A man asked Imam Malik (d. 179): “How did Allah make istiwa’ on the throne?” Imam Malik inclined his head and was silent until the sweat of fever covered his brow, then he looked up and said: “Istiwa’ is not unknown (ghayru majhul), the modality of it is inconceivable in the mind (al-kayfu minhu ghayru ma`qul); but belief in it is obligatory, and inquiring about it is a heretical innovation. You are an innovator.” And he gave orders for him to be taken out.

My Thoughts:

My methodologically challenged brothers have used this quote from Imam Malik to justify taking the unclear verses related to Allah upon it’s literal meaning (dhahir).  As an Ashari, we are concerned about following the Salafus Saleh, and we regard Imam Malik’s statement and followable, however we don’t understand it in the same way that the Salafis  understand Imam Malik’s statement.

 Imam Malik did not say istiwa is to be taken upon the literal meaning. Nowhere in any of the quotes that I read from Imam Malik, did he say to take istiwa upon its literal meaning.

He merely said, “Istiwa is not unknown.” The way the Asharis understand this is that, Istiwa is not unknown, for it is in the Quran. For example, If you would have said to Imam Malik, “Allahu Qadim”, Imam Malik would have said,” Qadim is unknown,” meaning this wording is not known in the Quran or hadiths. Thus Imam Malik was making tafwid.

That is how we understand that statement from Imam Malik.

“Istiwaa is not unknown” and “Istiwaa is known” are not the same, while the Salafis read it as the same.

I wanted to post site with authentic Islamic Lectures

http://www.islamicspirituality.org/lectures/tafsir/english-dawra

http://islamicvillage.podomatic.com

http://www.islamise.co.uk/islam/english-islamic-lectures/

http://bayyinah.com/media/

al-Imam al-Dhahabi says:

“Why do you say: ‘A hand in reality is this bodily limb’? Rather, a ‘hand’ is homonym, and it is in accordance with, and of the same category of what it is attributed to. Therefore, if the thing described therewith is an animal then the hand would be a bodily limb. If it were was statue made of brass and stone, the hand would also be of brass and stone. If it were an image drawn on the wall, the hand would be a drawing. If it were that of which neither there is a like, nor it is a body, the hand would also be that of which neither there is a like, nor it is a body”

He also says:

“If it is said: ‘In its conventional usage, a hand only refers to the limb that we all know of’ We would say in reply: Similarly, in conventional usage, knowledge, hearing and seeing are only accidents that subsist in bodies. Where, then, is the difference?”

Ithbat al-Yad lilLahi subhanah p. 42-44 by al-Imam al-Dhahabi.

My Thoughts:

Imam Dhahabi statement isn’t very logical. In regards to the animal’s hand he mentions limb, while with the other hands (ie statue, drawing) he mentions the makeup of the hands (ie limbs) like the hand of a statue is made of brass or stone, the hand of a drawing, is made of paper and ink.  The reality of these hands is they are all limbs distinct from each other in their makeup. So Imam Dhahabi went from the meaning or essence of hand (ie a limb that, which all hands have in common) with the hand of an animal but when he went to the hands of the other entities (ie statue or drawing), he used the characteristics of a hand (ie the thing that makes hands different from each other) which gave a false impression that the meaning or the essence of a hand can have different meanings. So the comparison is not similar.

I wouldn’t say Imam Dhahabi’s statement is anthropomorphic but his statement is very illogical and makes no sense, thus it is not a good argument for the case of taking yad in relation to Allah upon it’s literal meaning, because the literal meaning of yad, whether it is applied to a man, a statue, a drawing, an angel, a jinn, a clock. They all point to one of two meanings, either a limb or a part of something ( ie. body part). And Allah is NOT composed of parts. Qul Huwa Allahu Ahad, Allahu Samad.

And Allah knows best.

Answered by Shaykh Amjad Rasheed

What is the belief (‘aqida) of Ahl al-Sunna? Is it correct to believe that Allah is everywhere? What is the difference between the belief of the Salafis and the belief (‘aqida) of Ahl al-Sunna?

The answer to this question requires detail and explanation, and it is obligatory for the questioner to learn [h: what he or she has asked] from a trustworthy teacher according to the way of the Sunnis (Ahl al-Sunna wa’l-Jama‘ah), which is [h: represented by] the Ash‘aris and Maturidis ([h: which are schools ascribed to] the two Imams, Abu’l-Hasan al-Ash‘ari and Abu Mansur al-Maturidi).

