Refutation of Anthropomorphism (Euphoria come inside)

[ZubeirAwal]

This is my response to your topic defending the tajsim claims of the mujasim feiz muhammad.

Everything in this topic will have reference to the salafus-saalix, thus making it valid by consensus because indeed, the salafus-saalix were the best of generations, and that includes better than Albaani, uthaymeen,Ibn Baz, Ibn Abdul wahab, Ad-dhahabi, Ibn Kathir, Ibn Taymiyya.

A Refutation of Contemporary Anthropomorphism as expressed in the So-called "Fundamentals of Tawheed"

Bilal Philips says:

“He has neither corporeal body nor is He a formless spirit. He has a form befitting His majesty, the like of which no man has ever seen or conceived, and which will only be seen (to the degree of man’s finite limitations) by the people of paradise.”


The above statement made by Bilal Philips proves that he is from the mujassima (anthropomorphists), who commit tajseem by attributing a body to Allah cazza Wajal. None of the Sahaba, Tabi’een or Tabi al-Tabi’een, also known as the salaf us-saalix (or pious predecessors), said that Allah has a “form” because for anything to have a form, it must be composed of parts, dimensions, and limits. Bodies, parts, dimensions, and limits are all attributes of the weak creation which Allahu Ta’ala, the Majestic, is not attributed with. The ulema of Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jama’ah use the verse “Laysa ka mithlihi shayy...(42:11)” to refute the false claims of the mujassima. That is, “There is nothing like Him whatsoever...”


Imam Abu Ja’far at-Tahawi (239-321), who lived most of his life in the noble and blessed time period of the “salaf” praised by the Prophet (‘Alayhi-salatu-wassalaam) in sahih ahadeeth refutes the mujassima in his famous Statement of Islamic Doctrine, “Al-Aqida al-Tahawiyya.” Imam Tahawi states in #38 of his Al-Aqida: “He [Allah] is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs....” Such a statement clearly states that it does not befit Almighty Allah to be attributed with a “form,” since parts, limbs, and restrictions are characteristics of anything which has a form. It must be noted that Imam Tahawi lived at a time when both the direct and indirect disciples of the four Imams of Islamic Law (Abu Hanifa, Shafi’i, Malik, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal) were teaching and practicing. This period was the greatest age of Hadeeth and fiqh studies, and Imam Tahawi studied with all the living authorities in his days.

Al-Badr al-‘Ayni said that when the mujtahid Ahmad ibn Hanbal died, Tahawi was 12; when Imam Bukhari died, he was 27; when Imam Muslim died, he was 32; when Imam Ibn Majah died, he was 44; when Imam Abu Dawud died, he was 46; when Tirmidhi died, he was 50, and when Imam Nisa’i died, he was 74.



What Bilal Philips said: “He has a form befitting His majesty...” means that Allah has a form which is not like the form of the creation.

Furthermore, Bilal Philips said: “He has neither corporeal body...” to mean that Allah’s form is not corporeal like that of the creation, but non-corporeal. That is, he claims that Allah has a non-corporeal body, or a body not like other bodies.

According to Imam al-Baihaqi, in his “Manaqib Ahmad,” he relates with a sahih chain that Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: “A person commits an act of disbelief (kufr) if he says Allah is a body, even if he says: Allah is a body but not like other bodies.”

[ZubeirAwal]

He continues: “The expressions are taken from language and from Islam, and linguists applied ‘body’ to a thing that has length, width, thickness, form, structure, and components. The expression has not been handed down in Shari’a. Therefore, it is invalid and cannot be used.”

One can see that Bilal Philips is in opposition to what the Shari’a teaches, as the mujtahid mutlaq Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal beautifully refutes his anthropomorphic claims.

Other false claims of the mujassima, in addition to Bilal Philips, are made by other wahhabees also like the late so-called Mufti of Saudi Arabia Abdl Aziz bin Abdullah bin Baaz. Bin Baaz, in his commentary of Imam Abu Ja’afar at-Tahawi’s “Al-Aqida,” says under footnote #3:

“By hudood (limits) the author [refering to Imam Tahawi] means such as known by humans since no one except Allah Almighty knows His limits.”

One can see that Bin Baaz, the majassim, says that Allah has limits, when it is clearly stated by Ahl al-Sunna scholars like Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Imam Ghazali, and Imam Baihaqi that Allah is clear of any limits whatsoever. The noble Imam Tahawi clearly said:

“He [Allah] is beyond...being restricted...”

He did not say:

“Allah has restrictions which humans don’t know but restrictions which only Allah knows.”

