“Truly, the likeness of Jesus, in God’s sight, is as Adam’s likeness; He created him of dust, then said He unto him, ‘Be,’ and he was.” (Qur’an 3:59)
﷽
“Truly, the likeness of Jesus, with Allah, is as Adam’s likeness; He created him of dust, then said He unto him, ‘Be,’ and he was.” (Qur’an 3:59)
We have often seen Muslims explain this verse by stating what is different between Jesus (as) and Adam (as). ”You see Jesus (as) had only a mother, and Adam (as) had no mother or father.” However, that is a difference and not something in common.
This verse says there is similitude and likeness between them.
Another point that is better than the first non-similitude is that Adam (as) was created from dust and Jesus (as) — through his mother, was created from dust. However, most Christians do not deny the humanity of Jesus (as).
Let us look at some verses in context.
“The truth is from Allah; be not of the doubters.” (Qur’an 3:60)
“And whoso disputes with you concerning him, after the knowledge that has come to you, say: ‘Come now, let us call our sons and your sons, our wives and your wives, our selves and your selves, then let us pray in humility and sincerity and invoke Allah’s curse upon the ones who lie.” (Qur’an 3:61)
“Lo! This verily is the true narrative. There is no god but Allah, and assuredly Allah is the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.” (Qur’an 3:62)
So, from the previous verses, the point that is being made in Qur’an 3:59 is such a solid point that from there on there is no more point in debating with the Christians, etc. Nor is their force of conversion. Rather, it is time to invoke the curse of Allah (swt) on the group that is lying. Allah (swt) also connects verse 3:62 to the point He (swt) establishes in verse 3:59. The argument presented in 3:59 strikes at the idea that Jesus is a deity.
So let us go back and examine the verse:
“Truly, the likeness of Jesus, with Allah, is as Adam’s likeness; He created him of dust, then said He unto him, ‘Be,‘ and he was.” (Qur’an 3:59)
Question: Why would Allah (swt) say, ‘Be’ understood meaning “Exist” if he already existed as “dust” ?
Answer: As explained in our previous post, the “Be’ or “Kun” is a metaphor for the expediency of the command of Allah (swt). Some Muslims must imagine Allah (swt) constantly saying, “Be!” “Be!” , “Be!” when in reality He (swt) is not bound by that in order to create anything.
So what is meant by: “He created him from dust” ?
Imagine the Arab Bedouins of the 7th century. How would you communicate to them the idea or concept of nothingness? How would you communicate to them the concept or the idea of a void?
Indeed, We have warned you of an imminent punishment—the Day every person will see ˹the consequences of˺ what their hands have done, and the disbelievers will cry, “I wish I were dust.” (Qur’an 78:40)
Subhan’Allah! It is immensely powerful. Imagine the full weight of that day when being faced with the eternal consequence of ever-lasting paradise or ever-lasting hellfire!
The person is not saying: “Oh, I am 182cm in height. Oh, how I wish I could be reduced to 158cm in height.”
No! They are saying they wish they were dust. They wish they were nothing, non-existent.
“Truly, the likeness of Jesus, with Allah, is as Adam’s likeness; He created him of dust, then said He unto him, ‘Be,‘ and he was.” (Qur’an 3:59)
If we as Muslims want to say: Jesus (as) is not God because Adam(as) had no parents whereas Jesus (as) had at least one, Christians are keenly aware of this. In fact, their text says:
“Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.” (Luke 3:38)
If we as Muslims want to say: Jesus (as) had a human origin, as did Adam (as), the plain text of the Qur’an does not support that Adam (as) had a human origin. (That he had parents).
If we as Muslims want to say Jesus (as) had a human origin in that Adam (as) was made from dust and, via analogy, Jesus (as) is made from dust via Mary (as), Christians are aware of this too:
“Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.” (Genesis 2:7)
In fact their text also says:
“The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.” (John 1:14)
However, Christian theology states that Jesus (as) existed as the Word of Allah before being placed inside of Mary (as).
فِي البَدْءِ كَانَ الكَلِمَةُ مَوْجُودًا -In the beginning the Word (AlKalimat) Existed.
وَكَانَ الكَلِمَةُ مَعَ اللهِ، -And the Word (AlKalimat) was with Allah.
وَكَانَ الكَلِمَةُ هُوَ اللهَ. –And the Word (AlKalimat) was Allah.
كَانَ الكَلِمَةُ مَعَ اللهِ فِي البَدْءِ – The Word (AlKaimat) was with Allah in the beginning.
بِهِ خُلِقَ كُلُّ شيءٍ، -By Him all things were created.
وَبِدُونِهِ لَمْ يُخلَقْ شَيءٌ مِمَّا خُلِقَ. -And without Him nothing would have been created.
Prima-Qur’an comments: Now, the position of Sunni Muslim scholars is that they believe word for word the exact same views as stated in John 1:1-3 with one caveat.
That caveat being: “And the Word (AlKalimat) was Allah.” Instead, they would word it as: “The Word is not Identical to the Essence of Allah and yet, it is not other than the Essence of Allah!”
If that does not send chills down your spine and a wake-up call like a bucket of ice-cold water being splashed in your face, then so be it. Our refuge is in Allah (swt), the Creator of all things.
Now noticewe did not say this is the view of the majority of the Muslims.We want to be honest and protect the layman from false allegations. The truth is, the overwhelming majority of Muslims have never even contemplated these issues. They are simply following what their fathers follow and their father of their fathers. Or they call in and ask a Shaykh and the Shaykh tells them what to believe about the matter. The end.
The truth is the above position is taken by scholars who hold to schools that were adopted by certain Muslim empires not because the arguments in and of themselves have veracity.
Look at how the following verse describes Jesus (as)
يَلْبَسُ ثَوْبًا مَغْمُوسًا بِالدَّمِ، وَاسْمُهُ «كَلِمَةُ اللهِ. -“He wears a garment dipped in blood, and his name is, ‘The Word of Allah’. ” -Kalimat Allah (Revelation: 19:13) from Arabic to English.
“Truly, the likeness of Jesus, with Allah, is as Adam’s likeness; He created him of dust, then said He unto him, ‘Be,‘ and he was.” (Qur’an 3:59)
“O People of the Scripture do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and a word (kalimatuhu)from Him which He directed to Mary and a soul from Him. So, believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, “Three”; desist – it is better for you.” (Qur’an 4:171)
So the thrust of the above argument the one argument in which Allah (swt) says about: the truth is from Allah so do not be in doubt is that just as Adam (as) was created from nothing, Jesus (as) as the word of Allah was created from nothing. From non being into being.
Jesus (as) is the created word of Allah (swt). Just as all the words of Allah (swt) are created from his attribute of Speech. Not as the Christians claim that he is The Uncreated Word and that Allah (swt) uses that aspect of him known as the Uncreated Word to create everything else.
So the thrust of the above argument is the one argument in which Allah (swt) says: the truth is from Allah, so do not be in doubt is that just as Adam (as) was created from nothing, Jesus (as) as the word of Allah was created from nothing. From non-being into being.
Jesus (as) is the created word of Allah (swt). Just as all the words of Allah (swt) are created from his attribute of Speech. Not as the Christians claim that he is The Uncreated Word and that Allah (swt) uses that aspect of him known as the Uncreated Word to create everything else.
Jesus is not the eternal word of Allah. Jesus is the created word of Allah. Created from nothing “dust” and that which is created from dust or nothingness is not an attribute of Allah at all.
“The truth is from Allah; be not of the doubters.” (Qur’an 3:60)
May Allah (swt) open the eyes, intellects and above all, the hearts of this Muslim Ummah.
“Then if you were to dispute among yourselves about anything refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you indeed believe in Allah and the Last Day; that is better and more commendable in the end.” (Qur’an 4:59)
﷽
This subject is something that has stirred the emotions and passions of the Muslims in their history. It is a highly volatile subject. In the history of Islam, one party of Muslims, would persecute the other. When the persecuted party came into power, they returned the favour.
The Ibadi school was removed from these bloody affairs and allowed them to approach the subject with sobriety dealing only with the proof text and the justifications for the views.
From the outset it should be clear that all sides have their proofs and justifications for their positions. Albeit some like to pretend that the other side blatantly ignore verses of the Qur’an, this is a clear misrepresentation and meanness.
So, in this dispute we are commanded by Allah (swt) In the Qur’an:
“Then if you were to dispute among yourselves about anything refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you indeed believe in Allah and the Last Day; that is better and more commendable in the end.” (Qur’an 4:59)
It is up to you dear reader to see who relies more upon revealed text and who relies more upon theological speculation to draw their conclusions.
Any clear statement from the Blessed Messenger (saw) on this matter?
There is no clear statement from the Blessed Messenger (saw) on this matter.
Any clear statement from the immediate companions on this matter?
The only clear statement we have from a companion(sahabah) is the following:
Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud:
“Allah has not created (khalaq) in the heavens nor in the earth what is more magnificent than Ayat Al-Kursi.”
We do not have any reports from a companion(sahabah) to the contrary. So, our interlocutors will either have to weaken the hadith or employ interpretive principles to dismiss it as sound evidence.
Any clear statement from the Qur’an on the matter?
As regarding the Qur’an there is no clear statement that is it is uncreated. Those who oppose us on this matter have made it a theological conclusion. This is deduced after making certain assumptions about Allah (swt) and what are his essential attributes.
Whereas the Qur’an does have a clear text that states that is created. If there was such a text our interlocutors would be quick to quote it.
“Indeed, We have made it (ja’alnahu) an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand.” (Qur’an 43:3)
Our interlocutors have never been able to find any usage of the above word (ja’alnahu) in the Qur’an to show that something is uncreated, unmade, without origin, having an eternally abiding quality or trait.
In the Ibadi school we ground our aqidah on the source common to all Muslims (the Qur’an) and then we draw our beliefs from this.
We do not have theological speculations about Allah (swt) and then try and make the Qur’an conform to our theological suppositions about Allah (swt) as you the reader will soon see.
The issue regarding Sifat (Attributes) and Dhat (Essence) of Allah (swt)
Before I have approached this topic as a novice, and I still very much am a layman and not a scholar. With that out of the way I think it is very important to start with the crux of this issue which is really about the clash of understanding of essence (dhat) of Allah (swt) and what are/are not his essential sifat (attributes) and what categories they fall under as well as how different schools of aqidah (creed) further categorize those sifat (attributes).
The categorization of the Attributes of Allah is based on whether the Attributes are intrinsically bound to the Self (or Dhāt) of Allah or not bound intrinsically to the Self of Allah. So according to this, the Attributes are divided into three categories:
Attributes ascribed to His Self (Sifāt Dhātiyyah).
Attributes ascribed to His Actions (Sifāt Fi’liyyah).
Attributes ascribed to both His Self and His Actions (Sifāt Dhātiyyah Fi’liyyah)
A definition for each: 1. As for As-Sifāt Adh-Dhātiyyah (Attributes ascribed to His Self) then what is intended is those Attributes that are intrinsically bound to the Self of Allahsuch that He never ceases and will never cease to be described with them. Examples are Life (Al-Hayāt), Knowledge (Al-‘Ilm), Ability (Al-Qudrah), Might and Power (Al-‘Izzah), Wisdom (Al-Hikmah), Majesty (Al-Jalāl), Highness (Al-‘Uluw) and other such Attributes of the Self. They are referred to as Adh-Dhātiyyah (i.e. ascribed to the Self) because they are intrinsically bound to the Self of Allah, and similarly His other Attributes such as His Two Hands (Al-Yadayn),Two-Eyes(Al-‘Aynayn) and Face (Al-Wajh) — and these Attributes can be called As-Sifāt Al-Khabariyyah (i.e. Attributes that provide information of the Self of Allah, such as, Two Hands, Two Eyes, Fingers, etc.).
2. As for As-Sifāt Al-Fi’liyyah (Attributes ascribed to His Actions), they are the Attributes connected to His Will (Al-Mashee’ah) and they are not intrinsically bound to His Self (Adh-Dhāt), not in type and nor in their individual occurrence. Examples are the Ascending (Al-Istiwā) of Allah over the Throne, the Descending (An-Nuzool) of Allah to nearest Heaven of this world and the Coming (Al-Majee’u) of Allah on the Day of Resurrection to judge between the people. These are all Attributes ascribed to His Actions and connected to His Will — If He Wills, He does these actions and if He Wills, He does not do them. So, these Attributes are [newly] happening events in terms of their type and in their individual occurrences. So, the Ascending of Allah over the Throne did not take place until after He had created the Throne; the Descending of Allah to the nearest Heaven of this world did not occur except after He had created the Heavens, and [of course] the Coming of Allah will not occur before the Hour is established.
3. As for As-Sifāt Adh-Dhātiyyah Al-Fi’liyyah (Attributes ascribed to both His Self and His Actions) then if one was to consider this type of Attribute, he would find that Allah never ceases and will never cease to be described with it, so it is intrinsically bound to the Self (Dhāt) of Allah. And if one was to consider its occurrence, he would find that it is also connected to His Will, and not intrinsically bound to the Self (Adh-Dhāt). The Scholars use as an example the Speech (Kalām) of Allāh, the Most High. Speech (Al-Kalām) — in terms of the type of Attribute, it is ascribed to Allah’s Self, since He does not cease and will not cease to be described with speaking. His Speech is from His perfection that is due to Him (free is He from all imperfections). And as for individual occurrences of His Speech, then He speaks whenever He Wills [to whom He Wills at a time designated by Him] — so His Speaking is from the Sifāt Fi’liyyah (i.e. it is an Attribute ascribed to His Actions) because it is done according to His Will (i.e. when He Wills).
Do note that these categories and descriptions are the categories and descriptions not found in the Qur’an or the Sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw).
Our main point of difference with this sect of the Sunni Muslims (the ones who have been most vocal on the issue) is that where they would put the quality of speaking in category 3, we would put the quality of speaking in category 2. That being Sifāt Al-Fi’liyyah.
“These are all Attributes ascribed to His Actions and connected to His Will — If He Wills, He does these actions and if He Wills, He does not do them. So, these Attributes are [newly] happening events in terms of their type and in their individual occurrences.”
Also note some interesting admission in their description in point 3. They state: “And if one was to consider its occurrence, he would find that it is also connected to His Will, and not intrinsically bound to the Self.”
So what are the points of difference between us on this?
First, we don’t’ agree with them that anything and everything attributed to Allah (swt)is an attribute. Examples being but not limited to the following: Their belief that Allah (swt) has such attributes as: hands, face, eyes, that Allah chuckles or laughs, has a leg or foot. Some of them even affirm the idea that Allah (swt) has an uvular, runs, trots or jogs and so forth.
Then they make lofty claims that they take the outward meaning of text and leave it at and do not perform ta’wil (interpretation)yet from their own sources
“There is in no private conversation of three but that He is the fourth of them, nor are there five but that He is the sixth of them, and no less than that and no more but that He is with them wherever they are. Then, He will inform them of what they did on the Day of Resurrection. Verily, Allah knows all things.” (Qur’an 58:7)
Notice the title when speaking about the text in the Qur’an states: “By His Knowledge not His Essence) and that is not what the text (of the Qur’an) says at all! This is them applying their understanding of a text to refute other rival Muslim sects.
Another view concerning Allah (swt) that they have which has no support in the Qur’an or Sunnah is a what can be termed as pseudo-attributes or quasi-attributes of Allah (swt). Their claim ultimately is that Allah (swt) has attributes that are not identical to his essence nor other than it! You can see them try and make justification for it here: https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/282904/elaboration-required-if-one-says-allaahs-attributes-are-other-than-him
Notice that they make no recourse to the Qur’an nor to the Sunnah. This is speculative theology, and, in this manner, they are ahl kalam. Though they will claim they are people who take only the text.
“And that you say about Allah that which you do not know.” (Qur’an 7:33)
Whereas we rely upon the following text to show the absolute oneness of Allah (swt)
Your God is One (wāḥidun) God; there is no god but He, the All-merciful, the All-compassionate.” (Qur’an 2:153)
Say: ‘He is God, One (ahadun),” (Qur’an 112:1)
Wahid is that Allah (swt) is one and there is no other. When this is coupled with ahad it means that Allah (swt) is absolutely one. This is what the Qur’an affirms, and it is what we believe.
