Muqaatil ibn Sulayman ibn Basheer Al-Azdi, is an author of Tafsir and a liar Mujassim. Ibn Hajr states about him in his Taqrib, “He [was a] liar…he delved into tajseem (saying Allah 
has limbs etc).”1
Is-haaq ibn Ibrahim reports from Abu Haneefah that he said, “Two depraved opinions have reached us from East, those of Jahm [ibn Safwan] (d. 128/745), the nullifier of the divine attributes (Mu’attil), and those of Muqatil [ibn Sulayman al-Balkhi (d. c.a. 150/767)], the likener of Allah to His creation (mushabbih).” 2
Muhammad ibn Samaa’ah reports from Abu Yusuf from Abu Haneefah that he said, “Jahm [ibn Safwaan] was so excessive in denial that it was stated that he was laysa bi-shay (he is with nothing, or worth nothing etc). Muqaatil was so excessive in affirmation (al-ithbaat) that he made Allah like his creation.”3
Khaarijah ibn Mus’ab said, “Jahm and Muqaatil, according to us, are transgressing evil people.”4
Simply open the books of rijaal and find the severe criticism upon Muqaatil to see the enormities he delved into. The fact that he is equated with the forefather of the Mu’tazilis points us to the severe deviance he imparted upon this Ummah. Abu Yusuf, the student of Abu Haneefah and scholar of Imaam Ahmad, called this sect ‘ Al-Muqaatiliyyah ‘. So we have chosen such a labeling for the pseudo-salafis for the following reason:
Imaam Al-Baghawi (rahimahullah) states in his Ma’alim At-Tanzil,
{ ثُمَّ اسْتَوَى عَلَى الْعَرْشِ } قال الكلبي ومقاتل: استقر. وقال أبو عبيدة: صعد
Regarding the verse ‘Then He Istawaa Alaa (lit. upon or over) the ‘Arsh’, Al-Kalbi and Muqaatil said it means “Istiqarra” (to settle or to reside) and Abu ‘Ubaidah said, “Sa’ida” (He mounted).5
Then Al-Baghawi goes on to quote the stance of Ahlus Sunnah, the opposite of such a stance!
The exact phrase and wording is used by Ibn ‘Uthaymeen in his gloss of ’Aqeedah As-Safaariniy,
{ ثم استوى على العرش } في جميع مواقعها في اللغة العربية لا تقتضي إلا العلو والاستقرار ،
فمن أصول أهل السنة والجماعة : الإيمان بأن الله تعالى استوى على عرشه ،
أي علا عليه واستقر عليه علواً واستقرارًا يليق بجلاله عز وجل
“…And from the principles of Ahlus Sunnah is one is to have faith that Allah ta’alaa Istawaa upon his throne meaning ‘alaa upon it, high/exalted, and Istiqraaran (settling, sitting, residing), as befits His Majesty.”
Regarding such an abominable expression, Al-Imaam Al-Haafith Ibn Hajr Al-’Asqalaani states, “and the anthropomorphists (Al-Jismiyya) said: “Its meaning is Al-Istiqraar (settledness, sitting, residing).”6
The deviant Muqaatiliyyah, who departed from Ahlus Sunnah, said that Allah ta’alaa “settled/resided” above the throne. The pesudo-salafi wahhabis of Najd say the exact same thing as Muqaatil ibn Sulaymaan, word-for-word! The liar, the deviant, the Mushabbih Muqaatil is their Imaam and they are his followers!
Another scholar of law and hadeeth that stated that Allah “istiqraar” was Ibn Abdul Barr. In fact, Qaadhi Ibn ‘Arabi Al Maaliki wrote a refutation of the tashbeeh of Ibn Abdul Barr, refuting and rejecting his non-sense comparisons between creation and the created. He stated in that refutation, as translated by Shaykh G.F. Haddad,
- “What we must believe is that Allah
existed and nothing existed with Him; that he created all creation, including the throne, without becoming subject to disclosure through them, nor did a direction arise for Him because of them, nr did He acquire a location in them; that He does not become immanent, that He does not cease to be transcendent, that he does not change, and that He does not move from one state to another.Istiwaa in the Arabic language has fifteen meanings both literal and figurative. Some of these meanings are suitable for Allah and the meaning of the verse (20:4) is derived from them. The other meanings are not accepted under any circumstances. For example, if it is taken to mean being fixed in a place (tamakkun), settling (istiqraar), connecting (ittisaal), or being bounded (muhaadhaat): then none of these are suitable for the Creator (ta’alaa) and no-one should try to find His likeness in His creation…”7Regarding Ibn Abdul Barr, the Imaam of Ibn Hajr Al-’Asqalaani, Shaykhul-Islaam Zaynud-Deen Al-’Iraaqi said about Ibn Abdul Barr, “He is one of those who hold that Allah ta’alaa has a direction, therefore beware of him!”8
Ibn Jahbal, the erudite Shafi’i Faqih, also rejected his non-sense saying,
- “Concerning What Abu ‘Umar Ibn Abdul Barr said, both the elite and the general public know the man’s position and the scholars’ disavowal of it. The Maalikis’ condemnation of it, from the first to the last of them is well known. His contravention (mukhaalafa) of the Imaam of North Africa, Abul-Waleed Al-Baaji, is famous. It reached a point that the eminent people of North Africa would say: “No-one in N. Africa holds this position except he and ibn abi Zayd!’ although some of the people of knowledge cited an excuse for ibn Abi Zayd in the text of the great Qadhi abu Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhaab ibn ‘Ali ibn Nasr Al-Baghdaadi Al-Maaliki, rahimahullah!”
