Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

(1) The Holy Prophet (S)’s Succession Was Raised During His Lifetime

Clear evidences and logic prove that the Holy Prophet (S) raised the question of his succession since the first stages of his Divine Mission until the last sparks of his life. This point was also acceptable and normal, yet it stands out against Sunni reference books claiming that he did not nominate any for his succession and that Muslims never discussed or put forth such an idea before him. Anyhow, numerous Hadiths have shown that the Holy Prophet (S) referred to the Imamate of the Ahl al-Bayt. Let us refer to some of these evidences.

First Evidence

Many texts bear out that the Holy Prophet (S) invited the tribes to the new religion at the beginning of his Divine Mission and asked them to protect him during the promulgation of his Lord’s epistle. Some of these tribes accepted this invitation provided that they would have the leadership after him. The Holy Prophet (S)’s answer was that he was no more than a messenger who had no choice in the affair for which they were asking. It was Almighty Allah only Who may nominate anyone He desires. The most evident points in this regard are the story of the tribe of `Amir ibn Sa`sa`ah and that of the tribe of Kindah both of which had occurred on the first days of the Holy Prophet (S)’s promulgation, while the story of `Amir ibn al-Tufayl occurred on the last days of the Holy Prophet (S)’s lifetime.

Story of the Tribe of `Amir Ibn Sa`sa`ah

The following is quoted from Ibn Husham, al-Sirah 2/289:

The Holy Prophet (S) came to the [tribe of] `Amir ibn Sa`sa`ah and invited them to the “new” religion. A man called Baiharah ibn Firas addressed to him, ‘By Allah I swear, I will overcome the Arabs if I only assent to this Qurayshite young man. If we will support you in this matter and Allah will give you victory over your opponents, will you hold us your position thereafter?’ ‘This matter is decided by Allah only,’ answered the Holy Prophet (S), ‘He holds it to whomever He desires.’ Hence, they rejected saying, ‘We will make our necks the target of whatsoever is thrown at you and when Allah gives you triumph it goes to others? Nay, we are not in need for you.’ After they had returned from that season of Hajj, they told a man who was too old to accompany them and to whom they used to refer all their affairs about the story of the Holy Prophet (S) and their rejection to his call. The old man struck his head with both hands and shouted, ‘Oh for the `Amir! Can you catch him and change your situation? I swear by Him Who prevails on my soul, no single son of [Prophet (S)] Ishmael can lie in this affair. It is the very truth. Where were your minds when you rejected his offer?”1

Story of the Tribe of Kindah

This is the story as quoted from Ibn Kathir, al-Sirah 2/159:

`Abdullah ibn al-Ajlah said that his father, relating the story of the tribe of Kindah to his chiefs, said: As the Holy Prophetsought the tribe of Kindah’s support in the promulgation of his Mission, they stipulated that he should hold them the position of authority after his death. ‘Authority is Allah’s,’ he answered, ‘He hands it over to whomever He desires.’ Therefore, they rejected his request.

Story of the Tribe of `Amir Ibn al-Tufayl

Ibn Kathir, in al-Sirah 4/114, records the following:

[`Abdullah] Ibn `Abbas reported that Arbad ibn Qays ibn Juz` ibn Khalid ibn Ja`far ibn Kalab and `Amir ibn al-Tufayl ibn Malik came to al-Madinah and sat before the Holy Prophet (S) asking, ‘O Muhammad! What will you give me if we accept Islam?’ ‘You will be given what Muslims are given and forbidden from what Muslims are forbidden,’ answered the Holy Prophet (S). ‘Will you hold me your position after you?’ asked `Amir. ‘This position is neither yours nor your people’s. I may give you the commandments of the army,’ said the Holy Prophet (S). ‘I am now the commander of the armies of Najd. You may give me the leadership of the Bedouins exclusively,’ `Amir said, but the Holy Prophet (S) rejected. ‘I will fill in your area with horses and fighters,’ `Amir threatened as he went out. ‘Allah will protect against you,’ commented the Holy Prophet (S).

Second Evidence

The second evidence is that Ansar paid homage to the Holy Prophet (S) on three terms,

(1) to protect him against anything they protect themselves against,

(2) to protect his people and progeny as same as they protect their peoples and progenies and

(3) not to contend on matters of leadership with the worthy, because Muslims are not given the right to choose personally for this position. In other words, they must comply with the one selected by the Lord for this position.

The third term shows obviously that the principle of the divine selection of the Imams following the Holy Prophet (S) was admissibly settled since the first stages of the Mission. Ansar however fulfilled the first term completely but unfortunately they breached the two others very badly. These three terms have been mentioned in the most reliable reference books of Hadith. Let us refer to some of such narrations hereinafter:

Al-Bukhari, in al-Sahih 8/122, records the following:

It has been narrated that `Abadah ibn al-Samit said: We paid homage to the Messenger of Allah to listen to and obey him in good and bad conditions, not to contended with the worthy of leadership, to practice and say the truth wherever we are and to scorn any blame for sake of Allah.2

Al-Bukhari, in 8/88, records:

…The Holy Prophet (S) asked us to pay homage, and we did. We submitted to his stipulations that we should listen and comply with him in auspicious and misfortunate situations, should prefer him to ourselves and should not contend for the leadership unless we see a notorious evidential atheism.3

Ahmad (ibn Hanbal), in al-Musnad 5/321, records the following:

`Abadah ibn Al-Samit narrated that the Holy Prophetstated, “You should listen and obey in auspicious and misfortunate situations, prefer me to yourself and avoid contending against the people of leadership even if you conceive it as your right.”

These two additions are suspicious since homage occurred before the Holy Prophet (S)’s immigration when there was no single exception from obedience. The question of the priority of people of Quraysh came to existence only after the compulsory declaration of loyalty to Abu-Bakr and the objection of Sa`d ibn `Abadah. This demonstrates that the two additions were the result of the new relationship between Ansar and the Qurayshite leadership after the Holy Prophet (S)’s decease. Moreover, no single narration refers to the Holy Prophet (S)’s stipulating the term of avoiding contending against the people of leadership.

In Majma` al-Zawa`id 6/49, the following is recorded:

`Abadah ibn al-Samit narrated that As`ad ibn Zurarah shouted, “O people! Do you realize what you are giving Muhammad? You are swearing that you will wage wars against the Arabs and the foreigners and the jinn and mankind.” However, Ansar declared, “We are rivals of his foes and friends of his adherents.” Then they asked the Holy Prophet (S) to speak out his stipulations. He spoke, “You should declare that there is no god but Allah and that I be His messenger, and you should perform prayers, defray the zakat, listen and obey, avoid contending against the people of leadership and protect me as same as you protect your souls and people.”

Husayn ibn `Ali narrated that in al-`Aqabah, Ansar came to pay homage to the Messenger of Allah. `Ali was ordered to acknowledge their homage: “What should they swear for, Allah’s messenger?” asked `Ali. The Holy Prophet (S) instructed, “You should stipulate obedience to the Lord and protection of the Holy Prophet (S) and his household and progeny as same as they protect their souls and progenies.”

The pro-Qurayshite books of Hadith have concentrated on the point of avoiding contending against the people of leadership so as to use it as a proof on depriving Ansar of positions of leadership. On the other hand, they have avoided recording the term of protecting the Holy Prophet (S), his household and progeny as same as they protect their souls, households and progenies since this stipulation disagrees with the benefits of the Qurayshite leaders who attacked and set fire on the house of Fatimah and `Ali because they had objected against the illegal leadership of Abu-Bakr.