By doing so, [h: the questioner] will learn the belief (‘aqida) of the Sunnis (Ahl al-Sunna wa’l-Jama‘ah) and also how others have gone against them in certain beliefs. If it is not possible for him or her to learn this directly [h: from a teacher], then he or she should at least read a book on the subject, such as the book “The Jerusalem Creed” (al-‘Aqida al-Qudsiyya), by Imam al-Ghazali, which is printed in the beginning of the book Ihya ‘Ulum al-Din, [1] or one may read some other book, such as Kubra al-Yaqiniyyat al-Kawniyya, by the great scholar, Dr. Muhammad Sa‘id Ramadan al-Bouti. [2] However, what cannot be completely attained should not be completely left, so I say:

Sunni Belief

What is obligatory for all Muslims to believe is that Allah is perfect in his entity, names, and attributes, and that He is transcendently beyond every attribute that does not befit Him, Most High. Space and time, therefore, do not encompass Him; rather, He created them both. Neither His entity nor His attributes resemble anything of His creation. “There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing.” (42:11).

Neither the heavens nor the earth encompass Him, and He is not described by saying that His entity is literally above the heaven. Rather, He is above everything in His tremendous power and His magnificent wisdom. [h: That He is not literally above the heaven is proved by what] he (Allah bless him and give him peace) said in a rigorously authenticated hadith narrated by Imam Muslim: “… You are the Outwardly Manifest (dhahir) so there is nothing above You, and You are the Inwardly Hidden (batin) so there is nothing below You.” [3]

One may not say that Allah has a wajh (lit. “face”) or a yad (lit. “hand”) in the literal sense of these words because the literal meaning of each of these words in the Arabic language denotes a limb that is connected to the body and that could be separated from it, and our Lord is far above this.

Whatever mention of wajh (lit. “face”), ‘ayn (lit. “eye”), yad (lit. “hand”), and qadam (lit. “foot”) that has been made in certain noble verses and authenticated hadiths is interpreted according to meanings that befit Allah Most High’s entity. For example, His Most High’s saying, “Everything on it shall perish and the tremendous and mighty wajh of your Lord shall remain.” (55:26-27) [] What is meant by wajh (lit. “countenance”) in the verse is His Most High’s entity (in other words, “Everything except Allah shall perish”); nothing else can be meant by it.

In the Arabic language, wajh can be used to refer to the entity. Otherwise [h: if one interpreted wajh to mean “face”, for example], it would necessitate that His Most High’s entity is divisible and that part of it shall perish. This is both rationally and legally impossible and it is not permissible for anyone to believe in it.

Another example is His Most High’s saying about the ark of our master Nuh (upon him be blessings and peace), “It sailed in our ‘ayn.” (54:14). [h: The preposition ba’ in the verse] does not connote that the ‘ayn physically contained [h: the ark]; nor does the verse mean that Allah has an ‘ayn (lit. “eye”) in the literal sense of the word and that the ark sails inside it. No one believes this except for an ignoramus who has no veneration for Allah. Rather, what is meant by the verse is that the ark sailed under Allah’s care and protection so that it did not drown like everything else did at that particular time. In the Arabic language, ‘ayn can be used to refer to protection and care.

Is it permissible to believe that Allah is everywhere?

The belief that Allah Most High is personally in every location is a completely false belief that is not permissible for anyone to hold. Rather, what is obligatory to believe (as mentioned above) is that Allah is transcendently beyond occupying space and it is obligatory to forbid anyone who says anything else, for [h: anything else] constitutes anthropomorphism [4], which is completely incorrect. An example [h: of such anthropomorphism] is what some ignorant laypeople over here say (intending to venerate Allah by their saying it), “Glory be to Him in His place.” It is obligatory to explain the mistakenness of this expression and to guide them to what is correct.

If, however, a Muslim believes that Allah is everywhere in His knowledge, thereby meaning that He (Glory be to Him) knows everything at every time and place, it is a correct belief and it what is meant by His Most High’s saying, “He is with you wherever you are,” (57:4) i.e., “He is with you in His knowledge so that nothing of His creation is concealed from him.”

