Replying to Questions about Aqida
I received from Shabir Ally some questions to answer. Here is the reply:
Please note that I put the Questions and/or quotes from his papers in a Blue font, to be easily recognized. I also emphasized some of my paragraphs in red.
Question 1:
Please comment on my treatment of the verses 3:142, 9:16, and 47:31 in my paper.
In his papers, the person in concern said after stating the verses:
Or deemed you that you would enter Paradise while yet Allah knows not those of you who really strive, nor knows those (of you) who are steadfast? (Qur’an 3:142 trans. Arafat K. El-Ashi, Ph.D., Amana Publications 2002)
Or deemed you that you would be left (in peace) when Allah yet knows not those of you who strive, choosing none for friends and protectors save Allah and His Messenger and the believers? Allah is informed of what you do. (Qur’an 9:16)
And surely we shall try you till we know those of you who strive hard (for the cause of Allah) and the steadfast, and till we test your record. (Quran 47:31)
Then he said:
“The point in these verses is simply that Allah does not know yet who will strive because He did not fix in advance who will strive and who will not.”
اللهم غفرانك
I cannot comprehend how a Muslim, in his sound mind, can write with his own hands such as statement!
However:
I have explained in my previous replies that the assumption is that Allah knows everything, literally. Whatever we chose; whatever alternatives there will be, He knows and He knows what we will choose at any point of time. It is not going to save that person to say, “It implies a limitation in us that we are not yet proven to be Mujahideen”. This is only twisting of words! He is simply saying that Allah DOES NOT KNOW WHAT CHOICE WE WILL MAKE, plain and simple in his own words. This is not The Allah we all worship! This is less of Allah than the ONE Muslims' worship.
سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَى عَمَّا يَقُولُونَ عُلُوًّا كَبِيرًا
"Glory to Him! He is high above all that they say! Exalted and Great (beyond measure)!" (Al-Isra’a 17-43)
Considering the complete and utter knowledge of Allah SWT, which is a Muhkam of Quran, we then understand the meaning of the verses above. As I mentioned before, the Elm “knowledge” here is the bringing about of the original knowledge of Allah that is identical to what is happening or what will happen. Ibn Taymiyah explained that this is not an extra knowledge that Allah gains; it is simply materialization of His original knowledge. It also has nothing to do with his knowledge, as it refers to the action of the individual in real life, and it does not change what Allah SWT knows and wrote, although it is identical to it. It is to Allah only that He sees it happening in accordance with what His knowledge was. That is why It was reported that Ibn A’abas said: “to know is to see” as in the verse:
وَقُلِ اعْمَلُواْ فَسَيَرَى اللّهُ عَمَلَكُمْ وَرَسُولُهُ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ
"And say: Work (righteousness): soon will Allah observe your work, and His Messenger, and the Believers" (Al-Tawba 9-105)
No wonder that Ibn A’abas was called the Interpreter of the Quran and was blessed by the Prophet PBUH in knowledge of Quran, as he summed it up in one word, although it might not be the final explanation of these verses. The comprehensive understanding is that to Allah SWT, it is the realization of the knowledge that is required to happen to constitute the reward or the punishment. The word see might invoke another series of thoughts that would again take people to wrong believes if not understood in its right context. We have to realize that Quran uses WORDS of a vocabulary that humans use, with all the limitations that words of a language might have. That is why Omar Ibn Al-Khatab said: "verily Quran is merely made up of words, so use it the proper way". The proper way is to put it all together as a whole to serve the Muhkam meaning, which is in this case the comprehensive and complete knowledge of Allah.
