫‪Ithbat Sifat al-‘Uluww‬‬
‫‪-‬‬ ‫‪Dhamm al-Ta’weel‬‬
‫‪-‬‬ ‫‪Al-Sirat al-Mustaqeem‬‬
‫‪-‬‬ ‫‪Risaalah fi al-Qur’an‬‬
‫‪-‬‬ ‫‪Al-Burhan fi Bayan al-Qur’an‬‬
‫‪-‬‬ ‫‪Tahreem an-Nadhar fi Kutub al-Kalam‬‬
‫‪-‬‬ ‫‪Hikaayat al-Munaadhara fil Qur’an‬‬

‫‪Summary of His Stance:‬‬

‫‪) of the attributes.161 He‬كنه( ‪Ibn Qudamah emphasizes that we do not know the essence‬‬
‫‪) of the‬حقيقة المعنى( ”‪also says that we do not know the “reality of the meaning‬‬
‫‪attributes.162 At other times, he would refer to this as the modality/kayfiyyah or “tafsir” of‬‬
‫‪) of the sifat,164 as‬تحديد( ‪the attributes.163 He would also negate knowing the definition‬‬

‫الثاني‪ :‬أن هَذا مبني عَلى إثبات اِلفعال االختيارية‪ ،‬وقيامها بالذات‪ .‬وفيها قوالن ألهل ال َحدِيث المتأخرين من أصْحابنا‬
‫وغيرهم‬
‫‪161‬‬
‫‪He explains Imam Ahmad’s statement of not knowing the meaning and modality in that fashion; he states‬‬
‫‪in his Lum’at al-‘Itiqaad:‬‬

‫قال اإلمام أبو عبد هللا أحمد بن محمد بن حنبل رضي هللا عنه في قول النبي صلى هللا عليه وسلم‪« :‬إن هللا ينزل إلى‬
‫سماء الدنيا» ‪ ،‬أو «إن هللا يرى في القيامة» ‪ ،‬وما أشبه هذه األحاديث نؤمن بها‪ ،‬ونصدق بها بال كيف‪ ،‬وال معنى‪ ،‬وال‬
‫نرد شيئا منها‪ ،‬ونعلم أن ما جاء به الرسول حق‪ ،‬وال نرد على رسول هللا صلى هللا عليه وسلم‪ ،‬وال نصف هللا بأكثر‬
‫ير} [الشورى‪ ]11 :‬ونقول كما قال‪ ،‬ونصفه‬ ‫ص ُ‬‫ش ْيء َوه َُو السَّمِ ي ُع ْالبَ ِ‬
‫ْس َكمِ ثْ ِل ِه َ‬
‫مما وصف به نفسه بال حد وال غاية {لَي َ‬
‫بما وصف به نفسه‪ ،‬ال نتعدى ذلك ‪ ،‬وال يبلغه وصف الواصفين‪ ،‬نؤمن بالقرآن كله محكمه ومتشابهه‪ ،‬وال نزيل عنه‬
‫صفة من صفاته لشناعة شنعت‪ ،‬وال نتعدى القرآن والحديث‪ ،‬وال نعلم كيف كنه ذلك إال بتصديق الرسول صلى هللا‬
‫عليه وسلم‪ ،‬وتثبيت القرآن‬
‫‪162‬‬
‫‪He said in his Dhamm al-Ta’weel:‬‬

‫ع اما لم يعلموه‬ ‫عل ُموا أن ال ُمتَ َكلام بها صادِق ال شكا فِي صدقه فصداقوه ولم يعل ُموا َحقِيقَة َمعْناها فَ َ‬
‫س َكتُوا َ‬ ‫و َ‬
‫‪163‬‬
‫‪He said in Dhamm al-Ta’weel:‬‬

‫صفات هللا تَعالى وأسماءه ال تدْرك بِالعق ِل ِألن العقل إنَّما يعلم صفة ما َرآهُ أو رأى نَظِ يره وهللا تَعالى ال‬ ‫ومن ال َم ْعنى أن ِ‬
‫صفات دون‬ ‫صفاته وأسماؤه اإال بالتوقيف والتوقيف إنَّما ورد بأسماء ال ِ ا‬ ‫تُد ِْركهُ األبْصار وال نَظِ ير لَهُ وال شَبيه فَال تعلم ِ‬
‫كيفيتها وتفسيرها فَيجب اإلقتصار على ما ورد بِ ِه السامع لعدم العلم بِما سواهُ وتَحْ ِريم القَ ْول على هللا تَعالى بِغَيْر علم‬
‫ِبدَلِيل قَول هللا تَعالى ﴿قل إنَّما حرم َر ِباي الفَواحِ ش ما ظهر مِ نها وما بطن واإلثْم وال َبغي ِبغَيْر الحق وأن ت ُ ْش ِر ُكوا ِب َّ‬
‫اّلِل ما‬
‫لم ينزل ِب ِه س ُْلطانا وأن تَقولُوا على هللا ما ال تعل ُمونَ ﴾ [األعْراف ‪]٣٣‬‬
‫‪164‬‬
‫‪In his Dhamm al-Ta’weel, he relays the following from Ibn Thabit al-Tayyeb:‬‬

‫‪57‬‬
definition equates to the denotative meaning, which entails fully conceptualizing the
essence of what is being defined.
By these terms, he is referring to having a fully grounded, encompassing meaning and
conceptualization of the attributes. Something we identified earlier as the denotative
definition. Sometimes, Ibn Qudamah might just say “meaning,” but he is really referring
to “meaning” in the denotative sense, and this is clearly deduced by examining all his
words, as it is absolutely undeniable that he really does know the connotative meanings
of the attributes.
Further Elaboration

How do we know that what I just relayed, in summary, is true? Following are some
reasons:
• Ibn Qudamah is explicitly clear that the dhahir (apparent) meanings are known, as
the dhahir, according to him, are the meanings that first cross your mind.165

‫صحاح َمذْهَب السالف رضي هللا عنهم إثْباتها وإجراؤها على‬ ‫سنَن ال ِ ا‬ َ ‫صفات فَإن ما ُر ِو‬
‫ي مِ نها فِي ال ا‬ ‫أما الكَالم فِي ال ِ ا‬
‫صفات فرع على الكَالم فِي الذاات ويحتذي فِي‬ ‫ع ْنها واألصْل فِي هَذا أن الكَالم فِي ال ِ ا‬ َ ‫ظاهرها ونفي ال َك ْي ِفيَّة والتشبيه‬
‫ذَلِك حذوه ومثاله فَإذا كانَ َم ْعلُوما أن إثْبات رب العالمين عز وجل إنَّما ه َُو إثْبات وجود ال إثْبات تَحْ دِيد وتكييف‬
‫فَ َكذَلِك إثْبات ِصفاته إنَّما ه َُو إثْبات وجود ال إثْبات تَحْ دِيد وتكييف فَإذا قُ ْلنا هلل تَعالى يَد وسمع وبصر فَإنَّما ه َُو إثْبات‬
‫صر العلم وال نقُول إنَّها ال َجوا ِرح‬ َ ‫صفات أثبتها هللا تَعالى لنَف ِس ِه وال نقُول إن معنى ال َيد القُد َْرة وال أن معنى السامع وال َب‬ ِ
‫ِي جوارح وأدوات ال ِف ْعل ونقول إنَّما ورد إثْباتها ِألن الت َّ ْوقِيف ورد بها‬ َ ‫وال نشبهها ِباأل ْي ِدي واألسماع واألبصار الَّتِي ه‬
ُ‫صير﴾ وقَوله عز وجل ﴿ولم يكن لَه‬ ِ َ‫ش ْيء وه َُو السَّمِ يع الب‬
َ ‫ْس كمثله‬ َ ‫ع ْنها لقَ ْوله تبارك وتَعالى ﴿لَي‬َ ‫وو َجب نفي الت َّ ْش ِبيه‬
َ
﴾‫كفوا أحد‬
165
He said in his Dhamm al-Ta’weel:

‫العلم ونَحْ و هَذا من‬ ِ ِ‫] أي ب‬٤ ‫فَإن قيل فقد تأولتم آيات وأخبارا فقلتم فِي قَ ْوله تَعالى ﴿وه َُو َمع ُك ْم أيْن ما ُك ْنتُم﴾ [ال َحدِيد‬
‫ ِألن‬،‫ْس ِبتَأ ْ ِويل‬
َ ‫شيْئا وحمل َهذِه اللفظات على َهذِه المعانِي لَي‬ َ ‫واِلخبار فيلزمكم ما لزمنا قُ ْلنا نَحن لم نتأول‬ ْ ‫اآليات‬
‫ وظاهر‬،‫ظاهِر من َهذِه اِل ْلفاظ ِب َدلِيل أنه ال ُمتَبادر إلى اِلفهام مِ نه‬ ‫ِي ال ا‬َ ‫ه‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ن‬ ‫المعا‬ ‫ِه‬
‫ذ‬ َ
‫ه‬ ‫و‬ ‫ظاهره‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ع‬
َ ‫ظ‬ ْ
‫ف‬ َّ ‫ل‬‫ال‬ ‫صرف‬ ‫يل‬‫التَّأ ْ ِو‬
‫اللَّ ْفظ ه َُو ما يسْبق إلى الفَهم مِ نهُ َحقِيقَة كانَ أو مجازً ا‬

If it is said: You have made ta’weel of the ayahs and reports, for you said regarding
Allah’s words, “He is with you wherever you are” [57:4] that it refers to His Knowledge,
along with similar other ayahs and reports, thus you are bound by what we are as well.
We say: We did not make ta’weel of anything, and ascribing these meanings to these
words is not considered making ta’weel, as making ta’weel would entail deviating away
from their apparent, and these meanings are what is apparent from these words
because they are what first cross our minds in terms of understanding them. And
the apparent of the word is that which first crosses the mind in terms of
understanding it, regardless of whether it is literal or metaphorical.

58
 ‫‪As Ibn Rajab said, dhahir is of two types, a dhahir that is specific to creaturely‬‬
‫‪attributes, and this is negated, while another dhahir suits the majesty of Allah.166 Ibn‬‬
‫‪Qudamah, of course, affirmed the dhahir of the latter and negated the former.167‬‬

‫•‬ ‫‪Ibn Qudamah mentioned that the ayah on istiwa, just like the rest of the attributes‬‬
‫‪such as the hands, face, eyes, etc., is from the mutashaabih whose ta’weel we do not‬‬
‫‪know and which should be passed along on its plain reading.168 Yet, it is‬‬
‫‪indisputable that Ibn Qudamah did know that istiwa implied Allah’s elevation,‬‬
‫‪as he explicitly used it as proof to demonstrate so several times in his book, Ithbat‬‬
‫‪Sifat al-‘Uluww. He relayed narrations that likened this ayah to other ayahs and‬‬
‫‪ahadith, including the hadith on descent/nuzul,169 that explicitly prove Allah’s‬‬
‫‪elevation.170‬‬

‫‪166‬‬
‫‪He said in his Fathul Bari:‬‬

‫ِران‪ :‬ظاهر يليق بالمخلوقين ويختص بهم‪ ،‬فهو غير مراد‪،‬‬

‫اهر ظاه ِ‬ ‫ومن قال‪ :‬الظاهر منها غير مراد‪ ،‬قيل له‪ :‬ا‬
‫الظ ُ‬
‫وظاهر يليق بذي الجالل واإلكرام‪ ،‬فهو مراد‪ ،‬ونفيه تعطيل‪..‬‬
‫‪167‬‬
‫‪He said in his Lum’at al-Itiqaad:‬‬

‫وال نتأوله بتأويل يخالف ظاهره‪ ،‬وال نشبهه بصفات المخلوقين وال بسمات المحدثين‬
‫‪168‬‬
‫‪He said in Radwat an-Naadhir:‬‬

‫والصحيح ‪:‬أن المتشابه ‪:‬ما ورد في صفات هللا‪ -‬سبحانه ‪-‬مما يجب اإليمان به‪ ،‬ويحرم التعرض لتأويله‪ ،‬كقوله ‪-‬‬
‫سو َطتَان} ‪ِ { ،‬ل َما َخلَ ْقتُ بِيَدَي}‪َ ،‬‬
‫{ويَ ْبقَى َوجْ هُ َرباِك} {تَجْ ِري‬ ‫علَى ا ْلعَ ْر ِش ا ْ‬
‫ست ََوى} ‪{ ،‬بَ ْل يَدَاهُ َم ْب ُ‬ ‫{الرحْ َم ُن َ‬
‫تعالى‪َّ :-‬‬
‫بِأ َ ْعيُنِنَا} ‪ ،‬ونحوه‪ .‬فهذا اتفق السلف ‪-‬رحمهم هللا‪ -‬على اإلقرار به‪ ،‬وإمراره على وجهه‪ ،‬وترك تأويله‪ ،‬فإن هللا ‪-‬‬
‫سبحانه‪ -‬ذم المبتغين لتأويله‪ ،‬وقرنهم ‪-‬في الذم‪ -‬بالذين يبتغون الفتنة‪ ،‬وسماهم أهل زيغ‪ .‬وإذ قد ثبت أنه غير معلوم‬
‫التأويل ِلحد ‪ :‬فال يجوز حمله على غير ما ذكرناه؛ ألن ما ذكر من الوجوه ال يعلم تأويله كثير من الناس‬
‫‪169‬‬
‫‪He said in Ithbat Sifat al-‘Uluww:‬‬

‫وذكر أبو عمر بن عبد البر حديث مالك في الموطأ ‪ ...‬عن أبي هريرة رضي هللا عنه أن رسول هللا صلى هللا عليه و‬
‫سلم قال ينزل ربنا تبارك وتعالى كل ليلة إلى سماء الدنيا حين يبقى ثلث الليل فيقول من يدعوني فأستجب له من‬
‫يسألني فأعطيه من يستغفرني فأغفر له‪ .‬وقال هذا حديث ثابت من جهة النقل صحيح االسناد ال يختلف أهل الحديث في‬
‫صحته‪ .‬وهو حديث منقول من طرق سوى هذه من أخبار العدول عن النبي صلى هللا عليه و سلم‪ .‬وفيه دليل على أن‬
‫هللا تعالى في السماء على العرش من فوق سبع سموات كما قالت الجماعة‪).‬‬
‫‪170‬‬
‫‪He states in Ithbat Sifat al-‘Uluww:‬‬

‫على العَرْ ِش ا ْستَوى﴾ [طه ‪ ]٥‬وقوله تعالى‪﴿ :‬أأمِ نت ُ ْم َمن فِي السَّماءِ ﴾ [الملك ‪ ]١٦‬وقول‬‫﴿الرحْ َم ُن َ‬
‫ومن ذلك قوله تعالى‪َّ :‬‬
‫النبي ﷺ‪« :‬ربنا هللا الذي في السماء تقدس اسمك» (‪« ) ١‬وقال للجارية‪ :‬أين هللا؟ قالت‪ :‬في السماء‪ .‬قال‪ :‬أعتقها فإنها‬
‫مؤمنة» رواه مسلم‪ ،‬ومالك بن أنس‪ ،‬وغيرهما من األئمة‪ .‬وقال النبي ﷺ لحصين‪« :‬كم إلها تعبد؟ قال سبعة‪ ،‬ستة في‬
‫األرض وواحدا في السماء‪ .‬قال من لرغبتك ورهبتك؟ قال الذي في السماء‪ ،‬قال فاترك الستة واعبد الذي في السماء‪،‬‬
‫على ال َعرْ ِش ا ْستَوى﴾ [طه ‪ ]٥‬وقوله تعالى‪﴿ :‬أأمِ نت ُ ْم َمن فِي السَّماءِ ﴾ [الملك ‪ ]١٦‬وقول‬‫﴿الرحْ َم ُن َ‬
‫ومن ذلك قوله تعالى‪َّ :‬‬
‫النبي ﷺ‪« :‬ربنا هللا الذي في السماء تقدس اسمك» (‪« ) ١‬وقال للجارية‪ :‬أين هللا؟ قالت‪ :‬في السماء‪ .‬قال‪ :‬أعتقها فإنها‬
‫مؤمنة» رواه مسلم‪ ،‬ومالك بن أنس‪ ،‬وغيرهما من األئمة‪ .‬وقال النبي ﷺ لحصين‪« :‬كم إلها تعبد؟ قال سبعة‪ ،‬ستة في‬
‫األرض وواحدا في السماء‪ .‬قال من لرغبتك ورهبتك؟ قال الذي في السماء‪ ،‬قال فاترك الستة واعبد الذي في السماء‪،‬‬

‫‪59‬‬
 How did Ibn Qudamah determine that all these prove Allah’s elevation if he had no
idea what they meant? True tafweedh of the meaning would at least be open to the
possibility that perhaps istiwa, descent, etc., refer to something else unrelated to literal
elevation. If istiwa possibly referred to “overcoming” or if descent possibly referred
to “Allah’s mercy coming down,” then these cannot be used as prooftexts for Allah’s
elevation. But no, Ibn Qudamah knew enough of the basic core meaning to assert
that these attributes do prove Allah’s elevation.