Difference between Sunni belief and Salafi belief

Regarding the difference between the belief of the Sunnis (Ahl al-Sunna wa’l-Jama‘ah) and the belief of the Salafis ([h: the Salafis] are a group of Muslims who claim ascription to the righteous early Muslims (al-salaf al-salih) in terms of their belief, although in reality, they go against the righteous early Muslims in some of what they claim to agree with them on, as I shall partly explain in what follows), the Salafis go against the Sunnis in some of what I have explained above, such as belief that Allah has a wajh (lit. “face”), ‘ayn (lit. “eye”), yad (lit. “hand”), and qadam (lit. “foot”) in the literal sense of these words. [h: They also go against the Sunnis by believing] that He Most High’s entity is literally above the heaven [5], adducing as proof certain verses and hadiths, although they are mistaken in their understanding.

Rather, the position of the righteous early Muslims from among the Companions, Followers, and followed Imams is that Allah is transcendently beyond the literal meaning of the above-mentioned things because of the baseless anthropomorphism that they comprise, and because—as explained above—the verses and hadiths that have mentioned these matters are interpreted according to meanings that befit His Most High’s entity.

Some of the scholars of the early Muslims (Allah be pleased with them) explicitly stated these meanings whereas others remained silent and sufficed themselves with believing that Allah is transcendently beyond such false meanings, and both approaches are acceptable.[6]

As for a person’s believing that Allah is literally characterized by the above-mentioned matters, this is a completely false position and it goes against the position of the vast majority of the Imams of the Muslims in every time and place. Among the useful books about this subject are Daf‘u Shubah al-Tashbih bi-Akuff al-Tanzih, by the Hanbali Imam and hadith master, Ibn al-Jawzi [7], and Idah al-Dalil fi Qat‘i Hujaj Ahl al-Ta‘til, by the great Shafi‘i Imam, Badr al-Din b. Jama‘ah. Both books have been published. [8]

Amjad Rasheed
Amman, Jordan
(Translated by Hamza Karamali)

Hosted by Sunni Path (http://www.sunnipath.com)

Translator’s Notes:

[1] This has been translated in Book V of the Reliance of the Traveller and also at the back of the booklet, Becoming Muslim, both by Nuh Ha Mim Keller. There is also a brief synopsis of Sunni creed in The Key to the Garden, by Habib Mashhur al-Haddad (translated by Dr. Mostafa al-Badawi).

[2] This has not been translated into English, unfortunately.

[3] For a detailed explanation of why it is not permissible for Muslims to believe that Allah is literally in the sky, see Is it permissible for a Muslim to believe that Allah is in the sky in a literal sense?, by Nuh Ha Mim Keller. The article is available at www.masud.co.uk.

[4] Anthropomorphism (tashbeeh) means likening Allah to His creation.

[5] To believe Allah is above the heaven’s literally is against the understanding of the Salafus Saleh (the righteous early Muslims) as indicated in Imam Tahawi (239-321 AH) in his celebrated text Aqidah Tahawi, where he states, “He (Allah) is transcendent beyond limits, ends, supports, components, or instruments. The six directions (up, down, left, right, front, back) do not contain Him as they do created things.” (Added by aMuslimForLife)

[6] For an excellent and thoroughly documented account of the position of the early Muslims on the attributes of Allah, see Literalism and the Attributes of Allah, by Nuh Ha Mim Keller. The article is available atwww.masud.co.uk

[7] This book has been translated as Attributes of God translation by Abdullah Bin Hamid, he also has a lecture explaining this book available on his website lamppostproduction. (Added by aMuslimForLife)

[8] This book has not been translated, unfortunately.(Edited by aMuslimForLife)

I was shocked when I read it. But anyway, Ibn Taymiyyah said, “In the very beginning, I was very much impressed by Ibn Arabi and held him in great esteem as I had found many of his discussions in the Futuhat, Al Kunh, Al Muhkam al Marbut, Ad Durrat al Fakhirah, Matali an Nujum and others such works very illuminating and useful. I was not aware at the time of his esoteric ideas as I hard not read the Fusus and other like works.” (Majmu at At Rasa’il Wal al Masail 1:171-183)

 My Thoughts: I know Ibn Taymiyyah considered Ibn Arabi a Kafir, but he did not consider him a kafir because of what was written in the Futuhat, it is interesting that he considered this book to be “very illuminating and useful.” It seems what turned Ibn Taymiyyah against Ibn Arabi is what has been written in Fusus. So what this says is that Ibn Taymiyyah considered some of Ibn Arabi’s works acceptable and within the parameters of Islam, while he consider Ibn Arabi’s other books to be outside the parameters of Islam. So he was not against Sufism, because the Futuhat is a book of Sufism par excellence. Shaykh Abdur Rahman Ash Shaghouri use to read this book, The Futuhat, to his mureeds. And Shaykh Abdur Rahman also did not consider the Fusus al Hikam to be an Authentic book of Ibn Arabi. It is interesting similiarities between the two.

