Is THEM Guilty of Shirk? - Dr. Wesley Muhammad

if the religion was hanging on the distant star, men from the non-Arab Persians would reach it
and the luckiest of them would be the people of Faris.‖
I have demonstrated that these ‗Black sheep‘ who are the original recipients of the message of Islam are
the Black Arabs and they and their Islam are best represented by Ahmad ibn Hanbal. I further
demonstrated that the White sheep and their re-interpretation of Islam are best represented by the Persian
Hujjat al-Islam al-Ghazzali.
It is in this context that Bro Mubaashir offers the following Argument:
―The debates between the Mutazilites and the Asharites were not about whether Allah was a
human being or not, they were about whether Qur'anic statements referencing Allah's hand, foot,
etc. should be accepted on face value (literally) or understood as metaphorical. So, Imam Hanbal
and the others argued that Allah has a hand and a foot and a throne, but that no human's eyes can see
His hand, throne, foot, etc. Imam Hanbal would argue that Allah has a hand, but His hand does not look
like your hand. He would cite the hadith:
‗Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Allah's Apostle said, "On the Day of Resurrection, Allah will grasp the
whole Earth by His Hand, and all the Heavens in His right, and then He will say, I am the King.‖
Abu Huraira said, ‗Allah's Apostle said, Allah will grasp the Earth...‖‘
―But, Imam Hanbal would tell us that Allah has a hand, but we can't see or comprehend Allah's hand
that will hold the earth and skies and it is certainly not a human hand. The Mutazilite would argue
that Allah does not have a hand at all; that this Qur'anic reference is a metaphor for Allah's power
and control. Imam Hanbal was concerned about preserving the integrity of the text of the Qur'an
so that translators and interpreters would not substitute their interpretations for the actual words
used. He was not trying to prove that Allah was a man or human being. If that was his point, he would have said
so. He was a scholar, prolific muhadith, and teacher. Surely, he could have and would have made
this clear. But, you cannot find anywhere where Imam Hanbal argued that Allah is a human being.‖ [End
Quote; emphasis mine]
I must admit that I was taken aback after reading this. I can‘t believe that, had Bro Mubaashir
been familiar with my published works, he would have advanced this particular argument. I am humbled
to be one of those who are forcing a reevaluation of the Aqida of Imam Ahmad and its place within the
development of Sunni Islam. I have three published articles in peer-reviewed academic journals on the
subject, and I go into great detail regarding this matter in my doctoral dissertation, all of which are freely
available at www.drwesleymuhammad.com. The fact of the matter is, Bro Mubaashir completely
misrepresented the position of Imam Ahmad here. It is not his fault though: most Muslim scholars today
do. Because the religion of the non-Arab converts dominates Muslim thinking today, it was found
necessary to posthumously ―convert‖ important early figures to this religion, including the proud Black
Arab and staunch antagonist of this religion, Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal. But of all of the Four Imams, his
Aqida is best known to us because there is a wealth of material going back to Imam Ahmad himself. So we
don‘t have to engage in such unwarranted speculation about what Imam Ahmad ―would have said,‖ as
Bro Mudaashir felt free to do above. We need only quote Imam Ahmad himself. On the basis of this
wealth of material we can make the following affirmations with no fear of contradiction: 1.) Imam Ahmad
affirmed that Allah is a delimited (mahdud) being who literally has a human-like form, after which Adam‘s
form was patterned 2.) This human form can be seen with human eyes and 3.) Allah appeared to the
prophet in this human form as a man.
14