Once again, we must remember that Ibn Qudamah likened his approach to the ayah
on istiwa to those on hands, face, eyes, etc. This all entails that Ibn Qudamah’s
approach was not exceptionally unique to the topic of elevation and what directly
correlates to it.

• Building on the previous point on istiwa, he relays a narration where a person asked
Ibn al-‘Araabi (d. 231 A.H.): what is the meaning of “He made Istiwa over the
Throne,” and the response simply was: “He is on His Throne as He said.”171 Notice
that Ibn Qudamah had no problem relaying this narration, while the narration shows
that Ibn Al-‘Araabi did not say to the man: “we do not know the meaning of such
ayat, so do not ask me about them.”

• Ibn Qudamah said that we do not know the “reality of the meaning” of the hadeeth
that states that we will see Allah as clearly as we see the moon. He said the same
thing regarding the events of Israa wa-Mi’raaj, the story of Prophet Musa (peace be
upon him) with the angel of death, the signs of the Day of Judgment, etc. 172 But
again, that does not mean that Ibn Qudamah is claiming we absolutely have no idea
what the meanings of all these things are! Obviously not. Rather, he means that we do
not have the full detailed conceptualization of them.

171
He relayed the following in his Ithbat Sifat al-‘Uluww:

،‫ي‬ َ ‫س َليْمانَ دا ُودُ ْب ُن‬

‫ع ِل ا‬ ُ ‫ َحدَّثَنِي أبُو‬:َ‫ قال‬،ِ‫ط َو ْيه‬ َ ‫َّللاِ نِ ْف‬ َ ‫ ثَنا أبُو‬،‫ي‬
َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬ ُّ ‫ وأ ْنبَأنا ُم َح َّمدُ ْب ُن َج ْعفَر النَّحْ ِو‬:)١( ‫َّللا‬ ِ َّ ُ‫قا َل ِهبَة‬- ٨٩
:)٢( )َ‫ستَوى﴾ ؟ (فَقال‬ ْ ‫﴿الرحْ َم ُن عَلى العَ ْر ِش ا‬َّ :‫َّللا تَعالى‬ ِ َّ ‫ ما َمعْنى قَ ْو ِل‬:َ‫ فَقال‬،‫ي ِ فَأتاهُ َر ُجل‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ب‬
ِ ‫ْرا‬
‫ع‬ ‫األ‬ ‫ ُكناا ِع ْندَ اب ِْن‬:َ‫قال‬
‫ ما أ ْنتَ وهَذا ال‬، ْ‫ ا ْسكُت‬:َ‫ قال‬،‫ ا ْست َْولى‬:ُ‫ إنَّما َم ْعناه‬،ُ‫ْس هَذا َم ْعناه‬ َ ‫ لَي‬،‫َّللا‬ َ ‫ يا أبا‬:َ‫ فَقال‬،฀ ‫أخب ََر‬
ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬ ْ ‫ش ِه كَما‬ ِ ‫ه َُو عَلى ع َْر‬
…، ِ‫ش ْيء‬ َّ ‫على ال‬ َ ‫يُقا ُل ا ْست َْولى‬
172
He said in his Lum’at al-‘Itiqad:

‫ (إنكم ترون ربكم كما ترون هذا القمر ال تضامون في رؤيته) حديث صحيح متفق‬:‫وقال النبي صلى هللا عليه وسلم‬
‫ فإن هللا تعالى ال شبيه له وال نظير مما يجب اإليمان به كل ما‬،‫ ال للمرئي بالمرئي‬،‫ وهذا تشبيه للرؤية بالرؤية‬.‫عليه‬
‫ ومن ذلك حديث اإلسراء والمعراج وقصة موسى مع ملك‬،‫صح عن الرسول ولو جهلناه ولم نقف على حقيقة معناه‬
‫ وأشراط الساعة‬،‫الموت‬

60
‫•‬ ‫‪Ibn Qudamah said that there should be no distinction between any of the sifat and that‬‬
‫‪they are similar to the affirmation of Seeing, Hearing, Knowledge, Living, etc., for‬‬
‫‪Allah.173‬‬

‫•‬ ‫‪Of the strongest and clearest statements made by Ibn Qudamah in support of the‬‬
‫‪stance that he did not make tafweedh of the meaning of Allah’s attribute is that he‬‬
‫‪compared having Iman in sifat despite not knowing their “meaning” to having Iman‬‬
‫‪in the angels, Allah’s revelatory books and Messengers, despite not knowing the‬‬
‫‪“meaning” of these things either and only knows their names!174‬‬

‫‪How can we possibly make sense of this statement by Ibn Qudamah if we are going‬‬
‫‪to interpret him as teaching tafweedh of the meaning?! Do we honestly think that Ibn‬‬
‫‪Qudamah made tafweedh of the meaning of ayat pertaining to the angels, for‬‬
‫‪example? Undoubtedly not! Rather, he is speaking about the complete encapsulating‬‬
‫‪meaning of their essence. And this clarifies the other statements made by Ibn‬‬
‫‪Qudamah, which the pro-tafweedh camp appeals to when he says that we should‬‬
‫‪) of the sifat, as Ibn Qudamah said the same precise‬ألفاظ( ‪only believe in the words‬‬
‫!‪thing about the angels‬‬

‫‪And:‬‬
‫اإليمان بكل ما أخبر به الرسول ويجب اإليمان بكل ما أخبر به النبي ﷺ وصح به النقل عنه فيما شاهدناه‪ ،‬أو غاب‬
‫عنا‪ ،‬نعلم أنه حق‪ ،‬وصدق‪ ،‬وسواء في ذلك ما عقلناه وجهلناه‪ ،‬ولم نطلع على حقيقة معناه‪ ،‬مثل حديث اإلسراء‬
‫والمعراج وكان يقظة ال مناما فإن قريشا أنكرته وأكبرته‪ ،‬ولم تنكر المنامات‪ .‬ومن ذلك أن ملك الموت لما جاء إلى‬
‫موسى عليه السالم ليقبض روحه لطمه ففقأ عينه فرجع إلى ربه فرد عليه عينه‪ .‬ومن ذلك أشراط الساعة‪ ،‬مثل خروج‬
‫الدجال ونزول عيسى ابن مريم عليه السالم فيقتله (‪ )١‬وخروج يأجوج ومأجوج‪ ،‬وخروج الدابة‪ ،‬وطلوع الشمس من‬
‫مغربها‪ ،‬وأشباه ذلك مما صح به النقل‪.‬‬
‫‪173‬‬
‫‪He said in his Tahreem an-Nadhar fi Kutub al-Kalam:‬‬

‫صفات هللا تعالى التي سلمتموها من السمع والبصر والعلم والحياة‪ ،‬فإنها ال تكون في حقنا إال من أدوات‪ ،‬فالسمع من‬
‫انخراق‪ ،‬والبصر من حدقة‪ ،‬و العلم من قلب‪ ،‬والحياة في جسم‪ .‬ثم جميع الصفات ال تكون إال في جسم‪.‬‬
‫فإن قلتم‪ :‬إنها في حق الباري كذلك فقد جسمتم وشبهتم وكفرتم‪ .‬وإن قلتم‪ :‬ال تفتقر إلى ذلك‪ ،‬فل َِم احتيج إليها ههنا‬

‫‪And:‬‬

‫طائفة المتكلمين والمبتدعة تمسكوا بنفي التشبيه توسال إلى عيب أهل اآلثار وإبطال األخبار‪ ،‬وإال فمن أي وجه حصل‬
‫التشبيه‪ ،‬إن كان التشبيه حاصال من المشاركة في األسماء واأللفاظ فقد شبهوا هللا تعالى حيث أثبتوا له صفات من =‬
‫السمع والبصر والعلم والقدرة واإلرادة والحياة مع المشاركة في ألفاظها‪ ،‬وهلل تسعة وتسعون اسما ليس فيها ما ال‬
‫يسمى به غيره إال اسم (هللا) تعالى و الرحمن‪ ،‬وسائرها يسمى بها غيره سبحانه وتعالى‪ ،‬ولم يكن ذلك تشبيها وال‬
‫تجسيما‬
‫‪174‬‬
‫‪He said in his Tahreem an-Nadhar fi Kutub al-Kalam:‬‬

‫فإنه ال حاجة لنا إلى علم معنى ما أراد هللا تعالى من صفاته جل وعز فإنه ال يراد منها عمل وال يتعلق بها تكليف سوى‬
‫اإليمان بها ويمكن اإليمان بها من غير علم معناها‪ .‬فإن اإليمان بالجهل صحيح‪ ،‬فإن هللا تعالى أمر باإليمان بمالئكته‬
‫وكتبه ورسله وما أنزل إليهم وإن كنا ال نعرف من ذلك إال التسمية‬

‫‪61‬‬
‫•‬ ‫‪Ibn Qudamah cites scholars such as Ibn Khuzaymah,175 Ibn Abdul Barr,176 and Abu‬‬
‫‪Nasr al-Sijizzi177 as authorities, despite these scholars not being pro-tafweedh in their‬‬
‫‪theology.‬‬

‫•‬ ‫‪Ibn Qudamah defended Abu Ismail al-Harawi from the charge of anthropomorphism,‬‬
‫‪even though we showed earlier that Abu Ismail al-Harawi explicitly affirmed the‬‬
‫‪meanings of Allah’s attributes, along with His volitional attributes as well.178 One‬‬
‫‪would wonder why Ibn Qudamah would supposedly resort to tafweedh of the‬‬
‫‪meaning if he did not find al-Harawi’s theology to be problematic, unless, perhaps,‬‬
‫!‪Ibn Qudamah agreed with it‬‬

‫•‬ ‫‪If you refer back to the Ibn Abdul Barr citation earlier, you would see that Ibn Abdul‬‬
‫‪Barr states that the Jahmiyyah rejected the sifat on their haqeeqah. Well, they could‬‬
‫‪not have rejected the haqeeqah unless there was a meaning to be rejected! Obviously,‬‬

‫‪175‬‬
‫‪In his Dhamm al-Ta’weel:‬‬

‫عن السالف قرنا‬ ‫صفات هللا ُموافقَة لكتاب هللا تَعالى نقلها الخلف َ‬ ‫األخبار فِي ِ‬ ‫وقا َل اإلمام ُم َح َّمد بن إسْحاق بن خُزَ ْي َمة إن ْ‬
‫صفات هلل تَعالى والمعرفة واإليمان ِب ِه والت َّ ْسلِيم لما‬ ‫ِا‬ ‫ال‬ ‫يل‬‫ب‬
‫َِ‬‫س‬ ‫على‬ ‫َذا‬
‫ه‬ ‫عصرنا‬ ‫صحا َبة والتاا ِبعِينَ إلى‬ ‫بعد قرن من لدن ال َّ‬
‫عن كِتابه َم َع اجْ تِناب التَّأ ْ ِويل والجحود وترك الت َّ ْمثِيل والتكييف‬
‫َ‬ ‫ﷺ‬ ‫ُول‬ ‫س‬ ‫الر‬
‫َّ‬ ‫ونبيه‬ ‫له‬ ‫ي‬‫ز‬ ‫أخبر هللا تَعالى فِي تَ ْن ِ‬

‫‪And in his Ithbat Sifat Al-‘Uluww:‬‬

‫ي ِ ْب ِن َخلَف‪ ،‬أ ْنبَأ الحا ِك ُم أبُو َ‬

‫ع ْب ِد‬ ‫ي (قالَ) (‪ :)١‬أ ْنبَأ أحْ َمدُ ْب ُن َ‬
‫ع ِل ا‬ ‫ص ْيدَالنِ ُّ‬ ‫ط َّه ِر القا ِس ُم ْب ُن الفَ ْ‬
‫ض ِل ب ِْن َ‬
‫ع ْب ِد الواحِ ِد ال َّ‬ ‫أ ْنبَأ أبُو ال ُم َ‬
‫ق ب ِْن خُزَ ْي َمةَ ‪ -฀-‬يَقُولُ‪َ :‬من لَ ْم‬ ‫سمِ ْعتُ أبا بَك ٍْر ُم َح َّم َد ْبنَ إسْحا َ‬ ‫سمِ ْعتُ ُم َح َّمدَ بْنَ صالِحِ ب ِْن هانِئ يَقُولُ‪َ :‬‬ ‫ظ‪ ،‬قالَ‪َ :‬‬ ‫َّللا الحافِ ُ‬
‫َّ ِ‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ُ‬
‫عنقهُ‪،‬‬ ‫تْ‬ ‫ا‬
‫تاب وإال ض ُِربَ ُ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫َ‬
‫سماواتِهِ‪ ،‬ف ُه َو كافِر بِهِ‪ ،‬يُ ْستَتابُ ‪ ،‬فإن َ‬ ‫سبْعِ َ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫َ‬
‫على عَرْ ِشهِ‪ ،‬ق ِد ا ْستَوى ف ْوقَ َ‬ ‫يُق َِّر بِأنَّ َّ َ‬
‫َّللا َ‬
‫‪176‬‬
‫‪In his Ithbat Sifat Al-‘Uluww:‬‬

‫واإليمان بِها‪،‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫سنَّةِ‪،‬‬
‫آن وال ُّ‬ ‫الواردَةِ ُكلاِها فِي القُرْ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ت‬
‫صفا ِ‬ ‫على اإل ْق ِ‬
‫رار بِال ِ ا‬ ‫سنَّ ِة ُمجْ مِ عُونَ َ‬ ‫ع َم َر ‪-‬رحمه هللا‪ :-‬أ ْه ُل ال ُّ‬ ‫قا َل أبُو ُ‬
‫َع‪،‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫د‬ ‫ب‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ُ‬
‫ل‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ه‬ ‫أ‬ ‫ا‬‫م‬‫ا‬ ‫وأ‬ ‫‪.‬‬‫ً‬ ‫ة‬ ‫ور‬
‫َ‬ ‫ص‬
‫ُ‬ ‫حْ‬ ‫م‬‫َ‬ ‫ً‬ ‫ة‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ص‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ه‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ُّونَ‬ ‫د‬ ‫ح‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ي‬
‫َ‬ ‫وال‬ ‫‪،‬‬ ‫ل‬
‫ِكَ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ذ‬ ‫ن‬ ‫مِ‬ ‫ا‬‫ً‬ ‫ئ‬‫ي‬‫ْ‬ ‫ش‬
‫َ‬ ‫ونَ‬‫ُ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ي‬
‫ا‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫َ‬
‫ك‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ال‬ ‫م‬
‫ْ‬ ‫ه‬
‫ُ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫ن‬‫أ‬ ‫ا‬
‫إال‬ ‫‪،‬‬ ‫جاز‬
‫ِ‬ ‫م‬
‫َ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫لى‬ ‫ع‬
‫َ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ة‬
‫ِ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ِي‬
‫ق‬ ‫ح‬
‫َ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫لى‬‫ع‬ ‫و َح ْملِها َ‬
‫ع ُمونَ أنَّ َمن أقَ َّر بِها‬ ‫على ال َحقِيقَةِ‪ ،‬ويَ ْز ُ‬ ‫َوارجُ‪ ،‬فَ ُكلُّ ُه ْم يُ ْنك ُِرها‪ ،‬وال يَحْ مِ ُل مِ نها َ‬
‫ش ْيئًا َ‬ ‫ال َجهْمِ يَّةُ ‪ ،‬وال ُم ْعت َِزلَةُ ُكلُّها‪ ،‬والخ ِ‬
‫سنَّةُ َرسُو ِلهِ‪ ،‬وهُ ْم أئِ َّمةُ‬ ‫َّللا‪ ،‬و ُ‬ ‫شباِه‪ ،‬وهُ ْم ِع ْندَ َمن أقَ َّر بِها نافُونَ ل ِْل َم ْعبُودِ‪ ،‬وال َح ُّق فِيما قالَهُ القائِلُونَ بِما يَ ْنطِ ُق بِ ِه كِتابُ َّ ِ‬ ‫ُم َ‬
‫عةِ‪ ،‬وال َح ْمدُ ِ َّ ِ‬
‫ّلِل‬ ‫ال َجما َ‬
‫‪177‬‬
‫‪In his Al-Munaadhara fil-Qur’an:‬‬

