WAHABISM AND MONOTHEISM

In As­Sahih Fil Aqidetit Tahawiya, page 165, As­Saqaf, the current reviser, states:

Singling out metaphor is a course adopted by the worthy ancestors. No single sane can doubt so. Ibn Teimiya, in his Al­Iman, page 85, records Ahmed's considering metaphor as a style used in some expressions. Al­Hafiz Az­Zerkashi, in Al­Bahrul Muhit Fi Ilml Usoul, part 2 page 182, relates so to Ahmed. Ibn Teimiya and Ibnul­Qeyim failed in their endeavors to deny metaphor. They contrasted themselves! While he decides metaphor as a sort of devil deeds, Ibnul­Qeyim, in his Al­Fawaidul Mushawiqa, contrasts himself as he proves and cites many evidences on materialization of metaphor. Sheik Al­Albani, the self­contradictor, opposes Ibn Teimiya in this regard when he upholds metaphor in the introduction of Mukhtasarul Uluw, page 23 (the margin). On page 31 of our Al­Bisharatu Wel­Ithaf, we have referred to this contradiction.

Because of compulsion and force, the present compiler of Adwa'ul Bayan was suffering in the country he had lived in, in his final days, he had to deny metaphorical expressions of the texts. Compulsion, however, has its own rulings! At any rate, denial of this scholar is not that strong evidence to which students and seekers of the truth via individuals, not seekers of individuals via the truth, should hold fast, especially when clear proofs have been provided. Allah, however, is the guide.

It is quite strange for Ibn Teimiya to claim, on page 85 of his Al­Iman, that neither Ahmed's followers, Malik, Ashafii nor did Abu Haneefa maintain that there are metaphorical expressions in the Quranic texts. He also claimed that division of factuality and metaphor had been originated in the fourth Hijri century, and that it might have emerged in the last of the second and the first of the third Hijri centuries!

Indeed, this is inconstancy in identifying history. It is aimed for nothing more than deviating the readers. Masters of sects, specially Ashafii who used another term, did refer to metaphor. Muammar Bin Al­Muthenna, whose birth was in 106, did compile a book named Mejazul Quran, ­Metaphor in the Quran­.

As­Sahih Fil Aqidetit Tahawiya, page 311:

Corporalists provided God's saying, (The Beneficent settled on the Throne), as their evidence on God's being sitting on His Throne and being materially utmost. Evading stating belief of God's material settling and physical exaltation, some say that Allah is being above in the heavens.

Indisputably, this is a clear blunder. Allah is gloriously promoted against having a space. In Arabic, the expression 'He is in the heavens.', is used for glorifying. The following are detailed exposition about meanings of this Verse and its likes, 

quoted from Ibnul­Jawzi's Dafu Shubehit Tashbih, page 121, in addition to our comments:

The word, 'Throne' mentioned in God's saying, (He settled on the Throne), stands for the royal bench. It is commonly used in Arabic before and after Islam. It is also used occasionally in the holy Quran. The item 'settle' has various meanings. It may hint at equity, perfection, direction or prevalence.

As­Sahih Fil Aqidetit Tahawiya, page 324:

Corporalists and anthropomorphists claim that deniers of God's being in or out of the cosmos, are denying His Existence. This is a valueless mistake. They compare the Lord to corporealities. They believe that the Lord is a thing like other things and beings that occupy a point in spaces. Some imagine that He is compact corporeality, like mankind, or loose, like air, light or gas. In spite of their denouncement, they all imagine the Lord as a corporeality conceived by mentalities whether in or out of the cosmos. Our duty is clarifying this question, resting upon Quranic and prophetic texts.

Scholars, at suggesting that Allah is neither in nor out of this cosmos, intend that He, the Praised, cannot be given descriptions of this material cosmos. Hence, He is neither connected nor disconnected to this universe. Connection and disconnection are qualities of corporealities. Allah, the Exalted is as he describes Himself, (Nothing like His likeness). The point corporalists and anthropomorphists claim of being above the Throne and occupied by the Lord, the Praised the Exalted, should be positively a space. It would not have been possible to conceive had this point not been a space. By the same token, it would not have been described as occupied by the Lord, being above the Throne if it had not been a spatial point. Finally, it would not have been possible for them to indicate to that elevated point for referring to the Lord, if it had not been a definite point. Correspondingly, they imagine that Allah is a corporeity comparable to material beings. They conceive that He is being above the Throne that He created along with the cosmos. Accordingly, they believe Allah had had a lower locality before He created this cosmos. He would certainly have upper, before, behind, left and right localities had He a lower one. Complex of those corporalists and anthropomorphists is that they have not submitted totally to the doctrine. Hence, they could not recognize that Allah, the Exalted, is incomprehensible and inconceivable, and that He is promoted against whatever may come to connotation and minds. Had they submitted to His extraordinary Existence and incomprehensibility, they would have been saved and joined to faith of promotion; the genuine faith of Islam.