Also, the scholars who looked into this point were divided into two opinions: The Followers of Ibn Kullab “Al-Kullabiyah”; those who denied the renewed “action knowledge” that takes place in order to deny any extra knowledge to Allah. The other scholars; the people of Hadith, the Ahlul Sunnah and all the successors said what I have stated above; that this is a matter that is related to the doer of the action, but it is real and is extra, but not necessarily knowledge. They said that for Allah SWT, it is a matter of seeing it happening rather than knowing a new thing, and it then constitutes punishment. That is why Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal has ostracized Al-Harith Al-Muhasibi although Al-Harith was one of the scholars that he liked, as Al-Harith adopted Ibn Kulab’s opinion. It was reported that Al-Harith returned back to the opinion of Ahlul Sunnah in this matter, and Ahmad talked to him again. However, both parties; Ibn-Kullab and Ahlul Sunnah NEVER dared to say that Allah SWT DOES NOT KNOW what will happen in terms of the choice of a human being (for further discussion, please read Ibn Taymiyah's Collection of Fatawa V.8 p.496).
This understanding of Ahlul Sunnah makes all the texts that are available in Quran and Sunnah accepted and workable rather than resorting to omit what does not go with a twisted interpretation.
We have to emphasize here that the knowledge of Allah and writing what is happening and what will happen, has nothing to do with the free will of the person. This is a false connection that the people of Bida'a just like to keep establishing, either because their intellectual capacity is not up to the standard to understand the point, or because they are tied up to their own Hawa (desires) and wrong believes and do not wish to change it. Therefore, the points, which the person in concern, has put forth are irrelevant.
Those points are:
- Allah already wrote down the final place of each person.
- This writing cannot change.
- Therefore some people are doomed from start to finish; others are saved from start to finish.
- Therefore the choice of our final destination is already made for us and we cannot change it.
- Therefore the claim that we are responsible for choosing our destination is false.
This is totally wrong and twisted logic as we have explained. We choose our actions and Allah SWT knew what we are going to choose, and wrote it. We are not doing what we are not doing because we don’t want to do it, although we have the capacity to do it. The fact that what we do is exactly identical to what is wrote is because the comprehensiveness and completeness of Allah knowledge rather than He making us forced to do it. The word Jabr الجبر is not a legitimate word to use. Rather, the Shariah term is Jabl الجبل which means creating humans with original instinct, that was defined in Hadith as the Fitra or “Islam”. The Prophet said: “every new born is born on Fitra, and his parents makes him Christian or Jew”, Al-Boukari, Al-Temizie, Malik and Ahmad. This Hadith proves that all of us where given the chance to be good. However, other factors contributed to make many of us astray, in spite of the three guidance routs that Allah gave us: Fitra and the first constitution (as in Al-A’araf verse), the intellectual capacity to reach the truth, and finally Allah's messengers. So, no one can claim that humans where created originally bad. This is what Allah knew about them as He knows what they will turn to be in the future.
However, as the reader can see, this is a very fine matter, that is dangerous for those who do not have the intellectual capacity to discuss it, to get into. If the intellect of the person does not comprehend such arguments, then he has only two choices: either to keep looking into this and arguing and will end up astray, or keep it simple and just believe in what the Salaf used to believe and say: Allah SWT knows everything, He is Wise, Capable and has the ultimate knowledge. This will guarantee safety.
Question 2:
Please comment on Shaikh Ali al-Tantawi's position regarding the knowledge of Allah, the special case of human destiny, his treatment of hadiths on the subject, and his attitude towards hadiths in general as appears in my paper.
With all due respect, I have to say that Shaikh Ali Al-Tantawi is not the scholar to be quoted in such matters. He is a great Daeiyah داعية, but not a scholar as per the term used when it refers to scholars. However, I just have to speculate on what Shaikh Tantawi said about “changing the will of Allah” as I only have the paragraph that is quoted (quotes appear in Blue):
Ali Al-Tantawi, General Introduction to Islam: The Faith, trans. S. M. M. Nainar, Qatar: Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, 1995, pp. 112-113).
