The Interpretation of the ‘Face’ of Allāh From Three Authoritative Tafsirs

24 Comment(s)

1. On Sep 29, 2007, Mustafa said:

   as salaamu alaykum

   jazakallah khayr! A nice read!

2. On Sep 30, 2007, faqir said:

   as-salamu alaikum

   In Imam al-Bukharis Kitab al-Tafsir under the chapter of interpretation of surah al-qasas (28) ayat 88, al-Bukhari interprets wajh as Dominion

   كُلُّ شَىْءٍ هَالِكٌ اِلاَّ وَجْهَهُ‏}‏ اِلاَّ مُلْكَهُ، وَيُقَالُ اِلاَّ مَا اُرِيدَ بِهِ وَجْهُ اللَّهِ‏.‏ وَقَالَ مُجَاهِدٌ ‏{‏الأَنْبَاءُ‏}‏ الْحُجَجُ‏

   http://www.al-eman.com/hadeeth/viewchp.asp?BID=13&CID=139&SW=الا-ملكه#SR1

   Elsewhere, Ustadh Abdullah quotes Ibn Abi Hatim as reporting with a fair chain of narration (la ba’sa bihi) from Ibn ‘Abbas concerning the saying of Allah:

   ((So wherever you may turn, there is Allah ’s face)) [Baqarah: 115],

   Ibn ‘Abbas said,

   “Allah ’s direction of prayer” (qiblah).

   was-salam

3. On Oct 2, 2007, Sufyan Yunus said:

   Assalamu Alaikum.

   JazakAllah khayran for this post! Just what I wanted to find on this topic.

   May Allah Ta’ala bless you all immensely.

   Ma’salama

   Sufyan Yunus

4. On Oct 3, 2007, jinnzaman said:

   Assalamu alaikum

   How do the so-called Atharis respond to these evidences?

   masalama

5. On Oct 3, 2007, Taha said:

   Something interesting about Allah ’s ‘laughter’:

   Ibn Abd Al-Barr said in Al-Tamhid 18:345:
   وأما قوله (يضحك الله) فمعناه يرحم عبده عند ذاك، ويتلقاها بالروح والراحة والرحمة والرأفة، وهذا مجاز مفهوم

   (translation): “And as for his statement (Allah laughs), it means He has mercy on His servant at that, and receives him with repose, comfort, mercy and affection; and this is a well-understood metaphor.”

   Sheikh Hamd Al-Tuwaijiri (of King Sa’ud University), after rejecting Ibn Abd Al-Barr’s use of ta’wil, comments:
   لكن لعله يلتمس لابن عبدالبر عذر في ذلك، أنه فسر الصفة ببعض لوازمها ومدلولاتها، وهذا سائغ عند السلف
   (translation): “Howeover, perhaps Ibn Abd Al-Barr can be pardoned for this; he explained the Attribute as per one of its [various] connotations and considerations, and this warranted according to the Salaf.”

   Ibn Taymiyya stated in his Majmu’ Al-Fatawa (6:121):
   فجعل الأعرابي العاقل بصحة فطرته ضحكه دليلاً على إحسانه وإنعامه، فدل على أن هذا الوصف مقرون بالإحسان المحمود، وأنه من صفات الكمال
   “And so the sane desert Arab, with the uprightness of his fitra, understood His (Allah ’s) laughter to be indicative of His grace and endowment. And this shows that this trait (wasf) is connected to grace and endowment, and that is is from the Attributes of perfection.”

   And Imam Al-Bayhaqi stated in his Al-Asma’ wal-Sifat (p. 298):
   روى الفربري ، عن محمد بن إسماعيل البخاري رحمه الله تعالى أنه قال : معنى الضحك فيه الرحمة

   (translation): “And Al-Farbari (Imam Bukhari’s scribe) reported that Muhammad bin Isma’il Al-Bukhari (may Allah , the Exalted, have mercy on him!) said: the meaning of laughter in it - i.e. in the context of this hadith - is mercy.”

