Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

Juriscounsult Of Al-­Azhar Reckons The Commenders With The Interpreters

Sheik Salim Al-­Bishri used the name of interpreters to the entire commenders. Because they denied the divine attributes' having definite points and material

significances without mentioning the very intendment they are ruled as general interpreters. Sheik Al-­Bishri named the late commenders as particularized interpreters since they denied material significances and identified the exact intendments of allegorical Quranic and prophetic texts.

In his missive entirely provided in Chapter Seven Sheik Al-­Bishri says:

Such questions are classified as conjectural phenomena that are not opposite to the absolute decisive evidences referring to nonexistence of the Lord's definite space and locale. Obligatorily such questions are interpreted and based upon accurate predicates admitted by evidences and legal texts either generally without identifying the exact intendment or particularly by identifying predicates and their intendments. The first however is attitude of the worthy ancestors while the latter is the late's."

REASON BEYOND FORBIDDING EXEGESIS AND INTERPRETATION

A good deal of scholars asserted that the reason beyond the worthy ancestors' commending Verses and hadiths of the divine attributes to the Lord had been a sign of their analytical deficiency and anticipation of erring. This situation in fact should be naturally adopted by every reverent scholar intending to surpass his limits.

Jami'ul­Ahadithil­Qudsiya part 2 page 46:

In addition to our believing in Allah's being exaltedly promoted against any unfitting saying Verses and hadiths of divine attributes should be totally believed and credited according to conception of commendation adopted by the worthy ancestors. Since the late's sayings involved require a considerable amount of knowledge to understand we would better ensue conception of the worthy ancestors so that dangers would be evaded. False interpretation of words of Allah and His apostle is a horrendous danger.

Reason beyond the analytical deficiency intended by scholars is not scarcity in scholastic levels since most of scholars enjoyed penetrating mentalities. The reason is that narratives of practical descending seeableness anthropomorphism and corporeity of Allah publicly advertised by the ruling authorities were contrary to intellects and the Holy Quran and each other. Such narratives repudiated reasonable interpretation. Owing to authenticity of such narratives on their criteria they had to admit and commit themselves to. The best solution they could attain had been stopping at relating these narratives and absconding from finding exegeses. They ruled of obligation of believing without inquiry.

It is as a matter of fact a perceptible circumstance that Sunni scholars our brothers admit contraposition and commit themselves to believing in it. Moreover this question is not the only in this regard. Numerous questions

received by the worthy ancestors and delivered to the generations with full admission and believing without providing any evidence or exegesis.

The principal concern beyond such an impetuous admission and every contradiction noticed in Islamic rulings and conceptions was the discrepancies arisen just after the Prophet's decease. It was asserted by the formal situation adopted by Sunnis our brother when they declared the ultimate decency of the entire companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). Contradiction is an inevitable result attained by acceding to contrasted groups. Perplexity likewise is an unavoidable result of committing to partners differing with one another.

Doors to solving contradiction would have been opened before Muslims if they ­majority of this nation and ruling authorities­ had confessed of the Prophet's companions' having been engaged in discrepancies to the degree that they exchanged charges of atheism and killed one another. They should have conceded to the fact that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) had foretold of some companions' being in Hell. He had also told that some of his companions would not be seen by him and would not see him because they would change to the other side just after his decease. Finally they should have declared that Muslims individually should exert all efforts for scrutinizing the most virtuous and trustful individuals among the Prophet's companions and leaving the others' affairs to Allah the Exalted.

On the contrary the Prophet's companions were imposed on Islam in spite of their contrast. According to personal desires they forbade Muslims from putting any question or wonderment about the Prophet's companions.

We aim at exhibiting two matters. First contradiction in narratives of the divine attributes is in the surface only. The factual contradiction falls in resting upon a definite individual in the entire questions of religion. Second corporalists and anthropomorphists capitalized on silence imitated by the commenders. They alleged that the real reason beyond commendation was their abstinence from publicizing the cerebral exegeses of the divine attributes texts that they totally had been acquainted with. This is the worst category of distortion. It is using words for interpreting silence and misapplying commendation for interpreting commendation.

SCHOOL OF CORPORALISM

This attitude was adopted by those who forbade interpretation and commending to Allah the Exalted and imposed the extrinsic meaning of expressions. They opted for material meanings.

Seemingly they differ little but greatly from the commenders. The latter adopted an attitude of abstinence from interpreting the divine attributes while

resting upon extrinsic meanings is ruled as a declaration of opting for corporeal meanings.

For the commenders the expression 'hand of Allah' does neither refer to ability as the interpreters claim nor does it refer to that material organ as the corporalists claim. They abstain and halt before they discuss the meaning of such an expression.

Commenders occasionally deny and rule of unintendedness of the corporeal appearances since they rule that meanings are commended to Allah exclusively. This has been obviously shown through An­Nawawi's previous opinions.

Corporalists rule of obligation of opting for the actual meaning not the metaphoric of hand. They were so daring that they denied existence of any metaphoric style in the Holy Quran as well as hadiths. Hence they canceled metaphor of the Arabic since the Quran and hadiths pursued the exact linguistic rules and expressions of this tongue.