Third Evidence

The third evidence is the famous narration of ‘al-Dar.’ Reference books of Tafsir and history refer to this narration as they pass through Allah’s saying,

‘And warn your nearest relations.( 26:214)’

This holy verse indicates that the Lord ordered the Holy Prophet (S) to invite the Hashimites exclusively to the religion at the first stages of the Mission. So, what procedures did the Holy Prophet (S) take in this stage?4 How long did this private invitation last? Was it a number of months or years, until a divine commandment of expanding the Mission was revealed? What was the purport of the divine commandment of dedicating Muhammad’s Prophethood to the Hashimites before it was extended to include people of Quraysh, the Arabs and all humankind? What was the purport of the Qurayshite’s decision of laying siege to the Hashimites who, after the enforcement of this decision, surrounded the Holy Prophet (S) and tolerated that six-year siege? The Hashimites, despite their various classes of faithfulness, showed no weakness at all. What was the purport of the fact that except the Hashimites, none could endure the misfortunes that Muslims had suffered?

During the Battle of Uhud, all Muslims absconded, but the Hashimite struggled alone.

During the Battle of al-Khandaq, no single Muslim had the courage to face the champion who had challenged them, except the Hashimite hero-Imam `Ali (a.s.).

During the Battle of Hunayn, ten thousand Muslims absconded while the Hashimites alone stood firm.

These facts and events suggest a satisfactory explanation for the Hadiths related in Shiite reference books quoting the Holy Prophet (S)’s saying, ‘I have been sent to my household in private and to people in general.’

The aforementioned holy Verse points out that warning the Hashimites was a matter outlined by the Lord. It also refers to the fact that the Holy Prophet (S)’s nominating his successor from among them was a step within that divine plan.

Al-Suyuti, in al-Durr al-Manthur 5/97, records the following:

… `Ali narrated that when the Verse, ‘And warn your nearest relations,’ was revealed, the Holy Prophetsummoned me and said, ‘`Ali: Almighty Allah ordered me to warn my nearest relations, but I was depressed since I had realized that they would answer me disgracefully whenever I would call them to this matter. Hence, I tried to evade it until Archangel Gabriel came and threatened my Lord’s chastisement if I would not carry out. Now, I ask you to prepare some food on which you should cook a leg of a sheep and make us a skin of milk. Then, you should invite sons of `Abd al-Muttalib so that I will speak to them and convey this mission.’ I carried out the Holy Prophet (S)’s orders completely and invited sons of `Abd al-Muttalib who were about forty men. Abu-Talib, Hamzah, al-`Abbas and Abu-Lahab were also invited. As they all were present, the Holy Prophet (S) asked me to serve them the food I had prepared. With his teeth, he incised that piece of meat, threw its parts on the edges of that trencher and said, ‘Here you are, by the Name of Allah.’ They all ate to excess. By Allah I swear, each one ate as much as I had cooked for them all. Then, the Holy Prophet (S) asked me to serve them with that milk. They all drank from that skin. I swear by Allah, each one drank full skin of milk. As soon as the Holy Prophet (S) tried to speak, Abu-Lahab interrupted and said, ‘See how your man cast witchcraft on you.’ Therefore, they left before he could speak to them.

The next day, the Holy Prophet said to me, ‘You saw how that man interrupted me. Today, you should prepare food as same as you did yesterday and invite them again.’ I did the same and invited them, and they came, ate and drank. The Holy Prophet (S) then spoke, ‘O sons of `Abd al-Muttalib! By Allah, I do not know an Arab man who can bring to his people a matter better than what I am bearing to you. I am conveying to you the welfare of this world as well as the Hereafter. Almighty Allah has ordered me to invite you to this matter. Who will support me in this affair?’ I was the youngest among them when I shouted, ‘I will,’ but they began to laugh at me and left the place.

Relating the same report to another series of narrators, al-Suyuti says:

…Al-Barra` ibn `Azib narrated that when the Verse, ‘And warn your nearest relations’ was revealed, the Holy Prophet (S) invited sons of `Abd al-Muttalib who were about forty men…etc.

Hence, al-Suyuti interrupts the report at this point so that he would not mention the rest of the Holy Prophet (S)’s words. This style is commonly followed by the pro-Qurayshite reporters as they refer to the Narration of al-Dar, which shows that the Lord and the Holy Prophetselected the successor from among the nearest clan since that day.

Al-Amini, in al-Ghadir 1/207 records the following:

The following is a literal quotation of al-Tabari’s narration that distinguishes the right from the wrong. In Tarikh 2/217 (first edition), he records: … ‘Who will support me in this regard and he will be my brother, successor and inheritor amongst you?’ said the Holy Prophet (S). They all stopped talking when I, the youngest among them, said, ‘I will, Prophet (S) of Allah! I will be your backer in this affair.’ Hence, the Holy Prophet (S) took me from the neck and stated, ‘This is my brother, successor and inheritor. You should listen to and obey him.’ They all went out laughing and saying to Abu-Talib, ‘Well, he orders you to listen to and obey your son.’ [Al-Amini, al-Ghadir; 2/279]

In this very form, Abu-Ja`far al-Iskafi, a Mu`tazilite5 theologist who died in 240, records the same report in Naqd al-`Uthmaniyyah confirming its authenticity: It is also recorded in Burhan al-Din’s Anba` Nujaba` al-Abna` 46-8, Ibn al-Athir’s al-Kamil fi’l-Tarikh 2/24, Abu’l-Fida `Imad al-Din al-Dimashqi’s Tarikh 1/116, Shihab al-Din al-Khafaji’s Sharh al-Shifa 3/37 (though he interrupts the last sentences of the narration and says: It is recorded in al-Bayhaqi’s Dala`il al-Nubuwwah and other reference books in authentic documentation), and Ala` al-Din al-Baghdadi’s Tafsir al-Khazin 390, and al-Suyuti’s Jam` al-Jawami` 6/392. On page 397, he also relates the narration to the six famous Hadithists-Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abu-Hatam, Ibn Mardawayh, Abu-Na`im and Al-Bayhaqi. Ibn Abi’l-Hadid, in Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 3/254, records the same report.

Al-Amini then protests against those who have distorted this narration for sake of seeking the satisfaction of people of Quraysh. Though he records the narration in his Tafsir, al-Tabari, in Tarikh, confuses the last words of the Holy Prophet (S) regarding `Ali (a.s.): “… he then said, ‘This is my brother…’ and so on.” Imitating al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir mentions the narration in the same form.6

From the margin of Bihar al-Anwar 32/272, the following is quoted:

The bond of fraternity between `Ali and the Holy Prophet (S)-that was concluded according to a divine commandment in the beginning of Islam when Almighty Allah revealed the Verse ‘And warn your nearest relations’7-was fallen in a form of a covenant. The Holy Prophet (S) would not betake a brother, representative, associate and successor other than `Ali. Likewise, `Ali would not show any blemish in supporting, backing and advising for the Holy Prophet (S) and the religion. It is as same as Prophet (S) Aaron’s support to Prophet (S) Moses mentioned in the Holy Qur’an. When the Holy Prophet (S) held bonds of fraternity between each couple of his companions, he took in consideration the relationship linking each two.