‫عن‬‫عن َمس ُْروق َ‬ ‫سلَيْمان بن م ْهران األ ْع َمش َ‬

‫عن أبي الضُّحى َ‬ ‫الرحْ َمن بن ُم َح َّمد المحاربي قا َل َحدثنا ُ‬‫ث َّم قا َل َحدثنا عبد َّ‬
‫صوته أهل السَّماء قا َل أبُو نصر السجْ ِزي ‪ ฀‬وهَذا ال َخبَر لَي َ‬
‫ْس‬ ‫الوحْ ي سمع َ‬ ‫عبد هللا بن َم ْسعُود ‪ ฀‬انه قا َل إذا تكلم هللا بِ َ‬
‫ي َمرْ فُوعا إلى النَّبِي ﷺ‬‫فِي ُرواته اإال إمام َم ْقبُول وقد ُر ِو َ‬
‫‪178‬‬
‫‪In his Dhayl Tabaqat al-Hanabilah, vol. 3, p. 304, Ibn Rajab reports that Ibn Qudamah defended al-‬‬
‫‪Harawi from the charge of anthropomorphism made by Ibnul Jawzi:‬‬

‫َّللا األ ْن ِ‬
‫صاري يميل إلى التشبيه‪ .‬فال يقبل‬ ‫عبْد َّ ِ‬
‫صاري‪ :‬كانَ َ‬ ‫عن كَالم شيخ اإلسْالم األ ْن ِ‬ ‫سيْف‪ :‬وكتب ابْن الجوزي َ‬
‫قا َل ال َ‬
‫قَ ْوله‪ ،‬فألحق جدي‪ :‬حاشاه من التشبيه‪ ،‬وال يقبل قَ ْول ابْن الجوزي فِي ِه‪.‬‬

‫‪62‬‬
 the Jahmiyyah did not reject the actual words of the Qur’an itself. And yet, Ibn
Qudamah approves of this statement made by Ibn Abdul Barr.

Addressing Two Objections

Those who insist that Ibn Qudamah was a muffawwidh point to a statement of his where
he states:
‫ فكيف يخاطب هللا الخلق بما ال يعقلونه؟ أم كيف ينزل على رسوله ما ال يطلع على‬:‫فإن قيل‬
‫ يجوز أن يكلافهم اإليمان بما ال ي ا‬:‫تأويله؟ قلنا‬
‫ كما اختبرهم باإليمان الحروف‬...‫طلعون على تأويله‬
‫المقطعة مع أنه ال يعلم معناها‬
If it is said: How can Allah speak to the creation about that which they
cannot comprehend? Or how can revelation be sent to the Messenger
when its explanation is not known? We say: It is possible [for Allah] to
hold them accountable for having iman in that whose meaning they do not
know… just as He tested them with having iman in the huruf al-
muqatta’ah (disconnected letters at the start of some Surahs), even though
their meanings are not known.179
They then argue that Ibn Qudamah compared the attributes of Allah to the huruf
al-muqatta’ah, whose meaning we have no clue of.
Firstly, it is impossible that Ibn Qudamah treated the passages on sifat the same
identical way as the huruf al-muqatta’ah since it has already been shown that Ibn
Qudamah used passages on sifat to prove other things, such as Allah’s elevation.
On the other hand, no one can similarly use the huruf al-muqatta’ah to prove
anything, as nothing can be deduced from them.
Secondly, this statement is not saying that the passages on sifat are exactly like
the huruf al-muqatta’ah in terms of how much meaning could be derived from
them. Everyone concedes, including Ibn Taymiyyah, that there are things about
the sifat that remain mysterious to us that we must submit to believing in and not
question. Rather, the similarity that is being drawn between the two is that Allah
asks us to believe in both kinds of passages, which involve meanings that we do
not grasp and understand. In fact, Ibn Qudamah is appealing to the huruf al-
muqatta’ah to argue, a fortiori, that if Allah can demand us to have iman in things
like the huruf al-muqatta’ah and we are okay with it, then we should have no
objection submitting to the texts on sifat as well.

179
Rawdhat al-Nazir, vol. 1, p. 217

63
All this is notwithstanding the fact that Ibn Qudamah states elsewhere that he believes
that the huruf al-muqatta’ah are not mutashabih since some scholars did know their
interpretation.180
Another objection that is raised is that Ibn Taymiyyah himself allegedly described Ibn
Qudamah as a mufawwidh. Ibn Taymiyyah states:
‫س ِن بْن‬َ ‫ كَأبِي ُم َح َّم ِد ب ِْن ُك االب وأبِي ال َح‬:ِ‫ت العَ ْق ِليَّة‬ ِ ‫صفا‬ ‫و َمن أثْبَتَ العُلُ َّو بِالعَ ْق ِل و َجعَلَهُ مِ ن ال ِ ا‬
‫ أثْبَتُوا العُلُ َّو و َجعَلُوا ِاال ْستِوا َء‬:‫وكالقاضي أبِي يَ ْعلى فِي آخِ ِر قَ ْولَ ْي ِه وأبِي ُم َح َّم ٍد‬
ِ ُ‫غونِي و َمن وافَقَه‬ ‫ا‬
ُ ‫الزا‬
َّ ‫ت ال َخ َب ِريَّ ِة الَّتِي َيقُولُونَ ال َي ْعلَ ُم َم ْعناها اإال‬
ُ‫َّللا‬ ِ ‫صفا‬
‫مِ ن ال ِ ا‬
And those who rationally affirmed ‘uluww (elevation) and classified it
among the rationally-deducible attributes (al-sifat al-‘aqliyyah) like Abi
Muhammad b. Kullab, Abi al-Hassan b. al-Zaghouni, and those who
agreed with him, such as al-Qadi Abi Ya’la in the last of his stances and
Abi Muhammad: They affirmed ‘uluww and made istiwa from among the
revealed attributes (al-sifat al-khabariyyah) about which they say: No one
knows their meaning except Allah.181
It is alleged that “Abi Muhammad” here refers to Ibn Qudamah. It is further asserted that
the statement ascribed to him, “No one knows their meaning except Allah,” implies that
Ibn Taymiyyah deemed him to be a mufawwidh.
However, it cannot be claimed for certain that Abi Muhammad here is Ibn Qudamah for a
few reasons.
First, Ibn Taymiyyah often refers to Ibn Qudamah by his common honorific as “Shaykh
Abu Muhammad” or “Shaykh al-Muwaffaq.”
Secondly, Ibn Taymiyyah never clubs Ibn Qudamah along with other Mutakallimeen like
this. Ibn Taymiyyah typically clubs Ibn Qudamah with “pure muhaditheen” and tradition-
inclined scholars such as Ibn Battah and others.182
Thirdly, there is a more plausible theory as to which Abi Muhammad is being referred to
here, namely Abu Muhammad Rizq Allah al-Tamimi (d. 488 A.H.). When discussing al-
Qadi Abu Ya’la’s aqeedah earlier in this article, I cited Ibn Asakir, who stated that both

180
He states in Dhamm al-Ta’weel, vol. 1, p. 39:

‫ويلزم من هَذا أن يكون‬ ْ ‫الو ُجوه أن تَأ ْ ِويل ال ُمتَشابه ال يُعلمهُ اإال هللا تَعالى وأن متبعه من أهل الزيغ وأنه محرم على كل أحد‬ ُ ‫فَثَبت بِما ذَكرْ ناهُ من‬
‫ا‬ َّ
‫صفات هللا تَعالى وما أشبهه دون ما قيل فِي ِه أنه ال ُمجْ مل أو الذِي يغمض علمه على غير العلماء ال ُم َحقِقين أو ال ُح ُروف‬ ِ ِ‫ال ُمتَشابه ه َُو ما يتَعَلَّق ب‬
َ
‫عل ْي ِه وهللا أعلم‬ ْ ُ
َ ‫ال ُمقطعَة ِألن بعض ذَلِك َم ْعلوم لبَعض العلماء وبَعضه قد تكلم ابْن العَبااس وغَيره فِي تَأ ِويله فَلم يجز أن يحمل‬
181
Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 17, pp. 360-361
182
Ibn Taymiyyah states in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 6, pp. 52-53:

‫سن َِن‬ َّ ‫ض ِة كَأبِي بَ ْكر اآلجري فِي «ال‬

ُّ ‫ش ِريعَةِ» والاللكائي فِي ال‬ َ ْ‫ط ِريقَةُ ال ُم َح ِداثِينَ ال َمح‬ َ ُ‫ط ِريقَتُه‬ َّ َ‫َّللا ْب ُن ب‬
َ َ‫طةَ ف‬ ِ َّ ‫ع ْب ِد‬
َ ‫وأ اما أبُو‬
َّ ‫والخ اَال ُل مِ ثْلُهُ قَ ِريب مِ نهُ وإلى ط ِريقَتِ ِه يَمِ ي ُل ال‬
. َ‫ش ْي ُخ أبُو ُم َح َّمد و ُمتَأ ِ اخ ُرو ال ُم َح ِداثِين‬ َ

64
he and Abu Muhammad al-Tamimi got influenced by al-Baqillani’s student Abu
Muhammad al-Labban,183 and thus Abu Muhammad al-Tamimi being clubbed together
with al-Qadi Abu Ya’la makes much more sense than clubbing Ibn Qudamah with al-
Qadi given everything else Ibn Taymiyyah has said.
Ibn Taymiyyah even stated that Rizq Allah was influenced by the earlier Tamimi
scholars, who were known to have been influenced by ‘ilmul kalam.184 But can we
definitely say that Ibn Taymiyyah had Abu Muhammad Rizq Allah al-Tamimi in mind
here? Of course not; even this suggestion can be challenged, but it seems much more
plausible than believing that he had Ibn Qudamah in mind.
Fourthly, and this point is significant, even if we assume that Ibn Taymiyyah has Ibn
Qudamah in mind here, he is merely relaying what Ibn Qudamah said and not necessarily
stating that Ibn Qudamah was a mufawwidh.
In one instance, Ibn Taymiyyah virtually copy-pastes from Ibn Qudamah’s Dhamm al-
Ta’weel when answering a question on sifat.185 What he copy-pastes from Ibn Qudamah
includes a phrase uttered by Ibn Qudamah, “they relegated its knowledge to its speaker
and meaning to who said it” (‫)وردوا علمها إلى قائلها ومعناها إلى المتكلم بها‬. It also includes Ibn
Qudama’s citation of a statement attributed to Imam al-Shafi, “I believe in what has come
from Allah and His Messenger according to the intended meaning of the Messenger of
ِ َّ ‫سو ِل‬
Allah.” (‫َّللا‬ ُ ‫على ُمرا ِد َر‬
َ ‫َّللا ﷺ‬ ُ ‫ع ْن َر‬
ِ َّ ‫سو ِل‬ ِ َّ ‫ع ْن‬
َ ‫َّللا و ِبما جا َء‬ َ ‫)آ َمنت ِبما جا َء‬. Mufawwidhs constantly
bring up these two points to prove that Ibn Qudamah was a mufawwidh, yet here Ibn
Taymiyyah had absolutely no problem with them, which is a clear demonstration that
he did not understand that Ibn Qudamah intended the condemned form of tafweedh
by them.

Lastly, even if Ibn Taymiyyah did believe Ibn Qudamah was a mufawwidh, how is this a
definitive argument? If we are to agree with whatever Ibn Taymiyyah attributes to
scholars blindly, then we might as well end the discussion right now. Otherwise, what
ultimately counts is the evidence, and it has been demonstrated that there are good
reasons to believe that Ibn Qudammah was not a mufawwidh.
Another objection: The pro-tafweedh camp states that Ibn Qudamah has statements
supporting their view, so why shouldn’t we let the statements that they appeal to
183
Ibn Asakir in his Tabyin Kadhb al-Muftari, p. 262 states:

‫شيْخي ال َحنابِلَة كانا يقرآن على أبِي ُم َح َّمد بن اللبان‬

َ ‫وسمعت بِبَ ْغدادَ من يَحْ كِي أن أبا يعلي بن الفراء وأبا ُم َح َّمد التَّمِ يمِ ي‬
‫صول فِي داره‬ ُ ُ ‫األ‬
184
Ibn Taymiyyah states in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 4, pp. 166-167:

َ ‫يِ و‬
‫ع ِ ام ِه أبِي‬ َ ‫سلَ ِف ِه َك َج ِدا ِه أبِي ال َح‬
‫س ِن التَّمِ يمِ ا‬ َ ‫َّللا كانَ يَمِ ي ُل إلى‬
َ ‫ط ِريقَ ِة‬ ِ َّ ‫ور ْز ُق‬ َ ‫ي ِ وأبِي الوفا ب ِْن‬
ِ . ‫عقِيل‬ ‫َّللا التَّمِ يمِ ا‬
ِ َّ ‫ق‬ ِ ‫مِ ثْ َل ِر ْز‬
…ِ ‫ي‬ ‫س ِن التَّمِ يمِ ا‬
َ ‫ي ِ ب ِْن أبِي ُموسى ه َُو صاحِ بُ أبِي ال َح‬ ‫ع ِل ا‬ َّ ‫ي ِ وال‬
َ ‫ش ِريفِ أبِي‬ ‫ض ِل التَّمِ يمِ ا‬
ْ َ‫الف‬

َ ‫ أبُو ال َح‬: َ‫ظ ِم المائِلِينَ إلَ ْي ِه ْم التَّمِ يمِ يُّون‬

ُّ ِ‫س ِن التَّمِ يم‬
‫ي وا ْبنُهُ وا ْب ُن ا ْبنِ ِه ونَحْ ُو ُه ْم‬ َ ‫وكانَ مِ ن أ ْع‬

Contrast the response between Ibn Taymiyyah in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 4, p. 2 onward with Ibn
185

Qudama’s words in Dhamm al-Ta’weel, p.11 onward.

65
explain away and override the statements that you appeal to instead of vice versa?