During discussion they expound that Allah has a corporeal hand but different from that possessed by humans. They do believe that Allah has organs like a hand a leg an eye and so on. Nevertheless they only declare that Allah's organs are different from ordinary ones since they do believe that Allah's look is as same as humans; therefore he should have the same limbs and organs. Later on this shall be proved through their words.

FIRST EMERGENCE OF CORPORALISM

Rivals of Shias misalleged that Husham Bin Al-­Hakam had been the first man who provided conceptions of Allah's corporeity. Husham is a Shiite theologist and one of disciples of Imam Ja'far As­Sadiq (peace be upon him). He died in 200 A.H.

In his Ussoulu Matheb Ashi'etil­Imamiya part 1 page 529 Dr. Nasir Al-­Qifari the Wahabist records:

Sheikhul­Islam Ibn Teimiya identified the first man who took the charge of this terrible forgery. He said "Husham Bin Al-­Hakam was the first man in Islam whom was known as the originator of the saying that Allah is a corporeality. (Minhajus­Sunna part 1 page 20.)"

On page 530­1 part 1 of the same reference Al-­Qifari records:

Anthropomorphizing Allah is a trend existed at the Jews and found its way to Shias. Shism was the habitation of foes of Islam and its people. The first man who committed this great forgery was Husham Bin Al-­Hakam from whom this conception transferred to others ascribed as immoderate and aberrant.

Masters of the Ithnasharites(15) went on defending such devious individuals commonly known as seditious and evildoers. They also attempted to find interpretation and belie each heresy imputed to such individuals. Al-­Majlisi says "Obstinacy might be the only motive adopted by the dissidents' ascribing these two sayings to those people."

Concerning denial asserted by some of Shias this is not strange. Their habit was gainsaying obvious realities and trusting evident mendacities. Shias' supporting those individuals is not inexplicable since things usually defend their classes. They defended their associates. A faction of them went on exonerating the eminent disorderly ones whose evildoing dissension and deviation had been too widespread to be concealed.

Had Al-­Qifari taken a look at Al-­Bukhari's book of hadith besides many other references of hadith he would have practically perceived with hands before eyes that saying of anthropomorphism had been come forth since Aisha's time. Kabul­Ahbar and his party arose ideas and origin of this conception in the reign of Omar the caliph. This means that before the birth of Husham Bin Al-­Hakam's Abavus grandfather this conception was prevailed among Muslims. References of Sunnis our brothers recorded (authentic) hadiths of the Divine Throne's cracking fracturing and snapping due to the heavy weight of Allah the Exalted.

Al-­Heithami's Majma'uzzawa'id; part 1 page 83:

Omar: A woman sought the Prophet's supplicating God to enter her to the Paradise. The Prophet glorified the Elevated and blessed Lord and stated "His Bench extended to the heavens and the earth. Its cracking is as same as cracking of the new saddle used by a heavy man."

Al-­Bezar relates it with series of trustful men relied by the most authentic books of hadith.

On page 159 part 10 of the same reference the compiler says:

Saving Abdullah Bin Khalifa Al-­Hamadani the trustful the hadith ­previously provided­ is written down in Abu Yali's Al-­Kabeer and ascribed to series of trustful men relied upon in the most authentic books of hadith.

On page 373 the compiler of Kenzul­-Ummal rules of authenticity of the hadith involved. Its authenticity is also asserted on page 466 part 2 of the same reference.

As­-Suyouti's Ad­Durrul­Manthour part 1 page 328:

15. Ithnasharism is another name called at Shias who believe in imamate of twelve imams.

Abd Bin Humeid and Ibn Abi Asim (in his As­Sunna) and Al­-Bezar and Abu Yali and Ibn Jarir and Abusheik and At-­Tabarani and Ibn Merdawayih and Addiya (in his Al-­Mukhtara); all record the following:

Omar relates: A woman sought the Prophet's supplicating God to enter her to the Paradise. The Prophet glorified the Exalted and Blessed Lord and stated "His Bench extended to the heavens and the earth. Its cracking is as same as cracking of the new saddle used by a heavy man. Less than four fingers only remains."

Ad­-Deilami's Firdawsul­Akhbar part 3 page 86:

Omar Bin Al-Khattab stated:

Allah settles on the Throne so heavily that a cracking as same as that of a new can be heard.

Al--Khatib's Tarikhu Baghdad part 1 page 295:

Abdullah Bin Khalifa: Omar Bin Al-­Khattab stated:

Allah settles on the Throne so heavily that a cracking as same as that of a new saddle can be heard.

Al-Khatib's Tarikhu Baghdad part 4 page 39:

Jubeir Bin Mohammed Bin Jubeir Bin Mutim: his father: his father:

"O Apostle of Allah! Souls have striven children starved and wealths lost. Seek your Lord's watering us with rainfall. We do seek Allah's intercession to you and your intercession to Allah." a Bedouin orated. The Prophet (peace be upon him) went on uttering 'praised be Allah' severally that the attendants were bewildered. Then he added "Woe is you! Do you realize Allah? His divine concern is greater than anyone's interceding in His affairs. He is aloft His heavens on His Throne. A dome covers His throne that cracks as same as a new saddle under a heavy man."