He fraternized `Umar and Abu-Bakr, `Uthman and `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf, al-Zubayr and `Abdullah ibn Mas`ud, `Ubaydah ibn al-Harith and Bilal, Mus`ab ibn `Umayr and Sa`d ibn Abu-Waqqas, Abu-`Ubaydah ibn al-Jarrah and Salim the slave of Abu-Hudhayfah and Hamzah ibn `Abd al-Muttalib and Zayd ibn Harithah al-Kalbi.8 At these moments, he said to `Ali, “I swear by Him Who has sent me with the truth that I delayed you so that you will be dedicated to me. For me, your standing is as same as Aaron’s to Moses is. Yet, no Prophet (S) will come after me. You are my brother and successor. You will be with me in my palace in Paradise. If any disputes you, say: I am the servant of Allah and the brother of His Messenger. Except fabricators and liars, none should claim it after you.”9

Likewise, when the Holy Prophet (S) invited the tribes to accept his Mission, none admitted him except the tribe of `Amir ibn Sa`sa`ah. Their spokesman, Bayhara, stated, ‘By Allah I swear, I will overcome the Arabs if I assent to this Qurayshite young man. Providing we will pay homage to you in this matter and Allah will give you victory over your opponents, will you hold us your position thereafter?’ The Holy Prophet (S) answered, ‘This is Allah’s affair. He holds it to whomever He desires.’ ‘We will make our necks the target of whatever is thrown at you and when Allah gives you triumph it goes to others? Nay, we are not in need for your promulgation,’ they answered.10

As a result, supposing the Holy Prophet (S) had not concluded that bond of fraternity and inheritance with `Ali according to a divine commandment, he would not have wasted this opportunity and refuted them in such despairing words while he was in urgent need for the support of such tribes.

Al-Nu`man al-Maghribi, in Daa`im al-Islam 1/15, writes down the following:

We have already recorded the following narration of `Ali: When Almighty Allah revealed the Verse (And warn your nearest relations), the Holy Prophet (S) invited sons of `Abd al-Muttalib to a leg of a sheep and a cup of milk. They were more than forty men. Among them, there were at least ten men who used to have a whole slaughtered animal and drink a large pot of drink. They ate and drank to excess. After that, the Holy Prophetspoke, ‘O sons of `Abd al-Muttalib! Comply with me and you will be kings and rulers of the lands. The Lord selected a successor, vicegerent, inheritor, brother and supporter for each Prophet (S) that He sent. Which one of you should be my successor, vicegerent, inheritor, brother and supporter?’ They all stopped talking. He passed by them individually, but they all rejected. I was the youngest among them when I answered him, ‘It is I, Allah’s messenger!’ ‘Yes, it is you, `Ali!’ answered the Holy Prophet (S). When they left, Abu-Lahab said to them, ‘He served you with a single leg of a sheep and a cup of milk and you had to excess. This is an enough proof on his sorcery.’ They also laughed at Abu-Talib saying, ‘See how he preferred your son to you.’

Without doubt, the news of the Holy Prophet (S)’s invitation was spread among people of Quraysh as well as the Arabs. They for sure told each other that the ‘new’ Prophet (S) had gathered his relatives and warned them as he invited them to the new religion. He also asked for a supporter and successor, but none accepted except his young cousin; therefore, he betook him as supporter and successor.

The previous three evidences assert that the Holy Prophet (S)’s succession was a matter widely common for people since the earliest stages of his Divine Mission up to the last moments of his life. Furthermore, everybody recognized that Muhammad’s Prophethood was a practical contrivance of a formation of a state governed by him and need for a successor. Hence, all tribes, from a material viewpoint, conceived his mission as a desirable plan that they should take a part in by gaining his promise of handing his leadership over to them.

This leads to the supposition that within the foremost Muslims there were hypocrites attracted by that contrivance, which seemed to be achieving victory in the future. Each of them might look forward to obtaining a leading position in that state. This is the only way by which we can find a suitable interpretation of Allah’s saying revealed in Makkah:

“And We have not made the wardens of the Fire other than angels, and We have not made their number but as a trial for those who disbelieve, that those who have been given the Book may be certain and those who believe may increase in faith, and those who have been the Book and the believers may not doubt, and that those in whose hearts is a disease and the unbelievers may say: What does Allah mean by this parable? Thus does Allah makes err whom He pleases, and He guides whom He pleases, and none knows the hosts of your Lord but He Himself; and this is naught but a reminder to the mortals. 74/31”

From the above, it is hard to believe the chieftains of Quraysh who claimed that Muslims had not discussed the question of the Holy Prophet (S)’s succession during his lifetime, even in a form of lawful or unlawful. Correspondingly, it is unacceptable to conclude that Muslims, who asked the Holy Prophet (S) frequently about their future and narrated several reports in this regard, did not ask him about their next leader.

Notes

1. Al-Tabari, Tarikh 2/84 and Ibn Kathir, al-Sirah 2/158. In al-Ghadir 7/134, the story is related to Ibn Husham, al-Sirah 2/32, al-Rawd al-Anif 1/264, Imad al-Din al-`Amiri, Bahjat al- Mahafil 1/128, al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah 2/3, Zayni Dahlan: al-Sirah 1/302 and Muhammad Hasanayn Haykal, Hayatu Muhammad.

2. Also, Muslim: al-Sahih 6/16, al-Nassa`i’s al-Sunan 7/137, Ibn Majah: al-Sunan 2/957, Ahmad: al-Musnad 5/316, Al-Bayhaqi: al-Sunan 8/145.

3. Also, al-Bayhaqi: al-Sunan 8/145.

4. An important topic is to be mentioned in this regard; historians and biographers have attempted to obscure the stage of inviting the Hashimites exclusively and, instead, they have invented the stages of pre-Arqam’s house and post-Arqam’s house, using doubtful and authentic, and irrational and reasonable reports.

5. Mu`tazilah (Arabic: Those Who Withdraw, or Stand Apart) is an Islamic school of speculative theology that flourished in Basrah and Baghdad (8th-10th centuries AD).

6. Ibn Kathir al-Bidayah wa’l-Nihayah 3/40 and Tafsir 3/351.

7. See, for more details, al-Tabari’s Tarikh 2/321, Ibn al-Athir’s al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh 2/24, Abu’l-Fida’s Tarikh 1/116, Ibn Abu al-Hadid Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 3/254, Ahmad’s al-Musnad 1/159, Jami` al-Jawami` 6/408, and Kanz al-`Ummal 6/401.

8. Ibn Husham’s al-Sirah 1/504, al-Muhabbar 70-1 and Al-Baladhiri’s al-Sunan 1/270.

9. Al-Riyad al-Nadirah 2/168 and Kanz al-`Ummal 5/45-6.

10. Ibn Husham’s al-Sirah 1/424, al-Rawd al-Anif 1/264, Bahjat al- Mahafil 1/128, Zayni Dahlan’s 1/302 and al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah; 2/3.

Chapter: 5 At­Thehbi Is Ibn Teimiya's Inheritor

Familiarly Ibnul­-Qeyim Al-­Jawzi is Ibn Teimiya's inheritor. At-­Thehbi in fact is an invisible successor of Ibn Teimiya. Since enough light has not been focused on this personality we are to pass upon him exclusively.

Describing At­Thehbi's tendency towards corporalism and corporalists As-Sebki in his Tabaqatus­Shafiiya part 2 page 13 records:

Demeanors and variety of beliefs of both the criticizer and the criticized ought to be taken in consideration during scrutinizing criticism. This point is stressed by Ashafii who states "Seconders ought to be clear from malice and fanaticism in beliefs in order that they may not be induced to criticizing a litigant or approving a skeptic." A great number of master scholars were the victims of such a fanaticism. The criticizers were wrong and the criticized were right but such a confusion occurred due to conventional prejudice. In his Aliqtirah Sheikhul­-Islam and master of the late Taqiyuddin Bin Daqiq Aleed refers to this point. He states "A Muslim's repute is a hole of hell. Two groups of people stopped at the brim of that hole. They are the hadithists and the rulers."

