Is THEM Guilty of Shirk? - Dr. Wesley Muhammad

More documents

Recommendations

Info

another important observation above: ―I found that the Messenger sallallâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam clarified that which came from His Lord.‖ This is exactly the point I made in Philly and my reason for citing the Abd Allah report from the Prophet concerning al-Dajjal and his one eye: ―Narrated by Abd Allah: Al-Dajjal was mentioned in the presence of the Prophet. The Prophet said: ‗Allah is not hidden from you; He is not one-eyed,‘ and pointed with his hand towards his eye, adding, ‗While Al-Masih Al-Dajjal is blind in the right eye and his eye looks like a protruding grape‘.‖ The point of this hadith for me was/is the Prophet‘s physical gesture (i.e. pointing to his eye) to clarify what he means by ‗eye‘. There are several such reports. See e.g. the hadith reported on the authority of Abu Hurayra and found in Abu Dawud‘s Sunan: ―[Abu Yunus] said: I heard Abu Hurayra recite the verse ‗Surely God commands you to make over trusts to those worthy of them, and that when you judge between people, you judge with justice. Surely God admonishes you with what is excellent. Surely God is ever Hearing, Seeing.‘ Then he said: ‗I saw God's messenger [when he recited these last words] put his finger on his ear, and the next finger on his eye.‘ Abu Hurayra says: ‗I saw God's messenger, when he recited this [verse], he [so] put his two fingers‘.‖ Ibn Majah reports in his Sunan: ―Ibn Umar reported: I heard Allah‘s Messenger (s) saying while he was on the pulpit, ‗Allah the Compeller grasps His heavens and His earth in His Hand,‘ and the holy prophet closed his fist and began to close and open it.‖ These physical gestures made by the Prophet clearly suggest that his intent was for the descriptions to be taken in the physical sense. According to a tradition on the authority of Jubayr b. Mut‘im and found in Abu Dawud, Ibn Khuzayma, at-Tabarani and others, God sits on the Throne like a man sitting on a leather saddle and makes it creak. ―[Jubayr b. Mut'im] narrates: A Bedouin came to find the Messenger of God and said to him: ‗O Messenger of God, the men are all in, the women and the children perish, the resources are growing thin, the beasts are dying. Pray then to God in our favor so it rains! We ask of you to intercede for us alongside God, and we ask of God to intercede for us alongside of you.‘ ‗Unfortunate one!‘ answered the Messenger of God, ‗do you know what you're saying?‘ Then he started to say subhana llah, and did not stop repeating it so long as he didn't see his Companions doing as much. Then he said [to the Bedouin]: ‗Unfortunate one! One does not ask God to intercede alongside any one of His creatures! God is very much above this! Unfortunate one! Do you know who God is? (God is on His Throne, which is above His heavens, and heavens are above His earth,) like this‘—and the Messenger of God put his fingers in the shape of a tent—and it creaks under Him like the creaking of the saddle under the rider.‖ The Prophet compares Allah sitting on the Throne and making it creak to a man sitting on a saddled horse and making the saddle creak. The anthropomorphism is blatant. The Prophet‘s physical gesturing hardly allows us to see in this report anything other than a physical description of God‘s ―establishment‖ on the Throne. This is equally true of the other reports. The Prophet‘s physical gesturing when mentioning Allah‘s Sifat is no doubt his own tafsir of these Sifat. This is likely the Prophet‘s ―clarification‖ which al-Juwayni refers to above. 24
This issue of the significance of the verses and reports of the Sifat – literal or metaphorical – must be pursued further. To make his point that these are purely (which I assume he meant) parabolic or metaphorical, Bro Mubaashir quotes Sura 17:89. However, most exegetes who make this same claim start with Sura 3:7: ―He it is who has sent down to thee the Book: in it are decisive verses (muhkamāt); they are the foundation of the book: others are allegorical (mutashābihāt). Those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except God. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: ‗We believe in the book; the whole of it is from our Lord‘; and none will grasp the message except men of understanding.