Ponder on that.

Jurisprudence

Risalat al-Jami`ah

Safinat an-Najaa

Al-Muqaddimah al-Hadramiyyah

Matn Abi Shuja`

Safwat az-Zubad

Yaqut an-Nafis

`Umdat as-Salik (Reliance of the Traveler)

Minhaj at-Talibin

Arabic Grammar

Al-Ajurumiyyah

Mutammamat al-Ajurumiyyah

Al-Alfiyyah

Theology

Aqidat al-`Awam

Al-Aqidah (by Imam al-Haddad)

Hadith

Mukhtar al-Hadith (by Habib Umar bin Hafeez)

Al-Arba`in an-Nawawiyyah (The Forty Hadith, by Imam an-Nawawi)

Sciences of the Heart

Risaalat al-Mu`awanah (Book of Assistance)

   and other books in the series of Imam al-Haddad

Bidayat al-Hidayah (by Imam al-Ghazali)

Ihya `Ulum ad-Din (by Imam al-Ghazali)

 by Sheikh Nuh Ha Mim Keller

 Dala’il al-Khayrat, the most celebrated manual of Blessings on the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) in history, was composed by the Sufi, wali, Muslim scholar of prophetic descent, and baraka of Marrakesh Muhammad ibn Sulayman al-Jazuli (d. 870/1465). Born and raised among the Gazulah Berbers of the Sus region in southern Morocco, he studied the Qur’an and traditional Islamic knowledge before travelling to Fez, where he memorized the four-volume Mudawwana of Imam Malik and met scholars of his time such as Ahmad Zarruq, and Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah Amghar, who become his sheikh in the tariqa or Sufi path.

Amghar traced his spiritual lineage through only six masters to the great founder of their order Abul Hasan al-Shadhili and thence back to the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace). After initiating Jazuli into the way, he placed him in a khalwa or solitary retreat, where he remained invoking Allah for some fourteen years, and emerged tremendously changed. After a sojourn in the east and performing hajj, Jazuli himself was given permission to guide disciples as a sheikh of the tariqa.

Imam Ahmad al-Sawi relates that one day Jazuli went to perform his ablutions for the prescribed prayer from a nearby well but could not find any means to draw the water up. While thus perplexed, he was seen by a young girl who called out from high above, “You’re the one people praise so much, and you can’t even figure out how to get water out of a well?” So she came down and spat into the water, which welled up until it overflowed and spilled across the ground. Jazuli made his ablutions, and then turned to her and said, “I adjure you to tell me how you reached this rank.” She said, “By saying the Blessings upon him whom beasts lovingly followed as he walked through the wilds (Allah bless him and give him peace).” Jazuli thereupon vowed to compose the book of Blessings on the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) which came to be known as his Dala’il al-Khayrat or “Waymarks of Benefits.”

His spiritual path drew thousands of disciples who, aided by the popularity of his manual of Blessings on the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), had a tremendous effect on Moroccan society. He taught followers the Blessings upon the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), extinction of self in the love of Allah and His messenger, visiting the awliya or saints, disclaiming any strength or power, and total reliance upon Allah. He was told by the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) in a dream, “I am the splendor of the prophetic messengers, and you are the splendor of the awliya.” Many divine signs were vouchsafed to him, none more wondrous or unmistakable than the reception that met his famous work. Its celebrity swept the Islamic World from North Africa to Indonesia. Scarcely a well-to-do home was without one, princes exchanged magnificently embellished copies of it, commoners treasured it. Pilgrims wore it at their side on the way to hajj, and a whole industry of hand-copyists sprang up in Mecca and Medina that throve for centuries. Everyone who read it found that baraka descended wherever it was recited, in accordance with the Divine command: “Verily Allah and His angels bless the Prophet: O you who believe, bless him and pray him peace” (Qur’an 33:56). In the post-caliphal period of the present day, Imam Jazuli’s masterpiece has been eclipsed by the despiritualization of Islam by “reformers” who have affected all but the most traditional of Muslims. As the Moroccan hadith scholar ‘Abdullah al-Talidi wrote of the Dala’il al-Khayrat: “Millions of Muslims from East to West tried it and found its good, its baraka, and its benefit for centuries and over generations, and witnessed its unbelievable spiritual blessings and light. Muslims avidly recited it, alone and in groups, in homes and mosques, utterly spending themselves in the Blessings on the Most Beloved and praising him—until Wahhabi ideas came to spread among them, suborning them and creating confused fears based on the opinions of Ibn Taymiya and the reviver of his path Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab of Najd. After this, Muslims slackened from reciting the Dala’il al-Khayrat, falling away from the Blessings upon the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) in particular, and from the remembrance of Allah in general” (al-Mutrib fi awliya’ al-Maghrib, 143–44).