Ibn Abi Zayd, as mentioned above was criticised for his tashbih as well. Sidi Faqir has quoted a beneficial quote on Sunniforums from Imam Al-’Adawi’s gloss of Ibn Abi Zayd’s Risaalah:
Al-‘Adawī said in his supercommentary on Ibn Abī Zayd’s Risāla:
He [Ibn Abī Zayd] was taken to task for stating bi dhātihi, but not for stating “above His glorious Throne.” For the Law has cited aboveness in absolute terms, as in His saying (They fear their Lord above them (min fawqihim)) (16:50). So the meaning is that the aboveness [of Allāh I] is absolute in itself, not in its specific relation to the Throne. Hence, it is permissible for someone to say “above His heaven,” “above His Throne,” in the sense of an aboveness of status, majesty, and authority (fawqiyyat al-sharaf wal-jalāl wal-salt.ana). Imām Abū Muh.ammad ‘Abd Allāh Muh.ammad ibn Mujāhid said: “Among the matters over which they reached consensus is the [duty of] stating in absolute terms that He – Exalted is He! ‘is above His heavens, over His Throne, beyond His earth (annahu ta‘ālā fawqa samāwātihi ‘alā ‘arshihi dūna ard.ihi)’[17] in absolute terms according to the Law.” Nor is it mentioned in the Law that He is on the earth, hence his statement “beyond His earth.”[18]
Notes:17]This is exactly the terminology adhered to by Ibn Abī Zayd in his other statement of doctrine in al-Jāmi‘ fīl-Sunan (p. 141).
[18]Al-‘Adawī, H.ashiya (1:69-70).
So look at how these noble A’immah of this Ummah warned against Muqaatil, Ibn Abdul Barr, Al-Kalbi, and their likes. What of those in our time who say the exact same thing while being funded by oil money? Are they no different? Indeed, they are the neo-Muqaatiliyya, deviants who have departed from Ahlus Sunnah in creed. May Allah ta’alaa show mercy to Ibn ‘Uthaymeen and those who blindly follow him in his mistaken creed. Amin!
Updated: Feb. 6 2008
- #6868 [↩]
- Dhahabi, Siyar a‘lam al-nubala’ [Beirut: Mu’assasa al-Risala, 1401/1984], 7.202, also see Ibn Hajr’s Tahtheeb At-Tahtheeb entry number 7981 published by Daar Ihyaa’ [↩]
- Tahtheeb At-Tahtheeb ibid. [↩]
- ibid [↩]
- Al-Manaar Edition 3:488 [↩]
- Fat-hul-Baari 1959 edition 13:409 [↩]
- ‘Arida Al-Ahwaadhi – One needs to read the entire refutation to grasp how utterly foolish the claims of the pseudo-salafis are. [↩]
- Tarh-At-Tathrib [↩]
MashaALLAH. A very informative article explaining the issue as it is. May Allah
accept.
Aameen. Wa Jazaakum Allahu Khairan. wa Ghafar Allahu Lakum.
In Ibn Uthaymeen’s Sharh of ‘Aqeedat Waasitiyyah he maintains the same stance stated above. He further adds that there are two types of ‘Uluww (which can mean elevation or exaltation). The first is ‘Uluww regarding the attributes (sifaat) – i.e. that he is exalted. The second is that he is ‘uluww bi dhaatih – that he is elevated in in essence, sitting on the throne, above the throne.
Of course, Ibn ‘Uthaymeen claims he denies “direction/jiha” for Allah
ta’alaa. He also says he does not committ tamtheel, just as the Muqaatiliyya say.
Fact: Ibn ‘Uthaymeen LITERALLY affirms “sitting” for Allah
ta’alaa. Simple question for the neo-muqaatiliyya: What is the meaning of “sit”? They claim to know the literal meaning, so let them share with us what they truly believe of Allah 
; That he sits on a throne, but that sitting is not like our sitting. Just as I sit upon a chair, but you do not sit as I sit! We also want to know how they have determined this meaning to be literally “sit”, when as Ibn Qudaamah states, “The Messenger of Allah 
did not clarify the meaning!” Then they claim they do not make tamtheel etc. Yet they have made tamtheel by affirming the literal meaning for Allah 
ta’alaa. As Ibn Al-Jawzi said, “If only they had reported the narrations and remained silent afterwards.”
Instead, they delve into the meanings, and wade in the pools of tajseem and tashbeeh.
I was reading some “responses” to this post on some other sites. The deviant Muqaatiliyyah, worshippers of the sa’udi god made of divisions and literally sitting and talking and laughing, in a place and confined etc. I realized, none of them denied the fact that they believe Allah
literally sits. They could only bash ME by calling me names such as bankrupt blah blah. That is their intellectual dishonesty! They will attack me, but they can not attack Ibn Hajr or Zayn Ad-Deen Al-’Iraaqi; for if they do, they only show that what they have said about them is in fact true. The fact is they believe just as the Muqaatiliyyah did. That Allah 
LITERALLY sits (mustaqirr) on the throne.
They will not deny it either. I wonder if they know that Imaam As-Safarini also said that the Karramiya are those who say Allah
ta’alaa Mustaqirr upon the throne?
I’m sure they do. They care not though. Trying to hide behind their claim of “no tamtheel”. The claim of no tamtheel is as the human says to the other human, “There is no fingerprints like my fingerprints.”
Some of the early Muqaatili Hanbalis said that Allah
did have a likeness and that his likeness is like no other. Ibn Al-Jawzi mentions this point in his kitaab on sifaat saying,
“Another text [that has been the subject of debate] is the verse: ‘Nothing resembles His ‘likeness’ (ka-mithilihi).” These words, taken in their literal sense (thaahir), would indicate that [Allah
] has a likeness (mithl): nothing is like His “likeness” and [His likeness] is like nothing else. According to the lexicographers, however, a mithl designates nothing other than the thing (or being) itself. Thus it is said: “One like me should not speak to one like you.” The only possible meaning of the text is that there is nothing like Allah 
.”
[Also See Zaad Al-Maseer of Ibn Qutayba].
Ibn Al Jawzi, while explaining this issue of Istawaa, after mentioning all probable meanings says,
“Ismaa’il ibn Abi Khaalid At-Taa’i reports that the ‘arsh is described as being composed of red sapphire. All of the salaf, however, agree that this verse should be passed on (imraar)as it has been related, without tafseer (explanation) and without ta’weel (interpretation).
…he then quotes the statement of Imaam Maalik that is well known…
The people who came later interpreted the attribute [of istawaa] according to Al-Hiss (the sensory perception/experience). So they say Allah
istawaa ‘alaa al-’arsh bi-dhaatih (in his essence). This is an addition (ziyaadah) that has not been narrated. This understanding of theirs has no other source other than their Al-Hiss, since the person who sits on something does so in person. Ibn Haamid Al-Hanbali says Al-Istawaa’ means Mumaassa (contact, touching i.e. the throne) ascribed to his essence (dhaat)and the intent of it is qu’ud (sitting).’”