“The word ahad, -conveys an uncountable oneness. It is not one in a series. It cannot be added to or divided into fractions. It stands for a singular, unique entity.”-Shaykh Salman al-Oadah
However, our interlocutors believe Allah (swt) has attributes that are neither his essence nor other than it. This is important to keep in mind when reading the article.
The belief in the eternity of the Qur’an though its meanings differ, and its ways are diverse because of the differences among its supporters emanates from one source, namely not differentiating between Speaking as an Essential attribute of Allah and its EFFECTS, the Books that Allah has sent down to His Messengers. All who hold this opinion must necessarily believe in the eternity of all originated things, because these (also) are effects of Allah’s attributes. Because the creatures, regardless of their differences (from each other), are not other than effects of His Power, Will and Knowledge. His Power, Will and Knowledge is an eternal essential attribute because of the impossibility of Allah’s qualification with their opposites.
So, understand that by this when we say kalaam Allah it literally translates as the speech of Allah. And it is known the speech is but a by-product, an EFFECT of the attribute of Speaking. This is what we affirm.
And now here comes the real differentiation between the two:
1.Having the ability to speak.
2.Creating the speech itself.
If it’s the first, then it’s a necessary for the mind to affirm it as an attribute. If it’s the latter, then it’s a possible attribute, as Allah (swt) make create speech or may not create speech.
So, the kalaam Allah is from the Sifāt Al-Fi’liyyah
Remember above they themselves have defined Sifat Al-Fi’liyyah as:
These are all Attributes ascribed to His Actions and connected to His Will — If He Wills, He does these actions and if He Wills, He does not do them. So, these Attributes are [newly] happening events in terms of their type and in their individual occurrences.
You know that those among them who hold that Allah’s being Speaking is without His Will base their opinion on what is necessitated by making His worldly speech an eternal attribute abiding in His Essence. For the Eternal, no Will can precede His Eternity, as also for knowledge, Power, Life and other attribute of Allah, exalted is He. Just as it cannot be said that Allah is Powerful by His Will, Alive by His Will, Knower by His Will lest minds should infer origination (and contingency) in respect of these attributes, in the same way it becomes necessary for those who believe in the eternity of His being Speaking to say that it is not bound by His Will.
SPEAKING AS AN ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTE ABIDING WITH ALLAH (SWT)
Whereas the Athari (also called Salafi), Ash’ari and Maturidi schools of aqidah (creed)of what is known as Sunni Islam affirm speaking as an essential attribute we do not. Whereas Power, Will, and Knowledge are essential attributes of Allah (swt) because of the impossibility of Allah’s being qualified by their opposites. Revealed books are, indications of His Knowledge which is an attribute of His Essence.
They are not the attribute of the Knowledge itself which is a quality of his eternal Essence.
Our response to the first rational objection by the Athari/Salafi school of Sunni Islam.
They will say: “Just as the attribute of speech is a noble attribute, its opposite, muteness, is a characteristic that is not desired, nor is it considered praiseworthy. It is well known that the one who is mute is not like the one who speaks. Therefore, to claim that Allah does not possess the attribute of speech (or to interpret it away as the Ash’aris do) is in reality blasphemous, as this then implies that the Creator is mute, yet Allah is free of all attributes of imperfection.”
Source: (pg. 45. An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur’an by Yasir Qadhi)
The above statement is inter-Sunni polemic. Salafi/Athari Sunni Muslims directing this at Ash’ari Sunni Muslims, this line of thinking is severely flawed.
First, it is sufficient to attribute to Allah (swt) the attribute of Power without the attribution of speech. Speech is not the opposite of dumbness such that dumbness is negated by affirming it. The opposite of speech is silence. It does not mean that a non-speaking person is dumb; rather he is not non-silent.
We affirm the attribute of speech for Allah (swt) as Imam Diya al-Din ‘Abd al-Aziza Thamini (raheemullah), says in his Mu’alim:
“Know that speech is sometimes referred to Allah in the meaning of negating dumbness of Him, and it then to be understood as an essential attribute in the way of such attributes. And sometimes it is referred to Him in the sense of its being one of His actions, and it is then to be understood as such. So, the meaning of His being Speaking, according to the first interpretation, is that He is not dumb; and according to the second that He is a Creator of Speech.”
The meaning of Allah’s being Speaking is producing speech on the occasion of it.
What is not in dispute between us and the Sunni Muslims.
1) That Allah (swt) has never been unable to produce speech from all eternity.
2) That the Qur’an does not originate from any other than Allah (swt).
3) It is his Word, His Revelation and that which He sent down.
4) It was revealed in letters and words.
5) It was revealed to the heart of the Blessed Messenger (saw).
6) It is inimitable in its combinations and meanings. No human being can produce the like thereof.
7) It has been narrated from the Blessed Messenger (saw) through firm tawatur
It does not emanate from other than Allah (swt).
Just as all created things. “That is Allah—your Lord! There is no god ˹worthy of worship˺ except Him. ˹He is˺ the Creator of all things, so worship Him ˹alone˺. And He is the Maintainer of everything.” (Qur’an 6:102)
The dispute among the Sunni Hanbali school of Aqidah(creed). Due to the Hanbali school being among the Ahl Kalaam and people of speculative theology they have produced some of the more bizarre debates the Muslim Ummah has ever seen. If you research this matter you will find it to be true.
Among the Hanbali differences:
a) The voice of the reciter of the Qur’an and his recitation. Are they created or not?
b) The letters of the alphabet from which the words of the Qur’an and others are composed. Is it created or not?
c) Allah’s being Speaking, whether it is by His Will or not (By His Will).
Since their differences about the letters, sounds and recitation overlap, we have considered them together in reviewing and criticizing their opinions about them.
They attribute to Imam Ahmad the statement: ‘Whoever says My utterance of the Qur’an is created, he is a Jahmi and whoever says it is not created, he is an innovator.’
In this text that they have narrated, there is a contradiction that cannot be obscure to any intelligent person. There is no intermediary between creature and non-creature.
The thing is neither created nor non-created. If it is created, then why does he not accuse of error those who speak of its creation? If it is not, then why does he attribute innovation to those who speak of its non-creation? “Ahmad said: ‘Whoever says that any letter of the alphabet is created, he is a Jahmi, because he has walked on a path of innovation, and whoever says that the alphabet is created, then he [also] says that the Qur’an is created.’
Source: (Fatawa Ibn Taymiyyah, 12:83-85)
That is an excuse of no use. To deny the being created of what is known by reason and tawatur tradition to be created, and to attach it to Allah, exalted is He, in eternity, avoiding the firm Qur’anic texts that everything other than Allah is created-such as Allah’s saying:
“That is Allah—your Lord! There is no god ˹worthy of worship˺ except Him. ˹He is˺ the Creator of all things, so worship Him ˹alone˺. And He is the Maintainer of everything.” (Qur’an 6:102)
His saying: “The One Who holds control over Heaven and Earth, Who has not adopted any son nor has He any associate in control. He has created everything and measured it out precisely.” (Qur’an 25:2) is in no way permissible. How so, when the driving force behind this is only the fear of the rising sun of reality, and the evaporation of the fog of fancies, which they intended as a veil between reason and their grasp of the realities. Not content with mere refusal of reality, they went further to pass judgements on those who proclaim the reality as being Jahmi, innovators and unbelievers. Fa in-na li-l-lahi wa in-na ilayhi raji’un: so surely, we belong to Allah and to Him surely, we are returning!!
In how wretched a state Islam is left when interpreted in these contradictory directions! How far astray are the people of Islam if they do not recognize Islam but through these things.
Imam Ahmad was asked: “What is your opinion concerning those who say, ‘Our recitation of the Qur’an is created”? Imam Ahmad replied: “These people are worse than the Jahmiyah. Whoever believes this, then he believes that Gabriel came with something created, and the Prophet (saw) preached something created!” Source: (adh-Dhahabi, Ual-Uluww, p 212.)
So, then is our recitation uncreated?
No evidence from the Qur’an, the Sunnah or rational proofs, except what they bring from Ahmad. The make Ahmad and their scholars the standard by which the truth is measured. They will often use the term “salaaf” as the standard but what was the standard that Allah (swt) gave the salaaf if they should fall into disputes?
“Then if you were to dispute among yourselves about anything refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you indeed believe in Allah and the Last Day; that is better and more commendable in the end.” (Qur’an 4:59)
If that standard is good enough for them it is good enough for us! Whoever wants a more comprehensive understanding (of their various positions) should refer to the books of the holders of this belief, such as the 12th volume of Fatawa Ibn Taymiyya, which exceeds 600 pages. You will not move from one topic therein to another without witnessing the contradiction of what he says such as will suffice to demonstrate that the foundation on which they have laid down this belief is crumbling from its bases.
These huge disagreements among them are an indication that they are the people of innovation -differing among themselves in these matters in Aqidah (creed).
The positive evidence advanced by those that say that the Qur’an is uncreated.
Please note that the Sunni are divided on this issue, thus not all of them will agree to using the same arguments. However, this is as brief over view of arguments and evidences that they claim justify their position.
What they feel are logical/rational arguments.
The first one was already dealt with above. That was under the section: Our response to the first rational objection by the Athari/Salafi school of Sunni Islam.
Another logical/rational argument they bring is the following:
Only Allah (swt) is perfect, and the creation is imperfect. Thus, the trap they intend is this. Those who say that the Qur’an is created must therefore have to admit that it is imperfect!
However, this is a very flawed argument that you will see them retreat from. This argument destroys them. If A=B and B=C than A=C. So let us play the game: If only Allah (swt) is perfect. And the Qur’an is perfect = Allah (swt) is the Qur’an!
So, they must retreat further to their quasi-attribute. The one that is neither Allah(swt) nor other than Allah (swt). Since that is between negation and affirmation that really can’t say by their reasoning that the Qur’an is not Allah (swt).
Secondly, this can be answered by saying that the Qur’an is perfect in one way in that is a perfection revelation of Allah (swt). This is affirmed by:
“Lo! We, even We, reveal the Reminder, and lo! We verily are its Guardian.” (Qur’an 15:9)
Allah (swt) doesn’t have a guardian. That should be clear.
However, it is not absolutely perfect as Allah (swt) and the proof for that is:
There is nothing like unto Him. (Qur’an 42:11)
Yet do not be surprised nor dismayed if those who disputed on rather or not the ink, recitation or mushaf is created would not be swayed by such clear evidence.
Positive evidence from the Qur’an for those who argue it is eternal and uncreated.
The Creation and the Command argument:
“His are the creation and the command.” (Qur’an 7:54)
The argument that those who believe the Qur’an is eternal and uncreated is that the creation is the created and the command is His Word -which is not-created.
The command is His saying ‘Be’: “Indeed when He intents a thing, His is “be” and it is’ (Qur’an 36:82)
So, they feel this is strong evidence for their position. For if His Word which is command has been created, then He would have said: “His are the creation and the creation.”
Their reasoning fails on several counts:
1) The first is that the context of this statement is nothing other than Allah’s being alone in originating the originated things and turning them according to His will.
The text of the whole verse is: “Surely your Lord is none other than Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth in six days, and then ascended His Throne; Who causes the night to cover the day and then the day swiftly pursues the night; Who created the sun and the moon and the stars making them all subservient to His command. Lo! His is the creation and His is the command. Blessed is Allah, the Lord of the universe.” (Qur’an 7:54)
The most that this verse tells us is that, just as Allah, glorified is He, is alone in bringing the universe out of non-being (into being), in the same way He is alone
in the management of it. He has no partner in its creation and in its management. None other than Him alone belong the creations and the command. The meaning here, clearly, is management. And there is nothing in that which even remotely points either to the eternity of the Qur’an or to its contingency.
2) The second point that the conjunction ‘Wa’ or ‘And’ in English does not necessarily mean difference between the conjoined elements in every respect. Rather, it is enough that the difference is relatively, like the difference between specific and general, unconditioned and conditioned, or the difference of qualifiers with sameness of the noun.
Among the examples of that are His saying: “Guard strictly prayers and the middle prayer.” (Qur’an 2:238) The middle prayer is not (separated) out of the genus of the prayers, the guarding of which has been commanded.
And His saying:
“Whoever is an enemy to Allah, and His angels, and His Messengers, and Jibril and Mikael.” (Qur’an 2:98)
No-one says that Jibril and Mikael are (separated) out of the genus of angels.
There are many other examples. That should suffice.
3) The third point is that the command of Allah, exalted is He, has been mentioned in the Qur’an jointly with what denotes its creation. He says: “And Allah’s command must be fulfilled.” (Qur’an 33:37)
And He says: “So that Allah might accomplish a matter (amr) already decided.” (Qur’an 8:42)
And he says” “And the command of Allah is a decree determined.” (Qur’an 33:38)
4) The fourth point is that His command means in one place in the Qur’an something different from what it means in another. In His saying: “(So it was) till then there came Our Command and the oven gushed forth (water like fountains from the earth)” (Qur’an 11:40). It is not the same as in His saying: “Has come the command of Allah, seek not then to hasten it.” (Qur’an 16:1)
5) The fifth is that the interpretation of ‘the command’ in these verses which we have cited as (meaning) the Qur’an is not correct. It is known with certainty that the Qur’an is not meant (by ‘command’) in His saying: “Or there comes the command of your Lord.” (Qur’an 16:33) and His saying: “Until, when Our command came, and the oven overflowed.” (Qur’an 11:40)
As well as His saying: “So that Allah might accomplish a matter(amran) already destined.” (Qur’an 8:42)
So how can ‘command’ (amr) in His saying; “His are the creation and the command” be interpreted as the Qur’an, whereas the text denotes the opposite of it?
The next argument that they advance is creating with ‘be’ and the understanding of bi-l-haqq.
“We created not the heavens, the earth and all between them, but for just ends (bi-l-haqq) (Qur’an 15:85)
The way they argue is that the ‘haqq’ with which Allah has created them is His saying to them ‘Be’. If this saying (of ‘Be’) had (itself) been created, then it would not be correct to (say that) the creations were created by it, because the creation is not created by a creature. First, we do not accept that the meaning of ‘bi-l’haqq’ is as they say. The best tafsir of the Qur’an is the Qur’an itself.
His saying: “Our Lord, not for nothing have you created this.” (Qur’an 3:191), firmly denotes that the meaning of bi-l-haqq in the verse is in opposition to al-batil (i.e. Creation for nothing, vanity). The intention of describing Allah’s creation of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them as bi-l-haqq is to negate the futility of Allah, exalted is He, in His actions.
It is refutation of the futility that the unbelievers thought of His actions, as is clear His saying: “Not without purpose did We create heaven and earth and all between. That was the thought of the unbelievers. But woe to the unbelievers because of the Fire.” (Qur’an 38:27)
The meaning of ‘Be’ in the like of His saying, exalted is He, “For to anything which We have willed, We but say “Be” then it is.” (Qur’an 16:40)
This relates to the execution of His Will, exalted is He, in respect of anything of the mumkinat (what is possible) in the context of giving it existence or completing it. It is explained by his Saing, “When We have willed’ i.e. When Our Will has conjoined with it in a way of execution (of the command). Because ‘when’ is for time in the future, and this is emphasized in His saying: “an naqula la-hu.” (that We say to it), (Qur’an16:40) which is in the imperfect tense which, when it is with ‘an’, means the future.
It is known with certainty that whatever is since forever-like His Knowledge, His Power and His Life-the Will cannot be conjoined with it, because nothing can precede (what is eternal).
And this is emphasized by His saying ‘fa-yakun’ (then it is), the connecting particle ‘fa’ meaning order and sequence. From this you know that His saying, exalted is He, ‘kun fa-yakun’, is, wherever it occurs, nothing but an indirect expression of the speedy response of things to Him, glorified is He, in accordance with the conjunction of His Will with these things. Otherwise, there is no utterance of kaf nun (kun) in the concrete sense (of utterance). If we accept that, then we will say that our discussion is about the Word revealed such as the Qur’an, not the Word unrevealed.