Regarding Abu Hatem Bin Hebban some anthropomorphists alleged that he was inaccurate in his religion. They confessed that they banished him out of Sejistan because he had denied Allah's having an edge. Alas! Which team should be banished; the believers in Allah's having an edge or those promoting Him against corpreity?! Many examples can be cited in this regard. At-­Thehbi our master is a good example. Although he enjoys a considerable amount of knowledgeability and piousness he assails Ahlus­-Sunna exceedingly. Therefore it is impermissible to rest upon him.

As­Saqaf's Sharhul­Aqidetit­Tahawiya page 315:

While the heretic assert that attributes Allah has ascribed to Him should be used restrictively in referring to Him they say that He settled on the Throne by His Essence. What is the source of that Essence they used? In which part of the Quran or the Prophet's traditions has this word been used? This expression leads undeviatingly to anthropomorphism and supports their masters' saying that their god abides on the Throne so extensively that only a four finger distance remains.

An alike flaw occurred to Al-­Khellal when he recorded the following narrative of doubt documentation more than fifty times in his As­Sunna during providing the exegesis of God's saying (Maybe your lord will raise you to a position of great glory. 17:79):

Mujahid: The Verse implies that the Lord reposes on the Throne and seats Mohammed (peace be upon him) near to him in the four finger distance space of the Throne.

Al-­Hafiz At-­Thehbi who moderated only after his youth denied so and retreated from the ideas he had written down in his Siyeru- A'lamin­Nubela regarding those who added 'Essence' after mentioning Allah's exhalation settling and the like. He records "We have previously mentioned that the word 'Essence' is superfluous since it injures minds."

As­Saqaf however was inadvertent to the fact that At­-Thehbi had never negated Allah's descending by His Essence ­by self­mastery­.

This is clear from his words recorded in Siyeru A'lamin-­Nubela part 19 page 605:

… Ibnuz-­Zaghawani composes a poetry:

High on the elevated Throne by His Essence Praised be Him against a saying of the aberrant and atheists We have previously mentioned that the word 'Essence' is superfluous since it injures minds. Neglecting this expression is favorable.

Granting that was At-­Thehbi's word it is inevitable to interpret it in a way becoming his beliefs. He believes that Allah the Exalted reposes physically on the Throne and descends materially to the lowest heavens. He only assumes that it is favorable to neglect discussing bases of his belief. He also sees that since 'Essence' is unacceptable expression for Muslims' minds it ought to be avoided and kept within secrets of the belief and said before followers only. This is indicated by the fact that as if he approved Az­-Zaghawani's deciding atheism of the entire Muslims except anthropomorphists At­Thehbi shows no denial against this verdict issued by that Hanbalite master while he was providing his life account.

This is also supported by his statements recorded in Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 20 page 331:

It is obligatory to believe in the descending of Allah and it is favorable to neglect discussing its essentials. This was the worthy ancestors' course. Claiming of descending by His Essence was only purposed for submitting the interpreters who claimed descending of His knowledgeability. We do seek Allah's protecting us against disputing in the religion. The same thing is said about Allah's coming and the like. We say "He came" and "He descends" but we warn against claiming descending by Essence. In the same time we do not claim descending of His knowledgeability. We only keep silent so that we may not invent heretic expressions before the Prophet (peace be upon him).

Hence At­Thehbi refutes the interpretation that descending falls by means other than the Essence. Meanwhile he finds an excuse for those who claim descending by the Essence. He allege that such individuals said so just for submitting the interpreters who dispute and litigate in religious questions. This indicates that At­Thehbi adopts claim of descending by the Essence. He at the same time warns the anthropomorphists his group against claiming descending by the Essence so that others should not be spurred against them! At­Thehbi's attitude is evidently shown in his statement "It is favorable to neglect discussing bases of his belief."

He realizes and believes in essentials of the material descending. However neglecting such essentials is favorable. It is may be acceptable and excusable to disclose these essentials before rivals in cases of inescapable necessity.

This fact is also supported by his words about Kutah whose master dismissed him because he had been claiming "descending by the Essence" and was warmly received by the Syrian anthropomorphists.

Tethkiratul­Huffaz part 4 page 13:

Kutah: The Quran reciter the master Abu Masud Abdul­-Jalil Bin Mohammed. Abu Musa Al-­Madini states "He was unique in learning in addition to manners and decency. He was one of the favorable followers of Ismail Al-­Hafiz. I attended some of his sessions and heard Abul­-Qasim Al-­Hafiz in Damascus extol him nobly raise his standing and accredit erudition and accuracy to him.

He also was learned by Abdul­-Qahir Ashebrawi in Nisapur and another group in Baghdad. His master Ismail dismissed him because he asserted that Allah "descends by His Essence"…

This is also supported by his defending and praising Al-­Hafiz Abdul­-Ghani the famous corporalist.

Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 21 page 463:

In Miratuz­-Zeman Abu Muzaffar Al-­Waiz records:

Al-­Hafiz Abdul-­Ghani used to provide his lectures after the Friday Prayer. Muhyiddin Diyaddin and others went to the governor and complained against Abdul­-Ghani claiming his adopting anthropomorphism. The two parties argued. Abdul­-Ghani stated "I do not promote Him against ill matters so excessively that I deny His actual descending." "Allah was when there was no space. Today He is not as he was." and "Allah possess symbols and voice."

The adversary party concentrated on these points. They commented "Considering the Lord was not as he was this means that He has a definite space. Proving the Lord's actual descending affirms acceptance of His moveableness. Regarding symbols and voice masters such as Ahmed Bin Hanbal dedicated so to Allah's words that are not created."

The two parties were engaged in noisy discrepancy. Burghush the government asked "You think all those are wrong and you alone is right. Do you not?" "Yes I do " affirmed Abdul-­Ghani. Thus the governor ordered of destroying his pulpit and banishing him to Balbak. Later on he traveled to Egypt. Scholars there ruled of permissibility of killing him. They argued that he was ruining people's beliefs and advocating corporalism. Hence the vizier ordered of banishing him to Morocco. He died before execution of that order.

Owing to publicity of Abdul-­Ghani's importunate adherence to his anthropomorphism scholars agreed upon deciding his atheism and heresy. They also issued the impermissibility of keeping that man among Muslims. Hence he sought them to be granted only three days before he would be banished. They responded.

I noticed carelessness and lack of piety of Abul­-Muzaffar Ibnul­Jawzi in his historical texts. He was inclining to Rafidites. I could see one of his writing works brimming with calamities supporting the previous allegation. He would not have been alive if his claiming jurisprudents' deciding his atheism had been true. In Damascus Al-­Imad Muwaffaquddin Abu Omar Shamsuddin Al-­Bukhari and the other Hanbalite scholars agreed with him. Besides the country was full of master scholars who did neither decide his apostasy nor did they declare his downright statements due to which he was suppressed. It would have been safer and better for him had he shunned such statements and followed expressions of the texts. No single text regarding such illusive statements was reported. His worst statement was deciding aberrance of the present scholars and his being the right alone. He worded a statement filled in with evil depravity and disadvantage. May God forgive and be merciful to the all since they intended only to glorify and promote. The most perfect course of glorifying and promoting the Lord against ill matters was stopping at expressions of the Quran and the Prophet's traditions. This course was adopted by the worthy ancestors (God may please them). At any rate Al-­Hafiz Abdul­-Ghani was one of the religious learned pious and righteous men. He enjoyed numerous merits. Finally we seek God's protection against caprices prevarication fanaticism and forging lies. We also disavow every corporalist and Tatilist.