A group of some of our companions (i.e. hanbalis) state that Allah
does not actually completely fill the throne so He will invite the Prophet to sit on it with Him!” And He [Ibn Haamid] said, “Allah 
’s Nuzool (descent) is intiqaal (from one position to another position – translocation). I say (i.e. Ibn Al-Jawzi), “What they claim is that Allah 
ta’alaa is actually smaller than the ‘arsh! It is astonishing (‘ajab) that these people say they are not mujassimah!”
[End Quote]
The astonishing things these Hanbalis claim!
So this is the creed of the forefathers of the pseudo-salafis, as well as their own creed. They believe Allah
ta’alaa has place, that he sits on the throne, that He ta’alaa is smaller than the throne and is going to sit the Nabi 
(‘alayhis Salaam) upon it WITH him.
That He ta’alaa is “literally” Above, and so things are below him, literally.
To which Ibn Al-Jawzi states, “all of this reflects the ignorance of its author and his tashbeeh in its purest form! This shaykh does not comprehend what is necessarily entailed in Allah
’s status as the creatoror what is incompatible with that status. For Allah 
ta’alaa’s existence is not like the existence of atoms and bodies that occupy space necessarily. Spatial relations of “above” and below apply only to entities which stand over against each other or exist side by side….[he continues you refuting their non-sense].”
Place, is of creation, and Allah
is baa’in from creation. Unless of course you are an anthropomorphist who believes that Allah 
ta’alaa literally sits on a throne.
As ibn Hajr said about them, “And Allah
is exalted from what they say of Him!”
From a Salafi Forum
“You people should be beaten with sticks until you return to the Sunnah of Muhammad and leave the Sunnah of Pagans. Ash’aris have caused much confusion and problems for the Muslims, most of their scholars were no less than criminals and major sinners who were scared to even appear in public when the Islamic state was around. Now since kufr is ruling some parts, you see the Ash’aris having a field day.”
Indeed, the Hanbalis used to throw stones as well as abuse Imaam At-Tabari for just saying Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal was not a faqeeh!
Imagine what else they did when they were refuted by the Asha’ris!?! They turn to only beating, cursing, and abuse when they have been squelched! In fact, they released a fatwaa upon Ibn ‘Aqeel that he should be killed and his blood was halaal for anyone.
You saw what they did when I took the opinion of Ibn Hajr regarding tawassul. They told me my marriage was annulled, I was an apostate, and that I should be slain. They are lacking in creed, intellect, and manners. In fact, I believe the christians have better adab than the pseudo-salafis, yet their creed is one – anthropomorphism.
As salaam alaikom
mashaAllah a very good article, and also a great response too from our brother Abu Layth… ghafaraAllahu Lahu wa jaazahu Allahu 3anna kheyra Al-jazaa’
Ameen
Ibn Ata Al-Hanafi
حَدَّثَنَا حَجَّاجٌ، حَدَّثَنَا لَيْثٌ يَعْنِي ابْنَ سَعْدٍ، حَدَّثَنِي عُقَيْلُ بْنُ خَالِدٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ شِهَابٍ، عَنْ سِنَانِ بْنِ أَبِي سِنَانٍ الدُّؤَلِيِّ، ثُمَّ الْجُنْدَعِيِّ عَنْ أَبِي وَاقِدٍ اللَّيْثِيِّ، أَنَّهُمْ خَرَجُوا عَنْ مَكَّةَ، مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ إِلَى حُنَيْنٍ قَالَ وَكَانَ لِلْكُفَّارِ سِدْرَةٌ يَعْكُفُونَ عِنْدَهَا وَيُعَلِّقُونَ بِهَا أَسْلِحَتَهُمْ يُقَالُ لَهَا ذَاتُ أَنْوَاطٍ قَالَ فَمَرَرْنَا بِسِدْرَةٍ خَضْرَاءَ عَظِيمَةٍ قَالَ فَقُلْنَا يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ اجْعَلْ لَنَا ذَاتَ أَنْوَاطٍ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قُلْتُمْ وَالَّذِي نَفْسِي بِيَدِهِ كَمَا قَالَ قَوْمُ مُوسَى اجْعَلْ لَنَا إِلَهًا كَمَا لَهُمْ آلِهَةً قَالَ إِنَّكُمْ قَوْمٌ تَجْهَلُونَ إِنَّهَا لَسُنَنٌ لَتَرْكَبُنَّ سُنَنَ مَنْ كَانَ قَبْلَكُمْ سُنَّةً سُنَّةً.
this is from musnad ahmed 20892
and From Imaam Tirmidhee #2180
It is reported on the authority of Abu Waaqid al-Laithee that he said: We were traveling with the Prophet to Hunain, when we had only recently abandoned disbelief and the polytheists had a lotus-tree (sidrah) at which they used to worship and upon which they used to hang their weapons. They called it Dhaatu Anwaat. So, we said to Allah
’s Messenger: Make for us a Dhaatu Anwaat like theirs, at which they Messenger of Allah 
said: Allahu Akbar! Verily, it is as-Sunan (the way) [of the people before you]; that which you have said – by Him in Whose Hand is my soul – is the same as was said by the Children of Israa’eel to Moosa: Make for us a god such as the gods which they (the polytheists Egyptians) have. He (Moosa) said: Verily, you are an ignorant people. [Then (the Prophet) said]: You will definitely follow the ways of those who came before you.
brother abu layth can you check what is the authenticity of this hadeeth and its rijaal?
and whether whether this can be considered as a daleel that rasoulullah engaged into aqeeda(kalam) as this was what a talafi used as daleel!!
wa jazakaAllah kheyran
ibn ata al-hanafi
Firstly, the hadeeth, without a doubt is Saheeh. Imaam At-Tirmithi said after the narration,
هذا حديث حسن صحيح
This hadith is Hasan Saheeh. All of the men in the chain are also of impeccable trustworthiness (thiqaat) and Abu Waaqid Al-Laythi is a Sahaabi as stated by Ibn Hajr.