Ad-Deilami's Firdawsul-­Akhbar part 1 page 219:

Ibn Omar: Allah the Exalted has surely crammed in His throne. From every side of the Throne four fingers of Him the Beneficent remain.

It seems that Abdullah Bin Omar made the Divine Throne four fingers larger than the Exalted Beneficent. Pursuant to authentic narratives Adam who is sixty or seventy arm long was created as same as Allah's look; therefore each finger of their (lord) should be longer than a meter!

Abu Dawud's book of hadith page 418:

"His Throne forms a dome over His heavens. It makes sounds of cracking as same as those made by a new saddle under a heavy man."

Ibn Bashar: "Allah is on His Throne. His Throne is on His heavens…"

The same hadith is related by Abdul-­Ala and Ibnul-­Muthenna and Ibn Bashar. They referred it to Yaqub Bin Utba and Jubeir Bin Mohammed Bin Jubeir: his father: his father.

Yahya Bin Muin and Ali Bin Al-­Madini in addition to others admitted the documentation of Ahmed Bin Sa'eed and regarded as the most authentic. Ahmed records that a good group of narrators relate the Ibn Isaaq's report. The same version was rested upon by Abdul-­Ala Ibnul­Muthenna and Ibn Bashar. As a footnote it is written down: Cracking of saddle stands for its sounds.

Al-Bidaya Wen­Nihaya part 1 page 54:

Cracking occurs when it is disable to carry heavy things. Cracking of saddle occurs only due to heaviness.

Although we are acceptably sufficed by the previously mentioned references of report of the Throne's cracking the following related the same:

Ad­Deilami's Firdawsul­Akhbar part 1 page 220.

Majma'uzzawa'id part 10 page 398.

Kenzul-Ummal part 1 page 224 part 2 page 73 part 10 page 363 and 367 and part 14 page 469.

It is so obvious even for the minimal educated that sayings and hadiths of the Lord's corporeity came forth just after the Prophet's decease on the hands of Jews of Al-­Madina and particularly Kabul­Ahbar. After that these sayings took the form of the Prophet's traditions on the hands of some companions. Some brothers were so biased towards these sayings that they betook as an attitude. Sunni references of hadiths publicized such sayings exclusively. No single saying was mentioned in any of our reference books of hadith. On the contrary imams of the Prophet's progeny related their refuting and denial of such sayings. Has it now become evident for Dr. Al-­Qifari how corporalism found its way into Islam?

Sheik Mohammed Zahid Al-­Kawthari the researchist in Al-­Azhar could approach the truth when he confessed that roots of corporalism and anthropomorphism had been in the Sunni reference books of hadith. Lacking enough courage to accuse the Prophet's companions Al-­Kawthari charged responsibility of these beliefs to the corporalists among followers of the Prophet's companions and the successive generations. In the introduction of Al-­Beihaqi's Asma'i Wes­Sifat Al-­Kawthari records:

Hadithists and narrators occupy a great standing at majority of scholars. Unfortunately among such hadithists and narrators there are those who

exaggeratively exceeded their limits and engaged themselves in fields they ignored. Hence they introduced dishonor and harsh injury to their sects associates and followers.

Most of those who engaged themselves in question of the divine attributes are reckoned with the previous class. As an example we cite Hemmad Bin Selema's narratives respecting the divine attributes. These contained a great number of fraudulent reports communicated among classes of narrators. This man married one hundred women without obtaining a single child. This matter affected his mentality to the degree that he confused his source narratives with those falsely intrigued by Ibn Abil­Awja and Zeid Bin Hemmad his foster­children. Narrators of Thabit Al-­Benani that are related to Hemmad Bin Selema are entirely authentic. Majority of minor narrators were deviated by the false reports imputed to that previously eloquent supreme narrator. Readers may notice miscellaneous examples of such doubtful reports mentioned in sections dealing with monotheism in books of ordinary subjects and those of hadithists. Some spared no efforts for defending that man. Their efforts still went with the wind. Allah's laws should be preferred to defending an individual against whom decisive unjustifiable accusations were targeted.

Nueim Bin Hemmad's narrators played the same previous role. He was such an enthusiastic person that he was dragged to believing in Allah's corporeity. The same happened to master of his master Muqatil Bin Suleiman.

Injurious effects of such narrators can be readily seen in books of narrators who followed partisan pursuance in referring to such erroneous hadithists. The following are examples of these books:

Khusheish Bin Assram's Kitabulistiqama.

As­Sunna books compiled by Abdullah A­Khellal- Abusheikh Al-­Assal Abu Bakr Bin Asim At­Tabarani and Al-­Jami.

Harb Bin Ismail As­Sirjani's As­Sunnetu Wel­Jama'a.

Ibn Khuzeima's At­Tawhid.

Ibn Minda's At­Tawhid.

Al-­Hakam Bin Mabid Al-­Khuzai's As­Sifat.

Othman Bin Sa'eed Ad­Darmi's An­Naqdh.