It is also a metaphor for the expediency of Allah’s creative command.
“Allah created the heavens and the earth, and all that is between them, in six days” (Qur’an 7:54).
“The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: “Be”. And he was.” (Qur’an 3:59) Yet didn’t Jesus (as) take time to form in the womb?
Some scholars have said that Allah (swt) created this word and willed for it to follow his orders. So, all in all it’s not something coexisting with Allah (swt).
The next argument they bring: Seeking refuge in Allah’s complete words.
This is from the following hadith:
Khaula bint Hakim Sulamiyya reported:
I heard Allah’s Messenger (saw) as saying: When anyone lands at a place, and then says: “I seek refuge in the Perfect Word of Allah from the evil of what He has created,” nothing would harm him until he marches from that stopping place.
Second, that this seeking refuge in fact is with Allah (swt), because He is the Lord of the words. The words are included (in the sense) because of the blessing and goodness that Allah (swt) has put therein. It is a kind of metaphor.
And in the sound hadith has come seeking refuge in His actions, exalted is He, as in the prayer of the Prophet (saw) as follows:
It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that ‘Aishah said:
“I noticed the Prophet (saw) was not there one night, so I started looking for him with my hand. My hand touched his feet, and they were held upright, and he was prostrating and saying: ‘I seek refuge in Your pleasure from Your anger, in Your forgiveness from Your punishment, and I seek refuge in You from You. I cannot praise You enough, You are as You have praised yourself.'” Source: (https://sunnah.com/nasai:169)
Forgiveness is one of His actions, exalted is He, and it is (therefore) definitely originated. Seeking refuge in it was allowed because (forgiveness) does not emanate from other than Allah (swt).
Is Allah’s forgiveness Allah himself? Is Allah’s punishment Allah himself?
The next argument is the hadith of Ali in making the Qur’an and not a creature a judge.
The fifth is what Abu l-Qasim al-Lalka’i has narrated from Ali bin Abi Talib that he said -when it was to him that you made two men as your judges -‘I did make a creature a judge, I did not make a judge but the Qur’an’.
The answer to this is simple: His negation of making a creature as judge by making the Qur’an as judge is because the Qur’an is from Allah (swt). All that it in it the commands, prohibitions, permissions, restrictions, approval, rejection it is from Allah (swt). So, making the Qur’an as judge is referring for judgement to Allah who has sent it down with His Knowledge, and has related its judgement to Himself.
He says: “Who is better than Allah in judgement?” (Qur’an 5:50)
Do Note I have not been able to find the hadith attributed to Ali bin Abi Talib. Insh’Allah when I have the source it will be included.
The next argument is that Ibn Abbas (ra) critiqued a man for saying: Lord of the Qur’an
Is what has been narrated from ‘Abdullah b Abbas (ra) that he criticized a man who said: “Lord of the Qur’an.”
The answer is: that the evidence as to its not being sound is in abundance.
Do Note I have not been able to find the hadith attributed to Ali bin Abi Talib. Insh’Allah when I have the source it will be included.
Some discussion on Allah (swt) speaking with Musa (as)
The Hanbali/Salafi agree with us (The Ibadi School) that Musa (as) heard from Allah’s Speaking a speech composed of letters and that it had sound. On this point the Ashari disagree with us both. However, we differ on its eternity or origination. They believe in its eternity, and we believe in its origination.
Those who said that the speaking to Musa (as) that it is an eternal attribute, or that it is abiding with the essence of Allah (swt) both are incorrect.
Weak argument used by Hanbali/Salafi Sunni Muslims against Ashari Sunni Muslims.
There is however a very weak argument used by the Hanbali/Salafi in their discussion with the Ashari. They feel it is a strong argument.
The Hanbali/Salafi argument against the Ashari goes like this:
“If the Kalaam of Allah is without sound, then what did Musa (as) hear when Allah spoke to Him? If they respond that Allah (swt) created a sound, and caused Musa (as) to hear that created sound, then this means that this created object stated, “Oh Musa, Verily, I am your Lord, Verily, I am Allah, there is no god save me, so worship Me.” (Qur’an 20:12-14)
Source: (Pg. 44 An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur’an by Yasir Qadhi)
Yet, obviously, we know that Musa (as) did not perform any act of worship towards the direction of the voice. Or at least no act of worship is recorded.
Shaykh Yasir Qadhi and those who think this is some knock down killer argument must really have to wonder about the following:
What did Rasul Allah (saw) think when Angel Gabriel (as) said. “Indeed this, your religion, is one religion, and I am your Lord, so worship Me.” (Qur’an 21:92)
What? Did the Blessed Messenger (saw) make sujud and worship Gabriel? Obviously not!
Gabriel(as) was used as a medium in the same way the burning bush was.
Has the story of Musa reached you ˹O Prophet˺? When he saw a fire, he said to his family, “Wait here, ˹for˺ I have spotted a fire. Perhaps I can bring you a torch from it or find some guidance at the fire.” But when he approached it, he was called, “O Moses! It is truly I. I am your Lord! So, take off your sandals, for you are in the sacred valley of Ṭuwa. I have chosen you, so listen to what is revealed: ‘It is truly I. I am Allah! There is no god ˹worthy of worship˺ except Me. So, worship Me ˹alone˺, and establish prayer for My remembrance.” (Qur’an 20:9-14)
“And when Musa had completed the term and was traveling with his family, he perceived from the direction of the mount a fire. He said to his family, “Stay here; indeed, I have perceived a fire. Perhaps I will bring you from there [some] information or burning wood from the fire that you may warm yourselves.” But when he came to it, he was called from the right side of the valley in a blessed spot – from the tree (mina l-shajarati), “O Musa, indeed I am Allah, Lord of the worlds.” (Qur’an 28:29-30)
So rather it was a created word, or created tree or created angel, the Prophets of Allah (swt) are peak monotheist and understand the difference between the which is spoken (created) and the real source of the one speaking (Creator).
Allah (swt) also can make anything speak that wishes to make speak. An example would be:
“And they will say to their skins, “Why have you testified against us?” They will say, “We were made to speak by Allah , who has made everything speak; and He created you the first time, and to Him you are returned.” (Qur’an 41:21)
Imagine being in a masjid and a man recites from the Qur’an: “Indeed, this, your religion, is one religion, and I am your Lord, so worship me!”
Would anyone in that masjid begin to worship that man? Of course, they wouldn’t. The man is a created being reciting created speech. Yet, understanding the ultimate source of the statement is the key.
Another example: “Surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him ˹alone˺. This is the Straight Path.” (Qur’an 19:36)
Allah (swt) could have revealed the Qur’an in which he was always spoken about in the third person such as above.
However, he has allowed for his creation to recite the created speech: “I am Allah! There is no god ˹worthy of worship˺ except Me. So, worship Me ˹alone.”
The scholars have never declared someone a kafir for reciting this if they speaker did not claim the speech was a reference to him/herself.
“When Musa came at the appointed time and his Lord spoke to him.” (Qur’an 7:143)
“And messengers We have mentioned unto you before and messengers We have not mentioned unto thee; and Allah spoke (takliman) directly unto Musa.” (Qur’an 4:164)
“And it is not for any human being that Allah should speak to him except by inspiration, or from behind a partition or that He sends a messenger to reveal, by His permission, what He wills. Indeed, He is Most High and Wise.” (Qur’an 42:51)
Unless our interlocutors want to say that the Qur’an contains a flat contradiction than they will need to understand ‘Allah spoke to Musa with directly’ considering the above verse.
This spoke to Musa directly must fall under the category of inspiration, behind a partition or by sending a messenger to reveal his will to them.
Surely this is something to ponder for those who believe that Allah (swt) has a location.
WORDS OF FOREIGN ORIGIN IN THE QUR’AN AND THE IMPACT UPON THIS DEBATE.
This is not an argument from the scholars our school (Ibadi Scholars). Nor is it an argument that they rely upon.
This is an argument that I (Prima-Qur’an) conceived when investigating this issue.
“In other words, these particular phrases are originally non-Arabic in origin. However, as is the case with any language, these words were ‘borrowed’ by Arabic, and were used so commonly that they became a part of the Arabic language. Thus, for all practical purposes, these words became ‘a part of fluent Arabic, and were use din poetry…and if an Arab were ignorant of these words, it was as if he were ignorant of other Arabic words.” Source: (az-Zarkashee, v 1, p, 289)
“Therefore, the correct opinion is that there are no non-Arabic words in the Qur’an, although there are words that have non-Arabic origins. Due to the continued usage of these words by the Arabs, however, they can no longer be considered foreign.”
Source: (pg. 27 An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur’an by Yasir Qadhi)
Now this is a matter of debate among Muslim scholars and orientalist. That is rather or not the Qur’an contains words of foreign origin. Now, Praise be to Allah (swt) no matter the outcome: Yes, the Qur’an contains words that are borrowed from other languages and became part of the Arabic language or no it does not contain as such either way our position is untouched.
However, if one was to believe that the Qur’an is eternal and uncreated the discovery of foreign words borrowed from other languages is devastating to such a theological position A revelation that is eternal and uncreated does not need to incorporate words and expressions that are from languages that do not even exist at the time.
Now some clever theologian may try and argue: “Yes, but Allah (swt) knew in his infinite knowledge that those words would one day end up in the Qur’an, and thus he chose them for his revelation.” That creates a type of paradox in which a series of events are caused in such a way to have created words from a created language that are chosen to be part of an uncreated eternal attribute.
All in all, no matter the outcome it does not have an impact on our theological position on the matter.
The origins of statements in the Qur’an and the eternal knowledge of such statements.
If the khatib during a Friday sermon quotes a hadith of the Blessed Messenger (saw) the whole of the sermon is the speech of the khatib. However, it cannot be said that everything stated with the in speech of the khatib had its origin with the khatib. For example, if the khatib is quoting a hadith of the Prophet (saw), even though it is the speech of the khatib the quote has its origin with the speech of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
The Qur’an is Kalam Allah.
The Qur’an is a revelation from Allah.
It is clear when we read the Qur’an that we can see Allah (swt) speaking and addressing His creation in it. We can also see conversations between Iblis and Allah (swt). We can see conversations between Allah (swt) and his Angels. We can see conversations between the created beings. All of this known in the pre-eternal knowledge of Allah (swt). However, not all statements in the Qur’an are original statements of Allah (swt).
Examples:
Allah said, “What made you disobey Me?” Iblis replied, “I am better than Adam, for You have created me out of fire and Adam out of clay.” (Qur’an 7:12)
The part: “I am better than Adam, for you created me out of fire and Adam out of clay.” Is originally the statement of Iblis. In the Qur’an Allah (swt) is quoting Iblis.
Anyone who believes that it was Allah (swt) who stated: “You have created me out of fire.” And not that it was the words of Iblis has entered disbelief.
“And lo! those who disbelieve would fain disconcert you with their eyes when they hear the Reminder, and they say: Lo! he is indeed mad.” (Qur’an 68:51)
Anyone who believes that it was Allah (swt) who said about the Blessed Prophet (saw): “Lo! He is indeed mad!” that person has entered disbelief.
The part: “Lo he is indeed mad!” This is the statement of some of the Quraish against the Blessed Prophet (saw). In The Qur’an Allah (swt) is quoting the Quraish.
All this is from the knowledge of Allah (swt). Yet, the origins of the statements are from created entities. These statements from them are from the actions they have acquired.
The eternity of knowledge does not imply the eternity of the known, otherwise, all things that have come into being would be eternal!
Positive evidence from the Qur’an for those who argue it created.
Arguments from logic and rationality.
An obvious point is that everything other than Allah (swt) is created. So, is the Qur’an a creation or not?
If the interlocutors respond that the attributes of Allah (swt) are uncreated do keep in mind as above that the attributes are in a quasi-or pseudo status. They cannot say that they are the essence nor other than the essence.
Argument against attributing multiplicity to Allah (swt)
Permitting multiplicity of the eternal is contradictory to the unicity which is the most special of the attributes of Allah, Exalted Is He. (It is rejected) because it leads to permitting multiplicity of gods. Because the True God, Glorified and Exalted is He, only deserved Godhood in connection with His precedence over everything in existence. If there were any equal to Him in being eternal, then it would be correct for that equal to be His partner in Godhood, for there is nothing to prevent its being creator, sustainer, manager and wise.
If it is said that Allah (swt) is distinct from the Qur’an and other (instances of the) eternal Word, because of attributes other than eternity -such as Knowledge, Power, Hearing, Seeing-by Which He alone merits Godhood and Lordship.
The answer to it is that specification of Allah, glorified is He, with these attributes, as against His equal in being eternal, is giving a preference to Him over it, and this giving preference must have a justification. If it is said-that the (attribute of) being Speaking is itself, one of those attributes by which Allah merits being alone in the creation and command than We say that those attributes are not separated from Him, glorified is He.
Everything whose eternity is affirmed, its non-existence is impossible because the existence of the eternal is Essential Necessary Existence, which does not need justification in contrast to the existence of (that which) is only permissible (not necessary). It is impossible that anyone should have any authority over it in establishing, or removing, sending down or raising up, maintaining or taking away. While Allah Exalted is He, says about the Qur’an: “If it were Our Will, We could take away which we have revealed to you. (Qur’an 17:86)
The effects of that which is produced is apparent in the Qur’an. Each letter of it needs the other in sequence, its words being composed form them. And each word needs other words to combine as a sentence. Composition is an artwork that points to the artist and the artist must precede in existence the made art.
That kind of reasoning in not allowed in respect of any of His attributes. Thus, (in respect of His attribute of Power) it will not be said that Allah got power over this because of this, and (in respect of His Knowledge) that He knows this because of this, and (in respect of His being All-Seeing) that He saw this for this reason. And the same in respect of the other attributes.
The Proof Text from The Qur’an That Establish that is Created.
1. The first proof is that Allah (swt) has explicitly told us he created it in Arabic.
“Indeed, We have made it (ja’alnahu) an Arabic Qur’an that you might understand.” (Qur’an 43:3)
Our interlocutors have never been able to find any usage of the above word (ja’alnahu) in the Qur’an to show that something is uncreated, unmade or without origin.
“And thus, We have revealed to you an inspiration of Our command. You did not know what the Book is or, what is faith, but We have made (ja’alnahu) ita light by which We guide whom We will of Our servants. And indeed, you are guiding to a straight path.” (Qur’an 42:52)
“It is He who CREATED you from one soul and CREATED from it its mate that he might dwell in security with her.” (Qur’an 7:189)
The above text the first term used is “khalaqakum” (created) and the second term “ja’ala” (created). Again, this shows the interchangeable nature of these two terms.
We could simply stop here. That which is made-namely, the Qur’an in its Arabic, its giving light and its guidance is an established reality. Whoever rejects it, he has certainly unbelieved.
The Maker is other than the made. Making precedes the made.
2. The second proof is regarding its obvious order and arrangement.
“And He created all things, then made them in order.” (Qur’an 25:2)
“Verily, all things have We created in proportion and measure.” (Qur’an 54:49)
This is a quality apparent in the Qur’an. It is also showing the Qur’an is subject to order.
Just as Ibrahim (as) understood that the celestial bodies were subject to order.
That which follows laws and order is not that which creates the laws and order, namely Allah (swt). Ibrahim (as) understood this, yet it seems some Muslims do not.
Each letter needs the other in sequence, its words being composed from them. And each word needs other words to combine as a sentence. The letters are different, and none of them is not in need of the other. From what has been said of the distinctness of these letters, and their being absorbed in the composition, (it is clear) that someone has made this distinctness and has made each of them different from the other, and composed them with this art of composition, and made of it this eloquent speech!
3. The third proof is a Logical and textual proof.
Is the Qur’an a thing or nothing?