Secondly, Sidi I am not sure what you mean. Of course the Nabi
(alayhis salaam) engaged in ‘Aqidah. That was his job! In fact ‘Aqidah and tawheed are synonyms in Islam. Maybe I misunderstood your question though. So if you could clarify I would be grateful.
ok, is this daleel for going into ilm al kalam to refute the heretical sects ?
The proof for ‘ilm al kalaam is the necessity to refute misguided ideologies such as the Mujassima as well as aristotelian principles. I don’t really see how this could be used as proof for ilm al kalaam. I’m sorry if I did not answer your question sidi.
Salamu alaykum,
Bro Abul Layth, you wrote:
“when as Ibn Qudaamah states, “The Messenger of Allah
(SWT) did not clarify the meaning!””
Could you kindly provide the reference and context for that?
Wa’Alaykum Salaam,
http://seekingilm.com/archives/149 point 62 translated at the bottom of the page.
jazakallahu khair akhi
Jame’an insha’Allah
.
The meaning of what the muslims say whereby Allah
(established Himself over the Throne) is not that He is in contact with it, nor that He is fixed there (mutamakkin fih), nor that He is circumscribed (mutahayyiz) in any of its directions (jihat). However, He is separate (ba’in) from all of His creation. IT is but a report whose terms are ordained and so we say it, at the same timedenying any modality (takyif) for it, for (There is nothing whatsoever Like unto Him, and He is the All-hearing All Seeing) 42:11
Al-ash’ari said that Allah
effected an act pertaining to the throne which He named “establishment” (Istiwa). This is like other acts of His and as what He named “sustenance” (rizq), “Favor” (ni’ma), and others. further more, He did not give the “establishment” a modality beyond saying it is an attribute of action, because of His statement: (Then He rose over the Throne) 25:59, and the word “then” denotes sequence in time, which is the exclusive province of acts. Also, Allah 
’s acts take place without touch nor motion on His part.
Among the perspicuous scholars, abu al-hasan ‘ali ibn Muhammad ibn mahdi al-tabari said: “Allah
is ‘in the heaven above everything and established over His throne’ in the sense that He is elevated high (alin) above it, and the sense of istiwa is elevation (i’tila).”. . .
The Preternal One (al-Qadim) is thus elevated over His throne but neither sitting on (qa’id) nor standing on (qa’im) nor in contact with (mumass), nor seprate from (mubayin) the throne- meaning separate in His essence in the sense of physical separation or distance. For “contact” and its opposite “separation,” “Standing” and its opposite “sitting” are all characteristics of bodies (ajsam), whereas (Allah
is One, everlasting, Neither begetting nor begotten, and there is non like Him) 112:1-4 Therefore what is allowed for bodies is impermissible for Him.
The teacher abu bakr ibn furak also mentioned the above method if interpretation from one of our companions who said: “He established Himself in the sense of elevated.” Then he said that such elevation is not in the sense of distance, nor boundary, nor place in which He is firmly fixed. Rather, he means by it what Allah
meant when He said: (Have you taken security from Him who is in the heaven…) 67:16-17, that is, above it, together with the preclusion of limit (hadd) for Him and the fact that He admits neither of being contained by a heavenly stratum nor of being encompassed by earthly expanse of space. Allah 
Almighty was described thus in the evidence transmitted, and so we do not dispute what evidence said. (al kawthari p410-411, al hashidi 2:308-309 Cf. Imam malik rahimahullah : “He is neither ascribed a limit nor likened with anything” (la yuhaddad wa la yushabbah). ibn al-arabi said after citing it in Ahkam al-quran 4:1740: “This is a pinnacle of tawhid in which no muslim preceded Malik”
Taken from (Islamic doctrines and beliefs vol 4 Allah
’s Names and Attributes excerpts Al-Bayhaqi rahimahullah foreword by Shaykh muhammad Hisham Kabbani translated and ntoes by dr. gibril fouad haddad pg109-113
Some ignorant people have trespassed bounds in interpreting this hadith, claiming thes eis proof in it that Allah
“is in the heaven, on the throne, above the seven heavens’ We say taht this is a sign of tremendous ignorance.
What the hadith said is “He descends to heaven” without specifying from where He descends or How He descends. Ye tthey said- and their proof is again based on the literal sense ‘The Merciful Established himself over the throne ’20:2
We ask: What is the Throne in arabic, and what is Istawa?
They reply: as Allah
said: ‘That you may mount upon (tastawu) their backs, and may remember your Lord’s favor when you mount (istawaytum) thereon’ 43:13
We say: Allah
is mighty and higher than to have His Istawa on His throne compared to our sitting on the backs of animals.
They said: and as He said: ‘and it (the ship) came to rest (istawat) upon (the mount) al-judi’ 11:44
We say: Allah
is Mighty and Higher than a ship that sailed and then docked and stopped.
They said: and as He said. ‘And when you are on board (istawayta) the ship, you and whoso is with you’ 23:28
We say: Allah
forbid that his Istiwa be similar to that of Noah alayhi salam and his people. Everything in the latter case is created, as it consists in istiwa with an elevation and a settling in a place involving physical contact. The entire Umma is in agreement, even before hearing the hadith of descent that the arguments of those who rejected it, that Allah 
’s Istiwa does not involve any of those things. Therefore do not give examples from His creation for Him!…
They say: Allah
said: “He rules all affairs from the heaven to the earth” 32:5
We say: This is true, but it does not provide any proof for your innovation.
They say: All the firm believers in the oneness of Allah
raise their hands to the heaven when supplicating Him, and if Musa alayh isa lam not said to pharoah: ‘My Lord is in the heaven,’ Pharoah would not have said ‘O Haman,.. set up for me a lofty tower in order that I may survey the god of Moses’ 28:38
We say: You are lying about Mus a alayhi sa laam, he never said that. but your conclusion shows that you are indeed the followers of pharaoh, who believed that the Creator lies in a certain direction, and so he desired to climb up to Him on a ladder. He congratulates you for being among his followers, and he is you rimam.
They say: What about umayya ibn abi al-salt who said: “Glory to Him who creatures are unable to know in a way He deserves to be known, Who is on His throne, One and One alone, soverign and Possesser over the throne of heaven, unto Whose majesty faces humbled and prostrate”? and he – umayya had read the Torah, the bible, and the psalms.