At­-Thehbi's skillfulness of attaching school of his master Ibn Teimiya and him to the ancestors who were commenders should be acknowledged. He used their silence for his good and provided it as an adaptation of the material exegesis.

Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 10 page 505:

Scholars of the worthy ancestors interpreted expressions whether they were remarkable or not. They did not approach Verses and hadiths of the divine attributes at all. Yet these are the most remarkable questions of the religion. They would have taken initiative in interpreting such texts had they been conceivable. Hence it became appreciable that the right is only reciting and recognizing these texts without trying to find any other interpretation. Like the worthy ancestors we should believe and acquiesce in such texts.

In the previous text At­Thehbi commits a distortion so daringly that no anthropomorphist could attain. This distortion At­Thehbi attires dress of reasoning is clarified by the following example:

Considering there is an article of a law so ambiguous that it has two significances; extrinsic and metaphoric. An individual abstained from finding an explanation for that article claiming acquiescing in its aspect and commending its significance to the legislator. Do others dare to regard him as opting for the very extrinsic significance since he abstained from interpreting? Of course none dare to regard as so since that individual will certainly answer "I am abstinent from any interpretation. None is allowed to attach any interpretation including the extrinsic to me."

At-­Thehbi however dared to say so. He states "Hence it became appreciable that the right is only reciting and recognizing these texts without trying to find any other interpretation." He means any interpretation other than the material. Just after that he asserts "Like the worthy ancestors we should believe and acquiesce in such texts." This indicates that we should believe that material appearances of the texts should be embraced and then acquiesce in essentials of the belief like the commenders.

The entire words of the Sunni scholars flow in the same stream. "Recognize the texts as they are." "Pass the texts as they are." "Recite the texts as they are." "Take the texts as they are." "Acquiesce in the texts." All these words have the same meaning; Interpret not these texts and commend them to Allah the Elevated and His prophet. None at all ruled of opting for faces of these texts. How should then the anthropomorphists adopt (involving the appearances as they seem.) and attach to the commenders among the worthy ancestors?

It is not improbable that 'pass' mentioned in words of the Sunni scholars was in the origin 'recognize(18) '. But owing to clerical errors the word was confused. 'Recognition' is used for constant matters while 'passing' is used for the movable. Neither the early nor the late scholars used this word at all except in the item involved. For eloquence it is inappropriate to used 'pass' to unchangeable matters. The word however is used for expressing movable things. For example; 'pass the sheep' means 'let those walking sheep pass.' For constant things; such as texts we use 'recognize' which means 'accept'.

The following are examples of the worthy ancestors' words:

Al­Mizi's Tahdibul-Kemal part 1 page 514:

Ahmed Bin Nasr: I asked Sufian Bin Uyeina an interpretation for the sayings that hearts are between two of Allah's fingers and that Allah laughs when He is mentioned in marts. "Pass them as they are without asking how" answered Sufian.

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 5 page 162:

Al-­Awzai: Az­-Zuhri and Mackhul used to say "Pass the hadiths as they are."

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 5 page 337:

Al-­Awzai: He used to say "Pass the Prophet's traditions as they are."

At­Thehbi's Tethkiratul­Huffaz part 1 page 304:

Al-­Walid Bin Muslim: I asked Mali Al-­Awzai At­Thawri and Al-­Leith Bin Sa'd about hadiths pertaining the divine attributes. "Pass them as they are without asking how " they answered.

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 7 page 274:

Sufian was asked about hadiths pertaining the divine attributes. "Pass them as they are " he answered. Abu Nueim stated "Were I to skip out these hadiths totally." Abu Usama: Sufian said "Had my hand been amputated before I sought a hadith."

The two last sayings indicate that the reason beyond adopting for commendation was anticipating being sinful in case they adopt an interpretation leads to affirming anthropomorphism.

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 8 page 162:

18. In Arabic, the two words; 'recognize' and 'pass' differ in a single similar letter only.

Al-­Walid Bin Muslim: I asked Mali Al-­Awzai At­Thawri and Al-­Leith about hadiths pertaining the divine attributes. "Pass them as they are without asking how " they answered. Abu Ubeid commented "As we could not recognize a single individual cite an interpretation to these texts we should also neglect so." This Abu Ubeid compiled a book dedicated to strange hadiths. He neglected discussing any of hadiths of the divine attributes at all. As he told that he could not recognize a single individual cite an interpretation of such texts he abstained from interpreting. Positively had interpretation of such texts been conceivable or fundamental it would have been more concerned that interpretation of hadiths of secondary affairs and ethics. As scholars neglected citing any interpretation for such texts and passed them as they were it was perceivable that their course what the absolute right.

Abu Ubeid's saying "We could not recognize a single individual cite an interpretation to these texts." implies denial of the claim of opting for extrinsic interpretation. This saying also denies Ibn Teimiya's claim that Abu Ubeid did interpreted the Lord's settlement into descending. This claim is recorded in his book of Tafseer part 6.

The latter wording of At-­Thehbi is an attempt to decide 'passing their texts are they are' as same as interpreting them according to their aspects. Hence he attempts at making the commenders adopt the faith Ibn Teimiya and he had embraced.

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin-­Nubela part 8 page 467:

Respecting the hadith "Allah is astonished or laughs when He is mentioned in marts." Sufian commented "It is as it came. We accept and communicate it without asking how."

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 9 page 165:

Ahmed Bin Ibrahim Ad­-Dawraqi: Waki:

We should submit to these hadiths ­such as that of Allah's burdening the heavens of one of His fingers­ as they are. We do not ask how or what for.

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 15 page 86:

Abul­Hassan compiled four books appertained to principals of the religion and bases of the worthy ancestors' belief in the divine attributes. He records "These texts should be passed as they are. This is my saying and belief. I should not seek an interpretation."

Besides At­Thehbi as well as the worthy ancestors recorded tens of texts discussing this topic. All those texts indicated that trends of commendation and interpretation were the two major schools the Sunni ancestors belonged to. School of resting upon extrinsic meanings was adopted by the corporalists; the Hashawites some of the Hanbalites and few of the Asharites.

At­-Thehbi asserted that there had been three trends respecting this question.

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 19 page 582:

I asked him about hadiths of the divine attributes. He answered "People litigated about them. Some interpreted. Others abstained and others believed in their extrinsic meanings. I believe in one of these three trends."

Likewise Ibn Khuldoun discerned school of commendation from that of resting upon aspects of the texts. Moreover some late scholars such as An­Nawawi assert that the course of Sunni ancestors was commendation and refutation of the extrinsic meanings. This is a strange matter indeed. Commendation totally reconciles denial of extrinsic interpretations but it does in no means concur extrinsic interpretation. Any text is not commended to Allah if it is interpreted according to its aspect. While denial certain interpretations of a text does not injure commending to Allah.

Seyid Sharafuddin's Abu Hureira part 1 page 57:

An­-Nawawi the master asserts:

A number of scholars dispense with finding interpretations for such hadiths claiming "We do believe they are right and their extrinsic meanings are not intended and there are meanings becoming them." This is in fact trend of majority of the ancestors. It is the safest and the most secure.

CORPORALISTS ARE HEIRS OF EXTRINSICISM

It is obvious that the hypothetical base upon which corporalism was founded is necessity of resting upon extrinsic meanings of texts. This base seems to be imitated a long period after emergence of extrinsicism created by Dawud Alisfahani who publicized it in Morocco. Effects of that school are still manipulated in Ibn Hazm Al-­Andalusi's written works.