If the Qur’an is nothing than let that stand on the record. No need to discuss with those who do not see the obvious. If the Qur’an was a nothing or a non-thing there would be no discussion or dispute about it. However, If the Qur’an is a thing, then please be reminded of what Allah (swt) says:
“That is Allah, your Lord; there is no deity except Him, the Creator of all things, so worship Him. And He is Disposer of all things.” (Qur’an 6:102)
So if the Qur’an is a thing, what excludes it from the generality of ‘all things’ mentioned in the verse?
4. The fourth proof. Nothing comes anew from your Lord.
Muhdath in Arabic means newly made. And since it’s newly made it cannot be eternal. i.e. It came after being nothing which means it is created.
“No mention comes to them anew (muh’dathin) from their Lord except that they listen to it while they are at play.” (Qur’an 21:2)
“And no revelation comes to them anew (muh’dathin) from the Most Merciful except that they turn away from it. (Qur’an 26:5)
Our interlocutors and opponents say it refers to the sending down of the book and not the book itself. The response to this is that the eternal does not shift from its root, and that which is merely (accidental) cannot happen to it.
Second there is no authority of anyone or anything over the eternal because the eternal is not caused to be.
5. The fifth proof is that the Qur’an itself has been established and detailed by something external to it.
“This is a Book with verse established and further explained in detail from One who is All-Wise and All Informed.” (Qur’an 11:1)
The argument from this verse is that Allah has described the Qur’an as being established and detailed. Both attributes are an effect emanating from an effect-giver. It is not possible that the effect should be eternal since forever, because of the necessity of the effect-giver having precedence over it. The preceded is originated because evidently it is after when it was not.
So either
A) This Qur’an either it is joined with being established and detailed from its beginning, or these are qualities that Allah has created in it, after it had been void of them. Both possibilities point to its creation and origination.
B) Establishing and detailing are two effects falling upon it. The effect emanates from the effect-giver, attesting to the transferring from one state to the other of that upon which the effect has fallen. That is impossible for the eternal, because of the impossibility of anyone having authority over it. That is the reason why it is impossible to say that Allah has established His Power, or detailed It, or that He has established His Knowledge or detailed it.
Because that phrase necessarily implies origination of His Power and His Knowledge, exalted is He.
“Indeed, We brought them a Book, We detailed it knowingly.” (Qur’an 7:52) A) being ‘brought’ is transferal from one state to another state. That is impossible for the eternal as was explained above.
B) The second is the report about it that it is detailed. As in the foregoing already mentioned point.
C) The third is that its detailing emanates from His Knowledge, glorified is He. The emanating from a thing must be preceded by it.
6. The abrogation is impossible for the eternal.
“None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar.” (Qur’an 2:106)
Abrogation is omission and removal, and that is impossible for the eternal. The idea that some part of Allah’s eternal attribute of speech would be more perfect or more suitedthan other parts merits pensive reflection. Remember their argument from reason is the Qur’an perfect or not. This also falls back on them like a crushing tsunami wave.
7. Is that which is sent greater than that which sent it?
“The month of Ramadan, in which the Qur’an was sent down.” (Qur’an 2:185)
Sending down is moving from one place to the other, which is impossible for the eternal, because of the impossibility of anything having authority over it, or its being changed in its state.
“Very truly I tell you, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.” (John 13:16)
Is the Qur’an fulfilling a task or a mission or a purpose from Allah (swt) is or Allah (swt) fulfilling a mission, task or purpose of the Qur’an?
8. The preservation of the Qur’an.
“Surely We have sent down the message, and surely We will preserve it.” (Qur’an 15:9)
The preserved cannot but be the created, because the eternal does not need preserving by those that preserve. It is impermissible to say that Allah preserved His Life, or His Existence, or His Power, whereas it is permissible to say that Allah (swt) has preserved his Word, if the Word revealed is intended by that, and not kalam al-nafsi. The verse is a proof of its permissibility.
9. The division of the Qur’an into clear and allegorical and one is dependent upon the other.
The saying, exalted is He: “In it are verses clearly defined-they are the core of the Book-and others allegorical (mutashabihat).” (Qur’an 3:7)
The argument from this verse is that the verses of the Qur’an are divided into two types: the clearly defined and the allegorical, and that the clearly defined verses are the base for the allegorical which should be referred to the former in interpretation. That is impossible in respect of what is eternal.
This shows the division in the Qur’an. The Qur’an has division; this cannot be an abiding quality with Allah (swt) that has a division within it. If it has division as mukham and mutashabi it is divided, and we cannot ascribe that to Allah (swt).
10. The created cannot be a vessel for the uncreated.
“Rather: it is clear verses in the hearts of those who are given the knowledge.” (Qur’an 29:49)
The argument from it is that the hearts of scholars are originated the originated cannot be a vessel for the eternal. It is not appropriate to say we contain Allah (swt) in our hearts. That maybe appropriately only in a metaphorical way as mystics say. This is another objection to those Christians and other belief systems or ideas who believe that something eternal can reside in that which is originated.
11. The Qur’an itself mentions it is preserved in a created tablet.
“But it is a Glorious Qur’an, in a Preserved Tablet.” (Qur’an 85:21)
A) The Tablet is created, and the created cannot be a vessel for the non -created, as mentioned above. After all, if one were to believe that the Tablet is eternal and uncreated, then this is nothing other than Allah (swt).
B) This is the perfect opportunity for Allah (swt) the All-Mighty to say: “But it is a Glorious Qur’an, abiding with the All-Mighty, the All Praised.” That is not what was said. It is abiding in a preserved tablet, a created thing.
This is like Christian theology here:
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1)
12. The evidence of that which is mastered is originated.
“We have sent down to you the Book with the truth, confirming the Book before it, and mastering it.” (Qur’an 5:48)
The argument (from this verse) is that He has affirmed its being preceded by other (than it). The preceded cannot but be originated. And He has said that it is mastering its predecessor. The mastering is evidence that the mastered is originated. If the one before it is originated, then the quality of being originated its quite appropriate for it also.
The mastering is evidence that the mastered is originated. Alas the Torah is revealed in Hebrew, and the Injeel in Aramaic and thus the opponents cannot say that this eternal attribute is in Arabic, for it is also in Hebrew, and Syriac and Greek and all other languages, which is an attribute of his knowledge of the diverse languages of humanity and that revelation is produced in the language of the recipients.
13. Is Allah (swt) divided?
“It is a Qur’an which We have divided in order that you might recite it to men at intervals: We have revealed it by stages.” (Qur’an 17:106)
That which is divided is made and the made cannot be but originated.
So, are the believers in Allah (swt) saying He is One or divided?
14. No mention or admonishment of human beings in an eternal uncreated attribute that has mention and admonishment of human beings?
“There was certainly a time when there was no mention of the human being.” (Qur’an 76:1)
If the Qur’an is eternal than this verse would make little sense. Allah (swt) would be speaking for all eternity and human beings would be mentioned/remembered and given admonishment all throughout the Qur’an.
15. Allah (swt) acting upon a revelation prior to the Qur’an.
“Before this We wrote in the Zabur, after the reminder: My servants the righteous, shall inherit the earth.” (Qur’an 21:105)
The fact that Allah (swt) wrote in the Zabur (before the Qur’an) says that he did not something to a revelation that was prior to the Qur’an.
16.Allah (swt) is ascribed as writing his supposed eternal attribute of speech in the Torah
Narrated Abu Huraira:
“The Prophet (saw) said, “Adam and Moses argued with each other. Moses said to Adam. ‘O Adam! You are our father who disappointed us and turned us out of Paradise.’ Then Adam said to him, ‘O Moses! Allah favored you with His talk (talked to you directly) and He wrote (the Torah) for you with His Own Hand. Do you blame me for action which Allah had written in my fate forty years before my creation?’ So Adam confuted Moses, Adam confuted Moses,” the Prophet (saw) added, repeating the Statement three times.”
17. Allah (swt) the effects of Allah (swt) upon revelation given to Musa
And We wrote for him on the tablets [something] of all things – instruction and explanation for all things, [saying], “Take them with determination and order your people to take the best of it. I will show you the home of the defiantly disobedient.” (Qur’an 7:145)
This clearly shows that this is creation from Allah (swt)
18.Did Musa (as) throw down a creation of Allah (swt) or did he throw down something uncreated from Allah (swt)?
“And he threw down the tablets and seized his brother by [the hair of] his head, pulling him toward him.” (Qur’an 7:150)
Wonder what the Hanbali would have thought of Musa (as) and this action?
19. The Qur’an taking on forms and shapes and making intercession for us?
The eternal attribute of speech making intercession with the dhat (essence) of Allah?
“Abu Umama said he heard Allah’s Messenger (saw) say:
“Recite the Qur’an, for on the Day of Resurrection it will come as an intercessor for those who recite It. Recite the two bright ones, al-Baqara and Surah Al ‘Imran, for on the Day of Resurrection they will come as two clouds or two shades, or two flocks of birds in ranks, pleading for those who recite them. Recite Surah al-Baqara, for to take recourse to it is a blessing and to give it up is a cause of grief, and the magicians cannot confront it.”
Narrated Abu Hurairah narrated that the Prophet (saw) said:
“The one who memorized the Qur’an shall come on the Day of Judgement and (the reward for reciting the Qur’an) says: ‘O Lord! Decorate him.” So he is donned with a crown of nobility. Then it says: “O Lord! Give him more!’ So he is donned with a suit of nobility. Then it says: “O Lord! Be pleased with him.’ So He is pleased with him and says: “Recite and rise up, and be increased in reward with every Ayah.'”
This text is not devastating for those Sunni Muslims who follow the Māturīdī & Ash`ari schools of aqidah (creed) This is because they apply taw’il (interpretation) as you can see in the second hadith quoted above: (the reward for reciting the Qur’an) The are smart enough to realize the dangers to their creed in taking the position that an uncreated attribute of Allah (swt) comes in forms and shapes.
However, these text are absolutely devastating to those Sunni Muslims who follow the Salafi/Athari/ strand of aqidah (creed). Because they take the text as it is without taw’il (figurative interpretation).
So they have to do one of two very unpleasant things by their standards and one is a bitter pill to swallow and the other is simply game over on this whole debate.
a) follow the Ash’ari & Maturidi in applying taw’il (interpretation) to the text which they have apparently done at sunnah.com
b) admit that the eternal attribute of Allah (swt) takes on forms and shapes and thus check mate.
20. Can Allah (swt) destroy Jesus (as) completely or partially?
“They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allāh is Christ, the son of Mary. Say, “Then who could prevent Allāh at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?” And to Allāh belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allāh is over all things competent.” (Qur’an 5:17)
Naturally Allah (swt) can destroy Jesus (as) completely. This includes him as flesh and blood and as (bikalimatin). If a word from Allah (swt) can be destroyed it is not eternal.
21. Is Jesus the created word of Allah or the uncreated word of Allah?
“When the angels said, “O Mary, indeed Allah gives you good tidings of a word (bikalimatin)from Him, whose name will be the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary – distinguished in this world and the Hereafter and among those brought near [to Allah]. (Qur’an 3:45)
Jesus (as) is a word from Him.
“And [the example of] Mary, the daughter of ‘Imran, who guarded her chastity, so We blew into [her garment] through Our angel, and she believed in the words (bikalimati) of her Lord and His scriptures and was of the devoutly obedient.” (Qur’an 66:12)
Mary (as) is believing in the Lord and his words. Meaning they are not identical.
“O People of the Scripture do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and a word (kalimatuhu) from Him which He directed to Mary and a soul from Him. So, believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, “Three”; desist – it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs.” (Qur’an 4:171)
Jesus (as) is a word from Him.
“And if anyone of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the (kalam al-lahi) Words of Allah.” (Quran 9:6)
“Those who remained behind will say when you set out toward the war booty to take it, “Let us follow you.” They wish to change the (kalama l-lahi) Words of Allah.” (Quran 48:15)
All these words come from the same Arabic trilateral root.
ك ل م (kaf) (lam) (mim) Jesus is the created word of Allah (swt) just as the Qur’an is the created word of Allah (swt). If someone was to believe that Jesus (as) is the uncreated word of Allah (swt) than that would be Christianity. If someone was to believe that Jesus (as) is the created word of Allah (swt) that would be Islam and the path of safety.
One of our teachers has known of people who have left Islam for Christianity. You also encounter them online and some of them have said a study of the Qur’an helped them make that decision.
I have never heard of a Muslim that believes that Allah (swt) alone is the Creator and everything else (including the Qur’an as being created) become a Christian.
I do not doubt, respected reader, that after your acquaintance with the arguments and debates presented in this discussion on the issue of the Creation of the Qur’an, you will have realized that the correctness and safety lie in the belief that it is, like all other existing things, other than Allah. It came into existence after it had not been. Whatever is like that, it is without doubt created. You will have realized also that this belief in its being eternal opens the door for those who believe in the possibility of multiplicity of the eternal to the extent that it leads to belief in the world’s being eternal.
Our reliance is upon Allah (swt).
“So, in Allah let the believers put their trust.” (Qur’an 9:51)
And recite that which hath been revealed unto you of the Scripture of thy Lord. There is none who can change His words, and you will find no refuge beside Him. (Qur’an 18:27)
“We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it.” (Qur’an 15:9)
“It is for us to assemble it and to promulgate it. And when we have promulgated it, follow thou its recital (as promulgated). Nay more, it is for us to explain it.” (Qur’an75:17-19)
“It is not you who slew them; it was Allah: when you threw , it was not your act, but Allah’s: in order that He might test the Believers by a gracious trial from Himself: for Allah is He Who hears and knows (all things). (Qur’an 8:17)
﷽
Perhaps one of the most fundamental things that sets the Ahl Haqq Wal Istiqama (The People of Truth and Steadfastness) is the issue of the integrity of the sacred sources. None more important than the foundation of our faith, the Qur’an.
One can say they love the Blessed Messenger (saw) with every fiber of their beings. One can say they are defenders and vanguard of the Sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw). However, all of that is an absolute façade if one cannot defend the integrity of the foundation of our faith; namely the Qur’an.
In fact one Sunni apologist whom is known for mostly engaging with Shi’i made a video exclaiming that the fact that chapters of the Qur’an were forgotten and the fact that people forgot it was a proof for it’s veracity and integrity! Can you Imagine!
This article is written to refute the very dangerous assertion by those sources of the Sunni denomination whom proclaim that the Qur’an that Muslims have today does not have the entirety of the Qur’an with in it!
Those particular sources of theSunni denomination lead us to the following conclusions:
a) There are large portions of the Qur’an that are simply missing (because they were forgotten)!
b) There is some Qur’an that is not in the Qur’an that Muslims have today.
c) TheQur’an abrogates (over rides/cancels) other parts of theQur’an.
d) That c leads to the concept of redundant revelation.
The position of such people that believe these concepts and sources are an accurate portrayal of our faith is that we do not have the whole of the Qur’an today but we simply have the Qur’an that Allah (swt) intended us to have. Read that again because such a position is extremely nuanced and slippery.
Before I begin I would like to say that I would consider myself a fairly open minded Muslim. I would also consider myself able to accept a wide range of opinions and views with in the Islamic tradition.
However, when it comes to anyone trying to undermine the revelation of the Qur’an and thus undermine Islam in the process I am not open to such a position. It is without doubt a major redline.
In fact when some of the early scholars were writing text on issues of creed I do not see how they left out this most important issue; namely that the total Qur’an has come down to us without being tampered with, intact, guarded, preserved.
I do not compromise on the position that the Qur’an is 100% complete. Now those scholars of theSunni denomination may allege that I misrepresent their position.
They will claim that they too believe that theQur’an is 100% complete and at the same time they will affirm all of the oral traditions below. This tongue and cheek approach is anything but sincere. I believe in what Allah has said in the Qur’an.
1) Allah will guard the Qur’an.
2) None can change Allah’s words
3) Allah will collect, propagate and distribute theQur’an.
4) Nothing Allah (swt) revealed is redundant.
The Qur’an itself claims it is easy to remember and itself is called the dhikr, that which is remembered, recalled.
