Wahabists ensued their master, Ibn Teimiya, in citing Malik's statement about the exegesis of God's saying, (The Beneficent settled on the Throne), as their evidence on decorum of their faith. Bin Baz and AlAlbani have been used to using this statement.
Bin Baz's AlFetawi, part 2 page 171:
He, the Praised, is over His creatures and settling on His Throne in such a way fitting His glory and magnificence. On the contrary of claims of the heretic Jahmites and their likes, who cited 'seize' as the interpretation of 'settle', the flawless meaning is that adopted by the worthy ancestors, which is that Allah arose on His Throne. This is evidenced by Malik's answering the question about way of God's settling remarked in God's saying, (The Beneficent settled on the Throne). Malik said, "Settling is known and its way is unexplored, and believing in this is obligatory and questioning about it is heresy."
Bin Baz's AlFetawi, part 2 page 518:
"O Malik! (The Beneficent settled on the Throne), how His settling was?", a man asked. "Settling is familiar. Inversely to the commended meaning, the known settling is the elevation. It way is unexplored… Take this man out. He is heretic," ordered Malik.
Considering Malik's verdict has been operative, what should the ruling of Omar's demonstrating that Allah, the Exalted, reposes on the Throne which cracks and creaks, squeaks or grate owing to the Lord's heavy weight, be?
Second, as Ahmed or another said, "Pass these texts as they are.", was Malik (God please him) adopting this belief when he provided that answer and decided heresy of that asker? The asker, however, was not heretic when he asked about meaning of God's saying. He became heretic just after he had asked about the way of God's settling. The forecited saying of Malik represents completely course of the worthy ancestors and their ever followers. Malik stated that linguistic meanings of such texts are known, while methods and ways are thoroughly not. None other than the Owner, can recognize the way of the Essence and the attributes. Meanwhile, settling, hearing and sight are realizable matters.
As much as I think, Ahmed indicated miscomprehending the Verses and commending them to Allah exclusively. This trend is followed by the descendants. This is indeed the very denudation that leads to denying the Praised and Exalted Creator. I am highly touchy to SheikulIslam Ibn Teimiya's saying, "Anthropomorphists worship a pagan while Tatilites worship nothingness." The deviant heretics, especially in this country, claim that Allah is neither over, beneath, to the right, to the left, in nor out of this world. These are descriptions of nonexistent things. What should be the answer of any ordinary man if he is asked to provide a definition for nonexistence? Certainly he will answer: Nonexistence is nothingness. If he is also asked whether this nothingness is in or out this cosmos, the answer will be: This is incorrect, nothingness is neither in nor out of the cosmos. From this cause Ibn Teimiya said that Tatilites worship nonexistence.
We, hereby, concise the forecited prolonged essay of Bin Baz, by citing the following instructions and commentaries: Allah, the Exalted, is a corporeality. Corporealities are the only things existing in or beyond nature. Allah's settling on the Throne is a material matter. It is not valid to ask how; otherwise you shall be decided as atheist whom should be dismissed or killed. Besides, such procedures should not be regarded as intellectual terrorism since Malik had followed them. We, however, should refer to him in interpreting the divine attributes and religious terrorism. As a matter of face, we disagree to his heretic verdict of permissibility of visitating the Prophet's tomb!! Say not that Omar, the caliph, had represented God's reposal on His Throne as a man's sitting on a new made chair which cracks, creaks, squeaks or grates due to heavy weight!! This interpretation is legal for Omar, but illegal for others!!
Anyhow, the commenders committed a single intellectual terrorism, while Wahabists have been committing three ill deeds; two are reckoned with the intellectual terrorism and one to commendation. Commenders confessed of ignoring the Lord's way of settling on the Throne, and deemed forbidden asking about so. Wahabists confined people between two options; either to rest upon the extrinsic material settling as the very meaning involved, or to be lined up with Jahmites, Tatilites, deviants and atheists. After responding to the easier option; the previous, they will rule of your dissidence for your exposing Allah's corporeality concealment of which He has ordered, if you disregard commending that meaning to Allah. See how the forbidden commendation became obligatory after forcing on resting upon the material exegesis! Wahabists have been committing intellectual terrorism by forcing on resting upon the material exegesis, and another one by forcing on commending the physical settling and forcing on abstaining from asking about the way!!
A commender says: Do not open the door to questions and evade entering this place.
A Wahabist says: Jump from that high place, but evade falling to the ground!!
It was not proved that Malik had adopted the notion Wahabists held fast on.
1. AtThehbi's Siyeru A'laminNubela, part 8 page 100:
Jafar Bin Abdillah: A man asked Malik, "O Abu Abdillah! How was the Lord's settling mentioned in His saying, (The beneficent settled on the Throne)?" Malik had never been in such embarrassing moments. He nodded the head down and stroke the cane in his hand to the ground, and became sweaty. After a while, he raised the head, threw the cane and stated, "It is impracticable to ask 'how' about Allah. His settling is not inconceivable. Believing in so is obligatory. Asking about so is a heresy. I think you are a heretic. Take this man out." Hence, he dismissed the asker.
According to Salama Bin Shabib's narration, Malik stated, "I am afraid you are an aberrant."