   Note: this is the Ash’ari position: ta’wil of an attribute IN a particular context, as opposed to saying that hand means such-and-such definitively. This methodology is also that of Ibn Abbas, Qatada, Al-Hasan and others (Tafsir Ibn Kathir is online for all to see).

   I hope this can be benefit to us all!

   ws

6. On Oct 3, 2007, Mustafa said:

   salaamu alaykum,

   I just ordered names and attributes of imam bayhaqi rahimahullah by Gibril Hadad i look foward to reading it.

7. On Oct 4, 2007, Ibn Ahmad said:

   Wa Alaykum As-Salaam Ya Sidi Mustafa,

   I often think about you akhi and your struggles in trying to figure it all out. With the leave of Allah , I hope the book opens your heart and broadens your mind.

   I ask Allah to accept your fasts and prayers on this blessed month.

   -Your Brother
   Ibn Ahmad

8. On Oct 4, 2007, Hussain20 said:

   hmm the report of Allah ’s laughter according to the scribe of Imam Bukhari is that isnad accurate?

   I believe i’ve read somewhere that Abu Sulman al Khatabi didn’t hear from al-Farbari?

9. On Oct 8, 2007, Taha said:

   Allahu a’lam - it could be as you say. I don’t know what isnad Imam Bayhaqi relied on.

   The point remains, however, that we do find instances of Imam Bukhari doing ta’wil in certain instances.
   This is also the case with Imam Tirmidhi in his Jami’.

10. On Oct 8, 2007, al-faqir said:

    as-salamu alaikum,

    Al-hafiz Imam al-Bayhaqi (d. 458/1066) records that [Muhammad ibn Yusuf] al-Farabri (d. 320/932) related from the hadith master Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256/870) that he said, “The meaning of laughter in it is mercy” [emphasis mine] (Bayhaqi, Kitab al-asma’ wa al-sifat [1358/1939. Reprint. Beirut: Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabi, n.d.], 298).

    After quoting the words of Imam al-Bayhaqi al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar said:

    “I have not seen that in any of the copies that we have come across of al-Bukhari.”

    [This does not necessitate that such a manuscript never existed.]

    Anyhow, in al-Fath al-Bari, Volume 6, page 39-40 al-Hafiz does say:

    “….. In reference to al-Bukhari’s saying that the attribute of Allah , ad-dahik, means ‘mercy (rahma),’ it is closer to say that it means ‘acceptance of deeds.’”

    Imam `Izz al-Din Ibn Abd as-Salam interprets Laughter (al-dahik) as His satisfaction (rid.ā) and acceptance (qabūl) in al-Ishāra ilā al-Ijāz fi Ba`d. Anwā`al-Majāz (Ed. `Uthmān H.ilmī, Cairo: al-Mat.ba`at al-`Amira, 1313/1895).

    On the subject of Ta’wil, do also check:

    http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4030&highlight=ta%27wil+salaf

    was-salam

11. On Oct 8, 2007, Muslim said:

    What does Imam Tabari say about 55:27 , Could some one translate ?

12. On Oct 15, 2007, As salam wa alaikum to those who are on the path of Guidence said:

    This article is Ridiculous and very selective.

    There is clear Ahadeeth in Bukhari and Muslim which state that when the believers are in Paradise, Allah (swt) will ask them if they require anything else, they will reply “what else could we want oh Lord”.

    Allah (Swt) will than show his face, and according to Bukhari, the Believers will be able to see it as “clear as the Moon can be seen at night on a cloudless night”

13. On Oct 15, 2007, Taha said:

    No one denies those ahadith except a Jahmi or a Mu’tazili.

    It’s just that the way Salafis understand the ahadith of the attributes is as they understand the creation.
    Yes - I am talking about al-ma’na al-dhahir and tafwid al-kayf.