“[At this point in the book the following footnote appears:]
If all human actions were predestined since Eternity with no scope of change, alteration or option, there would have been no need to send Prophets to this world, nor to launch Jihad (Holy war) against the unbelievers; and to invoke the Almighty. (Ibid, p. 113).”It seems that this is the opinion of the one that is editing the book المحقق Rather than shaikh Tantawi. However, we cannot change our understanding of the whole religion of Islam and the extent of Allah's knowledge for a footnote!!! No matter who wrote it. It might mean the writer is another person who could not comprehend what we described in the answer of Q1, so, he was trying to find a way out of the false connection between the knowledge of Allah and the Jabr “coercion” of humans to perform the actions against their free will. However, wrong opinions kept floating over the history of Muslims, and will keep floating, as it is the realization of the hadith of the Prophet about the 73 sects.
“We should always be aware that the Holy Quran is the basis – the terra firma – of all our beliefs. So, if there is any contradiction between a Quranic Verse and a Tradition narrated on the authority of a single source, and there is no scope for reconciliation between the two in an agreeable manner, we should opt for the Quranic Verse. (Ibid, p. 117).”
Ahlul Sunnah agrees to that, it depends on how to use it. This point is a consensus of Ahlul Sunnah. It is not something that shaikh Tantawi or any one who just found out about! It is discussed in Usool Al-Fiqh under the subject of ‘Contradiction between Proofs” تعارض الأدلة where they discuss if the Verse contradicts Hadith, Verse contradicts verse, and Hadith contradicts Hadith. There are rules for that which is beyond the scope of this article. However, it is proven without a shadow of doubt that the correct understanding of the verses of Quran cannot and did not contradict any Sahih “correct” Hadith. Applying the right rules and the correct straight understanding solves the problems of such false contradictions, without the need to abolish the verses or the correct hadith. The degree of correctness also plays a rule in this matter, and the way the Imam perceives the relationship between the limitations of the A’am vs. the Khas (general/specific) and the Mutlaq vs. the Muqayad (the Absolute/Qualified) and the Mujmal vs. the Mubayan (Ambivalent/Clear), it also refers t o as the Delalaat (Inferences). They talk about the strength of the Hadith of the individual vs. the verse that is Mujmal or A’am or Mutlaq. As I said, there are rules for that, but we have to understand that such arguments were never applied to Aqidah matters, except by Ahlul Bida'a. We believe that the Hadith of the individual حديث الآحاد ; if correct and the chain is trustworthy and precise, it constitutes a definitive knowledge العلم اليقيني and belief as stated in all the text books of the Aqidah of Ahlul Sunnah. However, Ahlul Sunnah. They also agree that such Hadith, although constitutes belief, a doubt can happen in twisted minds because of the fine lines of such matters. That is why they ruled that those who deny the subject of such hadiths would not be Kufar (disbelievers). They would be considered Ahlul Bida'a. These rules are used to derive matters of Fatwa of Shariah actions (Ibadat and Mua’malat), not faith. This is the stand of Ahlul Sunnah. Many scholars wrote about this point such as Imam Ibn Qutaiybah in his great book: Ta’aweel Mukhtalaf Al-Hadith (تأويل مختلف الحديث), and Ibn Taymiyah has wrote his great encyclopedia like great book “Refutation of the false Conflict between Intellect and transferred text” (درأ تعارض العقل والنقل) which is often referred to as “The agreement between The clear intellectually proven and the correct transferred text” (موافقة صريح المعقول لصحيح المنقول). You have to emphasize the words of Tantawi where he said: “and there is no scope for reconciliation between the two in an agreeable manner”. This is a key to understand and deal with the text. I think Ahlul Sunnah has a very valid coordination and conciliatory way of understanding the subject of Qadar without omitting any correct Hadith, or resort to a false tactic that refuses the Hadith of Boukari and Muslim, being the highest level of authenticity, just to promote their sick logic. I strongly advice Mr. Ally, and those who derive their faith from light books and “footnotes!!” to start putting real effort to learn and understand this Shariah, before making statements that will be their enemy at the day of judgment. They owe it to themselves and to those they spread such twisted Aqida among.