“And We have certainly made the Quran easy to remember. So is there anyone who will be mindful?” (Qur’an 54:17)
“This (is) a Reminder. And indeed, for the righteous surely, is a good place of return.” (Qur’an 38: 49)
So imagine that Allah (swt) has said the Qur’an is easy to remember and even calls the Qur’an something that is recalled. Yet, these people want to claim that even the Blessed Messenger (saw) forgot his revelation.
They will often cite the following as evidence:
“We will have you recite ˹the Quran, O Prophet,˺ so you will not forget ˹any of it˺, unless Allah wills otherwise. He surely knows what is open and what is hidden.” (Qur’an 87: 6-7)
Some of the detractors focus on the part “unless Allah wills”.
First, it is important to understand that Allah’s will is not like a human will. If a human being wills something today that person may change their mind tomorrow, and when tomorrow comes they may again adopt a completely different idea.
Because exception by the Will of Allah comes in the Word of Allah to emphasize that what is reported happens by His Will (not otherwise). If he wills the opposite of that, it will be so. When Allah (swt) says that something happens if He wills it, it is intended to show His power and majesty because He has control over all things.
That is like in His saying, Exalted is He:
“We would have invented against Allah a lie if we returned to your religion after Allah had saved us from it. And it is not for us to return to it except what Allah wills. Our Lord has encompassed all things in knowledge. Upon Allah, we have relied. Our Lord, decide between us and our people in truth, and You are the best of those who give a decision.” (Qur’an 7:89)
We can see the phrase: ‘Except what Allah wills‘ above.
Does anyone think for a moment that the will of Allah (swt) that people leave Islam for their previous religion? Does anyone think, ‘Well you know there may be exceptions were Allah wants people to leave Islam and practice Shirk again!‘. It is an absolutely ridiculous idea.
Another example:
Certainly, has Allah showed to His Messenger the vision in truth. You will certainly enter al-Masjid al-Haram, if Allah wills, in safety, with your heads shaved and hair shortened, not fearing anyone. He knew what you did not know and has arranged before that a conquest near at hand.” (Qur’an 48:27)
This verse cannot be construed that Allah (swt) will ‘change his mind‘ as Allah (swt) has already given his decision on this matter: “You will CERTAINLY enter.”
Another example:
He will say, “The Fire is your residence, wherein you will abide eternally, except for what Allah wills. Indeed, your Lord is Wise and Knowing.” (Qur’an 6:128)
People use this to try and argue that people will not remain in the hellfire forever.
This is also clear from the following text:
“They would desire to go forth from the fire, and they shall not go forth from it, and they shall have a lasting punishment.” (Qur’an 5:37)
“Surely as for those who reject Our communications and turn away from them haughtily, the doors of heaven shall not be opened for them, nor shall they enter the garden until the camel pass through the eye of the needle; and thus do We reward the guilty.” (Qur’an 7:40)
So as we have seen ‘Except what Allah wills‘ can be seen as a rhetorical device.
They will also bring the following as evidence:
“We do not abrogate an ayat or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?” (Qur’an 2:106)
They are so certain that the word ‘ayat’ is used for the Qur’an itself rather than previous revelations or even miracles for that matter.
“There is no changing in the words of Allah.” (Qur’an 10:64)
So what about those who say what about the previous revelations? I have an article on that and Allah (swt) clearly told us in the Qur’an whom was responsible for safeguarding the previous revelations:
“Verily, It is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (the Qur’an) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption) .” (Qur’an 15:9)
“…and the rabbis and the priest (judged according to their Scriptures), FOR TO THEM WAS ENTRUSTED THE PROTECTION OF THE BOOK OF ALLAH, and they were witnesses to it.” (Qur’an 5:44)
For those interested you may read my article: Is the Bible the Unadulterated Word of God?
So let us look at the claimscontained with in Sunni sources.
The claims of Sayuti have mostly not been translated into English but remain in Arabic and other language sources.
The great Sunni Imam Sayuti claims records that
“It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar who said: “Let none of you say ‘I have full knowledge of the Quran’. How could he know what full knowledge of it is when much of the Quran has passed by him! Rather, let him say ‘I have acquired of the Qur’an that which is present.’”.
‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with, her) reported that it had been revealed in the Qur’an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklings and Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) died and it was before that time (found) in the Qur’an (and recited by the Muslims).
Abu Harb b. Abu al-Aswad reported on the authority of his father that Abu Musa al-Ash’ari sent for the reciters of Basra. They came to him and they were three hundred in number. They recited the Qur’an and he said:
You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara’at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it:” If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust.” And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it:” Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practice” (lxi 2.) and” that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection” (xvii. 13).
Abu Waqid al-Laithii said, “When the messenger of Allah (saw) received the revelation we would come to him and he would teach us what had been revealed. (I came) to him and he said ‘It was suddenly communicated to me one day: Verily Allah says, We sent down wealth to maintain prayer and deeds of charity, and if the son of Adam had a valley he would leave it in search for another like it and, if he got another like it, he would press on for a third, and nothing would satisfy the stomach of the son of Adam but dust, yet Allah is relenting towards those who relent.”
“We used to recite a surah similar to one of the Musabbihaat, and I no longer remember it but this much I have indeed preserved: ‘O you who truly believe why do you preach that which you do not practice?’ (and) ‘that is inscribed on your necks as a witness and you will be examined about it on the Day of Resurrection.’
“Yahya related to me from Malik from Zayd ibn Aslam from al-Qaqa ibn Hakim that Abu Yunus, the mawla of A’isha, umm al-muminin said, “A’isha ordered me to write out a Qur’an for her. She said, ‘When you reach this ayat, let me know, “Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and stand obedient to Allah.”‘ When I reached it I told her, and she dictated to me, ‘Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and the asr prayer and stand obedient to Allah.’ A’isha said, ‘I heard it from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.'”
“Yahya related to me from Malik from Zayd ibn Aslam that Amr ibn Rafi said, “I was writing a Qur’an for Hafsa, umm al-muminin, and she said, ‘When you reach this ayat, let me know, “Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and stand obedient to Allah.”‘ When I reached it I told her and she dictated to me, ‘Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and the asr prayer and stand obedient to Allah.”
Source: (Malik’s Muwatta, Book 8, Number 8.8.27)
Prima Qur’an comments:
Let me ask you my Muslim brothers and sisters when you open up theQur’an do you find “Guard the prayers carefully and the middle prayer and the asr prayer and stand obedient to Allah.” ?
https://www.islamawakened.com/index.php/qur-an (just in case you do not have aQur’an with you) Now for me the above are less serious as they can easily be attributed to a scribal error. People would often sit for long sessions taking information and transcribing. So I do not find the above to be truly problematic. However, it is a glaring reality that lone narrator reports do not necessarily convey absolute certainty.
Narrated Ibn `Abbas:
`Umar said, “I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, “We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book,” and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession.” Sufyan added, “I have memorized this narration in this way.” `Umar added, “Surely Allah’s Messenger (saw) carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him.”
Zirr ibn Hubaish reported: “Ubayy ibn Ka’b said to me, ‘What is the extent of Suratul-Ahzab? ‘I said, ‘Seventy or seventy-three verses’. He said, ‘Yet it used to be equal to Suratul-Baqarah and in it we recited the verse of stoning’. I said, ‘And what is the verse of stoning’? He replied, ‘The fornicators among the married men ( ash-shaikh)) and married women (ash-shaikhah), stone them as an exemplary punishment from Allah, and Allah is Mighty and Wise.”‘
Why I bring this up is that the Sunni Muslim scholars hold to the doctrine of abrogation.
So now we have a Qur’an that is both eternal that contains verses that abrogate each other?
Welcome to the very weird theological position of eternal abrogation! This is as weird a theological position as the Christian claim of ‘eternally begotten’. How are you going to be eternal and begotten at the same time? How is the Qur’an going to be eternal and abrogated simultaneously? Odd, very odd indeed.
How could you have an eternal perfect revelation that is at the same time replaced by other eternal revelation that is either similar to or superior than it?
But this is where it gets very messy.
I could very well see them making the counter claim. “No brother you see all the verses are eternal, what you don’t understand is that they were revealed in different sequences.”
Yet, the Allah (swt) says in the Qur’an:
“Do they not consider the Qur’an (with care)? Had it been from other Than Allah, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy.” (Qur’an 4:82)
The idea that theQur’an would contain eternal redundant revelation is both blasphemous and cause for pensive reflection
Prima Qur’an Conclusion:
The ideas that the sources of the Sunni denomination are propagating that the Qur’an does not contain the entireQur’an I feel greatly undermines the preservation, and veracity of the text of theQur’an.
Perhaps more than any other view on aqidah it is this belief that separates the Ibadi perspective from that of the Sunni perspective (with dissenting voices) as mentioned.
It puts the ultimate weapon in the hands of the detractors of faith to tear down the entirety of Islam.
The sources of the Sunni denomination have no moral ground, and in fact no justification to lift a pen in the defense of Islam, do a radio or television program, or write an article or book to defend this great faith because it is all done in vain.
Why on Earth Princess Leia would hand over plans to the death star to the empire, and than claim she has the best interest of the rebellion at heart is beyond me!
As a follow up I need to write an entry for the following. (Allah-willing)
a) showing the problematic nature of believing the Qur’an to be eternal.
I leave you with the supreme words of the Creator.
Those who distort Our revelations are not hidden from Us. Is one who is thrown into Hell better, or one who comes secure on the Day of Resurrection? Do whatever you wish; He is Seer of what you do. Those who have rejected the Reminder when it came to them; and it is an Honorable Book. No falsehood could enter it, presently or afterwards; a revelation from One Most Wise, Praiseworthy. (Qur’an 41:40-42)
Moses said to them: “Woe to you, do not invent lies about God, else the retribution will take you, and miserable is the one who invents.” (Qur’an 20:61)
They pleaded, “O Zul-Qarnain! Surely Gog and Magog are spreading corruption throughout the land. Should we pay you tribute, provided that you build a wall between us and them?” (Qur’an 18:94)
﷽
He said, “This is a mercy from my Lord. And when the Promise of my Lord comes, He will crumble it to dust. And the Promise of my Lord is true.” (Qur’an 18:98)
“And We shall leave them, on that Day, to surge against one another like waves. And the trumpet shall be blown, and We shall gather them together.” (Qur’an 18:99)
First we will share a clip in which the Mufti of Oman, the Islamic Scholar, the Sword on the Neck of the Munafiq, His Imminence, Shaykh Ahmed Al Khalili (h) touches upon two topics:
The emergence of Gog and Magog and the so-called second coming of Jesus (as). For those of you conversant in Arabic, you may follow along. Otherwise, a translation in English is provided below: insh’Allah.
First question about Juj & Majuj
Grand Mufti was asked if there are some signs in the Qur’an about Juj & Majuj. Can you share with us your view on this issue? Have they already come or are they yet to come later?
Grand Mufti replies: “This depends upon the research of the scholars. As there are many scholars who have agreed that they have already come forth. And this is not far away from reality, because it is possible that between their coming and the day of judgement there is a lot of time in between these events. Time is different from how we measure time. It is like the time on the day of judgement would be like 50,00 years of our time.”
Dr. Saif AlHadi asked what is meant in the Qur’an:
“Until he reached ˹a pass˺ between two mountains. He found in front of them a people who could hardly understand ˹his˺ language.” (Qur’an 18:93) and than the following verse:
“They pleaded, “O Zul-Qarnain! Surely Gog and Magog are spreading corruption throughout the land. Should we pay you tribute, provided that you build a wall between us and them?” (Qur’an 18:94)
So Dr Saif AlHadi is asking how we join these verses? Because if you take the apparent text of the Qur’an without approach to interpretative measures, it may not make sense. At first, they find a people who scarcely understands any word, and then suddenly, in the next verse, are those people able to communicate their issue with him?
So, to this, the Grand Mufti replies: There are two possibilities. 1) “That the majority of them do not understand anything but this would not mean all of them do not understand. So it is possible they have learned among those who understand but not the masses of them. “
2) “The other possibility is the use of another language common between the two.”
Now the question comes to the: The Coming of Jesus.
Grand Mufti replies: “There is a difference of opinion among scholars. This revolves around the (Qur’an 3:55) “I will give you death and I will raise you up to me.” and how one understands it. As well as: Rather, “Allah raised him up to Himself. And Allah is Almighty, All-Wise” (Qur’an 4:158) as well as the various narrations on the matter. Yet these hadith for us are not tawatur. We also have to take into account that the Prophet is the last prophet and no prophet is coming after him. The Messenger of Allah and seal of the prophets. And ever is Allah, of all things, The Knowing. (Qur’an 33:40) So as we understand this Jesus (as) will not come. The narrations are not mutawatir and thus we cannot take on this matter.
Prima-Qur’an comments:
Thus, dear readers, when one reads the Qur’an, you can see that Juj (Gog) & Majuj (Magog) were real people, real nations or tribes that would accost and harass some people. Zul-Qarnain was asked to erect a barrier to keep those people out. They were not supranatural peoples.
wanufikha fi l-suri (AND) will be blown the Trumpet. As Shaykh explained, he is of the mind that this event (The coming of Gog and Magog) has already happened. Now in English it is easy to get caught up in the flow of the language. Yet, the WA (And) is not something that indicates immediately after. We saw this in our article here:
In the above article, the respected Shaykh understood the WA(And) in Qur’an 3:55 as a vast period of time. Allowing him to believe that a lapse of time of more than 2000 years has passed.
The Shaykh also mentioned that it is possible we are in those end times now. However, we should understand that how Allah (swt) views and measures time is quite different from our vantage point.
“And they ask you to hasten on the punishment, and Allah will by no means fail in His promise, and surely a day with your Lord is as a thousand years of what you count.” (Qur’an 22:47)
Next, another verse not brought up in the discussion above, but the other place we am aware of in the Qur’an speaking of Gog and Magog is the following:
“Until ˹after˺ Gog and Magog have broken loose ˹from the barrier˺, swarming down from every hill, ushering in the True Promise. Then—behold!—the disbelievers will stare ˹in horror, crying,˺ “Oh, woe to us! We have truly been heedless of this. In fact, we have been wrongdoers.” (Qur’an 21:96-97)
The above verse simply reinforces the point made here:
“And We shall leave them, on that Day, to surge against one another like waves. And the trumpet shall be blown, and We shall gather them together.” (Qur’an 18:99)
Which, again, is not on the day of judgement but at a time before it.
Conclusion: In the Ibadi school. Juj(Gog) and Majuj (Magog) have already come. Jesus (as) has died, and he will not come back.
In the end, we defer our matter to the masters of the Arabic language. May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to Allah (swt).
If you would like, perhaps you would be interested in reading the following:
“And DO NOT OBEY the order of the transgressors, Who cause corruption in the land and do not amend their ways” (Qur’an 26:151-152)
﷽
“They will kill the Muslims but will not disturb the idolaters. If I should live up to their time’ I will kill them as the people of ‘Ad were killed (i.e. I will kill all of them)”
As mentioned before in a previous article. Having a stable government and a country or nation that you live in where your basic needs and necessities are being met is a huge provision and blessing of Allah (swt). Political stability is a huge blessing and provision from Allah (swt).
Yet, political stability cannot come as an enjoyment to one group of people and one class of people and a hardship for others.
Allah (swt) has commanded that we stand firm for justice and that this justice cannot be selective justice or a justice that is subservient to our whims and desires.
“O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both.” (Qur’an 4:135)
From Palestine to Yemen from Libya to Sudan. We have Muslim brothers who do not speak out against the leaders not because they are afraid of Abdel Fattah El-Sisi or Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud. They do not speak up because they fear that if they do they are going against Allah (swt) and his Blessed Messenger (saw). This has been implanted in their minds so that powerful rulers can stay in place and justify what ever decision or policy they wish and the masses have nothing to do but to keep quite on the matter.
Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman reported: I asked, “O Messenger of Allah, we were living in an evil time and Allah brought us good in which we live now. Will there be evil after this good?” The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Yes.” I said, “And any good after this evil?” The Prophet said, “Yes.” I said, “And any evil after this good?” The Prophet said, “Yes.” I said, “How will it be?” The Prophet said, “Leaders after me will come who do not follow my guidance and my Sunnah. Some of their men will have the hearts of devils in a human body.” I said, “O Messenger of Allah, what should I do if I live to see that time?” The Prophet said, “You should listen and obey the ruler, even if he strikes your back and takes your wealth, even still listen and obey.”
