Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

Chapter : 6 The God Of The Wahabists

Bin Baz's Al-­Fatawi part 4 page 131:

Interpretation of the divine attributes is deniable. It is obligatory to accept the divine attributes as they are in their extrinsic aspects that are becoming Allah the Exalted apart from any sort of distortion circumvention rearrangement or representation. This course was adopted by scholars among the Prophet's companions and their successors such as Al-­Awzai At­-Thawri Malik Abu Haneefa Ahmed and Isaaq.

Were Sheik Bin Baz only to name one of the Prophet's companions who had rested upon the material extrinsic aspects of texts respecting the divine attributes. Were he only to cite a single text of those followers of the Prophet's companions or their followers he had mentioned by name. In the previous chapter a good number of those scholars' texts appertained to the divine attributes was provided. We could not stroke any single text supporting question of resting upon the material extrinsic aspects of texts respecting the divine attributes. Later on we will prove falsehood of their referring and imputing to Malik in the question involved. Saving those old corporalists such as Kabul-­Ahbar Wahab Bin Munebbih Muqatil and their partisans they can depend upon none in this question.

A Muslim harassed Wahabists' master in hadithology Sheik Nasiruddin Al-­Albani when he addressed the following question at him:

Fetawil­-Al-­Bani page 509:

Q. Are beliefs embraced by the Islamic radicalists as same as the Prophet's companions'? Some argue that considering this is right would you provide name of a single companion who claimed believing in extrinsic meanings of the divine attributes texts and commending the form to Allah?

A. Is there a single companion of the Prophet who opted for the same interpretations of the late scholars? Would you provide one or tow names?

Explaining God's saying (Then He settled on the Throne. 7:54) Al-­Baghawi records:

Al-­Kelbi and Muqatil single out that settling implies stabilizing. Abu Ubeida opted for ascending as the explanation of Allah's settling. Mutazilites interpreted Allah's settling into His prevalence. Ahlus­Sunna aver "Settling on the Throne is one of Allah's attributes without asking how. Men are mandated to believe in so and commend its explication to Allah."

Malik Bin Anas was asked about the exegesis of (The beneficent settled on the Throne. 20:5). He had nodded his head a while before he addressed at the asker "Settling is not unknown. Its way is not realizable. Believing in it is obligatory. Asking about it is a heresy. I can obviously notice your aberrance! Take this man out."

The previous was the answer of that masterful Wahabist. He answers that considering the claim there was no single Sahabi ­the Prophet's companion­ who agrees with Wahabists' faith of resting upon the material extrinsic aspects of the divine attributes texts there is also no single Sahabi who agrees with school of interpretation.

On that account the asker may rule of inaccuracy of both Wahabists and interpreters and thus commenders are exclusively the right.

Al-­Albani denies the interpretation cited by Aisha Ibn Abbas and Ibn Masud in addition to the Prophet's household (peace be upon them). Besides models of interpretation cited by followers of the Prophet's companions have been provided throughout our previous debate of the first school. We also provided Abu Sa'eed's interpreting Allah's descending into descending of His mercy and Malik's interpreting the same into descending of His matters.

Except for Muqatil the Persian the Magus whose masters were the corporalist Jews and Ibnul­Kelbi whose dishonesty was unanimously proved Al-­Albani could not find any supporter of his Wahabism. Contemptibleness of this sect who claim inheriting and raising slogan of ancestral traditions and striking the Muslim's faces with its sword is obviously conspicuous. We have just noticed how their master of hadithology searched in hadiths and reference books and knocked the entire doors of the Prophet's companions and their followers but he was too short to find out a single individual that may put up with his faith. Finally he could find Muqatil and Ibnul­Kelbi and their likes. Are those the entire ancestors?!

Fatawil-­Al-bani page 516:

Q. Was commending the divine attributes adopted by the worthy ancestors?

A. Ibn Hajar Al-­Asqalani the Asharite states "Faith of the worthy ancestors was perceiving the Verses according to their aspects without interpretation or confusion. If we believe in an existent lord and lack his total attributes… only then we disbelieve in the Lord of servants when we deny the attributes as the commenders allege.

It is observable that the previous question about commendation of the worthy ancestors should be answered by citing opinion of one of those worthy ancestors who neglect commendation and rest upon the extrinsic aspects of the divine attributes texts. Al-­Albani would have not concealed such an opinion if there had been any. The truth is that there is actually no single opinion in this field. Instead Al-­Albani fetched a testimony of one of the tenth or eleventh generations of the late scholars. Ibn Hajar died in 582; in the late sixth Hijri century. Furthermore it is rightful for us to demand Al-­Albani with the text and the reference of Ibn Hajar's testimony. Without referring to the reference Al-­Albani confused that testimony with his own words. Next in this book Ibn Hajar's opinion and harsh campaign against the Hanbalite corporalists Al-­Albani's forefathers will be provided. Yet Ibn Hajar's opinion is contradictory to what has been previously provided by Al-­Albani.

Early in this chapter we have provided opinions of the most supreme scholars of Wahabism in current time. More texts regarding corporalism of their sect will be cited.