[At this point in the book the following footnote appears:]
“It is an acceptable principle among the scholars of Islamic religious disciplines that there can be no Tradition in contradiction to the Holy Quran, or to any tangible fact of life. If any such Tradition be narrated by anyone, we should deny its attribution to the Prophet, even if the chain of narrators be authentic. (Ibid, p. 117)”
Again, a footnote! I believe that this point was covered before. It seems the person who put the foot notes has the same problem as our friend here, so the explanation should be directed to him as well, rather than using his footnotes as proof of the contrary.
After studying a number of verses on the subject, Shaikh Al-Tantawi concludes:
“It is thus clear that there is no predestination of the freewill of man. And that freewill is corrected with certain attributes and actions falling within the scope of human volition. (Ibid, p. 119)”
Well, of course there is no predestination as in the Jahmiyah term, where Allah dictates for humans what they will do. Again, Allah knows what they do, and He wrote it, and if He wanted He would changed it, but rather He decided to leave it to happen as the human chooses.
Question 3:
Please comment on Abu Hanifah's (may Allah have mercy on him) position on the logical problem regarding saying that Allah knew how things would.
This is the quote from Mr. Ally’s papers:
The Imam saw a logical problem that ensues from that statement. For, if Allah knew that the kafir will be a kafir, then either He wanted the kafir to be a kafir or to be a believer. It couldn’t be that he wanted the kafir to be a kafir. But did He want the kafir to be a believer? According to Abu Hanifah, if anyone says that “he makes the Lord unable to achieve that which he wants because he desires the existence of that which He knows will not be. A person who affirms that is an unbeliever.” (Reported by Abu Yusuf as in the History of Baghdad quoted by Muhammad Abu Zahra, The Four Imams: Their Lives, Works and their Schools of Thought, trans. Aisha Bewly, UK: Dar Al Taqwa, 2001, pp. 221-222)
I am afraid Mr. Ally has grossly misunderstood both Abu Hanifah and Abu Zahrah! Abu Hanifah (RA) found no problem with any thing! He has always been away from such arguments that were growing in Iraq following many factors that contributed to the spread of what was called ‘Elm Al-Khalam” or the science of Talk, referring to the logic and refutation of the Mu'tazilah to the Greek philosophy and Christian faith. The establishment of such science has led to an enormous damage to the pure Islamic source of knowledge as was presented by the Prophet PBUH and accepted and followed the companions, a matter that is again beyond the scope of this reply. However, Abu Hanifah never tried to be part of such line of thought. Except few times he replied to questions, he never wrote a book or introduced a distinct line of thought to these matters. One of his arguments that he put forth to Abi Yusuf, as reported in the History of Baghdad was as follows:
English text: “Abi Yusuf: I heard Abu Hanifah saying: if you argued with the Qadari (Mu'tazilah) it is only two choices he has: Either to shut up, or become a Kafir (unbeliever). You say to him:
Did Allah know that things will be the way it is now or not?
If he replied: No, he is a Kafir.
If he replied: Yes, ask him:
Did Allah wanted it to be the way it is or not?
If he says: Yes, he then agrees with you that Allah wanted the Momen (believer) to be a Momen and the Kafir (unbeliever) to be Kafir.
If he says: No, then he is declaring a God that is frustrated and feels sorrow and this is Fufr (blasphemy).” Abu Hanifah, His life, time, opinions and Fiqh, By Imam Abu Zahrah p180
Arabic Text:
أبي يوسف: سمعت أبا حنيفة يقول: إذا كلمت القدري، فإنما هو حرفان، إماأن يسكت، وإما أن يكفر. يقال له: هل علم الله في سابق علمه أن تكون هذه الأشياء كما هي، فإن قال: لا فقد كفر، وإن قال نعم، يقال: أفأراد أن تكون كما علم أو أراد أن تكون بخلاف ما علم؟ فإن قال أراد أن تكون كما علم، فأقر أنه أراد من المؤمن الإيمان، ومن الكافر الكفر، وإن قال أراد أن تكون بخلاف ما علم، فقد جعل ربه متمنيا متحسرا، لأنمن أراد أن يمون ماعلم أنه لا يكون، أو لا يكون ما علم أنه يكون فإنه متمن متحسر، ومن جعل ربه متمنيا متحسرا فهو كافر.