Ideas and course of corporalism were originated a long time before coming forth of extrinsicism. This indicates that the objective base of their school was authored after existence of the school itself. In other more objective words their base was discriminating just like communism. The latter had been originated before it was fanatically embraced. A period after that its hypotheses were adopted by dialectic. Thus this historical article was picked up to be the objective base of communism.

As­Semani's Al-Ansab part 4 page 99:

Extrnisicism is imputed to that group who adopted school of Dawud Bin Ali Al-­Isfahani. They opt for the extrinsic meanings of texts. They are numerous. Abul­Hussein Mohammed Bin Al-­Hussein Al-­Basri acceded to extrinsicism.

Corporalists in fact mutinied against their fathers; the extrinsicists neglecting their principals and rules. Dawud Az­-Zahir (the extrinsicist) and Ibn Hazm opt for the extrinsic meanings to definite limits after which they interpret. They are then interpreters. For corporalists those two individuals are aberrant and atheists because they were not extrinsicists.

Ibn Hazm's Al-Fasl volume 1 part 2 page 122:

Sayings of Allah the Exalted should be taken as their extrinsic meanings unless there is another text congruity or a necessity contrasting so. It is recognized that whatsoever is existent in a place occupies ­that place­. These all are qualities of corporealities. Regarding so it is proved that nearness intended in God's saying (And We are nearer to him than his life­vein. 50:16) stands for control and awareness only.

Ibn Hazm's Al-Fasl volume 1 part 2 page 166:

Discussion Of The Divine Face Hand And Eye:

Allah the Exalted says (And there will endure for ever the face of your Lord the Lord of glory and honor. 55:27)

Corporalists used this saying as argument for their trend. Others said that 'face of Allah' is His person. This is actually the right proved by clear evidences… The purport of such things; Allah's hand eye face and the like is Allah the Exalted and nothing else.

Ibn Hazm's Al-Fasl volume 1 part 2 page 167:

The Prophet (peace be upon him) stated "Hell keeps on demanding with more till Lord of Dignity places His foot ­precedence­ in it."

In this hadith 'foot' stands for precedence. This meaning is mentioned in God's saying (A footing of firmness with their Lord. 10:2). Hence the meaning of the hadith is that Allah should fill in hell with people who preceded others in evildoing. The same is said about the authentic hadith "Allah created Adam on his look." This indicates that Allah had opted for the look on which he created Adam.

Ibn Hazm's Al-Fasl volume 1 part 2 page 140:

Unanimously Muslims agreed upon Allah's being hearing and seeing since this truth is emphasized in the Holy Quran. A group of Sunnis Asharites Jafar Bin Harb the Mutazilite Husham Bin Al-­Hakam and the corporalists claimed "We decisively believe that Allah the Exalted is hearing by a means of audition seeing by a means of sight." Groups of Sunnis including Ashafii assert that Allah the Exalted is hearing and seeing but they refuted mentioning means of audition and sight since Allah the Elevated has not referred to so. They believe that the Lord is hearing by His Essence and seeing by His Essence… Thus we adopt this very saying and rule of impermissibility of claiming of means of audition and sight since this claim has not proved by a text.

Chapter: 5 At­Thehbi Is Ibn Teimiya's Inheritor

Familiarly Ibnul­-Qeyim Al-­Jawzi is Ibn Teimiya's inheritor. At-­Thehbi in fact is an invisible successor of Ibn Teimiya. Since enough light has not been focused on this personality we are to pass upon him exclusively.

Describing At­Thehbi's tendency towards corporalism and corporalists As-Sebki in his Tabaqatus­Shafiiya part 2 page 13 records:

Demeanors and variety of beliefs of both the criticizer and the criticized ought to be taken in consideration during scrutinizing criticism. This point is stressed by Ashafii who states "Seconders ought to be clear from malice and fanaticism in beliefs in order that they may not be induced to criticizing a litigant or approving a skeptic." A great number of master scholars were the victims of such a fanaticism. The criticizers were wrong and the criticized were right but such a confusion occurred due to conventional prejudice. In his Aliqtirah Sheikhul­-Islam and master of the late Taqiyuddin Bin Daqiq Aleed refers to this point. He states "A Muslim's repute is a hole of hell. Two groups of people stopped at the brim of that hole. They are the hadithists and the rulers."

Regarding Abu Hatem Bin Hebban some anthropomorphists alleged that he was inaccurate in his religion. They confessed that they banished him out of Sejistan because he had denied Allah's having an edge. Alas! Which team should be banished; the believers in Allah's having an edge or those promoting Him against corpreity?! Many examples can be cited in this regard. At-­Thehbi our master is a good example. Although he enjoys a considerable amount of knowledgeability and piousness he assails Ahlus­-Sunna exceedingly. Therefore it is impermissible to rest upon him.

As­Saqaf's Sharhul­Aqidetit­Tahawiya page 315:

While the heretic assert that attributes Allah has ascribed to Him should be used restrictively in referring to Him they say that He settled on the Throne by His Essence. What is the source of that Essence they used? In which part of the Quran or the Prophet's traditions has this word been used? This expression leads undeviatingly to anthropomorphism and supports their masters' saying that their god abides on the Throne so extensively that only a four finger distance remains.

An alike flaw occurred to Al-­Khellal when he recorded the following narrative of doubt documentation more than fifty times in his As­Sunna during providing the exegesis of God's saying (Maybe your lord will raise you to a position of great glory. 17:79):

Mujahid: The Verse implies that the Lord reposes on the Throne and seats Mohammed (peace be upon him) near to him in the four finger distance space of the Throne.

Al-­Hafiz At-­Thehbi who moderated only after his youth denied so and retreated from the ideas he had written down in his Siyeru- A'lamin­Nubela regarding those who added 'Essence' after mentioning Allah's exhalation settling and the like. He records "We have previously mentioned that the word 'Essence' is superfluous since it injures minds."

As­Saqaf however was inadvertent to the fact that At­-Thehbi had never negated Allah's descending by His Essence ­by self­mastery­.

This is clear from his words recorded in Siyeru A'lamin-­Nubela part 19 page 605:

… Ibnuz-­Zaghawani composes a poetry:

High on the elevated Throne by His Essence Praised be Him against a saying of the aberrant and atheists We have previously mentioned that the word 'Essence' is superfluous since it injures minds. Neglecting this expression is favorable.

Granting that was At-­Thehbi's word it is inevitable to interpret it in a way becoming his beliefs. He believes that Allah the Exalted reposes physically on the Throne and descends materially to the lowest heavens. He only assumes that it is favorable to neglect discussing bases of his belief. He also sees that since 'Essence' is unacceptable expression for Muslims' minds it ought to be avoided and kept within secrets of the belief and said before followers only. This is indicated by the fact that as if he approved Az­-Zaghawani's deciding atheism of the entire Muslims except anthropomorphists At­Thehbi shows no denial against this verdict issued by that Hanbalite master while he was providing his life account.

This is also supported by his statements recorded in Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 20 page 331:

It is obligatory to believe in the descending of Allah and it is favorable to neglect discussing its essentials. This was the worthy ancestors' course. Claiming of descending by His Essence was only purposed for submitting the interpreters who claimed descending of His knowledgeability. We do seek Allah's protecting us against disputing in the religion. The same thing is said about Allah's coming and the like. We say "He came" and "He descends" but we warn against claiming descending by Essence. In the same time we do not claim descending of His knowledgeability. We only keep silent so that we may not invent heretic expressions before the Prophet (peace be upon him).