I personally have not delved into a deep study concerning monotheism and the divine attributes written by originator of Wahabism Mohammed Bin Abdil­-Wahab. It seems that he compiled his At­Tawhid abruptly. He records hadiths of miscellaneous subjects regarding a variety of subjects related to monotheism. After each hadith he fixes a brief index of ideas and notions he could attain. He listed these indices under 'questions'. Saving the following two items the entire book is empty from questions regarding the divine attributes. These two items however are acceptably sufficient to prove materiality of his god. Allah protect us against so!!

The first item. Page 130:

Title: Denying any amount of the divine names and attributes and God's saying (And they deny the Beneficent God. 13:30).

Al-­Bukhari: Ali's authentic narrative: "Communicate people only in the ways they realize. Do you want Allah and His Apostle to be belied?"

Abdurrezaq: Muammar: Ibn Tawus: his father:

Ibn Abbas saw a man shake his clothes as a sign of his sweeping objection against a prophetic text regarding the divine attributes he had just listened to. He commented "Nay! These ­people­ have been fearless. They inspect kindness at the decisive ­Verses­ and perish at the allegorical ­ones­."

When people of Quraish heard the Prophet (peace be upon him) mention the Beneficent they denied. Hence the Verse (They deny the Beneficent God.) was revealed.

The following questions are deduced from the previous:

1. Disbelieving in denying any of the divine names and attributes.

2. Exegesis of sura of Rad.

3. Avoiding relating what the receivers ignore.

4. Mentioning the reason beyond avoiding relating what the receivers ignore; which is that such matters may lead to belying Allah and His Apostle even if the ignorant receiver does not intend so.

5. Ibn Abbas's words addressed at that who denied any part of the divine names and attributes who asserted perishing of such deniers.

A primary look at the previous content shows that quoting narratives of Ali (peace be upon him) and Ibn Abbas is an ordinary matter. For learners about beliefs and argumentation the pure corporeality of Ummut­-Tufeil's report is accurately intended here. At any rate falsity of this report was proved by numerous Sunni scholars. Those who ruled of its authenticity either interpreted or commended it. Corporalists ruled of its authenticity and reckoned it with the knowledge that should be concealed from the public and kept with the private ones.

Siyeru A'lamin-­Nubela part 10 page 602:

Ummut­-Tufeil's report was related by Mohammed Bin Ismail At­-Tirmithi and others.

Nueim: Ibn Wahab: Amr Bin Al-­Harith: Sa'eed Bin Abi Hilal: Marwan Bin Othman: Imara Bin Amir: Ummut­-Tufeil (Ubey Bin Ka'b's wife):

I heard the Prophet mention that he had seen his Lord in a definite appearance.

This report is absolutely deniable. An-­Nisai provided considerable criticism when he said "Marwan Bin Othman is too belittled to be given credence in the face of Allah's words."

In addition to Nueim the report is related by Ahmed Bin Salih Al-­Misri Ahmed Bin Isa At­-Tusturi and Ahmed Bin Abdirrahman Bin Wahab. They relate it to Ibn Wahab. Abu Zura An­Nasri ruled of familiarity of the report narrators.

Indisputably Ibn Wahab and his master and Ibn Abi Hilal were familiar trustful narrators. But Marwan!! He is the grandson of Abu Sa'eed Bin Al-­Mualla Al-­Ansari and the student of Amara Bin Amir Bin Amr Bin Hazm Al-­Ansari. Even though the Prophet is more knowledgeable of what he had intended. The Prophet did not refer to the interpretation of his dream. We as well are too

short to interpret it accurately. We seek God's protection against wading into resting upon the extrinsic material meaning of its aspect. Some virtuous scholars decided that the report was erroneously written. Ali (God please him) said "Communicate people only in the ways they realize. Neglect what they ignore." Abu Hureira concealed a good number of hadiths regarding unneeded questions. He used to say "Had I announced these hadiths this throat would have been amputated."

As a matter of fact this is not reckoned with concealment of knowledge. It is quite believable that it is obligatory for hadithists to publicize and promote hadiths of required knowledge. In the same manner people are mandated to learn such knowledge. Authentic hadiths of ethics should be also promulgated and communicated and people should distribute. Hadiths of banned knowledge are not necessarily publicized. Saving private scholars such hadiths should not be put in everybody's hands.

At-­Thehbi's previous words are accurately intended by originator of Wahabism. Using the title 'Denying any amount of the divine names and attributes' indicates issuing obligation of accepting the entire divine attributes. He also reckons denying any of them with atheism. Because a number of these divine attributes according to their opinions supports corporalism he proceeds to discuss the obligation of concealing that knowledge from people except followers of his sect. He cited two narratives of Ali and Ibn Abbas as evidences of permissibility of concealing such knowledge.

In addition he adopts At-­Thehbi's thesis about 'banned knowledge' and obligation of dedicating such knowledge to private scholars. "Hadiths of banned knowledge are not necessarily publicized. Saving private scholars such hadiths should not be put in everybody's hands." just like knowledge of Jewism and Christianity dedicated to heads of rabbis and popes.