I have no idea where Mr. Ally gets his understanding from!? It is clear that Abu Hanifah believes that Allah SWT knows everything before it happens. This is the main and plain idea of Ahlul Sunnah. I have to elaborate on the point that the “will” of Allah for some one to be kafir is the “universal will” where nothing can happen against it. Allah did not wish to change what the Kafir wanted, although He could have done that.
Question 4:
Your example of the father who knows his son is an excellent illustration, and this is the first time I have seen it used. Most writings refer to a teacher knowing his student, which is also a good illustration. I understand, Dr. Tariq, that you have an engineering background. Please use an illustration of an engineer designing something and having the knowledge of what that thing will do. Will he blame the thing for functioning in the way he knew before hand that it would function?
I used the Father as an example as fatherhood constitutes more clear contact with and understanding of the son more than teacher with his student (of course with no reference to the Christian trinity God forbid). As for the engineering example, I believe I have answered this point before. Humans are not machines. The example is wrong right from the beginning. It is wrong to handle the matter like that. Humans have a will and they apply it. Allah SWT Has created every one on the right Fitrah of Islam. It gets corrupted by his own will either because of his Hawa (bad desires mixed with doubts) and/or external influence.
Question 5:
Please comment on my specific position. It comprises many parts. If one of the parts is missing, then it is not my position. Hence, for example, if you say that the future is fully and finally fixed, then I have to agree with you that you must also say that Allah knows the future as being fully and finally fixed. And if you say that the future is changeable then you must also say that Allah knows it to be changeable. And if you say that after all the changes there is a guaranteed final result then you must also say that Allah knows the guaranteed result. But if you can say, as I say, that the final result is undecided, then you will have to logical also say that Allah knows the final result as being undecided. It cannot be undecided and yet Allah knows it to be decided. Hence when I take the Quranic verses such as 3:142 literally as I do I am not limiting the knowledge of Allah but I am limiting the future, and leaving some of it for Allah to decide based on the free choices we make. As the commentators say, the negation of the knowledge in these verses actually imply the negation of the object of knowledge. For if there is an object of knowledge then surely Allah knows it. Please comment specifically on this position.
The problem here is the word ‘fixed”. It brings back to your mind the doubts of Jabr. The future is fixed but not in the sense you use it. It is fixed in the sense that Allah SWT knows whatever will happen, and as the assumption is that He has the ultimate comprehensive knowledge, it can NEVER happen otherwise. This Fixation of the future is due to that type of knowledge not to Allah making it compulsory to happen. If you can understand this point, you will then save us all a lot of explanation and save yourself a lot of deviation from Sunnah. The point you say is utterly wrong and out of Sunnah, and is of great danger as Abu Hanifah said to be out of Islam, although you wrap it up in nice words. When you say: undecided, you have to know that you have reversed the logic. It is actually undecided to us, not to Allah SWT. Allah SWT knows what the decision will be, but we don’t until we make it, and then it is proof either for our benefit if it is right or against us if it is wrong. You cannot escape the fact that you are limiting the knowledge of Allah even with using such nice approach such as: then you will have to logical also said that Allah knows the final result as being undecided. This flatly means that still Allah does not know part of the future until it takes place. The God I, and Ahlul Sunnah, is greater than that. The future is decided in terms of Known as the word decided has also shadows of compulsory decision by Allah. You better use the word Known. I already explained the verses that you mentioned here and this is what all of Ahlul Sunnah say about it.
