|Concerning the Saying of Imaam at-Tahawi (d. 321H): 'The Six Directions Do Not Contain Him' And a Decisive Confutation of the Jahmites|
Monday, October 05 2009 - by AboveTheThrone.Com
Read more articles at AboveTheThrone.Com
Before proceeding to the statement of at-Tahawi it is important to provide a little background. The Mutakallimoon (Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Kullaabiyyah, Ash'ariyyah, Maturidiyyah) all share in a rational, intellectual proof they devised to demonstrate the universe is created. This is called "Hudooth ul-Ajsaam" or "hudooth ul-a'raad fil-ajsaam". The basic underlying language, classification and terminology for this proof is Aristotles "Ten Categories", known to the Arabs in that time as "al-Maqoolaat al-Ashar", or "al-Jawhar wal-'Arad". It argues by the presence of qualities (sifaat), incidental attributes (a'raad) and events, occurrences (hawaadith) in the bodies (ajsaam) that make up the universe that these bodies are themselves events (hawaadith), and subsequently events cannot go on for infinity in the past, thus there must be a creator. This proof was pioneered by the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah, in particular, Jahm Bin Safwaan (ex. 128H), and refined and formalized by Abu al-Hudhayl al-Allaaf (d. 235H) - (see this article). The Mu'tazilah incorporated some other notions into it (namely "Atomism") to make it easier to argue the case and iron out some criticisms. The Ash'ariyyah took this from the Mu'tazilah and it is found in all their early foundational books such as those of al-Baqillani (d. 403H), Abu Mansur al-Baghdadi (d. 429H) and al-Juwaynee (d. 478H) - see the proof here. The usool of the Ash'ariyyah and Mu'tazilah are the same. Their differences in reality are only on subsidiary issues relating to what can and cannot be affirmed or denied (from a rational perspective) for Allaahwithout invalidating this proof they are all agreed upon.
Having used the language, terminology and classification of Aristotle's "Maqoolaat" in their proof against the Atheists, to argue that:
And then treating this proof to be the ultimate truth upon which the very veracity of Islaam depends[some of them like al-Juwaynee (d. 478H) going to extremes and making takfir of the one who reached the age of discernment, had the ability and opportunity to observe and inspect and prove His Lord through this proof but did not do so - see proof here] - they were forced to stick to that same language in describing their Lord to the Atheists. Now go and pick up the books of the Ash'arites (at-Tamheed of al-Baqillani, d. 403H, Usool ud-Deen of Abu Mansur al-Baghdadi, d. 429H, al-Irshaad of al-Juwaynee, d. 478H, by way of example) and that's all you are going to see for a significant part of these books.
Thus, the language of Tawheed became nothing but denying qualities (sifaat), incidental attributes (a'raad) and events (hawaadith) for Allaah. The differences between the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah and Ash'ariyyah are only subsidiary. Their arguments against each other are only to do with what can and cannot be affirmed or denied for Allaah, without invalidating the intellectual proof, after their agreement that this proof is the ultimate truth and that the deen of Islaam depends upon it. That's their secret, and if you grasp all of this, you've really got to the inner-core of their entire machinery.
So from all of the above, you should now understand why the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah and the later Ash'aris all say things like "Allaah is not in a place (makaan)" and so on. It is because they are Ahl ul-Kalaam, they are upon the "Maqoolaat" of Aristotle in the formulation of that intellectual proof they made to be the foundation of their religion, and Tawheed to them is to absolve Allaah of the properties of bodies (ajsaam), and barely extends beyond that. Take a good read of this article from Aristotle right here and also take a look at our support group, Aristotelians Anonymous where these matters are explained in great detail with all the proofs from the books (with scans) of the Ash'arites themselves.