Al-­Ajuri's Ashari'a.

Ibn Batta and Abu Nasr As­Sejzi's Al-­Ibana.

Abu Yali Al-­Qadi's Naqdhut­Tawilat.

Dhemmul­Kelam.

Al-­Faruq.

All these books contained narratives disdained by the doctrine and intellect in the same time. Othman Bin Sa'eed As­Darmi As­Sejzi was the daring among corporalists who gallantly distributed such injurious ideas. He said "Had Allah the Exalted desired to settle on a back of a bug His divine propensity would have enabled him of so. How is it then for an ample throne?!"

Sheik Al-­Harrani ­Ibn Teimiya­ pursued him in such a saying. In Ghawthul­-Ibad Published in Al-­Halabi Publication 1351 texts referring to the purport involved are recorded. In addition many other calamities such as Allah's moveableness and the like are invented by that As­Sejzi.

Many alike books of false and dishonorable reports and ideas were publicized. Fissure became highly extensive and catastrophe became so effective till honest trustful scholars took charge of blocking that fissure by means of narration and hypothesizing. Al-­Khattabi Abul­-Hassan At-­Tabari Ibn Fawrak Al-­Huleimi Abi Isaaq Alisfraini Abdul­Qahir Al-­Baghdadi and many others are included with the honest scholars.

Like Al-­Kawthari the fair Sunni scholars admit that hadiths of Allah's seeableness anthropomorphism and corporeity are entirely belonged to Hemmad Bin Selema Nueim Bin Hemmad Muqatil Bin Suleiman and Wahab Bin Munebbih. Those individuals had the same master; Kabul­Ahbar. They ­the fair Sunni scholars­ lack the heart to ascend a little to reach the Prophet's companions who adopted publicized and islamized the ill ideas of Kabul­Ahbar.

CORPORALISM OF KABUL­AHBAR BECAME AN ISLAMIC TREND

Ashehristani's Al-Milelu Wen­Nihel part 1 page 93; Al­Halabi Publication Cairo 1968:

Majority of the worthy ancestors recognized the eternal attributes of Allah the Exalted. Knowledge competence vitality will hearing viewing wording exaltation altruism generosity bestowal potency and magnanimity are eternal attributes. They cited no difference between attributes of Entity and those of operation. They treated the two in the same measure. They also recognized communicative attributes such as Allah's having hands face and the like. They neglected finding suitable interpretation for such questions. However they called such attributes as communicative since they were perceived through reports of Islamic legalism.

Unlike the worthy ancestors Mutazilites denied the divine attributes. Therefore they were called 'Tatilites(16) ' ­disavowers­ while the worthy ancestors were called 'Sifatiya' ­attributers­. Some of the latter exceeded when

16. Tatilism is a theologian Islamic faction that disavow the Lord's attributes.

they anthropomorphized the Lord. Others stopped at proving attributes indicated by ­the divine­ deeds and narratives. Hence they became two parties. Some interpreted according to a form rather concordant to the expression used. Others vacated interpretation as a whole. "By intellects " the latter party claimed "We perceive that Allah the Exalted has no equivalent at all."

Decisively Allah is neither like any of His creatures nor are they like Him. Purports of expressions of involved texts; such as (The Beneficent settled on the Throne. 20:5) (I created with My hands. 38:75) (And your Lord came. 89:21) and the like are unattainable for us. Besides we are not legally required to recognize the exact exegeses and interpretation of such texts. We are only required to believe that Allah has no associate and nothing is like Him. We could prove these matters in means of conviction."

A group of the late added the following to the belief of the worthy ancestors. "Such expressions ought to be taken as they seem and interpreted as they are without criticizing their interpretation or passing over the extrinsic meanings."

This conception which is totally contrary to the worthy ancestors' led them to literal anthropomorphism indeed. Anthropomorphism was adopted by certain Jewish groups. These were groups of their scholarly who found expressions bearing such meanings during reciting the Torah.

Ashehristani's current wording asserts that anthropomorphists became a limited sect that was exhortative for Sunni scholars. It also indicates that those group emerged in recent times surpassing the worthy ancestors' instructions of forbiddingness of interpreting divine texts of corporeality. On that account Ashehristani compares them to the Jews who recited the Torah since they were believing in Allah's corporeity purely. He adduces that anthropomorphism adopted by those Muslims was mixed not pure because of their circumspection against the other Muslims.

This assertion coincides the following assertion of Ibn Khuldoun and others who identified history of establishment of this sect or belief that provided Allah's materiality!!