Question 6:
You have said in reference to the Quran 5:94 and 29:2 that "to know" means "to see." I am aware that this opinion was traced to Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him. But did Ibn Abbas say that he arrived at this opinion because this is required by the language? While you seem confident that one who knows Arabic would know that this is so, Tabari in his tafseer denies this and says that actually "to see" would imply "to know", but "to know" does not necessarily imply "to see" for one may know something without seeing it, but one cannot see something without knowing it. Hence we have examples from the Quran and in Arabic literature where "see" implies "know" but not the other way around. How do you evaluate Tabari's position? Do you have any examples from Arabic literature that he was not aware of?
I believe that I have answered this point in detail in Question 1. I have to mention that the word of Ibn A’abas “to see” is not necessarily the final understanding of these verses, as mentioned by Ibn Taymiyah, as he said when he was talking about these verses: that Ibn A’abas may have a point in using “to see’. As for the point of seeing and knowing; to see in this context, is not different from to know as they are not mutually exclusive. To see, in this context, is only a degree of knowledge. The words see and know has general and specific inferences between them as we say in Arabic بينهما عموم وخصوص. Knowledge is more general than seeing as the ultimate knowledge includes seeing where things are confirmed. That is why the prophet Ibrahim PBUH asked Allah to see him, although he had the knowledge that constitutes believe but adding seeing is even more to substantiate the knowledge. Also, seeing can be more general than knowledge as it implies knowledge (no one see some thing without building sort of knowledge of it). However, in no place, Al-Tabari claims that Allah does not know the future or knows only that the future is undecided, or such twisted believes of Allah. Al-Tabari stand is that it knows means “to reveal your behavior or make it come true as He SWT knew”, not to “see” as Ibn A’abas said. Let us see what Al-Tabari said:
القول فـي تأويـل قوله تعالـى: لِـيَعْلَـمَ اللّهُ مَنْ يَخافُهُ بـالغَيْبِ فَمَنِ اعْتَدَى بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ فَلَهُ عَذَابٌ ألِـيـمُ . (المائدة 94)
“O ye who believe! Allah doth but make a trial of you in a little matter of game well within reach of your hands and your lances, that He may test who feareth Him unseen: any who transgress thereafter, will have a grievous penalty.” 5-94
Al-Tabari said (Arabic):
فتأويـل الكلام إذن: لـيعلـم أولـياء الله من يخاف الله فـيتقـي مـحارمه التـي حرّمها علـيه من الصيد وغيره ، بحيث لا يراه ولا يعاينه .
Al-Tabari said: “So, the understanding of the text is: so, those who are A’awliyaa (supporters) of Allah would KNOW who actually fears Allah and avoid His prohibitions that He made prohibited in hunting and otherwise so he does not see the prohibited or come across it”.
This literally says that Al-Tabari stand is that the knowledge in fact happens to the individuals or believers when they watch the events materializes. No trace for Allah’s lack of knowledge of the future or such Bida'a, May Allah keep us away from such astray.
القول فـي تأويـل قوله تعالـى: { وَلَقَدْ فَتَنّا الّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ فَلَيَعْلَمَنّ اللّهُ الّذِينَ صَدَقُواْ وَلَيَعْلَمَنّ الْكَاذِبِينَ } العنكبوت 3.