The real purpose beyond stressing on concealment of such hadiths is proving that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) Ali (peace be upon him) Ibn Abbas and Abu Hureira were corporalists like the Wahabists and they were concealing and ordering of concealing texts regarding the divine attributes.

It is obviously evidential for learners of hadith and history that the three hadiths cited by originator of Wahabism and At­-Thehbi as examples are not becoming enough to be provided as proof.

In the margins of Siyeru A'lamin­-Nubela the publisher records the following about Abu Hureira's saying:

Al-­Bukhari's 1:191­2 (part 1 page 8) records the hadith under the title: Retaining knowledge:

Ismail Bin Abi Uweis: his brother: Ibn Abi Thib: Sa'eed Al-­Miqbari:

Abu Hureira said "From the Prophet (peace be upon him) I could retain two vessels. I publicized the first. Had I announced the second this throat would have been amputated."

Scholars aver that the second concealed vessel contained texts respecting manners and reigns of the tyrant rulers. Abu Hureira could refer to some using metonymy since he anticipated harm of those tyrant rulers. Referring to Yazeed Bin Muawiya's reign which began in 60 A.H he said "I seek God's guardian against head of the sixty and princeship of the boyish." Abu Hureira's supplication was responded. He died a year before that.

By testimony of Ibn Hajar and other texts and evidences of the same purport Abu Hureira intended that he had concealed some of the Prophet's saying regarding people's deflection from the divine course just after his decease because he had been terrified by the ruling authorities.

This is ultimately remote from concealing the material attributes of Allah from ordinary people and dedicating them to private scholars!!

The following commentation on Ali's saying is recorded in the margins of Siyeru A'lamin-­Nubela:

Al-­Bukhari 1:199 (part 1 page 41) records the saying under the title; Retaining knowledge:

Dedicating knowledge to certain people that can perceive:

Ubeidullah Bin Musa: Maruf Bin Khurbuth: Abut­Tufeil:

Ali said:…

The same saying is recorded in Kenzul-­Ummal part 10 page 247 301 and 304.

Ali (peace be upon him) constitutes a general rule; teaching and speech should be fitting levels of the addressee. As a matter of fact the saying shows no single motion or indication to having do anything with the divine attributes and other subjects. Besides as much as I can perceive there is a rather nearness of aims of this saying and those of the previous.

How do they rule depending on this saying that Ali (peace be upon him) aimed at concealing the divine attributes. And how have they conceived that Ali was a Wahabist believing in corporalism and concealing essentials of his sect from Muslims?!

Ibn Abbas's saying is restrictively recorded by Abdurezaq in his Al-­Musannef part 11 page 422. I could not find it in any other reference. He records it directly after Abu Hureira's report of dispute of the Paradise and the Hell.

Muammar: Hemmam Bin Munabbih: Abu Hureira:

The Prophet (peace be upon him) stated:

The Paradise and Hell disputed. "Exclusively I am given the arrogant and the oppressors " Hell took pride. "Well how poor I am! I am entered only by the feeble the humiliated and the lowest " complained the Paradise. Immediately Allah said "You the Paradise are My mercy. By you I have mercy upon whom I opt from among My servants. You Hell are My torture. By you I torment whomever I opt from among My servants. Each of you should reach its profusion. While they shall be thrown in Hell it will be asking for more. It shall not be fully occupied unless I fix My feet in it. Only then it shall be filled and crowded. Allah does never wrong any of His creatures. Allah provides the Paradise with what He wills."

Abdurrezaq: Muammar: Ibn Tawus: his father:

Ibn Abbas saw a man stand up and shake his clothes as a sign of his sweeping objection against Abu Hureira's report. He commented "Nay! These ­people­ have been some fearless. They inspect at the decisive ­Verses­ and perish at the allegorical ­ones­."

During communicating the report originator of Wahabism states "Ibn Abbas saw a man shake his clothes as a sign of his sweeping objection against the hadith regarding the divine attributes he had just listened to."

Mentioning the divine attributes here means that the receiver was reproached by Ibn Abbas because he had disbelieved and denied that Allah has a foot to be fixed in Hell. How could that conclude so? Probably that man was on the Prophet's reverent companions who denied corporalism referred to in the previous report. Hence he left that session as a sign of objection. Ibn Abbas's saying however is general. It does in no means show that the man who shaked his clothes to reveal his sweeping objection was the addressee in Ibn Abbas's words. Presumably he addressed his words at some narrators. It is impracticable that a Sahabi or a Sahabi's follower deserves perishing and atheism just because he stood up and shaked his clothes for nothing more than evading being responsible for a hadith he sees as false or doubtful.

The words 'some' and 'kindness' are added and subtracted respectively from Ibn Abbas's words related by Abdurrezaq. Considering origin of the statement is 'inspect kindness at the decisive Verses' as originator of Wahabism recorded the meaning will be unbecoming since its equivalent is 'perish at the allegorical' not 'inspect perishing at the allegorical.' Besides 'some' added to the wording is meaningless. Certainly Ibn Abbas's words were distorted or erroneously recorded.