Ibn Khuldoun's Muqaddima page 462:

In numerous Verses of the holy Quran ascribing untranslatable evidential and illimitable exaltation to the Lord is regularly emphasized. These Verses were entirely negative and comprehensible; therefore it was obligatory to give credence to them. A good deal of Prophet's sayings as well as his companions and their followers referred to opting for the extrinsic purports of such Verses and hadiths. Other Quranic Verses although few referred illusively to Allah's corporeity. Some believed and in the same time rejected penetrating and interpreting such Verses as they revered them for their being words of Allah. This was the purport majority of them intended by saying "Recite these Verses as they are. Believe that they are Allah's. But advance not upon their interpretation or exegesis. They might be a sort of divine trial. Hence it is obligatory to abide and comply with them." In the same time heretic people were deviated by pursuing allegorical Verses. They probed deep in anthropomorphism. A group of them anthropomorphized the Divine Entity by imputing a hand foot or face to the Lord depending upon illusory expressions respecting so. They fell in direct corporalism and dissented Verses of illimitable divine exaltation that are greater in number and manifestation. Intellectuality of corporealities imposes deficiency and privation. fixing upon negational style in Verses of illimitable divine exaltation that are greater in number and manifestation is more approving than clinging to unessential illusory appearances. Another group combined the two evidences by resting upon personal interpretation. In fact their claim of Allah's being an incomparable corporeal that is different from others is seen as absconding from offensiveness of their combinatorial attitude. This claim however is profitless for them since it is a contrasted opinion that combined affirmation to negation in case of regarding the individual intellectuality of corporals. Providing they differentiate and deny the familiar intellectuality they will be according us in attitude of exaltation. Then they should reckon 'corporeality' with the Divine Names. Such matters depend upon permission.

Another group adopted anthropomorphism in the divine attributes. They ruled of Allah's having a definite locale settling descending utterance and the like. This attitude proceeds straightly to chamber of corporalism. Therefore they adopted the same saying "Incomparable locate settling descending and utterance that are different from those of ordinary corporealities."

Like the former this attitude collapsed. The worthy ancestors' beliefs and creeds of believing in such texts as they are in order that denial of their meanings should not reach their authentic and avowed entities survived alone.

From the above it is understandable that ideological principals and sectarian forms of corporalism were Jewish and Sunni. Shias are totally remote from this version except that proofless and false accusation against Husham Bin Al-­Hakam!!

Chapter: 3 Hanbalites And Corporalism Ground Of Corporalism Relies On Expressions

References of theology and biography profess that followers of corporalism formed majority of the ruling authorities retinue and the Hashawites who partisanly clung to whatsoever is narrated. "Corporalism was commonly spread among the incognizant narrators and majority of hadithists." Ibnul­-Jawzi asserts.

Some to no avail attempted at supporting the Hanbalites. That matter was constant and familiar to the degree that Az­-Zamakhshari recorded the following poetry foot in his Al-­Kashaf part 2 page 573:

If I claim being Hanbalite They would affirm I am gloomy incarnationist odious corporalist.

Al­Fakhr Ar-Razi's Al­Metalibul­Aliya volume 2 part 2 page 25:

Chapter Three

Providing Evidences On Allah's Impracticability Of Being A Corporeality.

Two famous opinions regarding this question are rendered by scholars:

Majority of people agreed upon promoting Allah the Praised the Exalted against corporeity and occupancy. Others claimed Allah's occupying a definite location. Those are the corporalists who disputed in some questions. Some claimed Allah's having mankind appearance while others denied so. Regarding the earlier Muslim anthropomorphists claimed the Lord's being a young man while the Jew anthropomorphists claimed His being an

old man. They also disputed about the Lord's moveableness. A group of the Karramites(17) admitted Allah's coming going moving and subsiding while others denied so. Majority of Hanbalites admit.

Al-Fakhr Ar­Razi's Al-Metalibul­Aliya volume 1 part 1 page 26:

Corporalists disputed about Allah's going and coming. The believers in His being a brilliance deny His having organs and limbs; like a head hand or leg. Majority of Hanbalites confirm existence of such organs and limbs.

Al­Khattabi's Me'alimus­Sunen part 4 page 302:

The trend followed by scholars and jurisprudents was dedicating to the extrinsic meanings of doctrinal texts respecting the divine attributes. They abstained from probing purports and interpretation since they realize their unattainability to understand such affairs. Some master hadithists erred during their commentary on hadith of Allah's descending to the lowest heavens. "If it is claimed that our Lord descends to the lowest heavens some may interrogate about way of descending. This may be answered that Allah descends as He wills. If the wonderment whether our Lord moves or not is put it may be answered that He moves when He wills and does not when He wills.

By these words Al-­Khattabi adopts school of commendation. He represents that the divine attributes should be taken as they are without interpretation. These words of commenders prove that they were the seed from which the third school was emerged and the hay the followers held fast. They claimed that the worthy ancestors referred to the physical demeanor of language which is in fact corporeality by preserving appearances and depending exclusively on explicit indications of the divine attributes texts.

The following text of At­Thehbi shows that Al-­Ghezzali had led a campaign against corporalism and corporalists.

Siyeru A'lamin­Nubela part 17 page 558:

This course adopted by the worthy ancestors was clarified by Abul­-Hassan and his acquaintances. It indicates submission to Quranic and prophetic texts. Ibnul­Baqillani Ibn Fawrak and Al­-Kebbar adopted this opinion which lasted to Abul-­Me'ali. In time of Sheik Abu Hamid various discrepancies and divergence occurred to this opinion.