“We did test those before them, and Allah will certainly know those who are true from those who are false.” 29-3
Al-Tabari said (Arabic):
يقول تعالـى ذكره : … فكذلك ابتلـينا أتبـاعك بـمخالفـيك من أعدائك فَلَـيَعْلَـمَنّ اللّهُ الّذِينَ صَدَقُوا منهم فـي قـيـلهم آمنا وَلَـيَعْلَـمَنّ الكاذِبِـين منهم فـي قـيـلهم ذلك ، والله عالـم بذلك منهم قبل الاختبـار ، وفـي حال الاختبـار ، وبعد الاختبـار ، ولكن معنى ذلك : ولَـيُظْهِرَنّ الله صدق الصادق منهم فـي قـيـله آمنا بـالله من كذب الكاذب منهم بـابتلائه إياه بعدوّه ، لـيعلـم صدقه من كذبه أولـياؤه ، علـى نـحو ما قد بـيّناه فـيـما مضى قبلُ
Al-Tabari said:
“Allah SWT said: …and we have tested your followers with those who went against them of your enemies, so Allah would know those who are truthful in what they say and those who are liars in what they say. And Allah knows that of them, before the test, and during the test and after the test, but it means (to know) to reveal those who are truthful in saying that he is a believer and reveal the lie of the liars as being tested with his enemy, so His (Allah’s) A’awliyaa know who is laying, as we have explained before”.
Subhan Allah !! no trace in Al-Tabari’s words of such Bida'a whatsoever. In fact he has been very careful in stating exactly what he means when he said: “And Allah knows that of them, before the test, and during the test and after the test”.
Al-Tabari may have not accepted Ibn A’abas explanation of “to know” by “to see”, but he adopted the view that it means “to reveal to the followers in accordance with the comprehensive knowledge that He knew before and during and after the fact”. This is what Al-Tabari say in all the verses of that sort.
وَمَا جَعَلْنَا الْقِبْلَةَ الّتِي كُنتَ عَلَيْهَآ إِلاّ لِنَعْلَمَ مَن يَتّبِعُ الرّسُولَ مِمّن يَنقَلِبُ عَلَىَ عَقِبَيْهِ . (البقرة 143)
“..and we appointed the Qibla to which thou wast used, only to know those who followed the Messenger from those who would turn on their heels (from the Faith). 2-143
Al-Tabari said (Arabic):
فإن قال لنا قائل : أوَما كان الله عالـما بـمن يتبع الرسول مـمن ينقلب علـى عقبـيه إلا بعد اتبـاع الـمتبع ، وانقلاب الـمنقلب علـى عقبـيه ، حتـى قال : ما فعلنا الذي فعلنا من تـحويـل القبلة إلا لنعلـم الـمتبع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من الـمنقلب علـى عقبـيه ؟ قـيـل : إن الله جل ثناؤه هو العالـم بـالأشياء كلها قبل كونها ، ولـيس قوله : وَمَا جَعَلْنَا القِبْلَةَ الّتِـي كُنْتَ عَلَـيْهَا إلا لِنَعْلَـمَ مَنْ يَتّبِعُ الرّسُولَ مِـمّنْ يَنْقَلِبُ عَلَـىَ عَقِبَـيْهِ يخبر أنه لـم يعلـم ذلك إلا بعد وجوده .
فإن قال : فما معنى ذلك ؟ قـيـل له : أما معناه عندنا فإنه : وما جعلنا القبلة التـي كنت علـيها إلا لـيعلـم رسولـي وحزبـي وأولـيائي من يتبع الرسول مـمن ينقلب علـى عقبـيه . فقال جل ثناؤه : إلاّ لِنَعْلَـمَ ومعناه : لـيعلـم رسولـي وأولـيائي ، إذ كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وأولـياؤه من حزبه ، وكان من شأن العرب إضافة ما فعلته أتبـاع الرئيس إلـى الرئيس ، وما فعل بهم إلـيه نـحو قولهم : فتـح عمر بن الـخطاب سواد العراق ، وجبى خراجها ، وإنـما فعل ذلك أصحابه عن سبب كان منه فـي ذلك .