Hence At­Thehbi refutes the interpretation that descending falls by means other than the Essence. Meanwhile he finds an excuse for those who claim descending by the Essence. He allege that such individuals said so just for submitting the interpreters who dispute and litigate in religious questions. This indicates that At­Thehbi adopts claim of descending by the Essence. He at the same time warns the anthropomorphists his group against claiming descending by the Essence so that others should not be spurred against them! At­Thehbi's attitude is evidently shown in his statement "It is favorable to neglect discussing bases of his belief."

He realizes and believes in essentials of the material descending. However neglecting such essentials is favorable. It is may be acceptable and excusable to disclose these essentials before rivals in cases of inescapable necessity.

This fact is also supported by his words about Kutah whose master dismissed him because he had been claiming "descending by the Essence" and was warmly received by the Syrian anthropomorphists.

Tethkiratul­Huffaz part 4 page 13:

Kutah: The Quran reciter the master Abu Masud Abdul­-Jalil Bin Mohammed. Abu Musa Al-­Madini states "He was unique in learning in addition to manners and decency. He was one of the favorable followers of Ismail Al-­Hafiz. I attended some of his sessions and heard Abul­-Qasim Al-­Hafiz in Damascus extol him nobly raise his standing and accredit erudition and accuracy to him.

He also was learned by Abdul­-Qahir Ashebrawi in Nisapur and another group in Baghdad. His master Ismail dismissed him because he asserted that Allah "descends by His Essence"…

This is also supported by his defending and praising Al-­Hafiz Abdul­-Ghani the famous corporalist.

Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 21 page 463:

In Miratuz­-Zeman Abu Muzaffar Al-­Waiz records:

Al-­Hafiz Abdul-­Ghani used to provide his lectures after the Friday Prayer. Muhyiddin Diyaddin and others went to the governor and complained against Abdul­-Ghani claiming his adopting anthropomorphism. The two parties argued. Abdul­-Ghani stated "I do not promote Him against ill matters so excessively that I deny His actual descending." "Allah was when there was no space. Today He is not as he was." and "Allah possess symbols and voice."

The adversary party concentrated on these points. They commented "Considering the Lord was not as he was this means that He has a definite space. Proving the Lord's actual descending affirms acceptance of His moveableness. Regarding symbols and voice masters such as Ahmed Bin Hanbal dedicated so to Allah's words that are not created."

The two parties were engaged in noisy discrepancy. Burghush the government asked "You think all those are wrong and you alone is right. Do you not?" "Yes I do " affirmed Abdul-­Ghani. Thus the governor ordered of destroying his pulpit and banishing him to Balbak. Later on he traveled to Egypt. Scholars there ruled of permissibility of killing him. They argued that he was ruining people's beliefs and advocating corporalism. Hence the vizier ordered of banishing him to Morocco. He died before execution of that order.

Owing to publicity of Abdul-­Ghani's importunate adherence to his anthropomorphism scholars agreed upon deciding his atheism and heresy. They also issued the impermissibility of keeping that man among Muslims. Hence he sought them to be granted only three days before he would be banished. They responded.

I noticed carelessness and lack of piety of Abul­-Muzaffar Ibnul­Jawzi in his historical texts. He was inclining to Rafidites. I could see one of his writing works brimming with calamities supporting the previous allegation. He would not have been alive if his claiming jurisprudents' deciding his atheism had been true. In Damascus Al-­Imad Muwaffaquddin Abu Omar Shamsuddin Al-­Bukhari and the other Hanbalite scholars agreed with him. Besides the country was full of master scholars who did neither decide his apostasy nor did they declare his downright statements due to which he was suppressed. It would have been safer and better for him had he shunned such statements and followed expressions of the texts. No single text regarding such illusive statements was reported. His worst statement was deciding aberrance of the present scholars and his being the right alone. He worded a statement filled in with evil depravity and disadvantage. May God forgive and be merciful to the all since they intended only to glorify and promote. The most perfect course of glorifying and promoting the Lord against ill matters was stopping at expressions of the Quran and the Prophet's traditions. This course was adopted by the worthy ancestors (God may please them). At any rate Al-­Hafiz Abdul­-Ghani was one of the religious learned pious and righteous men. He enjoyed numerous merits. Finally we seek God's protection against caprices prevarication fanaticism and forging lies. We also disavow every corporalist and Tatilist.

At­-Thehbi's skillfulness of attaching school of his master Ibn Teimiya and him to the ancestors who were commenders should be acknowledged. He used their silence for his good and provided it as an adaptation of the material exegesis.

Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 10 page 505:

Scholars of the worthy ancestors interpreted expressions whether they were remarkable or not. They did not approach Verses and hadiths of the divine attributes at all. Yet these are the most remarkable questions of the religion. They would have taken initiative in interpreting such texts had they been conceivable. Hence it became appreciable that the right is only reciting and recognizing these texts without trying to find any other interpretation. Like the worthy ancestors we should believe and acquiesce in such texts.

In the previous text At­Thehbi commits a distortion so daringly that no anthropomorphist could attain. This distortion At­Thehbi attires dress of reasoning is clarified by the following example:

Considering there is an article of a law so ambiguous that it has two significances; extrinsic and metaphoric. An individual abstained from finding an explanation for that article claiming acquiescing in its aspect and commending its significance to the legislator. Do others dare to regard him as opting for the very extrinsic significance since he abstained from interpreting? Of course none dare to regard as so since that individual will certainly answer "I am abstinent from any interpretation. None is allowed to attach any interpretation including the extrinsic to me."

At-­Thehbi however dared to say so. He states "Hence it became appreciable that the right is only reciting and recognizing these texts without trying to find any other interpretation." He means any interpretation other than the material. Just after that he asserts "Like the worthy ancestors we should believe and acquiesce in such texts." This indicates that we should believe that material appearances of the texts should be embraced and then acquiesce in essentials of the belief like the commenders.

The entire words of the Sunni scholars flow in the same stream. "Recognize the texts as they are." "Pass the texts as they are." "Recite the texts as they are." "Take the texts as they are." "Acquiesce in the texts." All these words have the same meaning; Interpret not these texts and commend them to Allah the Elevated and His prophet. None at all ruled of opting for faces of these texts. How should then the anthropomorphists adopt (involving the appearances as they seem.) and attach to the commenders among the worthy ancestors?

It is not improbable that 'pass' mentioned in words of the Sunni scholars was in the origin 'recognize(18) '. But owing to clerical errors the word was confused. 'Recognition' is used for constant matters while 'passing' is used for the movable. Neither the early nor the late scholars used this word at all except in the item involved. For eloquence it is inappropriate to used 'pass' to unchangeable matters. The word however is used for expressing movable things. For example; 'pass the sheep' means 'let those walking sheep pass.' For constant things; such as texts we use 'recognize' which means 'accept'.

The following are examples of the worthy ancestors' words:

Al­Mizi's Tahdibul-Kemal part 1 page 514:

Ahmed Bin Nasr: I asked Sufian Bin Uyeina an interpretation for the sayings that hearts are between two of Allah's fingers and that Allah laughs when He is mentioned in marts. "Pass them as they are without asking how" answered Sufian.

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 5 page 162:

Al-­Awzai: Az­-Zuhri and Mackhul used to say "Pass the hadiths as they are."

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 5 page 337:

Al-­Awzai: He used to say "Pass the Prophet's traditions as they are."