This is the hadith that is used by the Madhkali Salafiyyah as a proof text to justify their position.
We say that this hadith if taken the way the Madhkali want you to take it will cause confusion and clashes with other equally authentic reports that report contrary statements from the Blessed Messenger (saw).
The first point is to acknowledge that the in this hadith the Blessed Messenger (saw) is clearly stating they these leaders are not upon the guidance that the Prophet (saw) is upon. It is also clearly stating that they do not follow his way.
The second point where it is attributed to the Prophet (saw) the following:
“The Prophet said, “You should listen and obey the ruler, even if he strikes your back and takes your wealth, even still listen and obey.”
This means with right. That taw’il or interpretation of this is if the leader strikes your back or takes your wealth (with right).
Examples could be: The punishment for flogging. For fornication for drinking etc. There are examples of sahabah being whipped for drinking etc.
Taking your money could mean zakaat that is not paid. Abu Bakr (ra) fought what was known as the rida wars for those who did not pay the zakaat.
However….
It cannot mean that obey the leader even if he takes your wealth or strikes your back (without right).
So now let us look at what is the truth on this matter and openings are only with Allah (swt). May Allah (swt) guide is to the truth of these matters.
Three inconvenient points that Madhkali Salafi leave out when talking about obeying the ruler.
1. That ruler is singular.
2. That when the Blessed messenger (saw) says rulers (plural) it is always in succession and never concurrent. Meaning Muslims are not divided in their leadership.
3. The audience that is being addressed is a united Muslim body under united leadership.
Notice a very relatable argument that Prophet Joseph (as) uses:
Prophet Joseph (as) uses a relatable argument to his fellow prisoners. Something to think about.
“Oh my fellow companions of this prison, are masters with separate agendas better or Allah, The One, The Subjugator?” (Qur’an 12:39)
O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in the result. (Qur’an 4:59).
Understanding the proof.
In this clear verse, we find that in matters of disagreement between those in authority and those under authority, we need to refer back to Allah and the Messenger. Had it been that, those in authority were infallible or divinely appointed, or to be given absolute obedience then, Allah (swt) wouldn’t have given any scope to disagree with them.
The fact that there is disagreement proves that “those in authority aka the Uli-l-amri”, are neither an absolute nor an infallible authority, nor are Muslims to submit to their seat of power in all things.
These two verses together (Qur’an 4:59 & Qur’an 49:9) absolutely debunk the idea that Muslims cannot rebel against a leader. It is not reasonable to think that if two groups of believers were fighting each other (with intent to kill) that the leader would not be among one of the two warring factions himself! Thus, he would be opposed.
The leader would either be in group A or in group B.
Notice that it uses the word ‘believers’ when discussing those who would be fighting (with intent to kill). Also says until it complies with Allah’s command (amri-l-lahi). Notice it does not say until it complies with the uli-l-amri (those that are given authority over you).
Let it be known that the Qur’an is qati (it is decisive in proof and evidences).
Looking at hadith from the sunnah of the Blessed Messenger (saw).
“Verily, tyrannical rulers will come after me and whoever affirms their lies and supports their oppression has nothing to do with me and I have nothing to do with him, and he will not drink with me at the fountain in Paradise. Whoever does not affirm their lies and does not support their oppression is part of me and I am part of him, and he will drink with me at the fountain in Paradise.”
“If an Ethiopian slave with a cut off nose and ear were appointed as your ruler, you would have to listen to and obey his orders as long as he rules in accordance with the Book of Allah.
The Prophet said, “A Muslim has to listen to and obey (the order of his ruler) whether he likes it or not, as long as his orders involve not one in disobedience (to Allah), but if an act of disobedience (to Allah) is imposed one should not listen to it or obey it.
Look carefully at the two hadith. The Blessed Messenger (saw) is acknowledging that we as Muslims may outright have hypocrites as leaders. “Will have the hearts of devils in a human body.” This is the batin (the hidden). In Islam we do not judge by the batin (hidden). The man could be rotten to the core. This could be true of any of us for that matter. Allah (swt) sees and knows all.
If we were to put the two hadith together we have the following hadith of the Blessed Messenger (saw):
“A Muslim has to listen to and obey the ruler, even if he strikes your back and takes your wealth, even still listen and obey. As long as his orders do not involve one in disobedience, but if an act of disobedience is imposed one should not listen to it or obey it.“
Now it makes total sense. Now the apparent contradiction is resolved.
Now we know what was meant by the righteous Amir of the Muslims. Umar Ibn Al Khattab (ra).
Abdullah ibn ‘Utbah reported: Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra) said,
“Verily, people were judged by revelation in the time of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, and the revelation has ceased. We only judge now what is manifested outwardly of your deeds. Whoever shows us good, we will trust him and bring him close. It is not for us to judge anything of his inner secrets. Allah will hold him accountable for his inner secrets. Whoever shows us evil, we will never trust him or believe him even if it is said his intentions are good.
‘”A man asked the Prophet, when he had put his leg in the stirrup: “Which kind of Jihad is best?'” He said: ” A word of truth spoken before an unjust rulers.”
Now some people may also want to interpret this hadith to mean something pacifist. It is the right of every Muslim to receive good counsel, even the corrupt rulers. Yet, why is this the highest form of Jihad? Because more often than not it leads to martyrdom.
“[Pharaoh] said, “You believed him before I gave you permission. Indeed, he is your leader who has taught you magic. So I will surely cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides, and I will impale you on/in the trunks of palm trees, and you will surely know which of us is more severe in [giving] punishment and more enduring.” (Qur’an 20:71)
Did these magicians incite rebellion? Well, that depends. They are not recorded to have incited rebellion against Pharaoh. They did not take up weapons against him. However, some times simply by speaking the truth and uncovering that which is false can undermine a ruler, a false idea or a false ideology. Hence censorship and telling the people to keep quite.
Thus,
“Which kind of Jihad is best?” The Blessed Messenger (saw) replies:
“A word of truth spoken before an unjust rulers.”
Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sudays is basically saying that the killings are “fitna”. That we should not get involved and that we refer the matter back to the ruler and the scholars.
Meanwhile the military police stand close watch. Some how does not seem very convincing.
We should not be so quick as to condemn Shaykh Abdur Rahman Sudays or any of the other scholars. However, when geopolitical allegiances and alliances are involved we should be careful of who is saying what and what is the affiliation of their government.
On the authority of Abu Sa`eed al-Khudree (ra) who said:
I heard the Messenger of Allah (swt) say, “Whosoever of you sees an evil, let him change it with his hand; and if he is not able to do so, then [let him change it] with his tongue; and if he is not able to do so, then with his heart — and that is the weakest of faith.”
So be very careful dear brothers and sisters on racing to condemn each other. The Blessed Messenger (saw) has left some scope based upon the abilities of each individual.
He (saw) started by saying we should change the munkar (evil) with our hands.
However, if you cannot do so with your hands than through your speech.
If you are unable to do so via speech than at the very least hate it in your heart.
Not everyone is ready or prepared for martyrdom and even those of us who are may not be prepared to have our families threatened, or killed or horrific ways.
So condemning these nation state “rulers” you will end up with labels, “Khawarij” you may end u imprisoned and/or face horrific torture.
Make du’a for every single scholar of Islam from all the various Islamic schools of thought that Allah (swt) protect them guide them and give them strength.
“One does not deviate from obedience to the ruler, even if he commits adultery and drinks alcohol on live television!” ?
The improper understanding of the Qur’an and the Sunnah is what leads people like Dr. Abdulaziz Al-Rays to say the following:
This actually depends.
“If an Ethiopian slave with a cut off nose and ear were appointed as your ruler, you would have to listen to and obey his orders as long as he rules in accordance with the Book of Allah.”
So in the case of adultery on live television he would have enough witnesses to bring the punishment of adultery upon him and thus would be the leader no more as he would be executed.
In the case of drinking alcohol he would be whipped.
If he submits to the book of Allah (swt) one has scope to argue that he is to be obeyed. If he does not submit to the book of Allah (swt) than he is a hypocrite and what has Allah (swt) told us about the hypocrites?
“O Prophet! Fear Allah and do not obey the unbelievers and the hypocrites: certainly Allah is aware and wise.” (Qur’an 33:1)
There are a few scenarios when it comes to the rulers.
Example 1 Outwardly pious but inwardly evil. This was already discussed.
Example 2 Outwardly impious and ask us to go against the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Than he is definitely not to be obeyed.
Example 3 Outwardly impious does not ask us to go against the Qur’an and the Sunnah. However, he himself goes against the Qur’an and the Sunnah. This will depend upon the nature of his rebellion against the the Qur’an and the Sunnah.
Be very careful with point number 3. That is where things can get slippery. For example look at the following hadith:
Narrated ‘Ali:
“The Prophet sent an army unit (for some campaign) and appointed a man from the Ansar as its commander and ordered them (the soldiers) to obey him. (During the campaign) he became angry with them and said, “Didn’t the Prophet order you to obey me?” They said, “Yes.” He said, “I order you to collect wood and make a fire and then throw yourselves into it.” So they collected wood and made a fire, but when they were about to throw themselves into it, they started looking at each other, and some of them said, “We followed the Prophet to escape from the fire. How should we enter it now?” So while they were in that state, the fire extinguished and their commander’s anger abated. The event was mentioned to the Prophet and he said, “If they had entered it (the fire) they would never have come out of it, for obedience is required only in what is good.”
Ali said, “The Messenger of Allah(saw) sent an army and appointed a man as a commander for them and he commanded them to listen to him and obey. He kindled fire and ordered them to jump into it. A group refused to enter into it and said “We escaped from the fire; a group intended to enter into it. When the Prophet (saw) was informed about it, he said “Had they entered into it, they would have remained into it. There is no obedience in matters involving disobedience to Allah. Obedience is in matters which are good and universally recognized.
So all of those three hadith are not saying that you do not obey the leader if he slips up or makes mistakes or sins. Those hadith are saying that we, the people do not have to obey the leaders if they order us to do something against the Qur’an and the Sunnah.
This is a very important point to keep in mind.
It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira (ra) that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“It is obligatory for you to listen to the ruler and obey him in adversity and prosperity, in pleasure and displeasure, and even when another person is given (rather undue) preference over you.”
“It is obligatory for one to listen to and obey (the ruler’s orders) unless these orders involve one disobedience (to Allah); but if an act of disobedience (to Allah) is imposed, he should not listen to or obey it.”
Now when the two hadith are combined the apparent contradiction is removed. We are to obey the ruler as long as the ruler does not ask one to disobey Allah (swt) or his Messenger (saw).
The hadith on not over throwing the ruler as long as he does his prayer among you.
More contradictory hadith?
It has been narrated on the authority of ‘Auf b. Malik that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“The best of your rulers are those whom you love and who love you, who invoke Allah’s blessings upon you and you invoke His blessings upon them. And the worst of your rulers are those whom you hate and who hate you and whom you curse and who curse you. It was asked (by those present): Shouldn’t we overthrow them with the help of the sword? He said: No, as long as they establish prayer among you. If you then find anything detestable in them. You should hate their administration, but do not withdraw yourselves from their obedience.”
In other words if they do not establish prayer among us and if they stop ruling according to the book of Allah than obedience is forfeit.
How do we know that our understanding of the Qur’an and Sunnah is the correct one?
Because this is how the companions of the Blessed Messenger (saw) understood it.
“O people, whoever among you sees any crookedness in me in my character, my deals, my action, then let him straighten out that crookedness.” A man from the audience called out, “By Allah, were we to see any crookedness in you, we would have straightened it out with our swords.’ Umar then said, “All praise is for Allah, who has placed in this nation someone who will straighten the crookedness of Umar with his sword.’”
Source: (Akhbar Umar (pg. 231,232) and Ar-Riyadh an Nadirah)
Subhan’Allah is there a Muslim leader alive today who claims to be greater than Umar (ra)?
Secondly after Caliph Uthman was admonished again and again by the Muslims he was overthrown. By the Khawarij they will tell you. Well….about that.
So now you are in a pickle. If Amr b. al-Hamiq al-Khuza’i is to be damned (there goes the doctrine of the companions being all adala). Amr b. al-Hamiq al-Khuza’i is a khariji who dies the death of jahiliyah (according to them) or sacrifice this concept that there comes a point in which the believers may find it necessary to forcibly remove the Amir.
What has happened is that some of them so bewildered by these undeniable facts of history than go on to say that the sahabah did not know the books of aqidah (written with a sectarian milieu in mind long after the fact. Or even better yet, that these sahabah did familiar with the Qur’an and hadith on these matters!
All that has been written has shown this is not the case at all.
“If only Muslims were upon the proper manhaj, had proper aqidah and proper knowledge of tawheed none of this would be happening!“
Where have we heard this before?
“Everything will be alright once we get to Tir Asleen.”
Likewise some Muslims will say well, we just need to focus on obedience to Allah (swt) and Tawheed and the proper aqidah.
Look! The very essence of Islam is submission to the will of Allah (swt). Yet, the very fact that the companions who had proper aqidah and proper tawheed and yet had massive fitna is a prove that one can have can be hyper fixated on these things and still not save one from strife. Just like the idea of the Muslims having a Caliph did not stop the expulsion of Muslims from Andalusia.
This does not mean we do not strive to establish rule by the Qur’an and the Sunnah. It does not mean that we do not strive to worship Allah (swt) properly and be upon the proper aqidah. It simply means that human ego and the frailty of men will last until the day of judgement.
The hypocrisy of the Madhkali Salafiyah.
This whole mantra of obey the leader seems very specific to a particular group of leaders they feel approximate their idea of the correct aqidah and or manhaj. It doesn’t seem to apply to Ergodan or Mubarak, or the Muslim brotherhood, or Qatar, or Assad (who certainly deserved rebellion) and a litany of others.
One big elephant in the room. What is actually meant by ‘The Leader’ or ‘The Ruler’
Last I checked the agreed upon leaders of the Muslim Ummah (according to the Sunni and the Ibadi) were Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali. Than after Ali, the Ibadi and Sunni have different narratives. The Shi’a have a totally different narrative altogether, The Blessed Messenger (saw) and his family.
I mean I don’t remember the Muslim ummah holding shura for pretty much any of these guys. Who said they get the wealth of the land? Who said they get to buy football teams and sports cars with the money from the land? Is this from the Qur’an and the Sunnah?
Realistic expectations of Muslim rulers and governments and signs of the hypocrites.
Now I want to say I have seen allot of disdain for Arabs online over the issue of Palestine. First of all, I think love of the Arabs is a good thing because the Blessed Messenger (saw) was from among them. Secondly, you cannot blame Arabs as a whole. Blame their leaders! Lastly, many of you simply know better. Many of you know Arabs as your brothers and sisters who are generous and kind. They have shown you some of the best hospitality and certainly Saudi Arabia is to be commended for the logistics feat of hosting 3 million people for Hajj annually.
However, when it comes to the majority Muslim countries, it has to be said. If it quacks like a duck and moves like a duck it’s a duck! The geopolitical rivalries and alliances do not necessarily benefit the Ummah of Muhammed (saw).
“And Allah will surely make evident those who believe, and He will surely make evident the hypocrites.” (Qur’an 29:11)
“O Prophet, strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be harsh upon them. And their refuge is Hell, and wretched is the destination.” (Qur’an 66:9)
“They will kill the Muslims but will not disturb the idolaters. If I should live up to their time’ I will kill them as the people of ‘Ad were killed (i.e. I will kill all of them)”
Let me list countries with a Muslim majority (if I have missed any or you feel there are those who should be included and are left out please do let me know).
When we look at this list we need to ask ourselves some questions: What are their capabilities (militarily speaking) (economically speaking) and/or other. What are the current challenges that they are facing?
