Global Intifada

Introduction

I’ve been doing some thinking and I’ve concluded that almost every single aqeedah debate between Salafis and Ahl us Sunnah always avoids dealing with the substantive issues. Most of the time, the argument devolves into “my shaykh is better than your shaykh.” In order to make this discussion more beneficial, lets give the discussion more structure and address the core issues.

The fundamental core dispute between the Salafi and Ahl us Sunnah aqeedah is the nature of Allah ’s (subhana wa ta’ala) relationship with His Creation. The general principle that is based on clear, unambiguous texts of the Qur’an and various hadeeth, not to mention consensus, is that Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) is absolutely dissimilar from His creation.This is something that is agreed upon and anyone who rejects this principle is not a Muslim.

After this principle which is well established and agreed upon, the two fundamental issues are over the nature of God’s Attributes and His Actions

1. Do God’s attributes subsist within His essence?
a. Are God’s attributes created or eternal?

2. Do God’s actions subsist within His essence?
a. Are God’s actions created or eternal?

The answer to these questions have resulted in ikhtilaf by the scholars after the era of the Salafus Saleh. No one, not even the Hanbalis, can claim that they have the exact same aqeedah as the Salafus Salah had 100%. Every methodology has, to some degree, discussed issues that were not discussed in the era of the Salafus Saleh. This is not an ‘innovation’ but merely a clarification of a new issue that requires ijtehad since the sources of legislation aren’t clear (beyond the first principle that Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) is absolutely dissimilar to His creation.)

Lets deal with the most hotly contested issue which is over the nature of Kalam. (Hence the title “Ilm ul Kalam” for this sub-field within the science of aqeedah)

Their are two options: either Kalam is an attribute of Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) or it is an action of Allah (subhana wa ta’ala?)

First Scenario

The first scenario is “the attributes of God subsist within Him.” Lets apply the example of Kalam to this principle.

There are several obvious examples of Kalam: the Qur’an [which is preserved in the lawh mahfudh, preserved in the hearts and minds of men and is written), the speech of Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) to Musa (alayhi wa sallam), etc.

If the Attributes of Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) exist within Him, that means that the attribute of Kalam subsists within Him as well since Kalam is an attribute of Allah (subhana wa ta’ala).

However, sometimes Kalam appears to be eternal (since Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) is eternally speaking and He speaks when He wills) and sometimes it appears to be created. For example, when Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) spoke to Musa (alayhi wa sallam). This meant that the speech (which had a beginning and an end) was created. Since Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) spoke to Musa (alayhi wa sallam) and this speech began and ended, this means that this speech was created.

The first view (the Qur’an is eternal) creates a further issue: If the Qur’an is eternal (but it too has a beginning and an end), is our recitation of the Qur’an eternal since we are repeating the words of Allah (subhana wa ta’ala)?

The second view (the speech to Musa (alayhi salam) creates a further issue as well: If that speech was created, but speech is an attribute and attributes subsist within Allah (subhana wa ta’ala), does this mean that something created subsists within Allah (subhana wa ta’ala)?

As you can see, these issues are far from simple. The apparent wording of the texts are contradicting themselves. This is why some of the ‘Ulema have not taken them literally, nor did the Sahabah (radhi allahu anhum) delve into them. Thus, the Ashari/Maturidi clarification of these issues is entirely justifiable.

Lets deal with the second scenario which attempts to explain this issue.

Second Scenario

The second scenario is that “Allah ’s (subhana wa ta’ala) actions subsist within Him.” Lets also apply the topic of kalam to this issue.

Lets suppose someone were to say “Kalam” is an action and not an “Attribute” (This is the position of the Mu’tazila). Do these actions subsist within Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) or are they external to His essence? More importantly, are these actions created or eternal?

If a person says “God’s actions are eternal and they subsist within Him” this leads to an issue: God’s creation of the the Universe. The creation of the universe is an action. However, if actions are eternal and subsists within Him, this would mean that the universe is eternal and subsists within Him since the creation is an action. This completely contradicts the verses that are thoroughly unambiguous and emphasize the separation of the Creator and the Created.

If a person says “God’s actions are created and they do not subsist within Him” this leads to another issue: the Qur’an. This would mean that the Qur’an (which is the Speech of Allah (subhana wa ta’ala)) is created and does not subsist within Him, which also contradicts various narrations.

Conclusion

The purpose of this exercise was not show that the core sources of differences of opinion between the various methodological approaches to the aqeedah of Ahl us Sunnah are not caused by “rational” or “intellectual” differences as is implied by some of our Salafi brothers. They are caused by texts that seem to contradict each other apparently. The schools of kalam exist in order to explain the differences between these texts.

If one ponder’s deeply over the Ashari and Maturidi aqeedah, one will note that they are the path of moderation. They did not take the extreme affirmation of Allah ’s attributes like the Anthropomorphists nor did they take the extreme negation of the Allah ’s attributes like the Mu’tazila. The path of the Ashari/Maturidi schools of Kalam is one of moderation, one that is in complete accordance with the Qur’an and Sunnah and other sources of legislation, and one that is also rationally sound and creates tranquility in the hearts. The differences between the Athari, Ashari, and Maturidi schools are caused by their different attempts to answer the issues that were discussed above

Anyone who claims that they are philosophers or innovators is merely an ignoramus who doesn’t fully comprehend the true nature of these issues.

May Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) strengthen our ‘Ulema and save us from a knowledge that does not benefit and save our Ummah from the ignorant one’s who are misguided and will misguide others. Ameen.

Share This