This saying shows that corporalism attained its climax in reign of Seljukian dynasty on the hands of Abul-­Me'ali Al-­Juweini An-­Nisapuri Imamul­Haramein who died in 478 A.H. After people of Nisapur had banished him the Seljukians favored and assigned him as a tutor in Al-­Madrasa An-­Nidhamiya school in

17. Karramism is an Islamic theologian faction, founded by Mohammed Bin Karram.

Baghdad. In his last days Abul­Me'ali adopted this concept after he had been interpreter.

Al-­Ghezzali who succeeded him contradicted his opinions creating a noise by defending the interpreters. Through a considerable number of books of exegesis it was noticeable however that Al-­Ghezzali aimed at pleasing the corporalists.

In Al-­Aqa'idul­Islamiya volume 2, a thorough chapter is given over to exhibiting standings of the anthropomorphists and the corporalists in reference books of the Sunnis our brothers.

Chapter: 4 Ibn Teimiya The Reviver Of Corporalism Of Hanbalites

Ibn Batuta's Rihla page 90:

Taqiyyuddin Bin Teimiya the grand Hanbalite master of Syria had acquaintance of the entire aspects of principals. Yet he had a trouble in the mind. On a Friday I attended one of his sermons in Damascus. While he was admonishing people he said "Allah descends to the lowest heavens just as this descending." Meanwhile he descended a scale down the pulpit. A Malikite jurisprudent named Ibnuz­-Zahra objected and denied these words. People used their hands as well as sandals in beating that jurisprudent so heavily that his turban fell to the ground.

As­Saqqaf's Sharhul­Aqidetit­Tahawiya page 170:

Ibn Teimiya in his Al-­Muwafaqat (printed in the margin of Minhajus­Sunna) page 1118 claims "It became manifest that sayings of the commenders who maintain of their following the Prophet's traditions and the worthy ancestors' practices are the worst among sayings of the heretic and atheists."

Ibn Teimiya's book of Tafseer part 6 page 386:

Six variant opinions regarding Allah's settling coming and the like which are mentioned in the Quran were followed by people:

A group claim that such affairs should be taken in as their extrinsic meanings require. They rule that Allah's coming and settling is as same as any creature's. Those are the corporalists the anthropomorphists. Some of this group claim that the Throne becomes empty during the Lord's descending.

A group claim that the most suitable explication of such texts should be regarded and accorded to descriptions the Lord has used. He is (Nothing is the like of his likeness) inimitable in His Entity attributes and deeds. They claim that He descends and comes a sort of descending and coming fitting His

majesty. "He descends and comes while He is still Elevated on the Throne " they assert. Hemmad Bin Zeid says "While He is on the Throne the Lord approaches the creatures as He wills." Isaaq Bin Rahawayih expresses "He descends and keeps up in the Throne in the same time." Isaaq claims that this was Ahmed Bin Hanbal's opinion messaged to Musedded.

According to report of Abu Omar Bin Abdil-­Berr defining the Lord's descending as a deed of self­mastery was the opinion adopted by the hadithists. It was also adopted by majority of Ahmed's followers. Ibn Hamid and others asserted this opinion. At­-Tamimi Ibn Kelab Abu Yali and his followers denied falling of the optional deeds.

Two groups claim that the Lord descends but does not come. One attempted at finding suitable interpretation of this saying while the other suspended the meaning.

Two groups suspended the whole matter. One confessed of their lacking the knowledge of God's intendment from such attributing. The other was sufficed by reciting the Quran.

Majority of Sunnis and worthy ancestors' followers rule of fallibility of interpretation deciding denial of the Lord's settling and coming. Most of them however refute void interpretation and reckon such texts with 'Items interpretation of which should be concealed'."

Ibn Teimiya's book of Tafseer part 6 page 118:

This implies that Allah's exaltation is one of the indispensable attributes of praise. Thus it is impermissible to refer opposite of exaltation to Him. The Prophet (peace be upon him) stated "Thou art the Prior. Nothing was before Thee. Thou art the Ultimate. Nothing is after Thee. Thou art the Ascendant. Nothing is over Thee. Thou art the Prevailing. Nothing is after Thee." See that the Prophet (peace be upon him) had used 'after' instead of 'under'.

This hadith has been discussed under another title. Owing to texts in the Quran and the Prophet's traditions; such as (Are you secure of that in the heavens that He… 67:13) and the like some may conceive that the heavens is the very elevated created thing including the Divine Throne and whatsoever down. Hence they claim that (in the heavens) mentioned in the previous text stands for 'on the heavens'. They treated this text as same as God's sayings (I will certainly crucify you in the trunks of palm trees. 20:71) and (Walk in the earth. 67:15). In addition Every elevated thing is unidentifiably called 'heavens'. Hence (in the heavens) indicates whatsoever is elevated not low. The Lord is the Elevated and the Highest. He occupies the most elevated point in the heavens; the topmost of the Throne. There is nothing other than the Elevated the Highest the Praised and the Exalted.