At­Thehbi's Tethkiratul­Huffaz part 1 page 304:

Al-­Walid Bin Muslim: I asked Mali Al-­Awzai At­Thawri and Al-­Leith Bin Sa'd about hadiths pertaining the divine attributes. "Pass them as they are without asking how " they answered.

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 7 page 274:

Sufian was asked about hadiths pertaining the divine attributes. "Pass them as they are " he answered. Abu Nueim stated "Were I to skip out these hadiths totally." Abu Usama: Sufian said "Had my hand been amputated before I sought a hadith."

The two last sayings indicate that the reason beyond adopting for commendation was anticipating being sinful in case they adopt an interpretation leads to affirming anthropomorphism.

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 8 page 162:

18. In Arabic, the two words; 'recognize' and 'pass' differ in a single similar letter only.

Al-­Walid Bin Muslim: I asked Mali Al-­Awzai At­Thawri and Al-­Leith about hadiths pertaining the divine attributes. "Pass them as they are without asking how " they answered. Abu Ubeid commented "As we could not recognize a single individual cite an interpretation to these texts we should also neglect so." This Abu Ubeid compiled a book dedicated to strange hadiths. He neglected discussing any of hadiths of the divine attributes at all. As he told that he could not recognize a single individual cite an interpretation of such texts he abstained from interpreting. Positively had interpretation of such texts been conceivable or fundamental it would have been more concerned that interpretation of hadiths of secondary affairs and ethics. As scholars neglected citing any interpretation for such texts and passed them as they were it was perceivable that their course what the absolute right.

Abu Ubeid's saying "We could not recognize a single individual cite an interpretation to these texts." implies denial of the claim of opting for extrinsic interpretation. This saying also denies Ibn Teimiya's claim that Abu Ubeid did interpreted the Lord's settlement into descending. This claim is recorded in his book of Tafseer part 6.

The latter wording of At-­Thehbi is an attempt to decide 'passing their texts are they are' as same as interpreting them according to their aspects. Hence he attempts at making the commenders adopt the faith Ibn Teimiya and he had embraced.

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin-­Nubela part 8 page 467:

Respecting the hadith "Allah is astonished or laughs when He is mentioned in marts." Sufian commented "It is as it came. We accept and communicate it without asking how."

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 9 page 165:

Ahmed Bin Ibrahim Ad­-Dawraqi: Waki:

We should submit to these hadiths ­such as that of Allah's burdening the heavens of one of His fingers­ as they are. We do not ask how or what for.

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 15 page 86:

Abul­Hassan compiled four books appertained to principals of the religion and bases of the worthy ancestors' belief in the divine attributes. He records "These texts should be passed as they are. This is my saying and belief. I should not seek an interpretation."

Besides At­Thehbi as well as the worthy ancestors recorded tens of texts discussing this topic. All those texts indicated that trends of commendation and interpretation were the two major schools the Sunni ancestors belonged to. School of resting upon extrinsic meanings was adopted by the corporalists; the Hashawites some of the Hanbalites and few of the Asharites.

At­-Thehbi asserted that there had been three trends respecting this question.

At­Thehbi's Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 19 page 582:

I asked him about hadiths of the divine attributes. He answered "People litigated about them. Some interpreted. Others abstained and others believed in their extrinsic meanings. I believe in one of these three trends."

Likewise Ibn Khuldoun discerned school of commendation from that of resting upon aspects of the texts. Moreover some late scholars such as An­Nawawi assert that the course of Sunni ancestors was commendation and refutation of the extrinsic meanings. This is a strange matter indeed. Commendation totally reconciles denial of extrinsic interpretations but it does in no means concur extrinsic interpretation. Any text is not commended to Allah if it is interpreted according to its aspect. While denial certain interpretations of a text does not injure commending to Allah.

Seyid Sharafuddin's Abu Hureira part 1 page 57:

An­-Nawawi the master asserts:

A number of scholars dispense with finding interpretations for such hadiths claiming "We do believe they are right and their extrinsic meanings are not intended and there are meanings becoming them." This is in fact trend of majority of the ancestors. It is the safest and the most secure.

CORPORALISTS ARE HEIRS OF EXTRINSICISM

It is obvious that the hypothetical base upon which corporalism was founded is necessity of resting upon extrinsic meanings of texts. This base seems to be imitated a long period after emergence of extrinsicism created by Dawud Alisfahani who publicized it in Morocco. Effects of that school are still manipulated in Ibn Hazm Al-­Andalusi's written works.

Ideas and course of corporalism were originated a long time before coming forth of extrinsicism. This indicates that the objective base of their school was authored after existence of the school itself. In other more objective words their base was discriminating just like communism. The latter had been originated before it was fanatically embraced. A period after that its hypotheses were adopted by dialectic. Thus this historical article was picked up to be the objective base of communism.

As­Semani's Al-Ansab part 4 page 99:

Extrnisicism is imputed to that group who adopted school of Dawud Bin Ali Al-­Isfahani. They opt for the extrinsic meanings of texts. They are numerous. Abul­Hussein Mohammed Bin Al-­Hussein Al-­Basri acceded to extrinsicism.

Corporalists in fact mutinied against their fathers; the extrinsicists neglecting their principals and rules. Dawud Az­-Zahir (the extrinsicist) and Ibn Hazm opt for the extrinsic meanings to definite limits after which they interpret. They are then interpreters. For corporalists those two individuals are aberrant and atheists because they were not extrinsicists.

Ibn Hazm's Al-Fasl volume 1 part 2 page 122:

Sayings of Allah the Exalted should be taken as their extrinsic meanings unless there is another text congruity or a necessity contrasting so. It is recognized that whatsoever is existent in a place occupies ­that place­. These all are qualities of corporealities. Regarding so it is proved that nearness intended in God's saying (And We are nearer to him than his life­vein. 50:16) stands for control and awareness only.

Ibn Hazm's Al-Fasl volume 1 part 2 page 166:

Discussion Of The Divine Face Hand And Eye:

Allah the Exalted says (And there will endure for ever the face of your Lord the Lord of glory and honor. 55:27)

Corporalists used this saying as argument for their trend. Others said that 'face of Allah' is His person. This is actually the right proved by clear evidences… The purport of such things; Allah's hand eye face and the like is Allah the Exalted and nothing else.

Ibn Hazm's Al-Fasl volume 1 part 2 page 167:

The Prophet (peace be upon him) stated "Hell keeps on demanding with more till Lord of Dignity places His foot ­precedence­ in it."

In this hadith 'foot' stands for precedence. This meaning is mentioned in God's saying (A footing of firmness with their Lord. 10:2). Hence the meaning of the hadith is that Allah should fill in hell with people who preceded others in evildoing. The same is said about the authentic hadith "Allah created Adam on his look." This indicates that Allah had opted for the look on which he created Adam.

Ibn Hazm's Al-Fasl volume 1 part 2 page 140:

Unanimously Muslims agreed upon Allah's being hearing and seeing since this truth is emphasized in the Holy Quran. A group of Sunnis Asharites Jafar Bin Harb the Mutazilite Husham Bin Al-­Hakam and the corporalists claimed "We decisively believe that Allah the Exalted is hearing by a means of audition seeing by a means of sight." Groups of Sunnis including Ashafii assert that Allah the Exalted is hearing and seeing but they refuted mentioning means of audition and sight since Allah the Elevated has not referred to so. They believe that the Lord is hearing by His Essence and seeing by His Essence… Thus we adopt this very saying and rule of impermissibility of claiming of means of audition and sight since this claim has not proved by a text.