The answer to that is that the statements that I have appealed to can actually add clarity to
the statements that they appeal to and be reconciled with them. On the other hand, the
statements they appeal to, with the way the mufawwidhs interpret them, cannot be
reconciled with everything I have cited from Ibn Qudamah in any satisfactory and non-
ad-hoc manner.
A General Glimpse of Hanbali Aqeedah Prior to Ibn Taymiyyah

There is a misconception held by some that the dominant stance of the Hanbalis
prior to Ibn Taymiyyah was that of tafweedh of the meaning; however, this can be
forcefully challenged.
Ibn Rajab reports that in 460 A.H., al-Sharif Abu Ja’far went to the Mansur masjid along
with his Hanbali companions and the rest of the jurists and members of Ahlul Hadeeth
and read Ibn Khuzaymah’s Kitab al-Tawheed together.186 Ibn Khuzaymah’s proto-
Taymiyyan/Salafi theology requires no elaboration.187 This event is extremely significant
as it demonstrates what the majority of the Hanbalis believed.
Ishaq b. Ahmad al-‘Althi al-Hanbali (d. 534 A.H.) challenged Ibnul Jawzi’s claim that
Ahlus Sunnah did not understand Allah’s attributes.188

186
He states in Dhayl Tabaqat al-Hanabila, vol. 1, p. 38:

‫ قد عزم على إظهار مذهبه ألجل موت الشيخ‬- ‫ شيخ المعتزلة‬- ‫وفي سنة ستين وأربعمائة كان أبُو علي بن الوليد‬
‫ وسائر الفقهاء‬،‫ هو وأهل مذهبه‬،‫ وعبر إلى جامع المنصور‬،‫ فقام الشريف أبُو جعفر‬،‫األجل أبي منصور بن يوسف‬
،‫ ثم حضروا الديوان‬.‫ وقرأوا كتاب التوحيد البن خزيمة‬،‫ ففرح أهل السنة بذلك‬.‫ وبلغوا ذلك‬،‫وأعيان أهل الحديث‬
‫ واتفقوا على‬،‫ وقرىء هناك بمحضر من الجميع‬.‫ فأجيبوا إلى ذلك‬.‫وسألوا إخراج االعتقاد الذي جمعه الخليفة القادر‬
.‫ وبالغ ابن فَورك في ذلك‬.‫لعن من خالفه وتكفيره‬

.‫ ليس ههنا نسخة غير هذه‬:‫ فقال لهم الوزير‬،‫ أن يسلم إليهم االعتقاد‬:‫ والزاهد الصحراوي‬،‫ثم سأل الشريف أبُو جعفر‬
:‫ فقال‬.‫ قرىء في المساجد والجوامع‬،‫ هكذا فعلنا في أيام القادر‬:‫ فقالوا‬.‫ونحن نكتب لكم به نسخة لتقرأ في المجالس‬
.‫ وحضره الخاص والعام‬،‫ ثم قرىء بعد ذلك االعتقاد بباب البصرة‬.‫ وانصرفوا‬،‫ فليس اعتقاد غير هذا‬،‫هكذا تفعلون‬
187
Below are just a couple of examples from Ibn Khuzaymah’s Kitab al-Tawheed showing that he knew
the meaning of sifat, such as fingers and descent.

On page 184:

‫سوا ًء قَ ْب َل‬َ ،‫على ما فِي ال َخبَ ِر‬ َ ،ِ‫على أصابِ ِعه‬ َ ‫عال يُ ْمسِكُ ما ذُك َِر فِي ال َخبَ ِر‬ َ َّ َّ‫ أن‬:ُ‫أ اما َخبَ ُر اب ِْن َم ْسعُود َف َمعْناه‬
َ ‫َّللا َج َّل و‬
‫ وه َُو َم ْف ُهوم فِي اللُّغَ ِة الَّتِي‬، ِ‫ش ْيء‬
َّ ‫على ال‬ ِ ‫غي ُْر القَب‬
َ ‫ْض‬ َ ‫على األصا ِب ِع‬ َ َ‫ ِألنَّ اإلمْساك‬،‫ض‬ ِ ْ‫غي َْر األر‬ َ ‫ض‬ َ ْ‫َّللا األر‬ِ َّ ‫تَ ْبدِي ِل‬
‫ الَّتِي ُخوطِ بْنا ِبها‬،ِ‫ وه َُو َم ْفهُو ٌم فِي اللُّغَة‬، ِ‫ش ْيء‬
َّ ‫على ال‬ َ ِ‫ْض‬ ‫ب‬َ ‫ق‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ْر‬
‫ي‬ ‫غ‬
َ
ُ ِ ِ‫ع‬ ‫ب‬‫األصا‬‫ب‬
ِ ْ ِ‫ء‬ ‫ي‬ َّ
‫ش‬ ‫ال‬ ‫لى‬‫ع‬َ َ‫ْساك‬ ‫م‬ ‫اإل‬ َّ‫ن‬ ‫أل‬
ِ ‫ها؛‬ ِ ‫ُخوطِ بْنا‬
‫ب‬

And on page 290:

ْ ‫ الَّذِي‬،‫سماءِ الدُّ ْنيا‬
‫ إذْ ُمحال‬،ِ‫أخبَ َرنا نَبِيُّنا ﷺ أنَّهُ يَ ْن ِز ُل إلَ ْيه‬ َ َ‫عال فَ ْوق‬ َ َّ َّ‫ أن‬:َّ‫صح‬
َ ‫َّللا َج َّل و‬ َ ‫بار ما بانَ وثَبَتَ و‬ ْ ‫وفِي َه ِذ ِه‬
ِ ‫األخ‬
َ‫سف َل‬
ْ ‫ب أنَّ الن ُزو َل مِ ن أعْلى إلى أ‬ُّ ْ
ِ ‫ و َمفهُو ٌم فِي الخِ طا‬،‫سف َل إلى أعْلى‬ َ ُ ِ ‫فِي لُغَ ِة العَ َر‬
ْ ‫ نَزَ َل مِ ن أ‬:َ‫ب أنْ يَقول‬
188
We read in Ibn Rajab’s Dhayl Tabaqat al-Hanabila, vol. 3, p. 488:

66
Ibn al-Arabi (d. 543 A.H.) relays in his Al-‘Awasim min al-Qawasim, p. 209, that
once when Al-Qushayri (465 A.H.) was holding a session, the ayah “the Most
Compassionate, did istiwa on the Throne.” (20:5), was recited, and then the
Hanbalis who were present stood up and exclaimed loudly, “Sitting…Sitting.”189
This demonstrates that they did not make tafweedh of the meaning of istiwa.
In his al-Mataalib al-‘Aliyah, p. 17, Imam ar-Razi attributed to the majority of the
Hanbalis that they affirmed that Allah moves.190 Even though it is questionable that
the majority of Hanbalis explicitly affirmed this, it is very interesting to note that
ar-Razi at least thought that they did so (even if only as a necessary implication of
their beliefs).
Ibn Abi Qasim al-Dashti (d. 661 A.H.) authored a book entitled Ithbat al-Hadd
lillah wa-annahu ‘Qa’id ‘ala Arshihi, and in it he:

- Affirms that we must believe in the istiwa of Allah on the Throne just as the
laity do,191 which implies that we know the meaning. (page 118)
- Affirms a direction and place for Allah. (pages 127-129)
- Affirms that we go with the dhahir meaning of Allah’s attributes. (pages 158-
159)
- Affirms that the meaning of istiwa is sitting. (pages 171, 173-174, and 180)
Thus, it is quite clear that he was not a mufawwidh.
As we can see, the bulk of Hanbalis do not appear to have been influenced by kalam
during this period.

‫ وال أمالها قلب مليء‬،‫ كأنها صدرت ال من صدر سكن فيه احتشام العلي العظيم‬،‫( ثم تعرضت لصفات الخالق تعالى‬
‫ وز عمت أن طائفة من أهل السنة واِلخيار تلقوها وما‬.‫ بل من واقعات النفوس البهرجية الزيوف‬،‫بالهيبة والتعظيم‬
ً‫ وال جهال‬،‫ عن الجدال والخصام‬- ‫ بحمد هللا‬- ً ‫ ال عجزا‬،‫ بل كفوا عن الثرثرة والتشدق‬.‫ وحاشاهم من ذلك‬،‫فهموا‬
‫ ال عن جهل وعماية‬،‫ وإنما أمسكوا عن الخوض في ذلك عن علم ودراية‬.‫بطرق الكالم‬
189
He states:

،‫ فعقد مجلسا للذكر‬،)٤( ‫ من نيسابور‬،‫ الصوفي‬،‫أنه ورد بها األستاذ أبو القاسم عبد الكريم بن هوازن القشيري‬
- ‫) الحنابلة‬٥( ‫ يعني‬- ‫ فرأيت‬:‫ قال لي أخصهم‬.﴾‫ ﴿الرحمن على العرش استوى‬:‫ وقرأ القارئ‬،‫وحضر فيه كافة الخلق‬
‫ وثار إليهم أهل السنة من‬،)٧( ‫) مدى‬٦( ‫ وأبعده‬،‫ قاعد بأرفع صوت‬،‫ قاعد‬:‫يقومون في أثناء المجلس ويقولون‬
...،‫أصحاب القشيري‬
190
He says:

.‫ وأثبته قوم منهم‬،‫ والحركة والسكون؟ فأباه بعض الكرامية‬،‫المجسمة اختلفوا في هل يصح عليه الذهاب والمجيء‬
.‫وجمهور الحنابلة يثبتونه‬
191
Interestingly, several Ashari scholars deemed the views of the laity to be ‘anthropomorphic’ absent
being educated about Ashari theology; see Is Ash'arism the Theology of the Masses?

67
The Aqeedah of Hanbali Scholars Immediately Succeeding Ibn Taymiyyah

Despite not always adopting his terminology or agreeing with all his theological stances,
Ibn Taymiyyah had an undeniably strong influence on the topic of sifat on his students
and their students among the Hanbalis who came after him.192 To be more specific, they
denied tafweedh of the meaning of the attributes and affirmed Allah’s volitional
attributes.
Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani said that the majority of Hanbalis193 believed that Allah speaks
whenever he wills194 and thus deemed the divine attribute of speech to be a volitional
one.
Ibn Taymiyyah’s influence was upon Ahlul Hadeeth in general, even beyond the Hanbali
jurists.195
Ibn Abdul Hadi (d. 744 A.H.)

There is no dispute that Ibn Abdul Hadi was fully aligned with Ibn Taymiyyah on the
subject of sifat. He highly praised Imam Al-Darimi and Ibn Khuzaymah for their works
on sifat,196 which is enough to give away his theology.

192
Ibn Taymiyyah’s influence on the Hanbalis who came after him is difficult to deny. Even those who
dislike Ibn Taymiyyah frustratingly acknowledge this fact; see, for example, Imam Al-Kawthari’s remarks
on page 34 of his book, al-Ishfaq ‘ala Ahkam al-Talaq.
193
It is not explicitly clear whether he meant in general or specifically the Hanbalis during his time.
194
He says in his Fathul Bari, vol. 13, p. 493:

َ‫على ال َجهْمِ يَّ ِة وا ْفت ََرق‬

َ ‫الر ِدا‬َّ ‫ب‬ ِ ‫على ذَلِكَ أحْ َمدُ فِي كِتا‬ َ َّ‫غي ُْر َم ْخلُوق أنَّهُ َل ْم يَزَ لْ يَتَ َكلَّ ْم إذا شا َء نَص‬ ِ َّ ‫س أنَّهُ كَال ُم‬
َ ‫َّللا‬ ُ ِ‫والخام‬
‫صواتُ ُم ْقت َِرنَة ال ُمتَعاقِبَة ويَ ْس َم ُع كَال َمهُ َمن شا َء وأ ْكثَرهم‬ ْ ‫وف واأل‬ ُ ‫الزم لِذاتِ ِه وال ُح ُر‬ ِ ‫أصْحابُهُ فِرْ قَتَي ِْن مِ ن ُه ْم َمن قا َل ه َُو‬
‫علَ ْي ِه السَّال ُم حِ ينَ َكلَّ َمهُ ولَ ْم يَ ُك ْن ناداهُ مِ ن قَ ْب ُل‬
َ ‫قالُوا إنَّهُ ُمتَ َك ِلا ٌم بِما شا َء َمتى شا َء وأنَّهُ نادى ُموسى‬
195
Ibn Kathir who was Shafi states in his Bidayah wal-Nihayah, vol. 14, p. 208:
ْ‫ بَ ْع َد أنْ لَ ْم يَكُن‬- ‫س ِة‬ َ ‫ِياريَّةُ ال يَقُولُونَ ِبأنَّ فِ ْعلَهُ تَعالى القائِ َم ِبذاتِ ِه ال ُمقَ َّد‬ ِ ‫َّللا تَعالى تَقُو ُم ِب ِه اِل ْفعا ُل ِاال ْخت‬
َ َّ َّ‫َفإنَّ القائِ ِلينَ ِبأن‬
‫ وما كانَ قائِ ًما ِبذاتِ ِه ال‬،ِ‫سة‬ ََّ ‫َّللا تَعالى القائِ ُم ِبذاتِ ِه ال ُمقَد‬
َِّ ‫ َبلْ ه َُو كَال ُم‬.‫وق‬
ٍ ُ ‫ل‬‫خ‬ْ ‫م‬ ‫ب‬
َِ َ‫ْس‬ ‫ي‬ َ ‫ل‬ ‫و‬ ٌ
‫َث‬‫د‬ ْ‫ح‬‫م‬ ‫ُو‬
ُ َ ‫ه‬ : َ‫ون‬ ُ‫ بَ ْل يَقُول‬،‫ق‬ٌ ‫ َم ْخلُو‬-
ُ‫ ﴿ولَقَدْ َخلَ ْقنا ُك ْم ث َّم‬:‫ ]وقا َل تَعالى‬٢ ‫ ﴿ما يَأْتِي ِه ْم مِ ن ِذ ْكر مِ ن َرباِ ِه ْم ُمحْ دَث﴾ [ األنبياء‬:‫َّللاُ تَعالى‬ َّ ‫ وقَدْ قا َل‬،‫يَ ُكو ُن َم ْخلُوقًا‬
‫ فالكَال ُم‬،‫ق آ َد َم‬ ِ ‫صد ََر مِ نهُ تَعالى بَ ْع َد َخ ْل‬ ُّ ‫ ]فاأل ْم ُر بِال‬١١ ‫ص َّورْ نا ُك ْم ث ُ َّم قُ ْلنا ل ِْل َمالئِ َك ِة ا ْس ُجدُوا ِآلد ََم﴾ [ األعراف‬
َ ‫س ُجو ِد ِآلد ََم‬ َ
ْ
‫س اماهُ «» خَل ُق أ ْفعا ِل‬ َ ‫ كِتابًا فِي هَذا ال َم ْعنى‬- ฀ - ‫ي‬ ُّ ‫ُخار‬
ِ ‫ف الب‬ َ َّ‫صن‬
َ ْ‫ وقَد‬.‫ضع آخ َُر‬ ِ ‫ وهَذا لَهُ َم ْو‬،‫ْس َم ْخلُوقًا‬ َ ‫ت لَي‬ ِ ‫القائِ ُم بِالذاا‬
.»« ‫العِبا ِد‬
196
He said in his Risala Lateefah fi Ahadeeth Mutafarriqah Da’ifah, pp. 75-76:

‫وصنف كتابا جليال في الرد على بشر المريسي وأتباعه من الجهمية بعد المناظرة بينه وبين بعض الجهمية من‬
‫ وال أعلم للمتقدمين في هذا‬،‫ وقد هتك رحمه هللا في هذا الكتاب ستر الجهمية وبين فضائحهم‬...‫أصحاب بشر والثلجي‬
‫ وكتاب التوحيد إلمام األئمة محمد بن إسحاق ابن‬،‫الشأن كتابا أجود منه ومن كتابه اآلخر في الرد على عموم الجهمية‬
‫ وإ ن كان جليال في هذا الباب ومصنفه من أكابر أئمة المسلمين إال أن كتاب الدارمي أنفع في بعض شبه‬،‫خزيمة‬
‫مبرز في هذا الشأن وفي‬
‫ وكالهما إمام ا‬،‫ والدارمي أحذق في معرفة كالم الجهمية والعلم بمرادهم والرد عليهم‬،‫الجهمية‬
‫ رحمهما هللا ورضي عنهما وعن سائر أئمة الدين‬،‫غيره‬