Al-Tabari said:
“So, if one says to us (arguing): Did Allah not knew who will follow the messenger and who will roll back on his feet except after the follower followed and the one who rolled back retreated, and that is why He said: we have did what we have done of changing the direction of Qaba to know who will follow and who will retreat? We answer: Allah SWT is the one who knows of all things before it happens, and it does not mean; when He says: and we appointed the Qibla to which thou wast used, only to know those who followed the Messenger from those who would turn on their heels, that He is telling that He did not know except after it happened. If (the person) says: so, what it means then? We say: the meaning is: We have made the Qibla that you have to make my messenger and my A’awliyaa knows who follows the Prophet and who rolls backward, so, He SWT said: Except to know; means to make my messenger and my supporters know. Arabs uses, in their language, this kind of semantics (structure of sentences) by relating what the followers of the head appears in the speech as it is done by the Head himself, as they say: Omar Ibn Al-Khatab has conquered Iraq and collected its Khiraj; meaning that his soldiers and followers did that. 3-143
I have to reiterate what I have mentioned before; that any doubts of these points would be a result of:
- Lack of Arabic
- Lack of serious reading of Text books (mother books as they say in Arabic).
- Reading translated books that have twisted concepts;
- And being tested by Allah SWT with Bida'a and doubts in Faith.
Some general rules of understanding:
1. Al-Muhkam and Al-Mutashabeh المحكم والمتشابه :
Allah SWT said:
هُوَ الَّذِيَ أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُّحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ في قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاء الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاء تَأْوِيلِهِ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلاَّ اللّهُ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلاَّ أُوْلُواْ الألْبَابِ
He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book; in it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning, Muhkamat); they are the foundation of the Book: others are not of clear meaning (Mutashabehat). But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is not of well-established meaning. Seeking discord and searching for its hidden/actual meanings, but no one knows its true meanings except Allah. 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. A’al Imran 3-7
Now, the method of Ahlul Bida'a has always been to follow the Mutashabeh and leave the Muhkam. The Muhkam, in the Uloom AL-Quran and Usool Al-Fiqh is: those words which have clear and well defined meaning and can not have any other – second – meaning. An example of that the verses such as: “والله على كل شيئ قدير” which translates as “And Allah is capable of everything” or “إن الله بكل شيئ عليم” which translates as: “And Allah Knows all”. These meanings are the bases and foundation of our Faith. However, in the course of studying the Quran, we face some verses cannot directly understood at all such as the letters in the beginning of some Suras or that can be understood in different ways. Examples of that are the general verses that can be specified, the ambivalent that can be cleared or the absolute that can be qualified. It all falls into the category of the Mutashabeh that becomes Muhkam after it is qualifies, specified or cleared (details of this is the subject of Usool Al-Fiqh). Verses such as the Muhkam, has to be paramount in establishing our understanding of Quran. It is clear from the verse we have stated above that Allah SWT has warned us against following the Mutashabeh and trying to twist the Muhkam to force a pre-set concept. This is typical Bida'a method (see Al-I’etesam, Al-Shatbi, V1 p239).
2. Rejecting the Sahih “correct” Hadith that does not follow certain concept of Bida'a:
This is also a most preferred approach of Ahlul Bida'a, to reject the hadith that does not support their pre-set concepts. Al-Shatbi said: “they reject the hadiths that goes against their Hawa “desires”, and claim that it is not rational, or does not go with the proofs they laid out, as they denied the hadith of grave torture, the scale and seeing Allah SWT at the day of judgment…and they might disregard the companions or the successors and other Imams of Hadith, that are well known for their precision and trustworthiness. They do all of that to build the proof against those who contradict their concept”. V1 P231
We have to be ware of such methods, and the other methods that Shaytan uses to carry people away from the Sunnah and the right Path.
3. Lack of understanding of the Arabic tongue:
Al-Shatebi said: “and of their methods (the people of Bida'a) is to talk wrong in Quran and Sunnah, without any knowledge of Arabic? And they have preyed on that right as they thought they are Mujtahedeen and they are not…” V1 P238.
ألا هل بلّغت، اللهم فأشهد
Have I Informed with Clearance? Allah is my witness.