However we should confess that originator of Wahabism has been keener than At-­Thehbi in this regard because Ibn Abbas's report although lacking any indication is nearer to his goal.

The second item. Originator of Wahabism adopted a number of texts of corporalism; especially report of that rabbin whom as some Sunni reference book assert had been considered as true by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). In the last of his At­Tawhid this report is recorded under a special title:

Ibn Masud: Before the Prophet (peace be upon him) a rabbi spoke "O Mohammed! We received that Allah fixes heavens on a single finger trees on another water on a third dust on a fourth and other creatures of a fifth and shouts. 'I am the king'." The Prophet (peace be upon him) laughed to excess as a sign of giving credence to the previous saying of the rabbi. He recited (And they have not honored Allah with the honor that is due to Him; and the whole earth shall be in His grasp on Day of Resurrection and the heavens rolled up in His right hand; glory be to Him and may He be exalted above what they associate with Him. 39:67).

Muslim relates the same with the following difference; "…mountains and trees on another… then He shakes them and shouts I am the king I am Allah."

The following form is adopted by another relation of Al-­Bukhari; "…fixes heavens on a finger water and dust on another and other creatures on a third.…"

In volume 2 of Al-­Aqaidul-­Islamiya narrations of this misalleged fable that claims of our Prophet's having been tutored by one of the rabbis are discussed in detail.

Originator of Wahabism adopted and exerted great efforts for sake of scrutinizing meanings and aims of these texts. He could infer nineteen doctrinal questions that he provided before Muslims to be the base of their monotheism.

1. Exegesis of God's saying (And the whole earth shall be in His grasp on the day of resurrection.)

2. These categories of knowledge and their likes were kept by the Jews who coincided in time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) neither denied nor interpreted.

3. The Prophet (peace be upon him) gave credence to the rabbi's saying and the Quran supported so.

4. The Prophet's excessive laughter when the rabbi referred to that remarkable knowledge.

5. Identifying the Lord's two hands avowedly; heavens on the right and earths on the left.

6. Avowed identification of the left hand.

7. Describing the despots and tyrants.

8. The saying "Like a grain of a mustard­seed in the palm."

9. Immensity of the Chair in proportion to the heavens.

10. Immensity of the Throne in proportion to the Chair.

11. The Throne is different from the Chair and the water.

12. Distance between the heavens.

13. Distance between he seventh heavens and the Chair.

14. Distance between the Chair and the water.

15. The Throne is over the water.

16. Allah is over the Throne.

17. Distance between the heavens and earth.

18. Density of each heavens is five hundred year.

19. Distance between the bottom and the top of the ocean existent over the heavens is five hundred year march.

Thusly originator of Wahabism issues the verdict that the Jews' knowledge respecting Allah's corporeity have not been distorted. The Prophet (peace be upon him) laughed to excess for this highly remarkable knowledge and Allah the Exalted revealed a Quranic text for supporting so. Probably like His prophet the Lord might laughed as a sign of giving credence to that rabbi heir and conveyor of that highly remarkable knowledge to the seal of prophets.

The conclusion is that Allah the Exalted enjoys two physical hands and fingers and the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) declared this materialistic meaning of Allah's hands and fingers without any attempt to interpret. And that the Lord the Elevated is existent in a certain zone over the world on His Throne. And the distance between Him and us is identified by walking measure. Furthermore depending upon Mohammed Bin Abdil­Wahab's words it is possible to measure the distance to Allah's Throne in modern measures; like kilometer and send a spaceship there! Only then we may transmit verdicts totally to Sheik Bin Baz juriscounsult of Wahabism!

In addition to many others these two texts show that Wahabists follow the same corporalism adopted by the Jews the Hanbalites Ibn Teimiya and At­-Thehbi.

1. They refute interpretation since they claim Quran and the Prophet's traditions are empty of metaphor. Material linguistic meanings of the entire expressions should be exclusively rested upon. Quranic texts should not be taken as metaphoric interpreted or 'confused'. When the Quran pronounces 'hand of Allah' 'eye of Allah' 'face of Allah' and the like this implies for them that Allah has an actual hand eye face or the like. The statement (Everything is perishable but his face. 28:88) shows that saving His face Allah is perishable.

Bin Baz's Al­-Fetawi part 4 page 382:

The most authentic matter upon which researchists agree is that the Quran does not comprise metaphor realized by rhetoricians. Whatsoever is in the Quran is but a reality in its position.

It is incredibly surprising how a scholar proceeds to deny metaphor in the Quran while the Arabic is the tongue in which the Quran was revealed. Imputing such a misallegation to researchists is also a surprising matter. However we ask if that scholar has the capability of mentioning only one of these researchists. It is quite impossible to associate with society and family without reckoning their words with metaphoric expressions.