68
‫‪He affirmed knowing the qadr al-mushtarak (common factor) in the divine attributes that‬‬
‫‪would allow us to know their meanings, in addition to affirming the volitional attributes‬‬
‫‪of Allah.197‬‬
‫)‪Ibn Qadi Al-Jabal (d. 771 A.H.‬‬

‫‪A leading Hanbali jurist of his time, Ibn Qadi was an ardent supporter of Ibn‬‬
‫‪Taymiyyah’s theology. His work, al-Radd ‘ala man Radd ‘ala Shaykh al-Islam fi‬‬
‫‪Mas’alat al-Hawadith, clearly lays out his theology. In it, he challenges al-Qadi Abu‬‬
‫‪Ya’la’s attempt to make ta’weel of Imam Ahmad’s statement that Allah speaks whenever‬‬
‫‪He wills.198‬‬
‫)‪Abu Mudhfir Yusuf al-Sarmari (d. 776 A.H.‬‬

‫‪Abu Mudhfir authored a poem in defense of Ibn Taymiyyah against Imam al-Subki‬‬
‫‪entitled, al-Himyah al-Islamiyyah fi al-Intisar li-Madhab Ibn Taymiyyah. In it, he‬‬
‫‪explicitly defends that the divine attribute of speech is volitional.199‬‬
‫)‪Ibn Rajab (d. 795 A.H.‬‬

‫‪197‬‬
‫‪He states in his al-Sarim al-Munki, pp. 233-234:‬‬

‫لكن إثبات القدر المشترك ال بد منه كما في الوجود‪ ،‬وباقي الصفات‪ ،‬وإال لزم التعطيل المحض‪ ،‬فنحن نثبت النزول‬
‫على وجه يليق بجالل هللا وعظمته‪ ،‬من غير تحريف وال تعطيل وال تكييف وال تمثيل‪...‬‬

‫وقد دل العقل والنقل على قيام اِلفعال االختيارية به فهو الفاعل المختار بفعل ما يشاء ويختار‪ ،‬ذو القدرة التامة‬
‫والحكمة البالغة والكمال المطلق‪ ،‬وقد ثبت في الصحيح أنه يتحول من صورة إلى صورة وثبت أنه يتبدى لهم في‬
‫صورة غير الصورة التي رأوه فيها أول مرة ثم يعود في الصورة التي رأوه فيها أول مرة‪.‬‬
‫وهذا كله حق ألن الصادق المصدوق المعصوم الذي ال ينطق عن الهوى قد أخبر به‪،‬وليس في العقل ما ينفيه‪ ،‬بل‬
‫ً‬
‫أصال‪.‬‬ ‫جميع ما أمر به صاحب الشرع يوافقه العقل الصحيح ويؤيده وينصره وال يخالفه‬
‫وإذا عرف هذا فقد يقال ما ورد من األدلة الدالة على العظمة وكبر الذات‪ ،‬ليس بينها وبين ما قيل إنه يعارضها منافاة‬
‫وال معارضة‪ ،‬بل جميع ذلك حق والجمع بين ذلك كله سهل يسير بعد العلم بإثبات اِلفعال االختيارية‬
‫‪198‬‬
‫‪In the manuscript form of the book at Dar al-Kutub wal-Makhtutat al-Masriyyah, it states on page 14:‬‬

‫وتأول القاضي أبو يعلى المشيئة في قوله إذا شاء‪ ،‬على مشيئة اإلسماع بناء على أن الكالم صفة نفسية ال يتعلق‬
‫بالمشيئة بل هو نعت ذاتي كالحياة والعلم‪ ،‬فقيل عليه هذا باطل لثالثة أوجه أحدهما أن رد المشيئة إلى مشيئة اإلسماع‬
‫تأويل الكالم وخروج عن ظاهره بغير دليل‪ ،‬الثاني أنه يلزم منه قِدم السامع ألن قوله لم يزل عبارة مستغرقة‪ ،‬الثالث‬
‫أن اإلمام أحمد قال فيما رده على الجهمية في قوله تعالى "إنا جعلنا قرآنا عربيا" أي صيرناه على فعل من أفعالنا‪،‬‬
‫وهذا يخالف تأويل من تأول الجعل بمعنى التسمية‪..‬‬
‫‪199‬‬
‫‪He states:‬‬

‫ضاهيت قول امرئ مغو بأنصبه‬ ‫أو قلت فعل اختيار منه ممتنع‬

‫وبالكالم بعيدا في تقربه‬ ‫ولم يزل بصفات الفعل متصفا‬

‫في كل ما زمن ما من معقبه‬ ‫سبحانه لم يزل ما شاء يفعله‬

‫نوع الكالم كذا نوع الفعال قديم ال المعين منه في ترتبه‬

‫‪69‬‬
Ibn Rajab was a student of Ibnul Qayyim, and in essence, he followed the same theology
as Ibn Taymiyyah when it came to sifat. He was not a blind follower of Ibn Taymiyyah,
as he did disagree with him on tertiary matters such as Ibn Taymiyyah’s position on
divorce and whether to utilize ‘ilmul kalam itself to refute the Mutakallimeen.
Nevertheless, he affirmed both Allah’s volitional attributes200 and the meanings of the
divine attributes,201 hence making it clear that he did not belong to the tafweedh camp.
Al-Jamal Al-Maqdisi (d. 798 A.H.)

He was the grandfather of Imam ibn al-Mibrad (d. 909 A.H.). Ibn al-Mibrad reports some
of his grandfather Al-Jamal’s words from his missing book, al-Tuhfa wal-Fa’idah. In it,
we can clearly see that he agreed with Ibn Taymiyyah’s stance on the affirmation of
volitional attributes.202
Ibrahim Ibn Muflih (d. 884 A.H.)203

200
In his Fathul Bari, vol. 7, p. 236, Ibn Rajab affirms Allah’s coming as a volitional attribute connected to
Allah’s will and even states that this is the position of Imam Ahmad:

:‫ قوله تعالى‬:‫ وتمر كما جاءت عندهم‬،‫ومن جملة صفات هللا التي نؤمن بها‬
.‫] ونحو ذلك مما دل على إتيانه ومجيئه يوم القيامة‬٢٢:‫صفاًّ﴾ [الفجر‬ َ ًّ ‫صفا‬
َ ُ‫﴿وجا َء َربُّكَ ؟وال َملَك‬
.‫وقد نص على ذلك أحمد وإسحاق وغيرهما‬
.‫ أن ذلك من أفعال هللا االختيارية التي يفعلها بمشيئته واختياره‬:‫وعندهما‬

He does the same with Allah’s speech in vol. 9, p. 259 of the same work:

:‫ وفي بعض الروايات‬- »‫ «هل تدرون ماذا قال ربكم؟‬:‫وقوله‬

‫ وهي تدل على‬،»‫«الليلة‬
.‫أن هللا تعالى يتكلم بمشيئته واختياره‬
.‫ لم يزل هللا متكلما إذا شاء‬:‫كما قال اإلمام أحمد‬
201
In his Dhayl Tabaqat al-Hanabila, vol. 1, pp. 385-386, Ibn Rajab talks about how the attributes are
taken on their reality and that we know their meanings:

‫ فهو حقيقة في‬،‫ وإن دل بقرينة فداللته بالقرينة حقيقة للمعنى اآلخر‬،‫إن دل بنفسه فهو حقيقة لذلك المعنى‬ ْ ‫اللفظ‬
ْ ‫ «والساماواتُ َم‬:‫ لفظ اليمين في قوله سبحانه وتعالى‬: ‫ وإن كان المعنى المدلول عليه مختلفا فحينئذ يقا ُل‬.‫الحالين‬
‫ط ِوياات‬
ِ‫األسودُ يَمِ ي ُن هللا‬
َ ‫ «ال َح َج ُر‬:‫ ولفظ اليمين في الحديث المعروف‬.‫ وهو دال على الصفة الذاتية‬.‫ حقيقة‬،٦٧ :٣٩ »ِ‫بِيَمينه‬
฀».َ‫ فَ َمن صافَ َحهُ فَكَأنما صافَح هللا‬.‫ض‬
ِ ْ‫في األر‬
‫ وهو حقيقة في هذا المعنى في هذه‬.‫ محل االستالم والتقبيل‬- ‫ مع هذه القرائن المحتفة به‬- ‫ يمينه يُرادُ به‬:‫وقيل‬
‫ وال‬،‫ بل داللته على معناه الخاص قطعية ال تحتمل النقيض بوجه‬،‫ وليس فيه ما يوهم الصفة الذاتية أصال‬،‫الصورة‬
.‫تحتاج إلى تأويل وال غيره‬

‫ وال ابن الخاضبة كان‬:‫ البحث عن مدلوالت األلفاظ؟ قيل‬:‫ أعني‬- ‫ فابن الفاعوس لم يكن من أهل هذا الشأن‬:‫وإذا قيل‬
‫ لما سمعه من إنكار‬،‫ أو بلغه عنه إنكار أن يكون هذا مجازا‬،‫ وإنما سمع من ابن الفاعوس‬.‫ وإن كان محدثا‬،‫من أهله‬
‫ التي هي‬،‫عز جل‬َّ ‫لفظ المجاز فحمله السامع لقصوره أو لهواه على أنه إذا كان حقيقة لزم أن يكون هو يد الرب‬
.‫ وهللا أعلم‬.‫ وهذا باطل‬.‫صفته‬
202
See Ibn al-Mibrad’s Sayr al-Haath ila ‘Ilm al-Talaq al-Thalaath, ed. al-‘Ajmi, p. 59.
203
He is not to be confused with the more prominent Hanbali jurist, Shams ud-Deen ibn Muflih who died in
763 A.H.

70
Ibn Muflih categorized those who denied volitional attributes as Ibn Kullab, al-
Muhasibi, al-Ashari, al-Qadi Abu Ya’la, Ibn Aqeel, Ibn al-Zaghouni, etc. As for
those who affirmed them, he ascribes this stance to the majority of Ahlul
Hadeeth, such as Ibn Al-Mubarak, Al-Bukhari, al-Darimi, Ibn Khuzaymah, Ibn
Hamid, etc.204

Just by virtue of his categorization, it seems quite obvious which side he has
chosen!
The Aqeedah of Latter-Day Hanbali Scholars

As time progressed after Ibn Taymiyyah’s death well into the 9th century, Ibn
Taymiyyah’s influence remained visible but began to dissipate among some
Hanbali scholars, especially as they had to be wary of being persecuted for being
too assertive in espousing any theological stances in opposition to Ash’arism.205
Moreover, there was a noticeable prioritization of attending to fiqh and
standardizing some of the formal opinions of the juristic school during this period.
Nevertheless, Ibn Taymiyyah’s influence remained.
Consider the following eye-opening and telling accounts by Abi Salim al-
‘Ayyashi (d. 1090 A.H.). He states that on his trip to Madinah, he met the Shafi
scholar, Burhan al-Din al-Korani (d. 1101 A.H.), who authored a book on the
differences between the Hanbalis and Asharis. He commended Burhan al-Din for
his objectivity in his research. Al-‘Ayyashi states that Burhan al-Din told him that
the Hanbalis only make tafweedh of those meanings that are problematic

204
Still in its manuscript form, he states in al-Isti’adha min al-Shaytan wa-Ahkamihi, folio 16:

‫ وعنه جوابان‬،‫ هذا سؤال مشهور للنفاة‬:‫ قلنا‬،‫ فإن كان على العرش للزم التحول‬،‫ كان هللا وال عرش‬:‫فإن قيل‬
‫ كما هو قول ابن كالب والحارث‬،‫ قول من ال يجيز أن يقوم باهلل أفعال تتعلق بقدرته ومشيئته‬:‫ أحدهما‬،‫مشهوران‬
،‫ أن العرش حوله من حال إلى حال‬،‫المحاسبي واألشعري والقاضي أبي يعلى وابن عقيل وابن الزاغوني وغيرهم‬
...‫فكان التعبير والتحويل في العرش‬

‫ جواب أكثر أهل الحديث كابن المبارك وأمثاله والبخاري وعثمان الدارمي وابن خزيمة وابن حامد‬:‫والجواب الثاني‬
‫ إنه تقوم به اِلفعال‬:‫وابن منده وإسماعيل األنصاري وابن عبد البر وغيرهم – رضي هللا عنهم – ممن يقول‬
.‫االختيارية المتعلقة بمشيئته وقدرته‬
205
Examples of scholars oppressed for espousing views in defense of Ibn Taymiyyah are Ibn Abi
al-‘Izz al-Hanafi and Shihab al-Din ibn Murri al-Hanbali. Al-Maqrizi mentions how several of the
Hanbalis were oppressed as a result of following Ibn Taymiyyah’s aqeedah during his time. He
states in al-Muqaffah al-Kabeer, vol. 1, p. 281:

‫ ابن الشيخ شرف الدين‬،‫ي‬

‫ي الدين عبد الغن ا‬
‫ وحبس تق ا‬، ‫ وأوذي الحنابلة‬،‫صبون على ابن تيمياة بالقاهرة‬‫وكثر المتع ا‬
.‫ وشناع عليه‬،‫ وألزم سائر الحنابلة بالرجوع عن عقيدة ابن تيمياة‬.‫ي‬
‫الحنبل ا‬
For further examples, see Mashur b. Hassan, Mihnat Ibn Abi al-‘Izz al-Hanafi, pp. 103-107.

71
‫‪pertaining to the sifat, while generally speaking, they affirm the meanings as‬‬
‫‪understood by the Arabs such as istiwa, elevation, descent, etc.206‬‬
‫‪This is very interesting, as the stance of the Hanbalis is being described as that of‬‬
‫‪tafweedh of the meaning, although they still know the meanings according to the‬‬
‫‪Arabic language! Clearly, the meaning whose knowledge is being negated is the‬‬
‫‪denotative type, while the known one is connotative.‬‬
‫‪He also says that his Hanbali companions in Cairo showed him one of Ibn‬‬
‫‪Taymiyyah’s works and that it was standardized (mu’tamad) reading for the‬‬
‫‪Hanbalis.207 This is critical as we are speaking about mid-eleventh century Egypt,‬‬
‫‪and Ibn Taymiyyah’s theological works208 were still considered standard and‬‬
‫‪official readings among the Hanbalis!209‬‬
‫)‪‘Alaa’ al-Din al-Mardawi (d. 885 A.H.‬‬

‫‪206‬‬
‫‪We read in al-Rihla al-‘Ayyashiyyah, pp. 570-580:‬‬

‫ِب إلى الحنابلة‪ ،‬ولم يقلاِد في ذلك‬

‫وقد أجاد شيخنا رضي هللا عنه – يعني الكوراني رحمه هللا بالفحص عن ك اِل ما نُس َ‬
‫أهل مذهبه من الشافعية‪ ،‬لعلمه بما يقع بين المتناظرين وعدم تحقيق محل النزاع‪ ،‬ونسبة كل واحد منهما صاحبه إلى‬
‫الزم قوله وتعلقه بظواهر أقواله‪ ،‬وإن كان في صريح كالمه ما يدفع تلك اللوازم ويحيل تلك الظواهر‪ ،‬ولذلك كتب‬
‫شيخنا عند عزمه على البحث في هذه المسائل بإشارة شيخه الصفي إلى الشيخ عبد الباقي الحنبلي البعلي الدمشقي (أبي‬
‫محر ًرا مبياِنًا‬
‫َّ‬ ‫المواهب)‪ ،‬وهو إذ ذاك كبير الحنابلة وإمامهم علما وعمال وصالحا بدمشق‪ ، ،‬ليكتب له بمعتقد الحنابلة‬
‫بأدلته حتى ال ينسب إليهم شيئا مما لم يقولوه‪ ،‬وأخذ هو في الفحص عن رسائل الشيخ ابن تيمية وأصحابه فيما يتعلاق‬
‫تحرر له به معتقد الحنابلة ومبنى طريقتهم‪.‬‬
‫بذلك حتى ظفر من ذلك بما ا‬
‫قال لي‪ :‬لما أمعنت النظر في رسائل القوم ومصنفاتهم وجدتهم برآء من كثير مما رموهم به أصحابنا الشافعية من‬
‫التجسيم والتشبيه‪ ،‬وإنما القوم متمسكون بمذهب كبراء المحدثين كما هو المعروف من حال إمامهم رضي هللا تعالى‬
‫عنه‪ ،‬من إبقاء اآليات واألحاديث على ظواهرها واإليمان بها كذلك‪ ،‬مفوضون فيما أشكل معناه‪...‬‬