We say: It is just like you, in your ignorance, to cite as proof, first pharaoh, then the discourse of pre islamic arab supported by the torah and the bible which have been distorted and changed. Of all of Allah
’s creation the jews are the most knowledgable in disbelief in likening Allah 
to the creation.
What we must bleieve is that Allah
existed and nothing existed with Him; that He created all creation, including the throne, without becoming subject to disclosure through them, nor did a direction arises for Him because of them, nor did he acquire a location in them; that He does not become immanent, that He does not cease to be transcendent, that he does nto change, and that He does nto move from one state to another.
Istiwa in the arabic language has fifteen meanings both literal and figurative. some of these meanings are suitable for Allah
and the meaning of the verse 20:4 is derived from them. The other meanings are not accepted under any circumstances. for example, if it is taken to mean being fixed in a place (tamakkun), settling (Istiqrar), connecting (Ittisal), or being bounded (muhadhat): then none of these are suitable for the Creator Subhannahu wa ta ala and no-one should try to find His likeness in His creation.
One may refrain from explaining the verse, as Malik rahimahullah and others have said: ‘Istiwa is known’ – he means: its lexical sense- “and its modality is unknown’ (Wa al-kayfu majhul)- that is: the modality of whatever is suitable for Allah
among the sense of Istiwa: therefore who can specify such modality?- “And asking about it is innovation”- because, as we have just made clear, probing thi smatter is looking for dubious matters and that is asking for fitna.
Hence, from what Imam of muslims malik r ahimahullah has said, we can conclude that the istiwa is known; that what is suitable for Allah
is left unspecified; and that He is declared transcendent above what is impossible for Him. as for specifying that is not suitable for Him, it is not permissible for you, since you have completed the declaration of oneness and belief by negating likeness for Allah 
and by negating whatever it is absurd to believe concerning Him,. There is no need for anything beyond that, and we have already explained this in detail.
As for the phrases: ‘He descends, He comes, he arrives,” and similar ones whose meanings it is impermissible to apply to His Essense: they refer to His actions…. Al-awza’i explained this when he said, about this hadith: “Allah
does what he wishes” ( Also related from ishaq ibn rahuyah as narrated by al-bayhaqi in al-asma wa al-sifat 2:375-376 #951 and al-dhahabi in mukhtasar al-uluw p.191 #234 and the Siyar (9:558 #1877); Fudayl ibn iyad as related from al-athram by bukhari in khalq af’al al-ibad p14; Yahya ibn Ma’in as cited by Lalika’i in sharh usul i’tiqad ahl al0sunna. The later two are cited by ibn taymiyya in majmu’a al-fatawa 5:377)
It suffices to know or simply to believe that Allah
is not to be defined by any of the characteristics of creatures and there ther eis nothing in His creation that resembles Him and no interpretation that can explain Him.
They said: We must say “He descends” without asking how. We say: We seek refuge in Allah
from asking how! We only say whatever Allah 
’s Mesenger salalahu alayhi wa salam has taught us to say and what we have understood from the arabic language in which the Qur’an was revealed. And the Prophet salalahu alayhi wa salam said: ‘Allah 
says: O my servant, I was ailing and you did not visit me, I was hungry and you did not fee d me, I was thirsty and you did not give me drink…” (Narrated from Abu Hurayra radiallahu anhu by muslim and Ahmad) None of this is suitable of them through Him. In the same way, the saying “Our Lord descends” expresses that His servant and angels descends in His name with His order pertaining to whatever He bestows of His mercy, gives out of His generosity and showers His creation out of His bounty.
The poet says:
I hav edescended- therefore do nto suspect me of jealousy! in the station of the generous lover. (The scholars also often qoute al-shafii’s saying that when he first arrived in egypt they did not understand him, whereupon “I descended, and descended, and descended until they understood me”
A descent can be either figurative or physical. The descending that Allah
spoke about, if understood as physical, would mean His angel, Messenger, and slave. However, if you can understand it to mean that He was not doing any of this and that He then turend to do it in the last third of the night, thereby answering prayers, forgiving, bestowing, and that He has named this “descending from one degree to another and from one attribute to another, ” then that ironically is addressed to those who have more knowledge than you and mroe itnelligence, who are firmer in belief in Allah 
’s unity and are less confused than you-Nay, who are not confused at all!
They say in ignorance that if He meant the descending of His mercy he would not make that only in the last third of the night, because His mercy descends day and night. We say: Yes, he singled out the night, and the day of arafa, and the hour of jum’a, because the descent of His mercy in them is mroe abundant, and its bestowal is even greater then. Allah
told us of this when He said: “And those who beg forgivness in the early hours of the morning” 3:17
Ibn al-arabi, arida al-ahwadhi 2:234-337
As Salamu Alaikum Ya Sidi Mustafa,
I have missed you and your posts akhi. Good to see you back and I hope all is well on the home front Insha’Allah
.
-Ibn Ahmad
wa alaykum salam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh,
Jazakallah khayr akhi
May Allah
pour his mercy upon us and the muslimin and keep us safe from fitnah and an nar
as salaamu alaykum,
a brother on IA forums brought a good point from ibn hajar al-asqalani rahimahullah
ADITH of SAHIH BUKHARI : The Prophet Salalah u Alaihi wa sallam saw mucus on (the walll in the direction of) the Qiblah, it grieved him to an extent that it (the grief) was noticible on his face. He stood up and scratched it off with his hand then he said: When any of you stand in Salah , then he’s convercing with his Rabb, or he said: Surely his Rabb is between him and the Qiblah. So non of you should ever spit towards the Qiblah…. #405)
Hafith Ibn Hajr Asqalani states: “In this Hadith there’s refutation on those who believe that He is on the throne bithaatihi.” He then makes them aware of the fact that : “Whatever Taweel you use on this Hadith can be used on that Hadith.” (Fathul Baari 1/669)
as salaamu alaykum,
if everything was literal with regards to Sifat then we must believe that Allah
ta ala literally runs and that Allah 
ta ala is before us in our salah bi-dhatihi. Its odd that we have aqidah tahawiyah which states Allah 
is not in the six directions yet the Salafis will say Allah 
is literally in a Aboveness position thus being located by simply pointing ones finger. They assume that because Allah 
was when there was nothing and then Created, that we must now be in a position. Kan Allah 
wa la makan wa la zaman. I think the safest position is as Imam abu hasan al ashari rahimahullah has stated, that is ‘Istiwa is a divine act’ It is indeed there is no need for us to spend hours and hours saying we know the meanings and looking at all the 15 meanings and then try to confirm one of the 15 meanings to Allah 
. Rather, since Allah 
’s essence is unlike the creation then indeed all of his great Sifat are not understand in our language.