You should also realise that ta'weel was an innovation of the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah to deal with those problematic verses that clashed with their intellectual proof, many of the ta'weels of the later Ash'arites are those pioneered by the Mu'tazilah and Jahmiyyah ("yad" = "qudrah, ni'mah" and "istiwaa" = "isteelaa"). And likewise, Tafweed was an innovation borne out of the Kullaabi-Ash'ari paradigm, it was used to address the particular problems that ta'weel posed, because ta'weel essentially amounted to lying upon Allaah, and they did not feel comfortable in their souls about it. So those texts which gave the presumption of tajseem (i.e. which they considered to be a'raad and hawaadith) could be dealt with through tafweed ("it's not the obvious meaning in the language, only Allaah knows what it means, all we know is that this word exists in the Qur'an, so we affirm the word exists, annul its obvious meaning, claiming that it was not intended by Allaah, and then say Allaah knows best what He meant!") - and so the intellectual proof of "Hudooth ul-Ajsaam" is kept intact through this approach. Thus, the intellectual proof became decisive and definitive and the revealed texts became nothing but presumptions of tajseem and tashbeeh that were only useful for convincing the "dumb commoners" of faith, as Ghazali (d. 505H) was frank enough to admit.
As for Imaam at-Tahaawi, then he is a person of hadeeth, not a person of kalaam, and his creed is a Sunni, Salafi, Athari creed - however the Mutakallimoon found many general and ambiguous statements in his creed that they used to argue for their doctrines. At-Tahawi is not up the deen of the Kullaabiyyah Ash'ariyyah, he did not build his creed upon al-Jawhar wal-'Arad, he does not believe that the first obligation is nadhar and istidlaal (to observe, inspect and infer proof for the universe being created) - however some of his language is ambiguous and some of it agrees with the some of what the Mutakallimoon speak with and for that reason they pounce on his text and use it to promulgate their own Tawheed of al-Jawhar wal-Arad that at-Tahawi is free and innocent of.
Ibn Suraij as-Shafi'ee (d. 306H) said, as narrated from him by Abu Ismaa'eel al-Harawi in "Dhamm ul-Kalaam" and as mentioned by Ibn Taymiyyah in "Bayaan Talbees al-Jahmiyyah":
توحيد اهل العلم وجماعة المسلمين أشهد أن لا اله الا الله وان محمدا رسول الله وتوحيد اهل الباطل الخوض في الأعراض والأجسام وانما بعث النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم بانكار ذلك
There occurs in Aqeedat ut-Tahaawiyyah, the saying of Imaam at-Tahaawi (rahimahullaah):
لا تحويه الجهات الست كسائر المبتدعات
This can be translated as:
And we have used a number of English equivalents (underlined) for the verb "hawaa, yahwee" (in the statement, "tahweehi") so that the meaning is clear.
This statement has been used by the Ash'aris in order to impute their Jahmee belief, that Allaah is "neither within the creation nor outside of it" to Imaam at-Tahaawi (rahimahullaah) - free is he of them and they of him. And this creed of theirs, they learned it and acquired it from the Philosophers such as Ibn Sina (d. 429H) (thank you Ibn Sina - see here) and the Jahmiyyah and the Mu'tazilah who are the true and real authors of this statement and creed.
As for at-Tahawi, then he was a Sunni and a follower of the Salaf, and this statement of the Imaam - which is the subject of this article, along with his statements regarding the Arsh (Throne) are a decisive refutation of these Jahmites walillaahil-hamd.
So we say:
Point 1: Beware of the Translations That Support the Deen of the Jahmites!
The above statement of Imaam at-Tahaawi has been translated by some in a manner that allows the Jahmites to justify their falsehood that Allaah is not above all of creation, above His Throne (as is confirmed by at-Tahawi elsewhere in his own words - see further below).
So from these translations:
The first half is correct, but the second half is incorrect and it is a lie upon Imaam at-Tahaawi to claim that this meaning of the second half, which is provided in English in such a way, is the very same meaning as that intended and contained in at-Tahaawis original.
Rather, the meaning of the statement of at-Tahaawi is accurately represented in English - if we just paraphrase our translation above a little:
The six directions do not enclose, encompass, contain, surround Him, as they enclose, encompass, contain, surround all of the created things - meaning that nothing encloses, encompasses, surrounds or contains Him at all.