    As for this article being selective - again you are right. There are tons of authentic athaar from the Salaf that condemn ta’wil.
    Again, no one denies that. However, the mainstream orthodox community has understood their weariness differently in light of the fact that they *themselves* did ta’wil at times.

    It’s like standing so close to a painting that one only sees 2 or 3 brush strokes.
    Only when one stands back a few steps does one see the entire painting.

    ‘As salam wa alaikum to those who are on the path of Guidence’.

    And salam to you too, brother in Islam.
    Try to get cupping done on yourself or something. Perhaps reduce the venom.
    Insha Allah we’re all muslims here, so there shouldn’t be a problem saying salam directly.

14. On Oct 15, 2007, Taha said:

    The upshot is that ta’wil by the Salaf is a *FACT*.
    True it was not common, and true - it was generally disliked. This, by the way, was the case with the shuyukh of tasawwuf as well.

    The intent of the article was not to prove that doing ta’wil was the standard - rather it should insha Allah show that it’s not as Salafis make it out to be, i.e. no ta’wil at all.

    In fact, Salafis themselves do ta’wil of verses like ‘He is with you wherever you are’, and ahadith like ‘the closest a servant is to his Lord is during prostration’.
    But they take all the attributes that suggest human characteristics literally.
    So you see, Salafis do ta’wil as well - except they have their own yardstick.

15. On Oct 16, 2007, Shakeeb said:

    [quote]
    In fact, Salafis themselves do ta’wil of verses like ‘He is with you wherever you are’, and ahadith like ‘the closest a servant is to his Lord is during prostration’.
    But they take all the attributes that suggest human characteristics literally.
    [/quote]

    Ibn Qudaamah said, “If one says, ‘ You perform ta’weel of “…He is with you wherever you may be…” by saying that this nearness relates to knowledge, yet you always accuse us {the various sects} of ta’weel’, we shall reply that this is not ta’weel. Ta’weel is to remove words away from their apparent meaning. The meaning that we take here is the meaning which is “apparent”(dhaahir) and is easy to understand. He further states, that the meaning of “…Allaah is with you…” is the meaning that is easiest and most understandable. It is that He protects you and looks over you, as is stated by Allaah in His mention of the believers and prophets in connection with His mercy. Indeed, if Allaah is physically present and with everybody then there was no need to specify Moosaa and Haroon by saying, “…I am with you both and listening…” If Allaah were to be with everyone, then what would be the need for such specification? It is, therefore, clear that the apparent meanings of such verses are as we have taken them.

    Tawhid al Khalis of Badiuddin Sindi

16. On Oct 16, 2007, Taha said:

    Salam bro,

    Jazakumullahu khayr for sharing that.

    You quoted Imam Ibn Quddama:
    “the meaning of “…Allaah is with you…” is the meaning that is easiest and most understandable. It is that He protects you and looks over you, as is stated by Allaah in His mention of the believers and prophets in connection with His mercy.”

    As they would say, hadha ‘ayn al-ta’wil. i.e. this is pure ta’wil in it’s essence.

    So it’s a matter of calling a spade a spade.
    Some (i.e. Ash’aris) use the word “ta’wil” when it is ta’wil. Others don’t like to use that word.

    Of course, there are other ahadith that contradict the Goodyear Blimp aqida. Yes, I speak of the hadith that states that Allah is ‘between’ the Ka’ba and the person praying. The literal and immediate understanding of the hadith implies a physical location for Allah in front of the one praying.
    Or the hadith that says that Allah is closest to a servant when he is prostrating.
    Or the hadith that states “By Him in whose hand Muhammad’s soul is, if you were to drop a rope to the lowest land, it would descend upon Allah .” As we know, Imam Tirmidhi’s presentation of ta’wil was condemned by Ibn Taymiyya as Jahmite.