They say they affirm Yad Allah
. The meaning to them is lit. hand. Yet you ask them what is hand they say that is going into kayfiyyah. So inreality they only affirm a word because they dont know the true meaning lest they fall into tajsim by saying Yad means literally bodily appendeg or limb but unlike limbs!
Indeed Allah
created Adam alayhi salam with His yad and wrote the tawrah etc.. Without how. Its as abu hasan al ashari said Yad is a sifat just like hearing and sight. we dont interpret yad to be limb (and this is the apparent meaning in the language) thus the negation of this in of itself proves we dont know the meanings.
The salafis use imam malik rahimahullah to prove their corrupt aqidah yet to me it simply seems Imam malik said to report them as they are and do not interpret. Saying Yad is literally a hand or that Istawa literally means istiqrar is indeed interpreting is it not? Perhaps im wrong
Abul Layth, what do u think of Imam alQurtubi’s defence of Imam Ibn Abdul Bar rahimahuma Allah
, in his book al Asna?
Um Abdullah, what do you think of Sheikh Hamd Al-Tuwaijri’s (of King Sa’ud University) comment on Ibn ‘Abd Al-Barr’s ta’wil of Allah
’s dahk?
I do not know what ur talking about.
Refernce plz
أختي أم عبدالله الناس هنا يجاوبون السؤال بالسؤال؟
لا أدري لربما كان هذا منهجهم جواب السؤال بالسؤال!
والله أعلم
عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه ( ( أتاه ) ) رجل فقال : على أمه رقبة ، وقد ماتت ، وأتاه بجارية أعجمية فقال لها : من أنا ؟ قالت : رسول الله ، قال فأين الله ؟ فأشارت إلى السماء ، فقال اعتقها فإنها مؤمنة
الراوي: عبدالله بن عباس – خلاصة الدرجة: إسناده صحيح – المحدث: الذهبي – المصدر: العرش – الصفحة أو الرقم: 20
أن رجلا أتى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم بجارية سوداء أعجمية فقال يا رسول اله إن علي رقبة مؤمنة فقال لها رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : أين الله فأشارت برأسها إلى السماء بإصبعها السبابة فقال لها رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : من أنا فأشارت بإصبعها إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وإلى السماء أي أنت رسول الله قال : أعتقها
الراوي: أبو هريرة – خلاصة الدرجة: رجاله موثقون – المحدث: الهيثمي – المصدر: مجمع الزوائد – الصفحة أو الرقم: 1/28
ألا يدلانك هذان الحديثان للشيخان الذهبي والهيثمي أن الله سبحانه وتعالى في السماء! وهذا ما أثبته الله سبحانه وتعالى لنفسه في كتابه. وهذا أثر عن أمِّ سلمة -رضي الله عنها-، قالت أمُّ سلمة زوجُ النبي -صلى الله عليه وسلم- ومالكُ بنُ أنس، في قوله -عز وجل-: {الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَى} قالوا: الاستواء غير مجهول، والكيف غير معقول، والإقرار به إيمان، والجحود به كفر.
الاستواء غير مجهول, يعني: غير مجهول معناه في اللغة العربية.
والكيف غير معقول, يعني: كيفية استواء الرب لا يعقل ولا يعرف.
والإقرار به إيمان، يعني: يجب على الإنسان أن يقر بأن الله استوى على العرش.
والجحود به كفر؛ لأنه إنكار لكلام الله -عز وجل-، وهذا الأثر مأثور عن أم سلمة -رضي الله عنها-، وأثر عن الإمام مالك بن أنس، وأثر عن ربيعة شيخ الإمام مالك، وله ألفاظ، ومشهور عن الإمام مالك بلفظ: “الاستواء معلوم، والكيف مجهول، والإيمان به واجب، والسؤال عنه بدعة”.
والله أعلم
Shaykh Nuh Keller has written a response to such usage of this hadith:
http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/inthesky.htm
Another response to the claims of Abdullah written by Shaykh صفي الدين
محمد بن عبد الرحيم بن محمد الأرموي الهندي
titled:
الرَّسـَــــالةُ الـتـــّسْعِيــــنيّـــةُ
في الأصُـــــولِ الدّينــــِيّــة
http://www.al-razi.net/website/doc/resala.doc
He responds to the claims above thoroughly.
Also please read what the Azharian Shaykh الإمام العلامة المحدث المجدد أبو محمد محمود بن محمد بن أحمد بن خطاب السبكي الأزهري مؤسس الجمعية الشرعية بمصر وصاحب ( المنهل العذب المورود شرح سنن أبي داود ) المتوفى سنة 1352هـ رحمه الله تعالى
had to say on this issue:
http://www.al-razi.net/kwathare/fatawa.htm
Yet another response: http://www.al-razi.net/kwathare/jariya.htm
assalamu ‘alaykum wa rahmatu Llah!
frankly speaking,i’m confused..
if Ibn ‘uthaimeen is pseudo-salafi can i use his fatwas?does he refute 4 madhhabs?
is the official standing committee of Sa’udiya is pseudo-salafi or hanbali?does it mean that if they are pseudo-salafi their fatwas are invalid?
could you explain it please,brother Abul Layth?
Wa’alaykum Salaam Wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakaatuhu Brother Abu Hasan,
Bismillah wal Hamdulillah:
Akh Abu Hasan, There are basically two issues you have raised; 1) ‘Aqidah 2) Fiqh. In ‘aqidah the pseudo-salafis are united. They believe that Allah
is literally sitting or “above” (yet to be elaborated upon by them) a throne, as stated in the above article. They believe that Allah 
has literal hands, waist (or loins), eye(s), etc etc. And that Allah 
has place – “up”. You get the idea.