However, the Jahmee-inducing translation is:
And there is a difference between saying:
And between saying:
The particular translation in question opens up the door for the part that has been underlined above. And it allows them to negate what Allaah has affirmed in the Book and in the Prophetic Sunnah and upon the tongues of the Companions, the Taabi'een and the entirety of the early Salaf, upon Ijmaa', that Allaah Himself s above the Heaven, above the Throne - because this equals the attribution of a direction (from amongst the directions) to them, the Mutakallimoon - and direction necessitates makaan (place) and place necessitates jismiyyah - (thanks greekos).
So beware, and beware again of translations that come from the Jahmites or translations that come from those who are heedless of the snares of the Jahmites!
Point 2: The Saying of at-Tahaawi is a Refutation of the Jahmites and Deniers of al-Uluww!
And this is made apparently and abundantly clear by the following four points:
So try establishing or arguing:
Let the first Jahmee step forward and try arguing in favour of any of these sayings! In light of the above, the saying of at-Tahaawi (rahimahullaah):
Is a decisive, definitive proof for Allaah's Uluww, since it establishes He is not contained by the creation (as the notion of six directions only exists within the creation and it is all relative), and this establishes that He is unequivocally outside the creation, separate and distinct from it, outside of the confines of created bodies that are encompassed by the six directions on account of them being from within the creation.
Point 3: Imaam at-Tahaawi affirms Allaah Encompasses and is Above Everything and Is Not in Need of the Throne (Which is a True and Real, created Entity) or Whatever is Below It
والعرش والكرسي حق، وهو مستغن عن العرش وما دونه، محيط بكل شيء وفوقه
Which can be translated as:
A number of points regarding this:
Point 4: Emptying the Pockets of the Jahmites of Stolen Goods and Sending the Jahmites Home Empty-Handed
وقد أعجز عن الإحاطة خلقه
Which translates as:
Meaning it is impossible for His creation to encompass Him in this life or the next. And this means that they cannot encompass Him in knowledge in this life, for they only know of Him what He has revealed to them. And they cannot encompass Him with their vision in the Hereafter (when the Believers will see Him), because they will see Him but cannot encompass Him with their seeing.
And in this saying of at-Tahaawi is also an indication that the six directions cannot encompass Him either, as has preceded earlier on, as the six directions are notions within the universe, and as this is the case, then Allaah is above His Throne, above His creation, free of need of them, and they are in need of Him, and it is impossible for the creation to encompass Him, whether that is in the sense of knowledge or in the sense of what the Mutakallimeen speak of in terms of "jihah (direction)" and "makaan (place)", because all of that is below Him, and He is above all things, as at-Tahaawi said - and there are only two true and real directions, as it relates to Allaah and His creation, above and below.
When at-Tahaawi affirms that the Throne is "true and real" and then he says that Allaah "is not in need of the Throne and whatever is below it", and then he adds after that Allaah "encompasses everything and is above (everything)" and when he has already established that the "The six directions do not contain Him" but rather Allaah is the one who encompasses everything (in the manner explained above) - then all of that establishes that at-Tahaawi is upon what his Salaf were upon, that AllaahHimself is above the true and real created entity which is the Throne, without being in need of it or what is below it.
So here, we have made the Jahmee empty his pockets and we found that he stole some of the statements of at-Tahaawi that don't really belong to him at all. Why is this so?
So these statements that the Jahmee misappropriated from at-Tahaawi (regarding the six directions) - we have taken them off him and sent him back home empty-handed.
Finally, is it plausible that at-Tahaawi was upon something other than all of these: click here to see the list. If you say yes, you have reviled at-Tahaawi and if you say no, then you have invalidated your Jahmee belief that there is no deity above the Throne.
And how can it be that for around 100 years before at-Tahawi was even born, Ayyub as-Sakhtiyaani (d. 131H) was exposing the Mu'tazilah because they were attempting to say that Allaah is not above the heaven (see here), and he was followed in that by many of the Imaams of the Salaf that came after him - so how can it be claimed that at-Tahawi was upon a creed other than those great Imaams?