    The problem is that there are certain ayaat/ahadith that Salafis don’t apply their “ta’wil” - call it what you may. These verses/ahadith are the ones that suggest a body or a location.
    On the other hand, the ones that are not taken on their apparent meanings are those suggest that Allah is ‘everywhere’.

    The mujassims adopted one position and the jahmis adopted the other.
    The Ash’aris, on the other hand, reject both and say that ‘place’ doesn’t *APPLY* to Allah .

    If we were to follow the logic of easiest understandability as proposed by Imam Ibn Quddama, then istiwa will be noticed to occur in the context of Allah ’s perfecting/completing the creation of the Heavens and the Earth with the ‘Arsh.
    I’ll be more than happy to apply the Ibn Quddama’s proposition in understanding these verses in such a way.

17. On Oct 16, 2007, Taha said:

    I suggest to you, and everyone else, to get the Ash’ari understanding of ta’wil right first.
    It seems alot of Salafis don’t quite get it.

    I would suggest the noble Shaykh Said Fawda’s works.

    ws

18. On Oct 16, 2007, Ibn Saad said:

    “What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
    By any other name would smell as sweet”

19. On Oct 22, 2007, siddiqui4ever said:

    what is the response to the ash’ari claim that athari make ta’wil of Allah ’s nearness

    http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?t=3160

20. On Oct 22, 2007, Um Abdullah said:

    faqir said:
    [After quoting the words of Imam al-Bayhaqi al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar said:

    “I have not seen that in any of the copies that we have come across of al-Bukhari.”

    [This does not necessitate that such a manuscript never existed.] ]

    True, but you can’t be certain that there is a manuscript that states that + the chain is broken, so you are going by assumption, and to say that al Imam al Bukhari rahimahu Allah said something which you have no CLEAR AUTHENTIC evidence for is very major, because he might have not said that, thus you would be attributing to him something that he did not say.
    and you can’t use assumptions as evidence.

21. On Oct 22, 2007, faqir said:

    as-salamu ‘alaikum

    I agree with you on that specific point which you took from my post above but I do not think it far-fetched that such a manuscript did exist in Hafidh al-Bayhaqi’s possession. He died 458H whilst Imam Ibn Hajar died in 852H. But, regardless, I agree that we can not be absolutely certain.

22. On Oct 22, 2007, faqir said:

    …and just to clarify my earlier post [#10] which I should have made clearer [apologies], the quote from al-Fath al-Bari is as follows:

    قال وقال ابو عبد الله‏:‏ معنى الضحك هنا الرحمة‏.‏

    قلت‏:‏ ولم ار ذلك النسخ التي وقعت لنا من البخاري، قال الخطابي‏:‏ وتاويل الضحك بالرضا اقرب من تاويله بالرحمة، لان الضحك من الكرام يدل على الرضا فانهم يوصفون بالبشر عند السؤال‏

    http://www.al-eman.com/hadeeth/viewchp.asp?BID=12&CID=424&SW=الضحك#SR1

23. On Nov 1, 2007, Mysticsaint said:

    excellent post! mashallah. thanks so much. will be useful inshallah and will share in my blog with credit to you.

24. On Apr 5, 2008, Ibn Saad said:

    Interesting thing I found,

    Question 1

    Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Kathir

    Was Ibn Kathir considered to be part of Ahl al-Sunna by the orthodox community even though he was a student of Ibn Taymiya?

    Was Ibn Kathir’s Islamic faith (‘aqida) actually different than Ibn Taymiya’s? If so, on what points? (I will need references.) I know he differed on many fiqh issues, but that is because Ibn Kathir was a Shafi‘i scholar, one such difference being the Mawlid. Ibn Kathir’s tafsir (Qur’anic exegesis) is widely regarded as one of the great works of tafsir, but doesn’t it contain anthropormorphic assertions about the attributes of Allah Most High? If so, how can we reconcile that with the Ash‘ari and Maturidi positions?

    Answered here:

    http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/masudq1.htm