Ibn Teimiya's Ar­Risaletut-Tadmuriya page 39:

Attributes of affirmation and negation are ascribed to Allah the Praised. Examples of the earlier are His sayings (The Knowing of everything. 2:29) (He has power on everything. 2:20) (He is the Hearing the Seeing. 42:11) and the like. An example of the latter is His saying (Slumber does not overtake him nor sleep. 2:255). Unless it comprises affirmation style of negation is bare from praise or perfection. This is by reason that sheer negation is not sheer. Whatsoever is not sheer is nothingness. Nothingness is too deficient to be a style of praise or perfection. Praise and perfection are not attributed to nonexistence and nonbeing. On that account the general negational descriptive accounts used in the Quran comprised affirmation of praise. The same thing is said about God's saying (Visions comprehend him not). In this Verse comprehension which is awareness was negated exclusively. This meaning is adopted by majority of scholars. Mere seeableness is not negated since nonexistent things are not seeable. Being not seeable is not approbation. Had this been true nonexistent things should have been submissive to acclamation. Praise in fact is dedicated to point of the praised's incomprehensibility even if he is seeable and realizable. The Lord is incomprehensibly seen when He is seeable and incomprehensibly realized when He is realizable.

Ibn Teimiya's Ar­-Risaletut­-Tadmuriya page 47:

Answering the wonderment whether aspects of texts are their meanings or not we are to cite the following.

Expressions of aspects are generalized and combined. Considering believing that aspects of texts reveal anthropomorphizing the creatures' attributes and specifications this will certainly be unintended. Neither the worthy ancestors nor did the master scholars regard this as aspect of the texts. They also refuted the claim that aspects of the Quranic and prophetic texts are atheism and wrong. Allah the Praised the Exalted is too knowledgeable and wise to show atheism and aberrance exclusively through aspects of texts regarding His divine attributes. Adopters of such a trend either decide the void meanings as aspects of the text in order that this would be in need of interpretation contrasting the aspects or refute the true meaning that is ostensibly provided and decide its falsehood.

Ibn Teimiya's Ar-Risaletut­Tadmuriya page 72:

It is inappropriate to say that an expression is interpreted since this means that it is transferred from the predominant probability into the less. It is also unsuitable to say that interpretation of a definite text is known by Allah alone except that the aspect involving creation exclusively is intended. Indisputably adopters of this meaning have an interpretation violating face of the texts. Supposing they claim such texts are not submitted to interpretation violating their aspects or they are submitted to their manifest meanings only they will be inconsistent. Confusedness will be decided in case they intend two different

meanings each for a certain situation of the same text. Providing they figure mere expression as their intendment from regarding aspects of texts neglecting understanding their meanings this will engage them in contrast whether they prove or deny interpretation. This is by reason that proving or denying an interpretation affirms perception of meanings. The previous debate shows the contrast people are engaged in regarding matters of proving or denying the divine attributes.

Ibn Teimiya's Ar-Risaletut-Tadmuriya page 55:

It is provable that Allah the Exalted created the cosmos in serial stages. He created progressive independence of these stages. The upper should not be in need of the next. Atmosphere is not in need of the earth that carries it. The same thing is said about clouds that are above the earth. The heavens that are higher than the earth are not in need of the earth's carrying them. The Exalted and Highest is the Lord who is the owner of everything. He is in the highest point on His creatures; how is it then acceptable for Him to be in need of His creatures or Throne? How should His extreme elevation prompt such a need which is not prompt to His creatures? It is affirmative that the Creator is more rightful and deserving in affairs of His creatures. If a creature is in no need for another in a certain field such as wealth this will be discussing that Allah shall be more deserving to such a needlessness. Authentically the following prophetic saying is communicated: "Whenever you ask your Lord for the Paradise you are advised to name Al-­Firdaws which is the top and the middle of the Paradise. The ceiling of the Paradise is the Beneficent's Throne."

The last sentence shows that the Throne is on top of orbits.

Ibn Teimiya's Ar­Risaletut­Tadmuriya page 75:

Even if some impute anthropomorphism to this signification this does not mean it is denied by intellects and audible perceptions. The obligation is not more than denying what is denied only by legal and intellectual evidences. The Quran denied onymous of 'the like' 'the equivalent' 'the peer' and the like. Some claim that in the Arabic quality is neither like equivalent nor is peer the described. Hence this meaning does not participate in texts. Intellects however do not deny term of anthropomorphism intended by the Mutazilites.

Ibn Teimiya's Ar­Risaletut-Tadmuriya page 90:

The Competent is exaltedly promoted against having such organs of eating and drinking. The hand is different since it is the organ of acting and doing. Acting and doing are ascribed to Him the Praised. These are attributes of perfection. The able is more perfect than the disable. He the exalted is also exaltedly promoted against having organs and acquirements of having spouse and sons. Allah the Praised is also promoted exceedingly against weeping and grief since

these qualities prompt feebleness and deficiency. Happiness and ire on the other hand are ascribed to Him since they are attributes of perfection.