As­Sahih Fil Aqidetit Tahawiya, page 334:

The supreme reliable masters of Islamic scholarship and hadith pledged God's promotion against being in or out of this cosmos. They used the following expressions in various occasions. "He is neither in nor out of this cosmos." "He is neither connected nor disconnected to this cosmos." 

"He is neither combined nor separated from this cosmos." "He is neither touching nor quitting this cosmos." The entire expressions, however, lead to the same purport indeed. The following are sayings of those master scholars:

1. Al­Ghezzali, in Ihyau Uloumiddin, part 4 page 434:

Allah, the Exalted, is holily elevated against having a space, and blessedly promoted against having measures or localities. He is neither in nor out of this cosmos. By the same token, He is neither connected not disconnected to it. He bewildered some people's minds so perplexedly that they denied His Existence when they were unable enough to listen and recognize Him.

2 & 3. An­Nawawi and Al­Mutawalli:

In his Rawdatut Talibin, page 1064, An­Nawai records:

Al­Mutawalli says, "He is an atheist, that whoever believes in anteriority of the cosmos, contingent of the Creator, negation of constant unanimous attributes of the Anterior, connection or disconnection of the Lord."

An­Nawawi, however, certifies this statement; therefore, this is considered as sayings of two supreme scholars.

4. Al­Beihaqi, in his Al­Asmau Wes­Sifat, pages 410­1, as well as Shiebul Iman, renders this faith with thorough details.

5. Alizz Bin Abdus­Selam, in his Al­Qawaid, page 201, asserts that within faiths that are rather difficult for the public to apprehend, is God's being neither in nor out of this cosmos, and neither connected nor disconnected to it.

6. Abul­Muzaffar Alisferaini, in his At­Tabsiru Fiddin, page 97, revised by Al­Kawthari, Publication of Al­Anwar 1359:

… and to apprehend that moveableness and stillness… connection and disconnection are impracticable for Allah, the Exalted, since all require an edge and end.

7. Ibnul­Jawzi, the Hanbalite, in his Dafu Shubehit Tashbih, page 103, Publication of Darun Nawawi:

By the same token, it is illicit to claim that Allah is in or out of this cosmos, since being in or out are consequences of spatial beings.

The previous was a good number of the master scholars who assert that it is impracticable to describe Allah, the Exalted, as being in or out of this cosmos.

As­Sahih Fil Aqidetit Tahawiya, page 339:

The following is a literal quotation of his statements: 

"The hadiths 'Allah comes with His face' and 'Allah is between your hands in prayers' do not contradict His being on His Throne, elevating His creatures. This fact is asserted by Quranic and prophetic texts, as well as traditions of the Prophet's companions and the worthy ancestors. Still, Allah is being far ranging and comprehending the whole cosmos. He has told that His servants encounter His face whenever they turn their faces. Naturally, exalted things encounter whatever is below from every side. Hence, Allah, the Comprehensive of everything, should be fitting this affair more intensely. More details can be provided in books of Sheikul­Islam, Ibn Teimiya, specially Al­Hamawiya and Al­Wasitiya, pages 203­13, that are revised by Zeid Bin Abdil­Aziz Bin Feyad."

As if they are divine texts, Al­Albani, in the introductory of Mukhtasarul Uluw, page 71, attests and cites Ibn Teimiya's statements recorded in his At­Tadmuriya, as his evidence. "If localities are created beings, Allah, then, is not included with His creatures. If localities are what is aloft the cosmos, it is most surely that Allah is being aloft the cosmos. The same thing is said about those who substantiate that Allah is being in a certain locality. If they claim Allah's being aloft, they will be right. But if they claim His being included with His creatures, this will be wrong."

Thus, they claim existence of an area lying beyond the cosmos which is not included with the created beings. Hence, in that area, god of those faction exists!! As­Sahih Fil Aqidetit Tahawiya, page 358:

Corporalists and anthropomorphists are two names of the same faction. They conceive God's being a definite corporeality. Most of them imagine the Lord's being in a form of a man sitting on a great seat (throne). Statements of those faction, appertained to questions of monotheism and faiths, recorded in their books are clear evidences on the previous allegation. One of the most evident witnesses is the book titled As­Sunna, and ascribed to son of Ahmed, the master founder of Hanbalism. They do prevaricate when they claim their being believing in a faith other than the forecited. Their books, wordings, speech, private orations and many other ostensible matters; these all are obvious indications on authenticity of our claims against them. For instance, although they reckon with the divine attributes, they aver the Lord's having limbs and organs such as a hand, fingers, face, leg, feet, eye, side and the like. They ascribe qualities of contingent material beings to the Lord; such as sitting, moving, edges and localities