Then there are gray areas: The issue of tawassul – as to what constitutes shirk and what does not. The pseudo-salafis believe this is an issue of eemaan, whereas the traditionalists (Sunnis) argue that this is a matter of fiqh as presented by all of the past major A’immah save Ibn Taymiyyah and co. You can do a search on this website to clarify the issue of tawassul.
The fiqh matters that are not so gray are issues such as salah, zakaah, siyaam etc etc. The pseudo-salafis are disunited in fiqh. Some of them, particularly the Albaani (rahimhullah) followers and ‘school’, are harder against following the 4 schools. A refutation of this particular “school” was done by Imam Buti of Syria:
http://www.sunnipubs.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&category_id=2&flypage=shop.flypage&product_id=181&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=26
Or if that link does not work just go to http://www.sunnipubs.com to get the latest released translation. The brethren did a fantastic job in translating and conveying the message of Sunnism with this translation.
Then there is the “saudi/Najdi” school of pseudo-salafism. This school varies even amongst itself. However, those who cling to the rasaa’il of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab say they are Hanbalis, and do cling to the opinions of the madh-hab. One who taught some of the works of the Hanbalis in fiqh was the late Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen (rahimahullah). There is no doubt that he held to the hanbali principles, and studied as well as taught their works. Many times however, just as the mujtahideen of old did, he mixed opinions – as can be seen in his fatawaa – but in reality there is no harm in this practice as he was a Qadi for the Muslims, and a scholar of law.
He did however stand against Ibn Qudaamah in visiting the graves etc, and stepped outside of the established view of the school. Another issue that they have erred on – particularly Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen (rahimahullah) – is the issue of bida’ah. We have forwarded the proper understanding of the salaf regarding this matter in the following article: http://seekingilm.com/archives/41
My advice regarding fiqh is that one cling to the scholars who cling to the Imams of old. Those who abide by the usool and furu’ of the four A’immah and their schools are safe. Those who tend to step outside of the schools tend to wade in the waters of deviation and heresy. You can always go to http://qa.sunnipath.com/ to get your q?S answered etc.
Read works translated from the schools. There is a host of english literature on Hanafi, Maaliki, Shafi’i fiqh. The Hanbali madh-hab has unfortunately been hijacked by the najdis and polluted by their personal opinions, particularly those of Ibn Taymiyyah. So do as our forefathers did, cling to the 4 schools. They have been agreed upon for 1,200+ years of Muslim history.
I hope that clarifies our stance better for you brother.
-Abul Layth
as-salamu alaikum bro Abul Layth
that fatwa of the azhari shaykh you linked above was translated here:
http://www.marifah.net/articles/fatwaazhar-mahmudkhattab.pdf
was-salam
Assalamu ‘alaykum wa rahamtu Llahi Ta’alla wa barakatuHu ya akhi al-karim Abul Layth!
thank you very-very much for your help,waLlahi you do wonderful work,may Allah
help you,reward you with the great award for your successful seeking ‘ilm,and spread your knowledge!
as you know,our ‘ilm,which helps people, will live after we’ll go to meet Allah
and it will bring us the benefit,even during our being in the grave..so your work maintains a lot of good for all of us!my prayers for you,brother!
as for madhhabs,if i don’t find something in hanbali or it’s not according to sunnah i take an opinion of someone who’s shafee’e or hanafi or maliki,as i think everyone does it,so it’s not a problem to use fatwa of someone else and of course i’m trying to find opinions of our righteous forefathers,in the works of great imams of our jama’ah.and you know,i don’t trust those,who refute madhhabs,it worries me..
as i understand you,Ibn Taymiyyah(rahimahu Llah) poluted madhhab hanbali?
going down to the nearest sky,like imam does it from the minbar,and he didn’t confine Allah 
in space..as i remember his “Aqeedah Wasatiyah”,he just reported words from Quran about arms and eyes of Allah 
and he didn’t ask to understand it literally,but maybe i’m mistaken..
i read that it was lie,that he told about Allah
Pingback: Imam Abu Yusuf and the Muqaatiliyyah : Scan of Quote: Seeking Ilm (Knowledge)
Pingback: Part 2: Ibn Uthaymeen & the Neo-Muqatilliyyah - Istiwaa ‘Alal ‘Arsh - Negating the Anthropomorphism : Seeking Ilm (Knowledge)
Can I get a link to sh. al-uthaimeen’s sharh of aqida al-wasitiyya?
I have never read a book full of so much tashbih! I have the two volume set, and every time I pick them up and read it, my eemaan decreases. He states that Allah
istiqrar (sits) upon the throne and blah blah blah.
Its horrid!
http://www.al-eman.com/islamLib/viewtoc.asp?BID=335
In that case your iman must decrease every time you pick up the mus-haf and read ‘arRahmanu ‘al al-`arsh istawa’.
So originally “OM” I was going to respond to your stupid statement, then I realized its not worth the waste of my time to entertain idiocy.
So “Salama”.