‫فيقولون‪ :‬هللا ورسوله أدرى بمعاني اآليات واألحاديث من هؤالء المؤولين‪ ،‬وما ورد عنهم أنهم أولوا شيئًا من‬
‫ذلك… فمراد هللا بهذه األلفاظ هي المعاني التي تريدها منها العرب في لغتهم‪ ،‬وتطلق على كل واحد بحسب ما يليق به‪،‬‬
‫فالمراد باالستواء والفوق والنزول هي معانيها المعهودة في كالم العرب‪ ،‬فإذا قلت‪ :‬زيد فوق السرير" فمعناه مستقر‬
‫عليه متمكن منه مستعل‪ ،‬ولما علمنا أن زيدًا جرم من األجرام والسرير كذلك تحقق لنا أن الفوقية في حقه واستقراره‬
‫فوق السرير يوجب مماسته له‪ ،‬وتحيزه في جهة من جهاته‪ ،‬وأما المولى ﷻ فماهية ذاته غير مدركة ألحد من الخلق‪،‬‬
‫فكيف نقول بأن استقراره فوق العرش يوجب مماسته له وتحيزه في جهة‪ ،‬ألن ذلك استقرار الجسم‪ ،‬وأما استقرار من‬
‫استقرارا حقيقيًا فوق‬
‫ً‬ ‫ليس بجسم فال نحكم بأنه يوجب كذا وكذا حتى نعلم ماهيته والماهية غير معلومة‪ ،‬فنثبت له‬
‫العرش‪ ،‬ألنه أثبته لنفسه في كتابه وعلى لسان رسوله…‬
‫‪207‬‬
‫‪Al-‘Ayyashi said:‬‬

‫ولقد أطلعني بعض أصحابنا بالقاهرة على رسالة للشيخ ابن تيمية وهي معتمدة عند الحنابلة‪ ،‬فطالعتها كلها‪،‬‬
‫‪208‬‬
‫‪Pariticularly the Hamawiyyah, al-Tadmuriyyah, and Sharh Hadeeth al-Nuzul.‬‬
‫‪209‬‬
‫‪This should come as no surprise, given that Ibn Qutlubgha al-Hanafi (d. 879 A.H.) states in vol.‬‬
‫‪1, p. 86 of his commentary on a theological work of Ibn al-Humam called al-Musayara, that the‬‬
‫‪Hanbalis themselves confess that Ibn Taymiyyah is the most knowledgeable of them:‬‬

‫وإنما سقت كالم هذا الرجل االعتراف أهل مذهبه أنه أعلمهم‬

‫‪72‬‬
Imam al-Mardawi affirms Allah’s volitional attributes. When speaking about the
divine attribute of speech, he relays nine different opinions. The ninth opinion he
relays is precisely Ibn Taymiyyah’s, namely that Allah speaks whenever He wills
in a temporal sense. Al-Mardawi attributes this opinion to the Imams of hadeeth
and Sunnah, including Imam Ahmad himself.210
Also, al-Mardawi does not differentiate between how he affirms any of Allah’s
attributes, such as His speech, descent, coming, hearing, seeing, etc.211 This is
essential, as we all know that nobody made tafweedh of the meaning of Allah’s
hearing and seeing, and thus this would entail that he did not do the same for the
remaining.
And in case one retorts by saying that al-Mardawi considered the attributes to be
mutashabih, the fact remains that for al-Mardawi, mustashabih did not entail not
knowing their meanings at all. If we read al-Mardawi’s discussion on pages 1395-
1399 in volume 3 of his al-Tahbeer, it becomes evident that mutashabih for him
entails a lack of clarity on the details regarding a matter. For instance, he said that
the cow in Surah 2:67 is mutashabih because details of the cow were not specified.
But that does that mean that Al-Mardawi does not know the basic core meaning of
cow in the ayah!
Ibn Al-Mibrad (d. 909 A.H.)

He affirms the volitional attributes of Allah and even contests al-Qadi Abu Ya’la’s
attempt at making ta’weel of Imam Ahmad’s statement about Allah speaking

210
He states in his al-Tahbeer Sharh al-Tahreer, vol. 3, p. 1312:

َ ِ‫ وه َُو يتَ َكلَّم بِ ِه ب‬،ِ‫ بِكَالم يقوم بِه‬،‫ وكَيف شا َء‬،‫ و َمتى شا َء‬،‫ لم يزل هللا متكلما إذا شا َء‬:]‫ [أن يُقال‬:‫التااسِع‬
،‫ص ْوت يسمع‬
)‫عن أئِ َّمة ال َحدِيث والسانة‬ َ ‫ وهَذا القَ ْول ه َُو ال َمأْثُور‬،‫ وإن لم يكن الص َّْوت المعِين قَدِيما‬،‫وأن نوع الكَالم قديم‬

َ ‫ (لم يزل هللا تَعالى متكلما ك‬:َ‫ فَإنَّهُ قال‬،‫ومن أعظم [القائِلين] بِ َهذا القَ ْول األخير اإلمام أحْ مد‬
‫ وفِي‬،)‫َيف شا َء بِال تكييف‬
.)‫ (إذا شا َء‬:‫لفظ‬

He also reaffirms in vol. 3, p. 1352 that Imam Ahmad’s stance is that Allah speaks according to His will:

َ ‫ قد صرح فِي غير ِروا َية ِبأن هللا يتَ َكلَّم ِب‬- ُ‫عنه‬
‫ص ْوت بقدرته ومشيئته إذا شا َء وكَيف‬ َ ‫ورضي‬ َ ฀ - ‫فَ َهذا اإلمام أحْ مد‬
.‫ص ْوت وبدعه‬
َ ِ ‫ب‬ ‫م‬َّ ‫ل‬‫ك‬َ َ ‫ت‬‫ي‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ إنَّه‬:َ‫ وهجر من قال‬،‫شا َء‬
211
He states in, vol. 3, p. 1345:

‫ من‬،‫صفات هللا تَعالى‬ ِ ‫ كَما يَقُولُونَ فِي َجمِ يع‬،‫ وأنَّ ُه ْم قائِلُونَ فِي صفة الكَالم‬،‫ نفي الت َّ ْشبِيه والتمثيل والتكييف‬- ‫وال خيال‬
َ ‫ كَما قالَه سلف َهذِه األمة ال ا‬،‫ وغَيرها‬،‫ واليَد‬،‫صر‬
،‫صالح َم َع إثباتهم لها‬ َ َ‫ والب‬،‫ والسمع‬،‫ واالستواء‬،‫ والمجيء‬،‫النُّ ُزول‬

73
‫‪whenever He wills.212 He also cites Ibn Hamid’s opinion that descent implies‬‬
‫‪movement and that this is the majority stance of the latter Hanbalis.213‬‬
‫)‪Ibn al-Najjar al-Fattouhi (d. 972 A.H.‬‬

‫‪Ibn al-Najjar mentions nine opinions regarding the Qur’an, and in the ninth opinion,‬‬
‫‪which he attributes to Ahlul Hadeeth and Imam Ahmad, he states that Allah’s‬‬
‫‪speech is a volitional attribute connected to Allah’s will. He even cites Ibn Hajar‬‬
‫‪al-Asqalani as saying that this is the dominant stance of the Hanbalis.214‬‬
‫‪He even distinguishes this opinion from that of some of the Hanbalis, who said that‬‬
‫‪the Qur’an is eternal and is not spoken in succession.215‬‬

‫‪He states in his book Tuhfat al-Wusul ‘ila ‘Ilm al-Usul ‘ala Madhab Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jama’ah, pp. 106-‬‬
‫‪212‬‬

‫‪107:‬‬

‫وعندي أن األمر على غير ما ذكره القاضي‪ ،‬وأن األمر في ذلك على شيئين‪ :‬األول‪ :‬القرآن كالم هللا قديم‪ ،‬وهذا ليس له‬
‫مدخل في كالم أحمد‪...‬الثاني‪ :‬أن كالم هللا عز وجل بالقرآن وتعبير القرأن قديم‪ ،‬وأن هللا عز وجل لم يزل متكلما‪ ،‬وال‬
‫نقول‪ :‬الكالم صفة حدثت له = فهو لم يزل متكلما من حيث الجملة من غير نظر إلى شيء‪.‬‬

‫وقول أحمد‪(( :‬متى شاء)) يعني‪ :‬متى شاء أن يتكلم بشيء تكلم به‪ ،‬مع أن كالمه الذي هو ضد ما لم يتكلم قديم‪ ،‬وأنه إذا‬
‫شاء تكلم‪ ،‬وإذا شاء لم يتكلم‪ ،‬وأن كالمه ليس بمتصل منه في سائر اِلوقات‪ ،‬بل إذا شاء الكالم تكلم‪ ،‬مع أن وصفه‬
‫بأنه متكلم قديم‪ ،‬وأنه إذا شاء تكلم بشيء‪ ،‬وإذا شاء تكلم بغيره‪ ،‬وأما ما قالوه؛ يلزم منه أنه متكلم في كل وقت من‬
‫األوقات‪ ،‬وأن كالمه متصل مستمر على سائر األوقات‪ ،‬وهذا يرده النقل والعقل‪.‬‬

‫وأيضًا فإن قول النبي صلى هللا عليه وسلم‪( :‬إذا تكلم هللا بالوحي؛ سمع أهل السماء للسماء صلصلة كجر السلسلة على‬
‫الصفوان)‪ ،‬هذا يدل على أن له أوقات ًا ال يتكلم فيها‪ ،‬وأنه ال يتكلم إال إذا شاء‪ ،‬مع أن وصفه بأنه متكلم قديم‪ ،‬وقولهم‬
‫يلزم منه إذا تكلم بكلمة ال يزال يقولها‪ ،‬وليس اِلمر كذلك‪ ،‬بل يتكلم بشيء ينتهي ويأتي غيره‬
‫‪213‬‬
‫‪See: Tuhfat al-Wusul ‘ila ‘Ilm al-Usul ‘ala Madhab Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jama’ah, p. 73‬‬
‫‪214‬‬
‫‪He states in Sharh al-Kawkab al-Muneer, vol. 2, pp. 103-104:‬‬

‫ْف شا َء ِبكَالم َيقُو ُم ِبهِ‪ ،‬وه َُو َيتَ َكلَّ ُم ِب َ‬

‫ص ْوت يُ ْس َم ُع‪ ،‬وأنَّ ن َْو َ‬
‫ع‬ ‫َّللاُ ُمتَ َك ِلا ًما إذا شا َء و َمتى شا َء و َكي َ‬
‫التاا ِس ُع‪ :‬أنَّهُ يُقا ُل‪ :٦‬لَ ْم َيزَ لْ َّ‬
‫سنَّ ِة‪ .٧‬ومِ ن أ ْعظ ِمَ‬
‫ث وال ُّ‬ ‫عن أئِ َّم ِة ال َحدِي ِ‬‫ْ‬ ‫ور َ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫َ‬
‫َالم قَدِيم‪ ،‬وإنْ لَ ْم يَكُنْ الص َّْوتُ ال ُمعَيَّن قدِي ًما‪ .‬وهَذا الق ْولُ‪ :‬ه َُو ال َمأث ُ‬
‫ُ‬ ‫الك ِ‬
‫ي ونَحْ ُوهُ ْم‪.‬‬ ‫سعِيد الد ِاارمِ ُّ‬‫باركِ وعُثْما ُن ْب ُن َ‬
‫ي وا ْب ُن ال ُم َ‬ ‫ُخار ُّ‬
‫القائِلِينَ ‪ ٨‬بِهِ‪ :‬إما ُمنا أحْ َمدُ والب ِ‬
‫غي ُْر َم ْخلُوق‪ ،‬وأنَّهُ لَ ْم يَزَ لْ‬ ‫على ال َجهْمِ يَّةِ»‪« :‬أنَّ ك َ‬
‫َالم َّ ِ‬
‫َّللا َ‬ ‫«الر ِدا َ‬
‫َّ‬ ‫ب‬ ‫وقا َل الحافِ ُ‬
‫ظ ا ْب ُن َحج ٍَر‪ :‬نَصَّ اإلما ُم أحْ َمدُ فِي كِتا ِ‬
‫أن يُسْمِ عَنا‪.‬‬‫ي ْ‬ ‫ُ‬
‫القاضي‪ :‬قَ ْولهُ‪« :‬إذا شا َء»‪ ،‬أ ْ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ْف شا َء و‪َ ٢‬متى شا َء بِال َكيْف»‪.٣‬قا َل‬ ‫ُمتَ َك ِلا ًما إذا شا َء َكي َ‬
‫َّللاُ يَأ ْ ُم ُر بِما شا َء‪ ٤‬و ْي ُح ُك ْم‪ .‬ث ُ َّم قا َل ا ْب ُن َح َجر‪ :‬وا ْفت ََرقَ أصْحابُ أحْ َمدَ فِرْ قَتَي ِْن‪ .‬فَمِ ن ُه ْم َمن قالَ‪ :‬كَال ُمهُ‬
‫قا َل أحْ َمدُ‪َ :‬ل ْم يَزَ لْ َّ‬
‫صواتُ ُم ْقت َِرنَة ال ُمتَعاقِبَة‪ .‬ويُسْمِ ُع كَال َمهُ َمن شاء وأ ْكثَ ُرهُ ْم أنَّهُ يَتَ َكلَّ ُم بِما شا َء إذا شا َء‪ .‬وأنَّهُ‬ ‫وف واأل ْ‬ ‫الزم لِذاتِهِ‪ .‬وال ُح ُر ُ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫نادى ُموسى حِ ينَ َكلَّ َمهُ‪ ،‬ولَ ْم يَكُنْ ناداهُ مِ ن قَ ْبلُ‪.‬‬
‫‪215‬‬
‫‪He said on vol. 2, p. 97:‬‬

‫َّللا لَ ْم َيزَ لْ ُمتَ َك ِلا ًما إذا شا َء‪ ،‬وأنَّهُ‬

‫َّللا‪ ،‬و َكذَلِكَ الت َّ ْوراةُ‪ ،‬وأنَّ َّ َ‬ ‫ي كَال ُم َّ ِ‬ ‫غي ُْرهُ ْم إلى أنَّ القُرْ آنَ ال َع َر ِب َّ‬ ‫ض ال َحنا ِبلَ ِة و َ‬ ‫وذَه َ‬
‫َب َب ْع ُ‬
‫ص ْوتَهُ‪.‬‬ ‫ِياءِ َ‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ن‬ ‫واأل‬ ‫ة‬ ‫َ‬
‫ك‬
‫َ ِ ِ‬ ‫ئ‬‫ال‬ ‫م‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ن‬ ‫َ مِ‬‫ء‬‫شا‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬ ‫ع‬ ‫م‬
‫َْ َ َ‬‫س‬ ‫وأ‬ ‫‪،‬‬ ‫تَ َكلَّ َم ِب ُ ُ وفِ رْ ِ‬
‫آن‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ح‬
‫ْ‬ ‫ً‬ ‫لْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫لْ‬ ‫ً‬
‫س ُمتَعاقِبَة‪ ،‬بَ ل ْم تَزَ قائِ َمة بِذات ُمقت َِرنَة ال‬ ‫تْ‬ ‫َ‬
‫ت‪ ،٣‬ل ْي َ‬ ‫ا‬
‫الز َمة لِلذا ِ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫َ‬
‫وف واِلصْواتَ قدِي َمة العَي ِْن‪ِ ،‬‬ ‫وقالُوا‪ :‬إنا َه ِذ ِه ال ُح ُر َ‬
‫ق ‪.٤‬‬ ‫ق‪ ،‬بِخِ الفِ الخا ِل ِ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ق ال َمخلو ِ‬ ‫ت ُ ْسبَ ُق‪ ،‬والتَّعاقُبُ إناما يَ ُكو ُن فِي َح ا ِ‬
‫القارئِينَ ‪ ،‬وأبى ذَلِكَ َكثِير‪.‬‬ ‫عة مِ ن ِ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ِي ال َم ْس ُمو َ‬ ‫وف ه َ‬ ‫َب أ ْكثَ ُر َه ُؤالءِ إلى أنَّ األصْواتَ وال ُح ُر َ‬ ‫وذَه َ‬

‫‪74‬‬
However, Ibnul Najjar then does something strange by trying to combine the two
opinions together!216 Though it is possible to reconcile the belief that Allah does
not speak in succession with the stance that He speaks whenever He wills,217 it is
difficult to harmonize two contradictory opinions where one states that Allah’s
spoken speech is connected to His will, while the other one denies it being so!
Though we can speculate about what Ibnul Najjar had in mind here, it does seem
pretty clear, however, that he explicitly intended to, at the very least, affirm that the
attribute of speech is volitional in terms of it being connected to Allah’s will. And
Allah knows best.
Mar’ee al-Karmi (d. 1033 A.H.)