Malaysia Brunei Indonesia Bangladesh Comoros Islands Maldives Islands Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Uzbekistan Turkmenistan Tajikistan Azerbaijan- currently in conflict with Armenia/ backed by Iran Afghanistan-Taliban trying to rebuild the country after nearly 4 decades of war with foreign powers. Pakistan-currently in political turmoil Iran-currently backing Armenia against Turkey/Azerbaijan/Israel Iraq-still reeling from the U.S Invasions. Turkey-currently a part of NATO, backing Azerbaijan against Armenia/Iran. Albania Bosnia Herzegovina Syria-still reeling after a civil war. Lebanon-dealing with 1. 5 million refugees from Syria. Jordan Kuwait U.A.E Saudi Arabia Oman Yemen -still reeling after civil war. Egypt Somalia-civil war. Djibouti Sudan-currently in a civil war. Libya-currently in a civil war. Tunisia Chad -dealing with close to 500,000 refugees that came in from Sudan. Niger-forming new government after kicking out French colonialist. Mali -civil unrest. Burkina Faso-forming new government after kicking out French colonialist. Algeria-tensions with Morocco over Western Sahara. Morocco-tensions with Algeria over Western Sahara. Senegal Mauritania Guinea Sierra Leone Nigeria
Dagestan, Ingushetia/Chechnya (as part of the Russian Federation) are bogged down in conflict in Ukraine
So we need to be realistic about who can help and how they can help. This is why these protest, and boycotts are very very effective and something that I hope leads to greater things among the wider Muslim community namely economic cooperation and buying Muslim owned products. Insh’Allah. In my next article I will cover this.
I will leave the readers with this. I feel that this doctrine that Madhkali Salafiyyah is problematic and it is a manipulation of the text of the Qur’an and the Sunnah and a re-reading into the history of the early Muslims. It makes a great ideology for despots and tyrants. If anyone has an issue with it. We have our scholars who can debate your scholars on this matter. Insh’Allah it will be of benefit and we will certainly be waiting.
Think about how you as a Muslim. As a Sunni/Shi’i/Ibadi as Salafi/Sufi would feel if you woke up one day and saw the Kab’a absolutely destroyed? Mecca was in ruins? How would you feel knowing it was not from a flood or natural disaster but the enemies of the Muslims destroyed it. Now hold that feeling and read the following:
It was narrated that ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr said:
“I saw the Messenger of Allah (saw) circumambulating the Ka’bah and saying: ‘How good you are and how good your fragrance; how great you are and how great your sanctity. By the One in Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammed, the sanctity of the believer is greater before Allah than your sanctity, his blood and his wealth, and to think anything but good of him.’”
It is said that this hadith is Sahih li ghayrihi (authentic due to external evidence) according to Al-Albani
May Allah (swt) grant victory to our brothers and sisters in Palestine! May Allah (swt) grant this ummah good leaders, bridge builders, those who fear Allah (swt), and love his Messenger (saw) and love the ummah of Islam. Those who are wise and have bold vision. Those who stand firm upon the truth. Amin!
If you would like to learn more about the Madhkali I would suggest the following articles:
“Indeed, We have granted you, al-Kawthar. So pray to your Lord and sacrifice. Indeed, your enemy is the one cut off.” (Qur’an 108:1-3)
﷽
These sublime verses (Qur’an 108:1-3) were revealed to console the heart of the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) in the face of repeated antagonism by those who called him, ‘abtar‘, which means ‘the animal whose tail is cut off’.
It means one who has no one to come in succession, the one who has none to inherit.
1. Truly, We have granted you Al-Kawthar.)
2. Therefore, turn in prayer to your Lord and sacrifice.)
3. For he who hates you, he will be cut off.)
Muslim, Abu Dawud, and An-Nasa’i, all recorded from Anas that he said, “While we were with the Messenger of Allah in the Masjid, he dozed off into a slumber. Then he lifted his head smiling. We said, `O Messenger of Allah! What has caused you to laugh?’ He said,
(Truly, a Surah was just revealed to me.) Then he recited…
“Indeed, We have granted you, al-Kawthar. So pray to your Lord and sacrifice. Indeed, your enemy is the one cut off.” (Qur’an 108:1-3)
The Blessed Prophet (saw) had lost his flesh and blood son Ibrahim — May Allah have abundant mercy on him.
“When Ibrahim, the son of the Messenger of Allah (saw), died, the Messenger of Allah (saw) wept. The one who was consoling him, either Abu Bakr or ‘Umar, said to him: ‘You are indeed the best of those who glorify Allah with what is due to him.’ The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: ‘The eye weeps and the heart grieves, but we do not say anything that angers the Lord. Were it not that death is something that inevitably comes to all, and that the latter will surely join the former, then we would have been more than we are, verily we grieve for you.’”
We can see that the Blessed Messenger (saw) was overcome with grief from the death of his flesh and blood son. It was a cause of derision from his enemies. Yet, Allah (swt) revealed an entire chapter of the Qur’an on account of this.
“And We will surely test you with something of fear and hunger and a loss of wealth and lives and fruits, but give good news to the patient,
Who, when disaster strikes them, say, “Indeed we belong to Allah, and indeed to Him, we will return.“ (Qur’an 2:155-156)
So this is the attitude of the believers and who best to lead by example than the Blessed Messenger (saw). He expressed grief over the loss of his flesh and blood son. Allah (swt) revealed an entire chapter of the Qur’an which, He did not do for the death of anyone else in the Blessed Prophet’s family.
Furthermore…
Narrated Al-Mughira bin Shu`ba:
“On the day of Ibrahim’s death, the sun eclipsed, and the people said that the eclipse was due to the death of Ibrahim (the son of the Prophet). Allah’s Messenger (saw) said, “The sun and the moon are two signs among the signs of Allah. They do not eclipse because of someone’s death or life. So when you see them, invoke Allah and pray till the eclipse is clear.”
Now, if there was an occasion for the Muslims of this Ummah to mourn annually, it would certainly have been for the death of the Blessed Prophet’s son.
There is not a single hadith of the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) proclaiming Hussain will be a martyr or that the Prophet (saw) cried because he was a martyr. Not one!
People commemorate the deaths of others because, in their hearts, it is politics and the stirring of emotions. Yet, the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) son dies and our Noble Prophet (saw)cried and the whole Muslim Ummah has no day of grieving?
Now someone may retort, ‘There are millions of Hadiths. Have you read them all?’ It would be hubris to say that we have read them all.
However, what we can say is this. We can say that those who are more studied than us, more learned than us, more familiar with the traditions, and those who make political capital out of tragedy would have such hadith and utilize them.
The fact that they did not and still have not until this very day makes our case airtight.
Hadith from the Shi’a sources: (Update 8/31/2020) This is a typo. It is meant to say: Hadith that Shi’a relies on.
“Ummul Fadhl the daughter of al-Harith said that she entered on the Messenger of Allah (S) and she said: “Oh! Messenger of Allah, I had a strange dream last night. He said: And what is it? She said: It was difficult. He said: And what is it? She said: I saw, as if, a piece of your body was severed and was put in my lap! The Messenger of Allah (S) said: You saw well – Fatima will give birth, God willing, a boy so he will be in your lap. Then Fatima gave birth to al-Hussain (AS) and he was in my lap – just as the Messenger of Allah (S) said. So I entered one day on the Messenger of Allah (S) and put him in his lap, but I noticed that the eyes of the Messenger of Allah (S) were pouring tears! So I said: Oh! Prophet of Allah, my parents are your ransom, what is with you? He said: Gabriel (AS) came to me and informed me that my nation (ummah) will kill this son of mine.”
Source: (al-Mustadrak al-Sahih, al-Hafidh al-Hakim al-Nisapouri, v. 3, p. 176)
“Umm Salamah has said: “al-Hussain entered on the Prophet (S), while I was sitting at the door, so I saw in the hand of the Prophet (S) something he turned over while (Hussain) sleeping on his stomach. I said: Oh Messenger of Allah, I looked and saw you turning something over in your hand when the kid was sleeping on your stomach and your tears were pouring? He said: Gabriel came to me with the sand upon which he (Hussain) will be killed. And he informed me that my nation (umma) will kill him.”
Source: (al-Musannaf, al-Hafidh Abu Bakr bin abi Shaibah, v. 12.)
Prima Qur’an Comments:
Both of these hadiths are from sources that the Shi’i rely upon. Yet notice the following:
1 There is absolutely no mention that Hussain would die as a martyr. No mention at all.
2 That the Blessed Messenger (saw) cried upon information that a family member died would be a very human thing to do.
3 That the Blessed Messenger (saw) said that ‘my nation will kill him’.
The Blessed Messenger (saw) could have said, ‘renegades will kill him’. ‘He will be killed by unbelievers’ etc…..and He (saw) did not say that at all.
This is crucial when we consider the following:
Narrated `Aisha:
“Usama approached the Prophet (saw) on behalf of a woman (who had committed theft). The Prophet (saw) said, “The people before you were destroyed because they used to inflict legal punishments on the poor and forgive the rich. By Him in Whose Hand my soul is! If Fatima (the daughter of the Prophet) did that (i.e. stole), I would cut off her hand.”
So even if the mother of Hussain, the wife of Ali, stole something, the law would apply to her. This is important because there is no unequivocal statement from the Blessed Messenger (saw) stating that Hussain would die as a martyr.
Now imagine that noble Fatima (ra) did steal something. You don’t think it would grieve the Blessed Messenger (saw)?
Wouldn’t you as a parent be grieved if your child or grandchild was injured or punished? Even if they did something right or wrong?
How do we know that the Blessed Messenger (saw) wasn’t crying over the fact that Hussain brought women and children into a conflict where he was advised by senior companions not to do so?
What does it say about the character of Hussain if what we are told is true? That he ‘knowingly‘ knew that he would be ‘sacrificed?’ That he would ‘knowingly‘ sacrifice the honour of his noble sister Zaynab (ra) as well?
“He (saw) said: Gabriel came to me with the sand.”
If Gabriel could bring the sand, he could have brought an item of Hussain clothing. He could have brought anything. Yet, he brought the sand. The sand where many children and women were unnecessarily killed. Ill-advised indeed.
Hadith from the Sunni sources:
“Narrated Wakee’, narrated Abdullah bin Sa’eed, from his father from Aisha or Umm Salamah [Wakee’ said this doubt came from Abdullah bin Sa’eed] that the Prophet (saw) said to one of them [either Aisha or Umm Salamah], “An angel entered the house on me, he never entered on me before, and he said to me, ‘this son of yours, al-Hussain, will be killed, and if you wish I can show you the soil from the earth where he will be killed’. Then he took out some red soil”.
Source:[Recorded in Musnad al-Imam Ahmad, vol. 6 p. 294]
“Narrated Muhammed bin Udaid, narrated Shurahbil bin Mudrik, from Abdullah bin Nujayy, from his father, that he traveled with Ali, and he used to carry his purifying water. When they were next to Nainawa on his way to Siffin, Ali called, “Be patient Oh Abu Abdillah (the kunya of his son al-Hussain), be patient Oh Abu Abdillah by the banks of the Euphrates. I [Nujayy] said, “what is this?”. He [Ali] said, “I entered upon the Prophet (saw) one day while his eyes were shedding tears. I said, ‘what is it with yours eyes shedding tears?’. He said, ‘Rather, Jibreel was here earlier and he told me that al-Hussain will be killed by the bank of the Euphrates and he [Jibreel] said ‘do you want me to provide you a sample from his soil [where he will be killed] so you can smell it?’ and I said ‘yes’. So he extended his hand and he took a grip from the soil and gave it to me so I couldn’t help my eyes to fill with tears’”
Source: [Recorded by Ahmad, vol. 1, p. 85.]
Prima Qur’an Comments:
What is interesting and indeed telling, is that the Shi’i -from what we observe love to jump on the chance to show that there are problems with Sunni narrations on this or that. They are quite the hadith critiques. However, when it comes to anything from Sunni sources that will make their claims legitimate, all the critical thinking skills seem to go right out the window.
The first hadith has an interesting statement: “An angel entered the house on me, he never entered on me before, ” An unknown angel apparently comes to give the information.
The other odd contradictory piece of information is this.
That he traveled with Ali,
They were next to Nainawa on his way to Siffin,
Entered the house on me
So did the angel give this information when they were traveling on the way to Siffin or while the Blessed Messenger(saw) was in his house? It is quite redundant to bring the same information. Three of the hadith feel it is important to mention the sand, and one of them leaves it out completely.
Who entered in on the Blessed Messenger (saw)?
Ummul Fadhl?
Ali Ibn Abu Talib?
Umm Salamah?
Aisha?
We can reconcile this because Aisha and Umm Salamah are both wives of the Blessed Messenger (saw). Ummul Fadhl is a paternal Aunt. Ali Ibn Abu Talib, of course, is a cousin and son-in-law. So it is reasonable that they all entered in on different occasions. However, it is not reasonable to think these were separate locations and days. So, one can search the history and see if there are records of the four of them traveling together at that location. Which can’t be true as one of the narrations has it that the unidentified angel came to the Blessed Messenger (saw) while he was at home.
One thing is abundantly clear from the two Hadith from Sunni sources. There is absolutely no mention that Hussain would die as a martyr. No mention at all.
The conclusion?
People commemorate the deaths of others because, in their hearts, it is politics and the stirring of emotions. Yet, the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) son dies and our Noble Prophet (saw) cried, and the whole Muslim Ummah has no day of grieving?
The text of the hadith themselves raise questions and none of them unequivocally say that Hussain died as a martyr. There was one individual who tried to interact with this article some time ago on Facebook. That individual was shutdown. He did not interact with the material at all. Simply used emotionalism.
“This is the book of Shayk of Hanabila of his time, Al-Qadi Abi Ya’la, who was very opposed to Jahmiyya and Ashar’i. This book is intended as a rebuttal of the wrong interpretation and distorings about the names and attributes of Allah. However, the author has several weak or invented hadith, making it a controversial book from the people of knowledge.”
“But, Alhamdulillah we present this heritage of one of the Imams of the Salaf in a checked version, authenticated, and annotated. This allows the reader to distinguish the authenticate & the weak in the hadiths cited. And also to have the authentic position (words of imams of the Sunnah in support) on the weak chapters contained in this book.”
This narration attempts to answer the following question:
“Where is Allah is before creating sky and earth? It is answered by stating that He (Allah Most High) was riding on a whale that was made out of light... and the hadith continues and he says about it: “Even this is a strange hadith it finds support with other hadith!”
Christians must feel some form of poetic justice or vindication. All those years where Shaykh Ahmed Deedat was turned loose upon Christendom and jeering at anthropomorphic descriptions of God in the Bible and now the chickens have come home to roost.
May Allah (swt) forgive us. May Allah (swt) guide us.
“Verily! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day, there are indeed signs for men of understanding.” (Qur’an 3:190)
﷽
There has been circulating around social media a recent talk done by Dr. Ali Ataie of Zaytuna institute. It looks as if he was defending the concept that the earth is circular and flat rather than circular and spherical.
Note: This article has been updated as of 20/7/2023 in light of new developments. Please see the end of this article.
This seems to have spread from the venue of a YouTube channel for MCC East Bay and then quickly deleted.
Deleting the video was a bad move to begin with. Why?
Because it looks as if something was being covered up and, quite naturally, it got thinking people curious. The title of the video itself could go either way. Meaning Dr. Ataie could be discussing competing views while sharing his own. Or, Dr. Ataie could be sharing competing views while debunking another view.
The video title says: “Views on the Shape of the Earth: Flat Earth & Geocentrism| Dr. Ali Ataie“
Interestingly, the pro-Zionist, MEMRI channel picked up on this with lightning speed! MEMRI was co-founded by former Israeli military intelligence officer Yigal Carmon and Israeli-American political scientist Meyrav Wurmser.
You can see the video clip above:
Now some who do not think Dr. Ali Ataie was promoting flat earth may ask “Where is the time stamp where he says the Earth is flat?” In fact, Dr. Abdullah bin Hamid Ali posted this on his Twitter feed:
Three things to note from this:
“I was just raising some common arguments that flat earthers raise.” Which is not a denial that he is a flat-earther.