Ibn Teimiya's previous wording is accounted as the utmost point reached by Wahabists in field of dialectic styles of evidencing denial of metaphor in the Quran. He says "Nullity of the extrinsic aspects of Quranic texts is ruled if its meanings are unintended. It is unacceptable to decide nullity of aspects of the Quranic texts. Then it is conclusive that meanings of these aspects are intended."

This is really a cubic quibble in meanings of aspect nullity and applicability in Quran. If we claim 'extrinsic meaning of the Verse is unintended ' this will indicate that we have negated that meaning from the Quran. Accordingly how should a negated meaning be practical in the Quran? Nullity stands for our wrong conception of the meaning of a Verse. It is not a thing clear­cut in the Quran. Extrinsic meanings if negated by an expressional or intellectual presumption are no longer extrinsic. It is expended into illusion. The factual extrinsic meanings of speech are only the permanent and perceivable. The extrinsic meanings that are called off by presumptions are as same as the false dawn that removes and brings darkness back just before emergence of the true dawn. Expressional and intellectual presumptions play the starring role in identifying the permanent aspect. This point is very outstanding in recognizing their errors in discerning extrinsic meanings of a text and resting upon such meanings.

Adorers to physical aspects and material comprehension spare no efforts for proving their claims even by using six­dimensional dispute not only cubic as it is done in Pakistan.

2. They deem forbidden any sort of dispensing with finding interpretations for the divine attributes and commending them to Allah the Exalted. They allege that dispensing with finding interpretations and commending the divine attributes to Allah exclusively lead to desertion ­of the religion­ and atheism. Ibn Teimiya asserts "It became manifest that sayings of commenders who maintain their following the Prophet's traditions and the worthy ancestors' practices are the worst among sayings of the heretic and atheists."

This shows that Wahabists deem forbidden any interpretation or exegesis of the divine attributes texts. They also deem forbidden commending these Verses to Allah. They deem obligatory upon Muslims to rest upon the material meanings of these Verses.

This odd insistence lays two obstacles in the Wahabists' door:

First. Verses and hadiths opposing their sect:

They commit themselves to the obligation of resting upon extrinsic exegesis and forbiddingness of interpretation. As an exegesis of God's saying (Some faces on that day shall be bright. Looking at their Lord.) they state that Allah is a visible being viewing and viewed with eyes. On that account we should ask them what exegesis they would cite for God's sayings (Visions comprehend Him not) (You cannot see me.) and (Nothing likes his likeness;). They answer they would easily shift into interpretation but in such a crooked way that any testimony against them would not be given an opportunity to spring. They would be able to interpret whatever opposes their sect without resting upon extrinsic meanings. Meanwhile they deem forbidden interpretation resting upon extrinsic meanings. They allege that visions cannot comprise the Lord may be for their diminution or His immensity. They claim a part of Him can be seen only. They may also claim the negated part is the Lord's likeness not resemblant. They deny existence of the Lord's like peer and equivalent but they should not intellectually or communicably deny existence of the Lord's resemblant as Ibn Teimiya expresses.

The following question may be cited at them. Considering your claim Allah the Exalted is existent on the Throne depending upon His saying (He settled on the Throne) what should you say about His saying (And He is with you wherever you are. 57:4)? This Verse repeal your claim The Lord's being existent in a certain point in the cosmos. It reveals that He the Elevated enjoys another category of existence different from the cosmic. Imam Ali says "­He is­ with everything with no contact and different from everything with no comparison."

They would answer with the following:

This is not problematic. We would abscond from recognizing and translating 'with' into a case of coexistence. We also would accuse those who betake this Verse as their argumentation of denying Exaltation of the Lord on His Throne and attempting at proving His degrading…

This was the very thing adopted by their master Bin Baz.

Bin Baz's Al-­Fetawi part 2 page 89:

Ahlus­Sunna admit that coexistence is attributed to Allah the Praised the Exalted in such a way that becoming His Honor. In the same time they prove His settling on the Throne and His exaltation on His entire creatures and promote Him greatly against associating creatures. Jahmites(19) and Mutazilites single out the Lord's coexistence as their argument for denying His exaltation and claimed of His being everywhere. The worthy ancestors denied so and asserted that that coexistence requires His supervision and full acquaintance of His servants' manners while He is on the Throne.

At-­Thehbi and Ibn Teimiya were masters of Bin Baz in maneuvering. He described coexistence as acquaintance and hanged it in the neck of the worthy ancestors so that none would record his name in list of interpreters. He then substantiated their committing the forbidden interpretation. He alleged that this interpretation was (perpetrated) for the purpose of contradicting those who denied Allah's exaltation and aimed at proving His degrading!!

Successfully he could detect an Indian scholar named 'At-­Talamneki' and charge him of the responsibility of interpreting the Verse that opposed their sect. Bin Baz adhered to that Indian and revered him for attiring him the interpretation of the Verse.

Al-­Fetawi part 1 page 148:

…After all any sort of the Lord's extrinsic or real mixing or association with creatures should be understood from His saying (He is with you ) and its likes. The word 'with' does not reveal so in any means. To the furthest extent the Verse indicates the Lord's association coexistence and comparison in a certain affair. This coexistence is variant according to its circumstances.