Sheikh Nuh Keller

On Remembrance (Dhikr)

Imam Abdullah Al Haddad said, “You should have a wird[1] of remembering Allah [dhikr], which you must define with either a determined time or number.[2] Under these circumstances there is no harm in using a rosary to keep count.[3]” (The Book of Assistance)

The Explanation:

Imam Shafi statement, “When you find a hadith that is Sahih then this is my madhab.”

Imam Nawawi (rahmatullah alayh) comments,

This most certainly applies to only such a person who has the rank of ijtihad in the madhhab. It is a condition that he overwhelmingly believes that Imam ash-Shaafi was unaware of this Hadith or he was unaware of its authenticity. And this is possible only after having made a research of all the books of ash-Shaafi and similar other books of the Ashaab of ash-Shaafi, those who take (knowledge) from him and others similar to these (books). This is indeed a difficult condition (to fulfill). Few are there who measure up to this (standard).

What one Arabic tafsir would you recommend that a person read at least once in a life time? What four Arabic Tafsirs would you recommend for a student of knowledge to have? And could you list them in order of priority. And if there is one or two more that you would please list.

And he replied:

Walaikum assalam wa rahmatullah,

(1) I asked a number of leading Damascene scholars–including Shaykh Abd al-Halim Abu Sha`r and Shaykh Abd al-Rahman Kharsa–regarding a tafsir they’d recommend a seeker of knowledge to read cover to cover. They all recommended Imam Sawi’s Hashiya `ala al-Jalalayn, a supercommentary on Tafsir al-Jalalayn in 5 volumes.

This is summarized from Imam Jamal’s supercommentary on the same work, Hashiyat al-Jamal `ala al-Jalalayn. This work is twice the size, but also highly recommended–many scholars, including Shaykh Nuh Keller and Shaykh Adib Kallas, consider it an indespensible reference.

(2) Imam Anwar Shah al-Kashmiri mentions in his work on the principles of tafsir that there are four Qur’anic exegeses (tafasir, tafsir) that a serious researcher simply needs:

(a) In tafsir by transmission (tafsir bi’l ma’thur), Tafsir Ibn Kathir.

(b) In tafsir focussing on legal and religious deduction (tafsir ahkam al-Qur’an), Tafsir al-Qurtubi.

(c) In tafsir with focus on rational and theological discourse (tafsir fi’l ma`qulat wa’l kalam), al-Tafsir al-Kabir of Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi.

(d) In interpretatrive and linguistic tafsir, Tafsir Abi’l Su`ud of Shaykh al-Islam Abu Su`ud al-Imadi, arguably the greatest scholar of the Ottoman Khilafa;

(e) As an encyclopedic tafsir that excels in all the above, and also contains deep spiritual allusions throughout, Tafsir Ruh al-Ma`ani of Imam Alusi, a great 19th Century jurist, theologian, and master of Qur’anic exegesis from Baghdad (Iraq). There are all reference works, however.

In the first steps of one’s path of knowledge, one would benefit by studying shorter works first (and referring to some of the above consistently, as one’s language and understanding of the Sacred sciences deepens).

These short works would include:

(a) Safwat al-Tafasir by Shaykh Sabuni. This is a three-volume contemporary tafsir based on the major classical tafsir works, and is highly recommended by traditional ulema.

(b) Tafsir al-Nasafi of Hafidh al-Din al-Nasafi. Also in three volumes.

(c) The abovementioned Hashiyat al-Sawi `ala al-Jalalayn.

(d) The Tafsir of Ibn Juzayy of al-Andalus. And Allah alone gives success.

Wassalam, Faraz Rabbani