“Notice I never said that I believed in the flat earth.” But he never said he didn’t either.
“My position is always Allah Alim, it’s not essential to me either way.”
Also, the talk went very quickly into free-mason territory. Everyone from Sir Isaac Newton being a knighted Freemason occultist, to around 94% of astronauts being Freemasons to Neil deGrasse Tyson.
These are the type of things you would want to seed in the minds of the population if you wanted to say there was a massive effort to distort reality.
Now that being said, we want to say what our position is. We personally will stop using the terminology “conspiracy theory”. We believe such terminology is created by those who do not want us to think. Yes, indeed there are conspiracies. Not all conspiracies are nefarious. People could conspire to throw a colleague a surprise party, for example.
Yet, we do not believe in labeling things as conspiracy as a pejorative to shut down a particular view point.
Every theory is a theory that merits rigorous principles of logic, investigation, reflection and experimentation where possible.
In fact, we find it strange that those people who consider themselves skeptics or open-minded do not welcome the exploration of all theories.
So, for us it is all on the table.
Did the moon landing happen? Was JFK an inside job? Is COVID-19 a massive data collection ploy and a means to boost the revenue of big pharma?
Maybe it is plausible that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is a plant that said what he said to make anyone who challenged the official narrative of covid-19 look like anti-Jewish quack.
Who knows anymore!
There is something that strikes a cord with what Dr. Ali Ataie said, though that merits pensive reflection:
“If we are on a flat surface and all the stars and planets go around us, then this is clearly designed for us. Someone put us on a pedestal. But by insisting that we are all apes, living on some random planet, going around the sun, in the corner of some random galaxy among billions of others, then we are easier to control by people in power. They can convince us that our lives are all about dunya, and to obey them, not God” — Dr. Ataie
Now let us suspend judgement for half a second. If, for the sake of argument, that model of the flat Earth was/is true, it would be such, in your face, evidence that we really are a special creation that one would have to have veils upon veils of darkness upon them to deny Allah.
May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to Allah (swt).
We have two other related articles on the subject you, the reader may be interested in:
This article has been updated as of 20/7/2023 in light of new developments.
Dr. Ali Ataie has unequivocally stated that he is not a flat earther!
Because this does not help either brother Ataie. People will wonder
“Wallahi, anyone who calls me a flat earther is a liar.” -Dr. Ali Ataie
“I am not a flat earther.” -Dr. Ali Ataie
“But I am not a flat earther.” -Dr. Ali Ataie
Prima Qur’an comments:
Dr. Ataie states:
“The article by memri is an inaccurate hit piece written by a Zionist organization.”
Hence, the reason why the video should not have been deleted by MCC East Bay. Because that video would have provided much needed context, if any. However, we are the ones that pointed out that this organization (MEMRI) is run by Zionists, and we were also amazed at how quickly that organization picked up on some small discussion which was not at a convention or even well advertised. Dr. Ataie is not really all that well known. I do not mean that as a slight. Really makes you wonder who is who in our Muslim community. How did that organization(MEMRI) get that material and publish it ?
That being said, it would help if MCC East Bay did not delete the video. Because, on the one hand, Dr. Ataie is saying:
“The article by memri is an inaccurate hit piece written by a Zionist organization.”
While also stating:
“I made several ill-advised off-the-cuff comments during a random Q &A…”
“It was not wise to make those comments and cause confusion.”
We really, really wish Dr. Ataie wouldn’t have made that statement: “is an inaccurate hit piece.” The rest of his statement is absolutely fine.
However, by making that comment, Muslims are now going to wonder why the original video was deleted and if it would be made public and this has the potential to lend credibility to that cursed organization (Memri). That is if nothing was taken out of context.
Dr. Abdullah Bin Hamid Ali, who meant well by defending his friend, most likely triggered more people by tweeting a flurry of controversial tweets.
Views should be weighed by the evidence and the arguments.
That being said, we do not think that Dr. Abdullah, Dr. Ataie or anyone for that matter should be castigated for having views that others find that go against mainstream scientific convictions.
Naturally, some Muslims chimed in and rightfully mentioned that much of this could have been clarified from the first post.
The problem with this clarification is that it comes down to a situation of damned if you do and damned if you do not. So, because Dr. Ataie brought up the free masons, some flat Earthers who support Dr. Ataie (based upon their presumptions of his own views) are now going to think that Dr. Ataie is caving in to pressure from such groups. They fail to realize that Dr. Ataie was simply sharing their perspective without necessarily endorsing it.
People, it is not easy to be in the public eye.
Our sincere advice to Muslim speakers. Whoever is recording such public events should give full disclosure to the one being recorded and be completely transparent with them on how and where the contents are to be released.
Conclusion: Dr. Ali Ataie has not retracted or recanted anything. To recant or retract would be to state something and then change positions. He never claimed he was a flat earther. He has simply clarified in no uncertain terms. He is not a flat earther.
As regards those Muslims who associate with and support Zionist and Zionist supporters.
May Allah guide you! May Allah (swt) free Palestine and either guide or crush the oppressors! Amin
“The faculties of seeing (tudriku) cannot grasp Him, and He grasp all–seeing (yudriku), He is the All-Subtle and All-Aware.” (Qur’an 6:103)
May Allah (swt) bless our teacher, Shaykh Juma Muhammed Rashid Al-Mazrui.
These are notes I have taken from our Aqidah class on the subject: On the visibility of Allah (swt).
In the class we look at the proofs that other schools give to prove the visibility of Allah (swt). We go through each ayat of the Qur’an that is used. We go through the ahadith that are used. We than go through our proofs and evidences to show that Allah (swt) will not be seen in the life to come.
The hadith in question:
Narrated Jarir:
We were sitting with the Prophet (saw) and he looked at the moon on the night of the full-moon and said, “You people will see your Lord as you see this full moon, and you will have no trouble in seeing Him, so if you can avoid missing (through sleep or business, etc.) a prayer before sunrise (Fajr) and a prayer before sunset (`Asr) you must do so.” (See Hadith No. 529, Vol. 1)
Shaykh Juma was going to show the weakness in the chain of the transmitters in the sanad as well as problems with the matn. However, in this class there was a change of pace.
Of course we reject the hadith “That we shall see our Lord in the like manner as we see the full moon.”
So Shaykh Juma mentioned that next time (which has already passed and that lesson was recent) that there are many contradictions in the matn and the hadith is not logical and it is not acceptable.
HOWEVER…
For the sake of argument let us agree with those who say it is authentic. What is our interpretation of this hadith?
In the science and fundamentals -we have a principle -reconciliation between the text are apparently in conflict or contradictory to one another.
A verse that apparently contradicts another verse for example.
What is really intended by this verse. An example:
“Wherever you may be, death will overcome you—even if you were in fortified towers.” When something good befalls them, they say, “This is from Allah,” but when something evil befalls them, they say, “This is from you.” Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “Both have been destined by Allah.” So what is the matter with these people? They can hardly comprehend anything!” (Qur’an 4:78)
Then immediately verse 79:
“Whatever good befalls you is from Allah and whatever evil befalls you is from yourself. We have sent you ˹O Prophet˺ as a messenger to ˹all˺ people. And Allah is sufficient as a Witness.” (Qu’ran 4:79)
“Good is from Allah and what ever misfortunes is from yourself.” or the “Good and the misfortunate are both from Allah”
So, apparently this looks like a conflict.
So what is the interpretaton here? Here we apply the principle of reconcilation.
When Allah says everything is from Allah, he determines everything from his limitless, eternal knowledge. The second verse that says only good is from Allah and the bad from ourselves, that we are the real cause of those bad things.
The best thing to use to understand the Qur’an is the Qur’an itself.
“And if not that a disaster should strike them for what their hands put forth [of sins] and they would say, “Our Lord, why did You not send us a messenger so we could have followed Your verses and been among the believers?” (Qur’an 28:47)
“If We give people a taste of mercy, they become prideful ˹because˺ of it. But if they are afflicted with an evil for what their hands have done, they instantly fall into despair.” (Qur’an 30:36)
Something inflicts them because of their own actions and their own sins
Now when we read the same chapter:
“Corruption has spread on land and sea as a result of what people’s hands have done, so that Allah may cause them to taste ˹the consequences of˺ some of their deeds and perhaps they might return ˹to the Right Path˺.” (Qur’an 30:41)
So we have seen how this principle works.
Now to the subject: Is Allah visible? Will Allah be seen in the hereafter or not?
We reject it based upon the matn, but we say for the sake of the argument for those who say it is authentic, what is interpretation. Rueya is the word used.
You see or you will see, rueya , it also means to know or knowledge.
In other words you will have certainty of Allah (swt). That we will know Allah (swt).
Where do we get this interpretation of seeing to mean knowing?
“Have you not seen ˹O Prophet˺ how your Lord dealt with the Army of the Elephant?” (Qur’an 105:1)
So it is logical to ask someone this question if he did not see those people. That is if you interpret and understand optical seeing. This means that Allah (swt) would ask the Prophet (saw) about something that is not logical.
“Have not those who are ungrateful disbelievers seen how Heaven and Earth were once one solid mass which We ripped apart? ” (Qur’an 21:30)
Have not they seen?
“Have you not seen what your Lord did deal with ‘Aad?” (Qur’an 89:6)
So we use this method to understand and reconcile text.
“Did they not see how many generations we destroyed before them.” (Qur’an 36:31)
Did they not see: This means to know. They are aware about something to some degree or another.
“The heart did not lie about what it saw.” (Qur’an 53:11)
(The Prophet’s) heart did not deny what he (Muhammed) saw. His heart did not lie about what he saw. His (the prophet’s) heart/mind did not deny what he saw. His heart didn’t deny what he saw.
The poet says, “I have seen Allah is greater than anything in power and he has most soldiers.”
The Poet saw Allah (swt) ?
Another poet says: “I have seen Allah destroyed the people of aad, thamud and Noah as well.”
So we need to use methodological principles that are also acceptable to the other schools so that they can see the point.
So the hadith about seeing Allah like the moon.
We have to interpret it since the Qur’an is clear.
“The faculties of seeing (tudriku) cannot grasp Him, and He grasp all–seeing (yudriku), He is the All-Subtle and All-Aware.” (Qur’an 6:103)
That no eyes will see Allah (swt), no optical vision.
Next week we will look at the sanads (chains of transmission)
May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to Allah (swt).
For further articles on this subject kindly read the following:
“Creator of the heavens and the earth. He has made for you from yourselves, mates, and among the cattle, mates; He multiplies you thereby. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)
Above credit is to Kennst du schon die Umkreisel photo taken from: pexels.com
﷽
This entry is to educate and enlighten those Muslims who hold the view that Allah (swt) is everywhere.
They may rely upon the following proof text:
“It is He who created the heavens and earth in six days and then established Himself above the Throne. He knows what penetrates into the earth and what emerges from it and what descends from the heaven and what ascends therein, and He is with you wherever you are. And Allah, of what you do, is Seeing.” (Qur’an 57:4)
“Have you not considered that Allah knows what is in the heavens and what is on the earth? There is in no private conversation three but that He is the fourth of them, nor are there five but that He is the sixth of them – and no less than that and no more except that He is with them wherever they are. Then He will inform them of what they did, on the Day of Resurrection. Indeed Allah is, of all things, Knowing.” (Qur’an 58:7)
“And to Allah belongs the east and the west. So wherever you turn, there is the Face of Allah. Indeed, Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing.” (Qur’an 2:115)
In the Ibadi school, we understand that Allah (swt) has full power and knowledge of all things. We do not believe that Allah (swt) is omnipresent.
A text that seemingly conflicts with the belief that Allah (swt) is everywhere is the following:
“Nay, when the earth has been pounded with a great pounding and your Lord and the angels come row upon row.” (Qur’an 89:21-22)
If Allah (swt) is everywhere it would make little sense to believe that our Allah (swt) would ‘come‘ to a place he already ‘is‘.
“It is He who created for you all that the earth contains: then He turned to the heavens and made them seven skies-and He is the Knower of All Things.” (Qur’an 2:29)
If Allah (swt) is everywhere it would make little sense to believe that Allah (swt) would ‘turn‘ anywhere, for he is already ‘there‘.
“Creator of the heavens and the earth. He has made for you from yourselves, mates, and among the cattle, mates; He multiplies you thereby. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)
The verses above demolishes any concept of Allah (swt) resembling the creations. This shows that Allah (swt) exists without a place because whatever exists in a place is by nature composed of particles, body, occupying space. Allah (swt) is clear of occupying space.
This means Allah (swt) does not occupy one place (the throne) or (every place). After all space is a creation and one would need to ask who created spatiality? If it has always co-existed with Allah (swt) it cannot said to be created by our Lord.
The very idea of ‘where‘ is Allah (swt) is inappropriate. Just as the very idea of ‘when‘ is Allah (swt) is inappropriate.
All the above verses that quote Allah (swt) being ‘with you wherever you are’, or Allah (swt) ‘turning’ or Allah (swt) ‘coming’ are all interpreted using the sound principles embedded in the Arabic language in a way that conforms to Qur’an 42:11.
We also have two very important pieces of information. One from Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib and the other from the Blessed Messenger (saw).
The saying “Allah existed eternally without a place, and He is now as He ever was” is related – without chain – from ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib
Sources: (Ibn ‘Ata’ Allah al-Sakandari (d. 709) cites it as one of his Hikam (#34). As cited by ‘Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi (d. 429) in his al-Farq Bayn al-Firaq page. 256)
We also have from the Blessed Messenger (saw) who is reported to have said:
“Allah was when there was nothing else than Him, and His Throne was upon the water, and He wrote in the Reminder (al-dhikr) all things, and he created the heavens and the earth.”
Source: (Narrated from ‘Imran ibn Husayn by al-Bukhari, in the Book of the Beginning of Creation: https://sunnah.com/bukhari/59/2 )
Some people especially perennialist may like to argue that Allah (swt) is everywhere because it will end up supporting concepts like pantheism or pan-deism. Everywhere is basically pantheism or pan-deism. Allah (swt) exist as he was before all Creation (time/space).
Some questions for those who believe in the omnipresence of Allah (swt) is to ask them:
Is Allah (swt) fully present or partially present? What proof text would be offered to show ‘fully‘ or ‘partially‘?
Why not fully present? If fully present than why is it wrong to worship idols, Jesus, Iblis, Demons, or anything for that matter? Authubillah min dhalik!
If Allah (swt) is only partially present where is the other part that isn’t there?
The belief of Muslims is that Allah (swt) is not present in all of his Creation nor that Allah (swt) is his creation or that Allah (swt) became the universe.
“All will perish except His face.” (Qur’an 28:88)
If This verse is taken by its apparent meaning, it would indicate that that the Creator would increase or decrease. If the universe or reality ‘expands‘ or ‘retreats‘ it entails that the Creator ‘expands‘ or ‘retreats‘.
The only challenge to Allah as a “being” that I am aware of is Process Theology (or Process Theism) in Christianity where they state: “God is becoming” not being.
The irony is that the one opening for process theology in Islam is the following hadith Qudsi:
“Abu Huraira(ra) reported:
The Messenger of Allah, (saw), said, “Allah Almighty said: The son of Adam abuses me. He curses time and I am time. In my hand are the night and day.”
Sources: (Al Bukhari 4549, and Muslim 2246)
The irony here is that this one opening also defeats process theology of becoming a reality among Muslims. It defeats the whole idea of ‘becoming‘ if you are omnipresent or time itself. Glory be to Allah!!
“And when Musa came at Our appointed time and his Lord spoke to him, he said: My Lord! Show me (Yourself), so that I may look upon You. He said: You will not see Me but look at the mountain if it remains firm in its place, then will you see Me; but when his Lord manifested His glory to the mountain He made it crumble and Musa fell down in a swoon; then when he recovered, he said: Glory be to You, I turn to Thee, and I am the first of the believers.” (Qur’an 7:143)
Know that the creation cannot contain the Creator nor is the Creator present in the Creation.
May Allah (swt) guide us to what is beloved to Allah (swt).
For those who are interested you may wish to read the following:
Prima Quran 