Imam Mar’ee al-Karmi is not a mufawwidh. He says that we know the meanings of
Allah’s sifat, which are free of puzzles and riddles.218 He states that Ibn Taymiyyah
championed the madhab of the Salaf on the issue of sifat219 and that an attack on Ibn
Taymiyyah’s aqeedah is tantamount to attacking the aqeedah of the Salaf.220
However, there appear to be some statements made by Imam Mar’ee which seem to give
the impression that he was a mufawwidh. He states that the madhab of the Salaf is to not
delve into these issues and to do tafweedh to Allah.221 He even cited Imam al-Bayhaqi,
who said that “tafweedh is safer” and followed it by saying that he follows the path of the

216
He states on vol. 2, p. 114:

َ ‫ص ْوت و َحرْ ف قَدِي َمي ِْن‬

ِ ‫غي ِْر ُمتَعاقِبَي ِْن مِ ن فَ ْو‬
‫ق‬ َ ِ‫َّللا يَتَ َكلَّ ُم ب‬ ُ ‫اس فِي زَ َمنِنا يَ ْز‬
َ َّ َّ‫ع ُمونَ أنَّ القائِ َل بِأن‬ ِ ‫ِب النا‬ َ ‫ط ْلنا ألنَّ غال‬ َ ‫وإنَّما أ‬
‫غي ُْرهُما مِ َّم ْن ذَ َكرْ نا‬
َ ‫يو‬ ُ ُ
ِ ‫ فَ َهذا أحْ َمدُ والب‬.‫ يَكو ُن كاف ًِرا‬،‫ كَما ق ِ ار َر‬،‫ شا َء‬٤‫ْف‬
ُّ ‫ُخار‬ َ ‫السَّماءِ بِقُد َْرتِ ِه و َمشِيئَتِ ِه إذا شا َء و َكي‬
. َ‫ص َّر ُحوا بِذَلِك‬ َ
217
Something that scholars such as Imam al-Sijizzi tried to do; see: ‘Alaa Hassan Ismail, Dirasat al-Sifat
al-Ilahiyyah fi al-Awriqa al-Hanbaliyyah, pp. 190-193.
218
He states in Aqaweel al-Thiqat fi Ta’weel al-Asma’ wal-Sifat, p. 234:

ُ ‫ْث يعرف َم ْق‬

‫صود‬ َ ‫ونعلم أن ما وصف هللا بِ ِه نَفسه من ذَلِك فَ ُه َو حق لَي‬
ُ ‫ْس فِي ِه لغز وال أحاجي بل َم ْعناهُ يعرف من َحي‬
‫ش ْيء‬
َ ‫ْس كمثله‬ ُ ‫ال ُمتَ َكلام ِب َكالمِ ِه وه َُو‬
َ ‫سبْحانَهُ َم َع ذَلِك لَي‬
219
He says on p. 239:

‫على تأييد َمذْهَب السالف فِي عدَّة كراريس‬

َ ‫وأطال ابْن تَيْمِ ية الكَالم على ذَلِك و‬
220
He says in his al-Kawakib al-Duriyyah fi Manaqib al-Mujtahid Ibn Taymiyyah, p. 236:
ُ ‫فإن‬
‫ كما وقع االتفاق على ذلك وقت‬،‫ فعقيدته عقيدة السلف‬،‫طعن على الشيخ ابن تيمية – رحمه هللا – من حيث العقيدة‬
.‫فليطعن على السلف من طعن فيه‬. ‫المناظرة‬
221
He states on p. 61:

ُّ ‫أن َمذْهَب السالف ه َُو عدم الخ َْوض فِي مثل هَذا وال‬
َ ‫س ُكوت‬
‫عنهُ وتفويض علمه إلى هللا تَعالى‬

75
Salaf.222 After mentioning a dispute over the meaning of kursi, he remarked that its
meaning should be consigned (yufawwadh) to Allah.223
However, these could plausibly be explained by the fact that there was a conflation
between the terminological uses of ma’na (meaning) and kayfiyyah (modality) during that
time period, as was clearly highlighted when we discussed al-‘Ayyashi earlier.
Al-Mar’ee has another statement shedding much clarity on this matter when he states that
the meaning that should be avoided is the meaning that signifies modality (kayfiyyah).224
This demonstrates that Al-Mar’ee is not totally against assigning a meaning to the sifat
(as my very first citation of him clearly shows), but that we must avoid ones that signify a
modality; in other words, the denotative definition. And Allah knows best.
Ibn Balban (1083 A.H.)

Ibn Balban followed the path of the Mutakallimeen when it came to denying Allah’s
volitional attributes. Determining whether Ibn Balban did tafweedh of the meanings of
the divine attributes would require a pause for deliberation. If one reads pages 172-177 of
his Qalaid al-‘Iqyan, ed. Dar al-Minhaj, which is a summary exposition of Ibn Hamdan’s
theology, we note the following:
- On page 172, he states that we stop interpreting the nusus on sifat where our scholars
stopped. This is an important qualifier since if it can be shown that there is precedent for
interpreting some of these sifat, then technically speaking, Ibn Balban would (or at least
should) not object. Thus, he is not unconditionally against interpreting the nusus on sifat
but rather against interpretations lacking scholarly precedent.
- On page 174, he simply states that we must accept scriptural texts on sifat even if we do
not understand their meanings, but as we repeatedly said, “meaning” here could plausibly
refer to the denotative definition of the word that conflates with modality. Even Ibn

222
He on page 200:

‫علَ ْي ِه‬ ُ ‫قلت وبمذهب السالف أ ْقول وأدين هللا تَعالى بِ ِه وأسأله‬
َ ‫سبْحانَهُ ال َم ْوت‬
223
He states on pp. 117-118:

‫وا ْعلَم أن َهذِه األحادِيث ونَحْ وها تروى كَما جا َءت ويفوض َم ْعناها إلى هللا‬
224
He states on pp. 64-65:

‫ومن العجب أن أئِ َّمتنا ال َحنا ِبلَة َيقُولُونَ ِبمذهب السالف ويصفون هللا ِبما وصف ِب ِه نَفسه و ِبما وصفه ِب ِه َرسُوله من غير‬
‫ فَإن ظاهر‬،ِ‫علَ ْيه‬َ ‫ فَنصف هللا تَعالى ِبما وصف ِب ِه نَفسه وال نزيد‬...‫تَحْ ِريف وال تَعْطِ يل ومن غير تكييف وال تَ ْمثِيل‬
‫صيل معنى يشْهد الشااهِد فِي ِه معنى‬ ِ ْ‫سبْحانَهُ أن تكون ُم ْلحقَة بِذاتِ ِه فَإذا ا ْمتنعت ذاته المقدسة من تَح‬
ُ ‫صفاته‬ ِ ‫األمر فِي‬
َ َ
‫وصيَّة ل ُهم فِي ذلِك بل‬
ِ ‫ص‬ َ ِ ‫يُ َؤ ادِي إلى َكيْفيَّة فَ َكذَلِك القَ ْول فِيما أضافَهُ إلى نَفسه من‬
ُ ‫ هَذا كَالم أئِ َّمة ال َحنابِلة وال ُخ‬،‫صفاته‬
.‫هَذا َمذْهَب َجمِ يع السالف والمحققين من الخلف‬

76
Taymiyyah himself said the same thing,225 yet no one would dare suggest that he was a
mufawwidh!
- On page 177, he states that we must have Iman in the passages on sifat in accordance
with what they entail according to the language (‘ala muqtadha al-lugha). This is an
extremely critical point, and it stands in opposition to the stance of tafweedh of meaning.
Ibn Hamdan relayed this same exact phrase from Ibn al-Zaghouni, yet if we were to refer
to Ibn al-Zaghouni’s book, al-Idah, we do not find this identical phrase. Yet, as we
pointed out earlier when we spoke about Ibn al-Zaghouni’s aqeedah, the meaning of this
phrase is affirmed a number of times by Ibn al-Zaghouni. All of this bolsters the idea that
Ibn Hamdan, and consequently, Ibn Balban, agreed with Ibn al-Zaghouni that the
attributes are meant to be understood according to what is prevalent in Arabic discourse
pertaining to the terms in question. Hence, they should not be considered mufawwidhs.
Uthman al-Najdi (d. 1097 A.H.)

Uthman al-Najdi, like others from the latter Hanbalis, tries combining differing
viewpoints; nevertheless, his theology inclines more toward Ibn Taymiyyah’s
theology, especially since he affirms speech to be a volitional attribute of Allah.226
Ibn Abdul Baqi (d. 1126 A.H.)

Ibn Abdul Baqi’s methodology tries to combine the approaches of both Ibn
Taymiyyah and al-Qadi Abu Ya’la. The Mutakalimun’s influence on him is
evident, and yet, despite his convoluted theological methodology, he ultimately
ends up agreeing with Ibn Taymiyyah regarding the affirmation of Allah’s
volitional attribute of speech.
He says that the view that Allah speaks whenever He wills is that of Imam Ahmad
and Ahlul Hadith.227 He proceeds on to quote Ibn Taymiyyah’s elaboration of

225
Ibn Taymiyyah states in his Tadamurriyyah:

‫ أن ما أخبر به الرسول عن ربه فإنه يجب اإليمان به سواء عرفنا معناه أو لم نعرف؛ ألنه الصادق‬:‫القاعدة الثانية‬
.‫ فما جاء في الكتاب والسنة وجب على كل مؤمن اإليمان به وإن لم يفهم معناه‬،‫المصدوق‬

226
He said on page 25 of his book, Najat al-Khalaf fi ‘Itiqad al-Salaf, ed. al-Hameed:

‫ هذا مذهب اإلمام أحمد وأصحابه وهو‬، ‫ يأمر بما شاء ويحكم‬،‫ وإذا شاء بال كيف‬،‫فلم يزل هللا تعالى متكلما كيف شاء‬
‫ قاله ابن‬.‫ وجمهور العلماء‬،‫ ومذهب اإلمام محمد بن إسماعيل البخاري إمام الحديث بال دافع‬،‫إمام السنة بال منازع‬
.‫مفلح في ((أصوله)) وابن قاضي الجبل‬

It is important to note that he attributed this stance to Ibn Taymiyyah’s students Ibn Muflih and
Ibn Qadi al-Jabal, and we have already shown that Ibn Qadi al-Jabal is undisputedly in alignment
with Ibn Taymiyyah’s theology on this matter.
227
He states on pages 65-66 of his book al-‘Ayn wal-Athar fi ‘Aqaid Ahlul Athar, ed. al-Qal’aji, 1st ed.:

77
what this entails, namely, that Allah’s attribute of speech is interlinked with His
will as a volitional attribute, in contradistinction to those who viewed it purely as
an eternally essential attribute such as Life, which he argues results in rationally
defective implications.228 The statement is crystal clear, and it is also clear that
Ibn Abdul Baqi agrees with it since he does not relay an opposing opinion on this
specific issue, in addition to the fact that he already acknowledges it to be Imam
Ahmad’s position.
There is also a very insightful and important remark that Ibn Abdul Baqi makes
that adds clarity to some of the phrases that he makes that may come across as
pro-tafweedh. He states that not knowing the modality (kayf) of istiwa does not
entail that we do not know its core foundational (asl) meaning, similar to how
we believe in Allah, despite not knowing how He is, while obviously not totally
being clueless about Allah Himself. Ibn Abdul Baqi even concludes this statement
by referring to Ibn Taymiyyah’s authority and statements on the subject.229 The
generality of Ibn Abdul Baqi’s words, despite the context being specific to istiwa,
would clearly extend to all attributes according to him if we presumed he was
consistent.
In summary, Ibn Abdul Baqi tried to mix the thought of Ibn Taymiyyah and al-
Qadi Abu Ya’la in his book, and it would not be accurate to assign him to either
camp unconditionally. Yet, the ‘taymiyyan’ influence on him is strikingly evident.
Al-Saffaarini (1188 A.H.)

‫ ومذهب‬،‫ وهذا مذهب اإلمام أحمد وأصحابه‬.‫ يأمر بما يشاء ويحكم‬،‫ بال كيف‬،‫ إذا شاء‬،‫فلم يزل هللا متكلما كيف شاء‬
،‫ وابن قاضي الجبل‬،‫ قاله ابن مفلح في أصوله‬،‫ محمد بن إسماعيل البخاري وجمهور العلماء‬،‫المحدثين بال شك‬
228
We read the opinion that he relays from Ibn Taymiyyah on pp. 68-69:

‫ إن هللا سبحانه وتعالى‬:‫ فقد قال األئمة‬،‫ يأمربما يشاء ويحكم‬،‫ ولم يزل هللا متكلما كيف شاء إذا شاء بال كيف‬:‫وقولنا‬
‫ ومن‬،‫ ومن يتكلم أكمل ممن لم يتكلم‬،‫ بمعنى أنه لم يزل متكلما إذا شاء ؛ فإن الكالم صفة كمال‬،‫يتكلم بمشيئته وقدرته‬
‫ بل كالمه الزم لذاته‬،‫ ال يتكلم بمشيئته وقدرته‬:‫ وقال قوم‬.‫يتكلم بمشيئته وقدرته أكمل ممن يكون الكالم ممكنا له‬
‫ والصوت ال يبقى زمانين فضال عن أن‬،‫ ثم من هؤالء من عرف أن الحروف واألصوات ال تكون إال متعاقبة‬. ‫كحياته‬
‫ هو معنى‬:‫ وامتناع التخصيص بعدد دون عدد فقالوا‬،‫ القديم معنى واحد المتناع معان ال هناية لها‬:‫ فقال‬،‫يكون قديما‬
‫ إنه‬:‫ ومنهم من قال‬،‫ ومعنى آية الكرسي الدين واحد‬،‫ معنى التوراة واإلنجيل والقرآن معنى واحد‬:‫ وقالوا‬،‫واحد‬
‫ وأن الحروف‬،‫ والسين لم تسبق الميم‬،‫ وأن الباء لم تسبق السين‬،‫حروف وأصوات قديمة األعيان لم تزل وال تزال‬
،‫ وهي متراتبة في حقيقتها وماهيتها غير متراتبة في وجودها‬،‫ لم يزل وال يزال‬،‫مقرونة ببعضها اقترانا قديما أزليا‬
‫ إنها معلومة الفساد‬:‫ إلى غير ذلك من اللوازم التي يقول جمهور العقالء‬.‫ إنها مع ذلك شيء واحد‬:‫وقال كثير منهم‬
.‫بضرورة العقل‬
229
Ibn Abdul Baqi states on p. 111:

‫ بل أول من قال ذلك الجهمية‬،‫إن هذا تفسير لم يقل به أحد من السلف من سائر المسلمين من الصحابة والتابعين‬
‫ فإنه كان معلوما للسلف علما‬،))‫ وكتاب ((اإلبانة‬،))‫والمعتزلة كما قاله أبو الحسن األشعري في كتاب ((المقاالت‬
‫ ((والكيف مجهول)) فالجهل‬:‫ وأما قوله‬،‫ االستواء معلوم‬:‫ ولهذا قال مالك‬،‫ فيكون التفسير المحدث باطال‬، ‫ظاهرا‬
- ‫ أشار إلى ذلك الشيخ ابن تيمية‬،‫ وال نعلم كيف هو‬،‫ كما نقر باهللا ونؤمن به‬، ‫بالكيف ال ينفي علم ما قد علم أصله‬
.‫ وهللا أعلم‬،‫ في بعض رسائله‬- ‫رحمه هللا تعالى‬

78
Al-Saffaarini says that three groups deviated from the path of the Salaf, one of
which he labeled as Ahlul Tajheel,230 with tajheel coming from the root word jahl,
meaning ignorance. He defines Ahlul Tajheel as a position that is subscribed to by
some who claim to follow the Sunnah and Salaf, namely tafweedh of the
meaning.231
Regarding volitional attributes, al-Saffarini disagrees with al-Qadi Abu Ya’la’s
opinion that Allah’s descent is an essential attribute and affirms that it is an
action/volitional attribute.232
Clearer proof that al-Saffarini affirms volitional attributes is that on the very next
page, he relays the position of the Mu’tazilites233 who denied that Allah acts
temporally, followed by citing Ibn Taymiyyah refuting this position.234
Nevertheless, just like other latter Hanbalis, al-Saffarini falls into apparent
contradictions like when he relayed al-Qadi Abu Ya’la’s stance on speech, yet
tries to explain it through Ibn Taymiyyah’s words! This could possibly be
reconciled, but if so, then it would entail his inclination toward Ibn Taymiyyah’s
theology.235
All in all, al-Saffarini was evidently more inclined to Ibn Taymiyyah’s aqeedah
on sifat.
Ahmad Al-Ba’li (d. 1189 A.H.)