2. AburRabi ArRashidini:
Ibn Wahab: We were attending at Malik when a man asked, "O Abu Abdillah! (The Beneficent settled on the Throne), how was that settling?" Malik nodded the dead down and became sweaty. After a while, he raised his head and said, "The Beneficent settled on the Throne as he describes Himself. It is impracticable to ask 'how' about Him. 'How' is invalidated for Him. You are an ill heretic. Take him out."
3. Mohammed Bin Amr Qamshard AnNisapuri:
Yahya Bin Yahya: We were attending at Malik when a man asked… The same previous narrative with the following addition, "Settling is not inconceivable."
4, 5. AtThehbi's Siyeru A'laminNubela, part 8 page 105:
Ibn Edi: Mohammed Bin Harun Bin Hassan: Salih Bin Yaqub: Habib Bin Abi Habib:
Malik stated, "Affairs of our Lord, the Blessed the Exalted, are descended. He is everlasting and unchanging." Yahya Bin Bukeir commented, "This is a qualified saying, but I did not hear it from Malik directly."
Salih is unknown for me. Habib is so familiar. The most well known narrative related to Malik is that of AlWalid Bin Muslim who asked about texts of the divine attributes. Malik answered, "Pass them as they are, without exegesis." Subject to authenticity of Habib's narrative, Malik had two sayings in the question concerned.
6. Eyad, the judge:
Abu Talib AlMekki: Malik (God please him) was the most distant from theologists. He was also opposite of the Iraqis.
Sufian Bin Uyeina: A man asked Malik, "O Abu Abdillah! (The Beneficent settled on the Throne), how was that settling?" Malik could say nothing and became sweaty. After a while, he said, "His settling is familiar. It is impracticable to ask 'How' about Him. Asking about this is heresy. Believing in it is obligatory. I see you but a deviant. Take him out."
It is noticeable that there is no single narrative support Wahabists' claim of Malik's adopting for resting upon the extrinsic meanings of texts. Actually, these narrations refer to the opposite. In the first narration, Malik denied the general 'how' ascribed to Allah, the Exalted. He did not negate the way of God's settling. He says, "'It is impracticable to ask 'How' about Allah. His settling is not inconceivable." This means that settling for the Lord is originally out of a method or a way. It is not a material settling the way of which is not known, as Wahabists claim. Malik's 'not inconceivable' means that it is decisively provable to Allah, the Exalted, by Quranic texts. Where is, then, the evidence on their claims of material settling?
The second and third narrations support the first. Malik said, "The Beneficent settled on the Throne as he describes Himself. It is impracticable to ask 'how' about Him. 'How' is invalidated for Him." As a matter of face, the expression, "It is impracticable to ask 'how' about Him" is usually used in reports of AhlulBeit for negating materiality misalleged to Allah, the Elevated. The expression is also used for promoting God against such unfitting matters.
In the fourth narrative, Malik interpreted the Lord's descending into descending of His affairs. He says, "Affairs of our Lord, the Blessed the Exalted, are descended. He is everlasting and unchanging." For Wahabists, interpretation is a heresy, denudation, deviation and atheism. Therefore, pursuant to rulings of their sect, they should rule of heresy, denudation, deviation and atheism of Malik so that he may be free from being their ceiling!
The fifth narrative is pure commendation that does not stand for any sort of resting upon extrinsic or intrinsic meanings. AtThehbi himself declares so, "…asked about texts of the divine attributes. Malik answered, "Pass them as they are, without exegesis."
Malik's expression in the sixth narration, "His settling is familiar. It is impracticable to ask 'How' about Him", shows denial of inquiring the way of settling. This means that he denies the Lord's material settling adopted by Wahabists. The word 'for him' shows that he denies ways of the Lord's settling or the absolute 'how' accredited to Him. Malik's saying 'familiar' insinuates that this matter is provable by Quranic texts.
How is it, then, adequate for them to claim Malik's acceding to their sect? What for are they taking Malik as their ceiling? What for do they delude Muslims that Malik is one of them and with them and they, nearly, would be about to issue his membership to their club!!
AlMudawwanatulKubra, part 6 page 465:
Malik nodded the head down, sweated and thought for a considerable time when he was asked about God's settling in His saying, (The Beneficent settled on the Throne). After a while, he answered, "It is impracticable to ask 'how' about Him. His settling is not unfamiliar. Believing in so is obligatory and asking about it is a heresy. I see you a heretic. Take him out." Hence, the asker was dismissed.
The same is recorded in Asharani's AtTabaqat.
Like the earliest, Malik's answer in this narration commences with denial of the Lord's material settling they believe in. How was it, then, possible for them to claim that, by saying, "Settling is not unfamiliar", Malik intended at the Lord's material settling on the Throne. Exalted be Allah against so!
Our claim is also supported by Ashafii's words recorded in AsSibki's TabaqatusShafiiya, part 9 page 40: Ashafii: As I asked him about monotheism, Malik answered, "It is absolutely inapplicable to think that the Prophet (peace be upon him), who trained his nation how to cleanse after defecation, had not taught them monotheism. Once, he (peace be upon him) said, 'I have been ordered of fighting people till they say there is no god but Allah.'… He did not say that believing in Allah's occupying an elevated space, is within monotheism."