Ibn ‘Abdel Barr
at-Tamhid
عن أبي هريرة أن رسول اللهقال:” ينزل ربنا تبارك وتعالى كل ليلة إلى السماء الدنيا حين يبقى ثلث الليل فيقول من يدعوني فأستجيب له من يسألني فأعطيه من يستغفرني فأغفر ” له هذا حديث ثابت من جهة النقل صحيح الإسناد لا يختلف أهل الحديث في صحته رواه أكثر الرواة عن مالك هكذا كما رواه يحيى ومن رواة الموطأ من يرويه عن مالك عن ابن شهاب عن أبي عبدالله الأغر لا يذكر أبا سلمة وهو حديث منقول من طرق متواترة ووجوه كثيرة من أخبار العدول عن النبي [...] وفيه دليل على أن الله عز وجل في السماء على العرش من فوق سبع سموات كما قالت الجماعة وهو من حجتهم على المعتزلة والجهمية في قولهم إن الله عز وجل في كل مكان وليس على العرش والدليل على صحة ما قالوه ( 7 ) أهل الحق في ذلك قول الله عز وجل الرحمن على العرش استوى وقوله عز وجل ثم استوى على العرش ما لكم من دونه من ولي ولا شفيع وقوله ثم استوى إلى السماء وهي دخان وقوله إذا لابتغوا إلى ذي العرش سبيلا 11 وقوله تبارك اسمه إليه يصعد الكلم الطيب 12 وقوله تعالى فلما تجلى ربه للجبل وقال أأمنتم من في السماء أن يخسف بكم الأرض
وأما قوله في هذا الحديث : “ينزل تبارك وتعالى إلى سماء الدنيا” فقد أكثر الناس التنازع فيه والذي عليه جمهور أئمة أهل السنة أنهم يقولون ينزل كما قال رسول الله ويصدقون بهذا الحديث ولا يكيفون والقول في كيفية النزول كالقول في كيفية الإستواء والمجيء والحجة في ذلك واحدة وقد قال قوم من أهل الأثر أيضا أنه ينزل أمره وتنزل رحمته وروى ذلك عن حبيب ( 52 ) كاتب ملك وغيره وأنكره منهم آخرون وقالوا هذا ليس بشيء لأن أمره ورحمته لا يزالان ينزلان أبدا في الليل والنهار وتعالى الملك الجبار الذي إذا أراد أمرا قال له كن فيكون في أي وقت شاء ويختص برحمته من يشاء متى شاء لا إله إلا هو الكبير المتعال وقد روى محمد بن علي الجبلي وكان من ثقات المسلمين بالقيروان قال حدثنا جامع بن سوادة بمصر قال حدثنا مطرف عن مالك بن أنس أنه سئل عن الحديث إن الله ينزل في الليل إلى سماء الدنيا فقال مالك يتنزل أمره وقد يحتمل أن يكون كما قال مالك رحمه اللهعلى معنى أنه تتنزل رحمته وقضاؤه بالعفو والإستجابة وذلك من أمره أي أكثر ما يكون ذلك في ذلك الوقت والله أعلم
Jâmi3 bnu Sawâda
Kachf Al-Hadith
الكشف الحثيث ج 1 /ص 83
[185] جامع بن سوادة عن آدم بن أبي إياس بخبر باطل في الجمع بين الزوجين قال الذهبي كأنه افته ثم ذكره بإسناد جامع انتهى وقد ذكر هذا الحديث بن الجوزي في الموضوعات بإسناده عن جامع ثم قال هذا موضوع وجامع مجهول انتهى
Lissan Al-Mîzân Ibn Hajar volume 2 p.93
لسان الميزان ج 2 /ص 93
[375] جامع بن سوادة عن آدم بن أبي إياس بخبر باطل في الجمع بين الزوجين كأنه آفته قال حدثنا آدم ثنا بن أبي ذئب عن الزهري عن أبي سلمة عن أبي هريرة رضي الله عنه مرفوعا من مشي في تزويج بن اثنين أعطاه الله بكل خطوة وبكل كلمة عبادة سنة ومن مشى في تفريق بين اثنين كان حقا على الله أن يضرب رأسه بألف
صخرة من جهنم خرج بن الجوزي هذا الحديث في الموضوعات من طريق محمد بن إسماعيل بن العباس الوراق وكان أحد الحفاظ الثقات عن علي بن محمد بن أحمد الفقيه عن جامع هذا وما عرفت علي بن محمد وروى له الدارقطني في غرائب مالك حديثا من وجهين عنه عن زهير بن عباد عن أحمد بن الحسين اللهبي عن عبد الملك بن الحكم عن مالك عن نافع عن بن عمر رفعه آخر من يدخل الجنة رجل من جهينة فيسأله أهل الجنة هل بقي أحد يعذب فيقول لا فيقول عند جهينة الخبر اليقين الدارقطني الحديث باطل وجامع ضعيف وكذا عبد الملك بن الحكم
Habîb : Mâlik’s scribe
المغني في الضعفاء ج: 1 ص: 146
1287 حبيب بن ابي حبيب زريق المدني
كاتب مالك قال احمد كان يكذب وقال أبو داود كان يضع الحديث
Nasâ-Î volume 1 p.34
الضعفاء والمتروكين للنسائي ج: 1 ص: 34
161 حبيب كاتب مالك متروك الحديث
Taqrîbou Tahdhîb de ibn Hajar volume 1 p.150
تقريب التهذيب ج: 1 ص: 150
1087 حبيب أبي حبيب المصري كاتب مالك الغرماء أبا محمد واسم أبيه إبراهيم وقيل مرزوق متروك كذبه أبو داود وجماعة مات سنة ثماني عشرة ومائتين من التاسعة ق
Ibn Taymiyya
charH Hadith annouzoul p.31
وهؤلاء يدعون أنهم وافقوا السلف ; وليس الأمر كذلك . كما قد بسط في موضعه
وكذلك ذكرت هذه رواية عن مالك رويت من طريق كاتبه حبيب بن أبي حبيب ; لكن هذا كذاب باتفاق أهل العلم بالنقل لا يقبل أحد منهم نقله عن مالك . ورويت من طريق أخرى ذكرها ابن عبد البر وفي إسنادها من لا نعرفه
Adhahabî
Siyar A’lâm Annoubala volume 8 p.105
سير أعلام النبلاء ج:8 ص:105
وقال ابن عدي حدثنا محمد بن هارون بن حسان حدثنا صالح بن ايوب حدثنا حبيب بن أبي حبيب حدثني مالك قال يتنزل ربنا تبارك وتعالى أمره فأما هو فدائم لا يزول قال صالح فذكرت ذلك ليحيى بن بكير فقال حسن والله ولم أسمعه من مالك
قلت لا أعرف صالحا وحبيب مشهور والمحفوظ عن مالك رحمه الله رواية الوليد بن مسلم أنه سأله عن أحاديث الصفات فقال أمرها كما جاءت بلا تفسير فيكون للإمام في ذلك قولان إن صحت رواية حبيب
i read in a website asharis.com that we asharis believe the quran to be created is that true?
In answer to your question you can read the following:
http://sunnianswers.wordpress.com/2009/10/05/the-quraan-and-allaahs-attribute-of-speech/
also
http://sunnianswers.wordpress.com/2009/03/25/wahabi-contention-ash%CB%86aris-say-this-quran-is-not-allaahs-speech/
and
http://sunnianswers.wordpress.com/2008/10/29/wakii%CB%86-on-those-who-say-the-quraan-is-created/
and
http://sunnianswers.wordpress.com/2008/09/19/wahabi-asks-%E2%80%98who-said-alif-laam-meem%E2%80%99/