Ibn Teimiya's Ar-Risaletut-Tadmuriya page 95:

Some of the divine attributes are recognized by intellectuality. Attributes of knowledgeability competence and vitality are recognized by the same way. (Does He not know who created? 67:14). This Verse guides to the meaning involved. Unanimously scholastic provers of the divine attributes assert that the following divine attributes are recognized by the learned with the intellect. They are vitality knowledgeability competence willingness. Hearing seeing and uttering are added to these attributes. Pleasantness satisfaction and ire can be proved by intellect too. The Lord's exaltation and incomparability are also recognized with the intellect. Ahmed Bin Hanbal Abdul-­Ali Al­-Mekki Abdullah Bin Sa'eed Bin Kelab and others proved this question. The Lord's seeableness is proved by intellects. Some alleged that seeableness of every being is possibly attainable. Others claimed that seeableness of every idiosyncratic entity is possibly attainable. The latter is more adequate. The Lord's seeableness can be proved by other means of distributing affirmation and denial. It is claimed that seeableness is exclusively depending upon existential affairs. The Anterior Necessary Aseity is more deserving than possible beings in affairs depending upon existential affairs exclusively.

COMPONENTS OF IBN TEIMIYA'S SCHOOL

The previous were a set of Ibn Teimiya's texts respecting hypothesizing his school. Later on more shall be proceeded. The following points are acceptably sufficient for proving Ibn Teimiya's believing in corporalism:

First: Ibn Teimiya refuses commending interpretation of the divine attributes to Allah the Exalted since "these are the worst among sayings of the heretic and atheists." This testifies that he carries in mind the ill idea that abstinence from interpreting 'face of Allah' and 'hand of Allah' is reckoned with flat atheism!

Second: Ibn Teimiya decides the obligation of concluding the manifest linguistic aspects of Quranic texts respecting the divine attributes. This means that he opts for material meanings of such texts. He also stands against culling metaphoric meanings since as he believes there is no existence for metaphor in Quran and hadiths.

Third: Pursuant to Ibn Teimiya's trend Allah the Exalted is existent at the top of this world. Except air nothing is above Him. Below Him is this world. "See that the Prophet (peace be upon him) had used 'after' instead of 'under'." The Lord is existent on His Throne. He may descend to this world. He sees with the eye since "seeableness is exclusively depending upon existential affairs. The Anterior Necessary Aseity is more deserving than

possible beings in affairs depending upon existential affairs exclusively." The evidence he cited on Allah's being self­sufficient against the world was so derisive that even ordinary people would disgust. He stated that every exalted thing dispenses with what is under it. Accordingly leaves of a tree dispense with trunks and upper story dispense with the lower!

Fourth: For Ibn Teimiya Allah's descending to the lower heavens is intrinsic. He asserted "The Lord's descending as a deed of self­mastery was the opinion adopted by the hadithists.." In addition to Ibn Batuta's testimony it is proved that Allah's descending is a physical descending of a material being. Hence Ibn Teimiya's words of evading this idea were futile.

Fifth: Ibn Teimiya aimed at defending his belief by denying its comprising anthropomorphism. He stated that the Lord has a physical face and hand but not like these of humans or other creatures. For him this statement is enough to exclude circle of anthropomorphism. Cautiously he omitted anthropomorphism by inventing another matter. He stated that texts should be regarded according to their material aspects "fitting His Glory" not the unbecoming.

Sixth: Proceeding in a daring step towards proving anthropomorphism Ibn Teimiya stated "Even if some people impute anthropomorphism to this signification this does not mean it is denied by intellects and audible perceptions. The obligation is not more than denying what is denied only by legal and intellectual evidences." By these words Ibn Teimiya tries to say that Quranic and prophetic texts negate Allah's having peers associates likes and equivalents. They do not negate His being anthropomorphized. At exposing God's saying (Nothing like a likeness of Him;) majority of Muslims; Shias Sunnis philosophers and Mutazilites negate Allah's having a resemblant. Hence nothing may stop in the face of negating Allah's having an alike since this matter is negated by texts and Allah's anthropomorphizing His creatures!! As long as He does not deny His being anthropomorphizing His creatures what is the wrong then if we adopt so?!

Ibn Teimiya therewith declares that God's saying (Nothing like a likeness of Him;) implies negation of His like not resemblant. Allah does have a resemblant; Adam and another resemblant; Ibn Teimiya!!

Seventh: Supposing the following argument is provided before Ibn Teimiya. "You definitely refer to anthropomorphism by your denying interpretation and commendation and insist on interpretation according to aspects of texts." He shall certainly answer "Majority of Sunnis and ancestors' followers rule of fallibility of interpretation deciding denial of the Lord's settling and coming. Most of them however refute void interpretation and reckon such texts with 'Items interpretation of which should be concealed.'

Ibn Teimiya consequently decides that it is not inadmissible to liken Allah the Exalted to His creatures. He also emphasizes that interpretation of anthropomorphism should be concealed. He exhibits that his god is existent in a certain point up the heavens we could see. That god is a physical being occupying the Throne. Nothing except air is above him while he is restricted from beneath. That god can move and descend to the earth. Ibn Teimiya however is unlike Ibn Khuzeima his master who claims that god's ability of ascending. Exalted and glorified be Allah against such funny statements! Later on the other sides of Ibn Teimiya's beliefs will be debated.