Abu Amr At-­Talamneki (May God rest him) says "Unanimously Sunni Muslims opted for God's acquaintance as the only clarification of His saying (He is with you ) and its likes. Allah however is above the heavens in His Essence settling on His Throne. His divine book utters this truth."

19. Jahmism is an Islamic theologian faction.

Therewith Bin Baz solved the problem without touching interpretation by any organ. He could find an individual taking the mission of satisfactory interpretation. That individual was At-­Talamneki.

Soon after that Bin Baz supported his verdict by unanimity reported by that At-­Talamneki. He supposes the entire Sunni Muslims concluded that Allah the Exalted is a material being sitting on His Throne. Quite absolutely this principle is as same as the Jews'. Everybody is mandated to accept and close their eyes before opinions of the whole scholars and thousands of references if At­-Talamneki speaks out.

The second item is more calamitous than the previous. It regards corporalism.

By claiming that Allah the Exalted has a physic hand eye and face and occupying His Throne they would certainly anthropomorphize him. Hence they are worshipping a corporeality.

They answer: No we are not anthropomorphists. We do not liken Allah the Exalted to His creatures. The Lord will be certainly an entity of corporiety if he is anthropomorphized. Corporalists are atheists indeed.

As long as they rejected interpretation commendation and metaphor and deemed obligatory resting upon the extrinsic literal meanings of the texts they would certainly be trapped in anthropomorphism and corporalism voluntarily or compulsorily!

They answer: No we insist on explaining the divine attributes texts according to the material extrinsic meanings of their aspects but we in the same time refute anthropomorphism you claim of its coincidence to this sort of explanation since (Nothing is like a likeness of Him.)

The following question is addressed at them: How is it for you to believe in a god sitting on a chair having a hand foot face and eye descending to the lowest heavens by his person practicing happiness laughter and rage having the same look of Adam …etc. all these attributes are believed by resting upon the extrinsic meanings of texts meanwhile that god is not resemblant to physical and material beings that are identified by certain space and time?

They answer: The question is not that difficult. We can add 'as it fits His glory' after mentioning each attribute. For instance we say He has a material eye but not like those had by his creatures. He has an eye as it fits His glory. By the same token He has a hand foot and face in the extrinsic meaning of aspects but not like our hands feet or faces. He has such organs as they fit His glory.

Wahabists imagine that solutions of philosophic and objective problems can be attained by a magic touch which is their saying 'as it fits His glory' in the same way they adopted for solving the problem of interpretation when they stuck it to At-­Talamneki.

Glory they intend was totally evaporated after they had ascribed physical limbs and certain point and time to their god! Moreover they ruled of his total termination except his face! Allah be exaltedly praised and glorified against what they impute.

On that account It is meritoriously adequate to describe Wahabism as a sect grounded upon brittle substructure and clear quibble. In logic such a quibble is identified as 'Admitting premises and rejecting conclusions'. In theology it is identified as 'Nonrecognizance of the faith's essentials'. It is also identified as 'Adopting anthropomorphism and corporalism and shunning the names'.

PRINCIPAL OF CIRCUMSPECTION IN WAHABISTS' CORPORALISM

Wahabists rest upon principal of circumspection against Muslims. They conceal attributes of their god. Meanwhile they reproach Shias distinctly for resting upon principal of circumspection against ruling authorities in questions appertained to Imamate and decency of the Prophet's companions.

Any research on Wahabism leads to one of two matters; either scholars of Wahabism are languid or they are resting upon principal of circumspection against introducing their god under lights. It is seeming that Mohammed Bin Abdil­Wahab and some of his contemporary students; Bin Baz and Al-­Albani and their ancestors; At-­Thehbi and Ibn Teimiya and the Hanbalite corporalists; all those precisely conceive resting upon extrinsic meanings which necessarily leads to anthropomorphism. In the same time they defend themselves against Muslims by denying such necessary result. Their words and private lessons introduces anthropomorphism so evidently. Ibn Teimiya expresses this meaning by saying "…Items interpretation of which should be concealed." He also claim negation of Allah's peer like and equivalent was exclusively stated by the Quran and the Prophet's traditions. Allah's having a resemblant was not negated or denied; therefore it is neither rationally nor legally unacceptable to claim such a matter. Occasionally Wahabists' faith regarding their god came forth so clearly through slips of tongues and certain deeds. On the pulpit of Damascus Ibn Teimiya once committed such a slip.

The following forecited sayings of At-­Thehbi are evidentiary enough to introduce Wahabists' factual faith. "Hadiths of banned knowledge are not necessarily publicized. Saving private scholars such texts should not be put in everybody's hands." "It is obligatory to believe in descending of Allah and it is favorable to neglect discussing its

essentials." This 'it is favorable' is a jurisprudential terminological term stands for permissibility of doing and favorableness of neglecting. This indicates that At­-Thehbi is responsive and adherent to essentials of anthropomorphism his sect but he prefers no to discus so evading citing an evidentiary fact­finding for the adopters of Allah's absolute promotion against being resembled or anthropomorphized. Ordinary Wahabists are too simple to realize meanings of interpretation commendation actuality and metaphor. They know nothing more than praising their sect and considering it sect of monotheism and the worthy ancestors of Islamic nation.