230
He says in his Lawami‘ al-Anwar, vol. 1, p. 116:

.‫ أهل التخييل وأهل التأويل وأهل التجهيل‬:‫وأما المنحرفون عن طريقهم قثالث طوائف‬
231
He states on vol. 1, pp. 117, almost virtually copy pasting from Ibn Taymiyyah in his al-Fatwa
al-Hamawiyyah al-Kubra:

‫ وال جبريل يعرف‬،‫ إن الرسول لم يعرف معاني ما أنزل عليه من آيات الصفات‬:‫وأهل التجهيل هم الذين يقولون‬
‫ وأن الرسول تكلم بكالم ال يعرف‬،‫ وكذلك قولهم في أحاديث الصفات‬،‫ وال السابقون األولون عرفوا ذلك‬،‫معاني اآليات‬
‫ ال يعلم معرفتها إال‬:‫ فيقولون في آيات الصفات وأحاديثها‬،‫ وهذا قول كثير من المنتسبين إلى السنة واتباع السلف‬،‫معناه‬
‫ وظاهرها‬،‫ تجرى على ظاهرها‬:‫ ويقولون‬، ]7 :‫ {وما يعلم تأويله إال هللا} [آل عمران‬:‫ تعالى‬- ‫ ويستدلون بقوله‬،‫هللا‬
.‫ إن لها تأويال بهذا المعنى ال يعلمه إال هللا‬:‫مراد مع قولهم‬
232
He says on vol. 1, p. 250:

‫ والحق أنه صفة فعل‬،‫وقال القاضي النزول صفة ذات‬

233
And, of course, the bulk of Mutakallimun agreed with the Mu’tazilites on this point.
234
Refer to page 251 onward.
235
See Alaa’ Hassan Ismail, Dirasat al-Sifat al-Ilahiyyah fi al-Awriqa al-Hanbaliyyah, pp. 350-351

79
‫‪He affirms the volitional attributes and states that Allah speaks whenever He wills by‬‬
‫‪relaying the identical statement made by Ibn Taymiyyah, which al-Mardawi himself also‬‬
‫‪cites.236‬‬

‫‪Conclusion‬‬
‫‪We have taken a cursory glimpse into the aqeedah of Hanbali scholars spanning nearly a‬‬
‫‪millennium, and we have observed that Imam Ahmad’s aqeedah has been faithfully‬‬
‫‪transmitted down the centuries through a dominant stream of theological thought within‬‬
‫‪the broader Hanbali school.‬‬
‫‪A parallel stream of thought that was heavily influenced by ‘ilmul kalam also arose and‬‬
‫‪inadvertently diverted away from the path of Imam Ahmad on some issues, despite‬‬
‫‪earnestly intending to stick to the aqeedah of Imam Ahmad.‬‬
‫‪Despite his disagreements with some of the Hanbalis influenced by al-Qadi Abu Ya’la’s‬‬
‫‪methodology, Ibn Taymiyyah still viewed their differences to be tertiary.‬‬
‫‪For instance, Ibn Taymiyyah cited Ibn Al-Zaghuni from his book Al-Idah in support to‬‬
‫‪bolster his argument for affirming the attribute of the hand.237 He also states that Abul‬‬
‫‪Faraj al-Shirazi and other Hanbali shaykhs never stepped outside the fundamental‬‬
‫‪principles of Ahlus Sunnah.238 In fact, he said the same for Hanbalis in general.239‬‬

‫‪236‬‬
‫‪He states in al-Dhukhr al-Hareer bi-Sharh Mukhtasar al-Tahreer, pp. 268:269:‬‬

‫قال السالف واألئِ َّمة‪ :‬إن هللا تَعالى يتَ َكلَّم بمشيئته وقدرته‪ ،‬وإن كانَ َم َع ذَلِك قديم النَّ ْوع‪ ،‬بِ َم ْعنى أنه لم يزل متكلما إذا‬
‫شا َء‪ ،‬فَإن الكَالم صفة كَمال‪ ،‬ومن يتَ َكلَّم أكمل مِ َّمن ال يتَ َكلَّم‪ ،‬ومن يتَ َكلَّم بمشيئته وقدرته أكمل مِ َّمن ال يكون متكلما‬
‫بقرته ومشيئته‪ ،‬ومن ال يزال متكلما بمشيئته وقدرته أكمل مِ َّمن يكون الكالم ُممكنا لَهُ بعد أن يكون ُم ْمتَنعا عنه لو قدر‬
‫أن ذَلِك ُممكن‪ ،‬فكيف إذا كانَ ُم ْمتَنعا ِال ْمتِناع أن يصير الرب قاد ًِرا بعد أن لم يكن‪ ،‬وأن يكون الت َّ َكلُّم وال ِف ْعل ُممكنا بعد‬
‫أن كانَ غير ُممكن‪.‬‬
‫‪237‬‬
‫‪Ibn Taymiyyah states in Bayan Talbees al-Jahmiyyah, pp. 254-260:‬‬

‫فإذا كان هذا هو المستقر في اللغة‪ ،‬وجب حمل هذه الصفة في حق الباري تعالى على ظاهر ما وضعت له‪ ...‬واليد‬
‫المطلقة في لغة العرب وفي معارفهم وعاداتهم‪ ،‬المراد بها إثبات صفة ذاتية للموصوف‪ ،‬لها خصائص فيما يقصد‬
‫به‪ ،‬وهي حقيقة في ذلك‪ ،‬كما ثبت في معارفهم الصفة التي هي القدرة‪ ،‬والصفة التي هي العلم‪ ،‬كذلك سائر الصفات من‬
‫الوجه والسمع والبصر والحياة وغير ذلك‪ ،‬وهذا هو األصل في هذه الصفة‪ ،‬وأنهم ال ينتقلون عن هذه الحقيقة إلى‬
‫غيرها‪ ،‬مما يقال على سبيل المجاز إال بقرينة تدل على ذلك‪.‬‬
‫‪238‬‬
‫‪He said in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 3, p. 377:‬‬

‫ب فِي‬ ‫عةِ» بَلْ كانَ لَ ُه ْم مِ ن التَّرْ غِي ِ‬ ‫سنَّ ِة والجَما َ‬ ‫ِبار عَنْ أُصُو ِل «أ ْه ِل ال ُّ‬ ‫و َهؤُالءِ ال َمشايِ ُخ لَ ْم ي َْخ ُرجُوا فِي اِلُصُو ِل الك ِ‬
‫ح ما َرفَ َع َّ‬
‫َّللاُ ِب ِه‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ص‬‫َّ‬ ‫وال‬ ‫ل‬‫ِ‬ ‫ض‬
‫ْ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫وال‬ ‫ِين‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫د‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ع‬
‫َ َ‬ ‫م‬ ‫َها‬ ‫ف‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫خا‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬
‫َ‬ ‫ة‬
‫ِ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ذ‬ ‫ب‬
‫َ‬ ‫نا‬ ‫م‬
‫ُ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ها‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ْ‬
‫على ِ‬
‫ش‬ ‫ن‬
‫َ‬ ‫ص َ‬ ‫س َّن ِة والدُّعاءِ إلَيْها والحِ رْ ِ‬ ‫صو ِل أ ْه ِل ال ُّ‬‫أُ ُ‬
‫ظرائِ ِه ْم‬ ‫َالم نُ َ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ك‬ ‫و‬ ‫م‬
‫ِْ‬‫ه‬ ‫المِ‬ ‫َ‬
‫ك‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫َ‬ ‫د‬ ‫ج‬
‫َ‬ ‫ُو‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ْ‬
‫وأن‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫د‬‫ُ‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ه‬‫َّ‬ ‫ن‬‫أ‬ ‫ع‬ ‫م‬ ‫د‬ ‫ي‬
‫ا‬
‫ِ َِ َ َ‬‫ج‬ ‫ِبار‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ها‬ ‫ل‬
‫ِ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ص‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫أ‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ه‬‫ن‬
‫َ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ل‬‫و‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ي‬
‫َ‬ ‫ما‬ ‫ِبُ‬ ‫ل‬‫وغا‬ ‫‪،‬‬ ‫م‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ه‬‫نار‬
‫َ َ ْ‬ ‫م‬ ‫ْلى‬ ‫ع‬ ‫وأ‬ ‫م‬‫أ ْق َ ْ‬
‫ُ‬ ‫ه‬‫دار‬
‫ير ِة‪.‬‬ ‫ص‬
‫َ ِ َ‬ ‫ب‬‫ال‬ ‫ُ‬
‫ل‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ه‬ ‫أ‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫ه‬‫ُ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ع‬
‫ِ َ َ َِْ‬‫ي‬ ‫ما‬ ‫ع‬ ‫م‬ ‫(‬ ‫ُ‬ ‫د‬ ‫ر‬ ‫َّ‬
‫َط‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ال‬ ‫يس‬ ‫ي‬‫قا‬
‫َ ِ ُ‬ ‫م‬ ‫و‬ ‫ُتُ‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َث‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ال‬ ‫يثَ‬ ‫د‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫َأحا‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ِ؛‬ ‫ة‬ ‫َ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ِي‬‫ع‬ ‫ض‬
‫َّ‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ل‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ئ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫َّال‬ ‫د‬ ‫وال‬ ‫ة‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ح‬
‫مِ ن ال َم ِ َ ُ َ‬
‫و‬ ‫ج‬ ‫رْ‬ ‫م‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ئ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫سا‬
‫‪239‬‬
‫‪He said in Majmu’ al-Fatawa, vol. 4, p. 166:‬‬

‫ت الَّذِي يَ ْنفِي ِه طائِفَة أ ُ ْخرى مِ ن ُه ْم ومِ ن ُه ْم َمن يُ ْمسِكُ َ‬

‫ع ْن النَّ ْفي ِ‬ ‫فَما زا َل فِي ال َح ْنبَ ِليَّ ِة َمن يَ ُكو ُن َم ْيلُهُ إلى ن َْوع مِ ن اإلثْبا ِ‬
‫ُ‬
‫ق؛ وأ اما اِلصُو ُل الكِبا ُر‬ ‫ع ُه ْم فِي َمسائِ ِل ال َّد ا ِ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫َّ‬ ‫س الت َّ ُ‬
‫نازعِ ال َم ْو ُجو ِد فِي سائ ِِر الطوائِفِ ل ِكنَّ نِزا َ‬ ‫ت َجمِ يعًا‪ .‬فَفِي ِه ْم ِج ْن ُ‬ ‫واإلثْبا ِ‬
‫ب‬
‫مام أحْ َمدَ فِي با ِ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫واآلثار ِألنَّ لِْل ِ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫سنَّ ِة‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫ً‬ ‫ْ‬ ‫َّ‬
‫عليْها و ِل َهذا كانُوا أقَ َّل الطوائِفِ ت ُ‬
‫َنازعًا وافتِراقا ِلكَث َرةِ ا ْعتِصامِ ِه ْم بِال ُّ‬ ‫َ‬ ‫فَ ُه ْم ُمت َّ ِفقُونَ َ‬

‫‪80‬‬
It appears that some of the latter-day Hanbalis saw both al-Qadi’s and Ibn
Taymiyyah’s theological inclinations as being two valid streams of thought in
Hanbalism. Some of them would agree with al-Qadi on some points while
agreeing with Ibn Taymiyyah on others. Some would go so far as trying to
combine both of them in an attempt to reconcile the two. Whether this is an
informed and cogent stance is a separate matter.
However, what is absolutely certain is that they, at the very least, deemed Ibn
Taymiyyah’s stances to be valid.240 And this is a very modest claim, for as has
been demonstrated, many of them either overwhelmingly inclined toward Ibn
Taymiyyah’s theology on sifat or at least agreed with him on essential points such
as the affirmation of volitional attributes and the meanings of attributes.

ِ‫سلَف‬
َّ ‫سبِي ِل ال‬ ِ ‫سنَّ ِة وات ا‬
َ ‫ِباع‬ ِ ‫ وأ ْقوالُهُ ُم َؤيَّدَة بِالكِتا‬.ِ‫ْس ِلغَي ِْره‬
ُّ ‫ب وال‬ َ ‫اس ما لَي‬ َ َ‫ِين مِ ن األ ْقوا ِل ال ُمبَياِنَ ِة لِما تَناز‬
ُ ‫ع فِي ِه النا‬ ِ ‫صو ِل الدا‬ ُ ُ‫أ‬
.‫ب‬ َّ
ِ ِ‫الطيا‬
240
For example, consider what the prominent jurist and expositor of the Hanbali madhab, Imam al-Buhuti
(1051 A.H.), states regarding Ibn Taymiyyah. He says that Ibn Taymiyyah followed the madhab of the
Salaf when it came to Allah’s attributes in Hawashi al-Iqna’, vol. 1, p. 42:

‫ انتهى هذا وقد امتحن بمحن وخاض فيه‬.‫ إن ابن تيمية في (كل) العلوم أوحد أحييت دين أحمد وشرعه يا أحمد‬:‫فقلت‬
‫ ولم يجدوا لهم مندوحة غير أنه كتب جوابا سئل عنه من‬،‫ وهو من ذلك بريء‬،‫ ونسبوه للبدع والتجسيم‬،‫أقوام حسدا‬
‫ وأيده هللا‬،‫ فكان من أمره ما كان‬،‫ ورجحه على مذهب المتكلمين‬،‫حماة جاءه في الصفات فذكر فيه مذهب السلف‬
.‫ ونفعنا به‬،‫ رحمه هللا تعالى‬،‫ قديما وحديثا‬،‫ وقد ألف العلماء في فضائله ومناقبه‬،‫عليهم بنص ره‬

He makes a similar claim in his Kashshaf al-Qina’, vol. 1, p. 20.

81