Save that it should be clarified that at-Tahaawi used some generalized ambiguous language that has led all of the Jahmites to flock to his book, making it their pillar and support in arguing for the deen of the Jahmites that if Allaah is described with what they deem to be incidental attributes (a'raad), that he must be a body (jism) - in accordance with their proof of "Hudooth ul-Ajsaam" and at-Tahaawi is free of the Jahmites, and he is not upon that falsehood of the Mutakallimeen, and the greatest of proofs for this is the saying of at-Tahaawi regarding the issue of the Qur'aan - for it is a decisive refutation of the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah and Ash'ariyyah all of whom hold that the Qur'an that we have, which we recite and memorize is created, and they say this in order not to falsify their proof of "Hudooth ul-Ajsaam", because if the Qur'aan is the spoken word of Allaah, it means Allaah is subject to events and occurrences (hawaadith) and therefore must be a body.
So when Imaam at-Tahaawi completely annihilates this Jahmee, Mu'tazili, Ash'ari belief with his statements, it shows that he is not in agreement with the foundation and core of the deen of the Mutakallimeen, which is their claim that Allaah does not have actions tied to His will (iraadah) - which to them constitute "hulool ul-hawaadith" - the taking place of events, occurrences that can only occur in created bodies. And it is for this reason you see these Ash'arites flocking to the book of at-Tahawi and attempting to explain away his creed on the Qur'an in the style and manner of the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah who say that this Qur'an we have, in our possession, in its letters and words, recited, heard and memorized, is created.
And when one looks more and more into the creed of at-Tahaawi - putting aside the fact that at-Tahaawi did use some generalized ambiguous language not known from the Salaf - then there is a comprehensive refutation of the deen of the Jahmites (inclusive of the Mu'tazilah and Ash'ariyyah) therein walillaahil-hamd.
27 فبراير، 2010
Posted by asha3ira.blogspot.com at 11:07 م
24 فبراير، 2010
فَصْل: رد فحول النظار حجج النفاة لحلول الحوادث
|المفتي:||شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية|
أرشيف المدونة الإلكترونية
- الامام الطحاوي و الجهات الست - بالانجليزية Tahawee...
- رد فحول النظار حجج النفاة لــ حلول الحوادث
- حسن السقاف و تعاطي السحر
- أبيات حول الصفات و التوحيد للشيخ العلامة محمد سالم...
- عبث أهل الأهواء بتراث الأمة و وقيعتهم في علمائها (...
- لا دفاعاً عن الألباني فحسب ... بل دفاعاً عن السلفي...
- أسماء بعض علماء اللغة العربية من أهل السنة السلفيي...
- سعيد عبد اللطيف فودة الصوفي القبوري الجهمي التكفير...
- نسيان اللَّه من نسيه , ودعوى المشاكلة في الصفات
- شرح القواعد السبع من التدمرية - يوسف الغفيص
- عدد أخبار الاحاد في العقيدة - معلومة مهمة جدا
- الأشاعرة الشيخ/ ناصر بن محمد الأحمد
- تناقضات الاشاعرة - مجموعة مقالات مفيدة
- الأثر المشهور عن الإمام مالك - رحمه الله - في صفة ...
- الرد على سعيد فودة في صفة الإرادة
- شبهات الاشاعرة
- حكم إدخال أسماء الله وصفاته أو بعض ذلك في المتشابه...
- ابن تيمية والتجسيم !
- بيان تلبيس الجهمية في تأسيس بدعهم الكلامية -شيخ ال...
- محاضرات و دروس مرئية في العقيدة - الاسماء والصفات ...
- مالك والأشعري وبدعة التمشعر المالكي
- كلمة حول عقيدة ابن الجوزي رحمه الله
- الصوفية الاشاعرة والشبه بالخوارج / فيديو رائع !
- شرح رد ابن القيم على الامور العشرة التي وضعها الرا...
- بالصوت : شرح مختصر الصواعق المرسلة على الجهمية وال...
- الاشاعرة والصوفية في نظر الروافض
- ▼ فبراير (26)