Scholarly and educated Wahabists assume that resting upon the extrinsic material meanings of aspects of the divine attributes texts has been the only sect adopted by the public and the worthy ancestors of the Islamic nation. This is a natural consequence of the condensed instructions they have been receiving during their study and through the variant mass media. Nearly none of them realizes the real meaning and the essentials of resting upon extrinsic meanings of aspects of texts.

Wahabists masters claim Allah's sitting on His Throne and descending to the earth in the very same way Ibn Teimiya had done when he descended a single scale from the pulpit in Syria. This makes Allah the Exalted be identified by certain space and time and as a sequence enjoying space­time continuum. When the previous discussion is introduced before an educated Wahabist he answers " No! This does not necessarily refer to anthropomorphism and corporalism. The Lord sits as it fits His glory and descends as it fits his glory." Such a poor student think that as soon as he moves his tongue with 'as it fits His glory' that objective problem shall be totally solved or that he hit the very target! Example of such individuals is that who eats and drinks in the daylight and insists on being fasting ­ritual abstinence from drinking and eating­ because he fasts as it fits his fasting and eats as it fits his personality. Yet nothing fitting his personality has been left! Another example is that who answers when he is informed of his master's consuming intoxicants "No! Cups of wine are automatically changed into a purified drink as soon as my master touches them." He also answers when he is told that his master was seen at a prostitute's house "No that prostitute is automatically changed into a celestial virgin dame as soon as my master touches her."

Facts however cannot be changed by a master's touch or Wahabists' sayings or interpretations introduced by an At-­Talamneki!!

The following text of As­Sibki shows that principal of circumspection was familiarly known at ancestors of Wahabists and that some Sunni scholars of promotionism ­promoting and exalting Allah against sayings of anthropomorphism and corporalism­ cited the reasons beyond adopting such a principal.

Tabaqatus­Shafiiya part 8 page 222:

Sheik Abdus­Selam states:

Anthropomorphist Hashawites are of two categories. A category deliberate no harm from introducing their faiths so evidently. (And they think that they have something. 58:18).

SAVING HIS FACE WAHABISTS' GOD ENCOUNTERS EXTINCTION

One of distinctive phenomena of the Quran is blocking the way in the face of ideological and doctrinal deflection. In the Quran there is a single Verse sufficient enough to reveal falsity of their faith of resting upon the extrinsic meanings of aspects of texts regarding the divine attributes. It is God's saying (Everything is perishable saving His face. 28:88). What should Wahabists and anthropomorphists their forefathers argue about this Verse? Should they pursue majority of Muslims who stress that 'His face' is metaphoric which stands for 'his essence' or 'his prophets and their disciples'? Or should they importunately insist on claiming the statement's proposing physical face and claiming that Allah the Exalted will be terminated totally except His face?! Glory and exaltation be to Allah against their imputation.

On this very point ship of Wahabists and anthropomorphists break down and all its engines stand still. Although they are stormed and drowned to the chins they keep up their insistence on their controversy challenging the result whatever it shall be. We seek God's guardian against their sayings.

They said "Termination will affect Allah the Exalted totally except His face. For solving this problem they repeated the same "He terminates in a form fitting His glory and perishes in a form fitting his glory."

Keeping on path of transgression they denied that any of the worthy ancestors had interpreted 'His face' into 'His essence' or 'His prophets.' They denied reports registered in Al­-Bukhari's book so that falsity of their faith should not be emerged and aberrance and atheism of Al-­Bukhari should not be proved for them.

The story is herewith introduced totally:

Al­Albani's Al­Fetawi page 522:

Q. Before I introduce my variant questions I would like to provide this question which I could not attach with the other. Yesterday I mentioned that Al-­Bukhari in his book of hadith records that 'His face' in the Verse (Everything is perishable except His face.) was interpreted into 'His property'. As a matter of fact I quoted this claim from a book written by Ahmed Isam and named Dirasetun Tahliliyatun Li Eqidetibni­Hajar. I still claim this man communicates this relation authentically. However I would like to introduce before you the following implication mentioned in the forecited book

"Al-­Bukhari interpreted 'face' mentioned in God's saying (Everything is perishable except His face) of sura of Qassas into 'His property' or 'What is only offered for the sake of Allah'. Regarding the earlier interpretation it was cited by Al-­Hafiz in a narrative related by An­Nesfi. Muemmar Abu Ubeida Bin Al-­Muthenna in his Mejazul­Quran states that 'His face' stands for 'His Person'."

Today I myself referred to Fetihul-­Bari Fi Sharhi Sahihil­-Bukhari and other books explaining Al-­Bukhari's reference book of hadith. Surprisingly I could not perceive any signal of that text ascribed to Al-­Bukahri. It seems that Ahmed Isam intends to state that the matter involved in situated in An­Nesfi's narrative communicated by Al-­Bukhari. Would you please provide us with your reply on this question?