‖ The foundation of the Book comprises muhkamāt, clear verses whose meaning is sufficiently known and therefore require no further explanation. In contrast to these, there is a smaller portion of the Book comprising mutashabihat, uncertain or doubtful passages whose meaning is open to two or more interpretations. The true significance of these is known only to Allah and they thus require further explanation. The pressing question of course is to which category are the Ayat al-Sifat, and by extension the Akhbar al-Sifat or hadith references, belong? It is generally assumed today that these are from the mutashābihāt or doubtful verses and are thus majāz, ―metaphorical‖. This means that the apparent meaning of such a verse is not be countenanced and its hidden meaning is found through ta‟wīl, metaphorical interpretation (as advocated by Bro Mubaashir). So the Qur‘anic references to Allah‘s hand, for example, do not mean that Allah actually has a hand: the term yad (hand) is but a metaphoric reference to Allah‘s grace. In contrast, among the muhkamāt or decisive verses whose apparent meaning is clear and obligatory are the allegedly ‗anti-anthropomorphic‘ verses such as 42:11 (―There is nothing like Him‖), declaring Allah‘s incomparability, and 6:103 (―Vision comprehends Him not‖), declaring the inability of human eyes to comprehend God. These latter verses, we are told today, are not subject to ta‟wīl but are to be understood according to their apparent (zahir/haqiqa) meaning. While today this division of the verses (muhkamāt = allegedly anti-anthropomorphic verses/ mutashābihāt = anthropomorphic verses) is generally recognized and is even orthodox, in the Classical Period it was the mutakallimun or speculative theologians like the Ashariyya who adhered to this division. On the other hand, the Traditionalist Sunni scholars, that is to say the Sunni scholars (not just the Hanbalis) who privileged the authenticated reports over the so-called ―rational arguments‖ of the mutakallimun, adhered to the exact opposite division: it is the allegedly anti-anthropomorphic verses that are mutashābihāt and therefore requiring further explanation, and the anthropomorphic references that are muhkamāt and therefore are to be understood according to their apparent meaning. For example, Imam Ahmad specifically identified the main proof-texts of the anti-anthropomorphist theologians – 50:16; 57:4; 6:103; 42:11 – as mutashābihāt (Kitab al-Risalah li-Ahmad; Al-Radd „ala l-Zanadiqa wa l-Jahmiya). On the other hand, regarding the sifāt khabariyyah or Revealed Attributes (i.e. scriptural anthropomorphisms), they are muhkamāt and are therefore to be affirmed according to their literal meaning („ala zahirihi; see Ibn al-Jawzi, Manaqib Imam Ahmad, 155; Ibn Hanbal, usul al-Sunna, in Ibn Abi Ya‘la, Tabaqat al-Hanabila, I:246). So too the famous Maliki scholar from al-Andalus, Yusuf Ibn Abd al-Barr (d. 1071), who said in his al-Tamhid lima fi l-Muwatta min al-ma‟ani wa l-asanid (7:145): ―The People of the Sunna are agreed in affirming all the Attributes which are related in the Qur‘an and the Sunna, having iman (faith) in them and understanding them ala l-haqiqa (according to their apparent and real sense), not ala l-majaz (metaphorically).‖ While there are many such references that I could cite to prove that the Traditionalist scholars understood the Sifat as muhkamāt and therefore possess literal significance, I will conclude with the important statement of 25
Page 1 and 2: Is THEM Guilty of Shirk? The Long O
Page 3 and 4: ARGUMENT 1 First, Dr. Wesley refers
Page 5 and 6: your Allah is one Allah. So stand t
Page 7 and 8: "He ran the race." "He ran up the b
Page 9 and 10: He adds to his case by saying that
Page 11 and 12: Allah, only to turn around and say,
Page 13 and 14: In his review Bro Mubaashir display
Page 15 and 16: 1. Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal affirmed t
Page 17 and 18: came to the Prophet as a young man.
Page 19 and 20: Sunna is a formless, invisible God
Page 21 and 22: Salaam Bro Dr Wesley Muhammad 3.] D
Page 23: ―When the Prophet tells his peopl
Page 27 and 28: ―So if it is said (by the believe
Page 29 and 30: When Imam Mubaashir stated; ―As a
Page 31 and 32: 7.] Dr Wesley Muhammad - Response P
Page 33 and 34: ownership rights over this Islam th
Page 35 and 36: secondary meaning ―He manifested
Page 37 and 38: 9.] Dr Wesley Muhammad - Response P
Page 39 and 40: people say, ―He (God) is solid,
Page 41 and 42: ―Within the pages of the Holy Qur
Page 43 and 44: Salaam 12.] Kyle J. Ismail -Respons
Page 45 and 46: 14.] Dr Wesley Muhammad Response As
Page 47 and 48: To negate an act of the past we may
Page 49 and 50: Fakhr al-Din Razi (d. 1209) who, am
Page 51 and 52: which He bestowed on Mary, and a sp
Page 53 and 54: After all, how could we believe thi
Page 55 and 56: things, whoever says any of which,
Page 57 and 58: We are all familiar with the Greek
Page 59 and 60: Your positions were well laid out a
Page 61 and 62: Muslim and thus was an advocate of
Page 63 and 64: different opinions between the Saha
Page 65 and 66: Ru‘ya, with one possible exceptio
Page 67 and 68: In the Pushkin State Museum of Fine
Page 69 and 70: the sociological enigma of the mode
Page 71 and 72: 23.] Imam Salim Mu‟min Response t

Is THEM Guilty of Shirk? - Dr. Wesley Muhammad

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?