A. Our reply has been previously cited.

Q. I only intend to explicate so in order that I should not impute such words to Al-­Bukhari.

A. Well may God reward you worthily.

Q. You have heard me raise doubt to the matter that Al-­Bukhari might say such statement that the meaning of 'face' in God's saying (And there will endure for ever the [face] of your Lord the Lord of glory and honor.) is property.

A. O brother! A believer Muslim should never state such words!

Q. I also said that this statement is available in certain versions of books commentating on Al-­Bukhari's reference book of hadith.

A. Then the answer is already provided. May God reward you worthily for your wording about emphasis that Al-­Bukhari's reference book is barren from such an interpretation which is core of Tatilism ­denuding the Lord from His entire divine attributes for ruling of nonexistence.­

Q. It seems there is a part of such a statement in Fetihul­Bari Fi Sharhi Sahihil­Bukhari. As much as I retain I could find such an evidentiary argumentation in a certain point in the book to which a friend of mine lead me. This asserts that some versions of the book comprise this statement. I argued that existing things are only Allah the Exalted and His creatures. Considering 'face' stands for 'property' what shall be perishing then?

A. O brother! Invalidity of this matter needs an evidentiary argument. The most important thing however is saving Al-­Bukhari from claims of interpreting the Verse. Al-­Bukhari is a head master in hadithology and theology. Thanks to God his faith is following the worthy ancestors.

These were words of Al-­Albani the most leading Wahabist in hadithology.

It is noticeable that it is not problematic for Sheik Al-­Albani to rest upon the extrinsic physical meaning of 'face' mentioned in God's saying (Everything is perishable except His face). He undertakes that everything including his god's hand foot side and every organ is perishable except the face.

For Al-­Albani this horrible saying and disastrous calamity which is refuted even by the Jew and Christian corporalists a part of whom is still kept by Al-­Albani in Syria is not the problem. He states that the real problem is saving Al-­Bukhari his acquaintance from claim of interpreting the divine attributes since as Ibn Teimiya expresses this deed is deemed unlawful and reckoned as the most dangerous ill sayings of the heretic and atheists. Al-­Albani describes it as 'core of Tatilism and aberrance' and 'a believer Muslim should never state such words!' Al-­Bukhari however is a believer Muslim.

I doubted Al-­Albani's words about Al-­Bukhari. While I was taking a review on Al-­Bukhari's reference book of hadith I found what that 'connoisseur hadithist the retainer and tutor of Al-­Bukhari's reference book of hadith' had just negated and raised Al-­Bukhari against was recorded on page 17 part 6 of that reference book. Instead of a single interpretation of the Verse there are various sorts of interpretation written there.

Al-­Bukhari's book of hadith part 6 page 17:

'His face' mentioned in God's saying (Everything is perishable except His face.) stands of His property. Some interpreted into 'what is intended for the sake of Allah.'…

Ibn Hajar's Fetihul­Bari Fi Sharhi Sahihil­Bukhari part 9 page 410:

'Face' mentioned in God's saying (Everything is perishable except His face.) in sura of Qassas is interpreted into 'His property' or 'What is offered only for the sake of Allah'. Regarding the earlier interpretation it was cited by Al-­Hafiz in a narrative related by An­Nesfi. Muemmar Abu Ubeida Bin Al-­Muthenna in his Mejazul­Quran states that 'His face' stands for 'His Person'.

At­Tabari relates these very meanings to some linguists. Al-­Ferra records the same.

Ibnut­Tin: Abu Ubeida states: 'Face' stands for God's glory. Some mention God's Person. The Arabic saying 'God may honor your face' means 'God honor you.'.

At­Tabari relates the interpretation of 'face' into 'what is offered only for the sake of God' to some linguists. The same is related by Ibn Abi Hatem to Khassif to Mujahid and Sufian At­Thawri. Both said "God's face implies what is intended only for the sake of Allah; like virtuous deeds and the like."

Different opinions depending upon the sect were introduced for these questions. Some permitted accrediting the expression 'thing' to Allah. They assert that the exception in the Verse involved is connected ­to the previous sentence­. Hence 'face' stands for 'person'. The Arab however used to use the most dignified part for expressing the whole substance. Others impermitted ascribing the expression 'thing' to Allah. They claim exception in the Verse is separated. This makes meaning of the Verse be the following "But Allah is not perishable." Others claim 'face' stands for 'what is done only for the sake of Allah'.

The statement then is recorded in Al-­Bukhari's reference book. Revisers of that book asserted this fact. It is originally refutable to ascribe the statement to Muemmar. Al-­Bukhari himself emphasized that Muemmar said that 'His face' stands for 'His Person'.

From this cause we do suggest to Al-­Albani Bin Baz and the somewhat fair Wahabists to opt for interpretation so that they would not be having to decided termination of their god to the neck saving the face and aberrance or atheism of Al-­Bukhari for committing the offense of interpreting the divine attributes. Will they accept our suggestion?!