Bin Baaz misrepresents the pious Salaf and is following the footsteps of Shaytan by trying to twist the correct explanations of sahih treatises written by Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jama’ah. Wahhabees are infamous for their mockery and misrepresentation of Ahl al-Sunna scholars.
Furthermore, Bin Baaz says in the same footnote:

“Similarly, his [refering to Imam Tahawi] saying “The six directions do not surround Him like all other innovations ” means the six created directions. He does not means the negation of Allah being above His creation and established on His throne because His position is not covered by the six directions, as He is above this universe and surroundings.”

Like Bilal Philips, Bin Baaz has also contradicted himself. According to Bin Baaz, Allah is not bound by the “created directions,” but then contradicts himself by saying,

“All the evidence from the Book and the authentic Mutawatir Sunnah prove that He is in the direction above us”

later in the same footnote. The deviation of their intellectc compel them to contradictory statments and the do not heven realized it. Bin Baaz is not only contradicting himself, but also lying in behalf of the Qur’an and the authentic Mutawatir Sunnah. The fact is that the Qur’an, Sunna and the Ahl al-Sunna scholars have never attributed a direction to Allah.

A hadeeth related by Imam Bukhari states:

“Allah existed eternally when there was nothing else with Him.”

This means that absolutely nothing existed, including the throne. Everything that came into existence after once having been in a state of non-existence is a creation which does not possess eternal attributes. The Ahl al-Sunna ulema say that the claim that Allah is sitting on His Throne indeed stipulates a direction because the throne is a creation of Allah, and all of creation is located in “created directions.” Saying that Allah is in the “direction” of the throne is indeed imposing a sensory limitation to Allahu Ta’ala. After all, is the throne not located in a particular direction? The fact is that the throne is located in a certain direction and a certain place. For Allah to be localized on the Throne would mean that Allah is in a place. This opposes the creed of Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jama’ah. Imam Bukhari, who passed away in 256 AH,
believed that Allah exists without a place, as it is authentically stated by Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his “Fath al-Bari.”

In addition to Bilal Philips and Bin Baaz, other wahhabees have also imposed directions for Allahu Ta’ala, and opposed the sahih creed of Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jama’ah. Muhammad Khalil Harras, another wahhabi, writes in his translation of Ibn Taymiya’s “Sharh Aqeedah al-Wasitiyyah,” page 73:

“The Mutazila deny the vision. This denial is based on refusing to accept Allah in any direction for it is necessary for a thing being seen to be in the direction of the seer...”

Al-Harras thus claims Allah must be in a direction to be seen in the Hereafter. This makes him a mujassim like Bilal Philips and Bin Baaz. The Ahl al-Sunna scholar Imam Abu Ja’far at-Tahawi in his “al-Aqida” once again refutes this mujassim by saying:

#35 says: “The Seeing of Allah by the People of the Garden is true, without their vision being all-encompassing and without the manner of their vision being known....We do not delve into that, trying to interpret it according to our own opinions or letting our imaginations have free rein.”

Also, remember that “Allah is not contained by the six directions.”

Bilal Philips also opposes the sahih creed of the salaf us- salih like a-Harras by saying:

“He has a form befitting His majesty, the like of which no man has ever seen or conceived, and which will only be seen (to the degree of ma's finite limitations) by the people of paradise.” (emphasis added),

One clearly sees that this statement of Bilal Philips is based on his imagination and sensory delusion, and it is in opposition to the creed of the pious salaf.

Other wahhabis like Muhammad Saleh al-Uthaymeen, shows that he is also a mujassim by saying in his “Aqidat al-muslim” that

“Allah’s establishment on the throne means that He is sitting ‘in person’ on His Throne.”

The hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his “Fath al-Bari” rejected the statement that Allah is on the Throne “in person” as equally preposterous as saying that Allah is everywhere. Ibn al-Jawzi in his “Daf shubah al-tashbih said:

“They said: He is established on the Throne “in person.” But this addition is not related by anyone!”

Even Sulayman ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, the wahhabi founder’s grandson, declared anyone a kafir who used the term “in person” in relation to Allah being in a place in his “al-Tawdih ‘an tawhid al-khallaq fi jawab ahl al-‘Iraq.”

Be attentive that the Ahl al-Sunna scholars in Ibn Taymiya’s time accused him of being a mujassim. Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani’s biography of Ibn Taymiyya in “al-durar al-kaamina fi a‘yaan al-mi’at al-thaamina” [The Hidden Pearls Concerning the Famous People of the Eighth Century] is sahih dalail (proof) to justify such a claim. Ibn Hajar states authentic statements in his book such as:

“People were divided into parties because of him. Some considered him an anthropomorphist [mujassim] because of what he mentioned in ‘al- ‘aqeeda al-Hamawiyya’ and ‘al-‘aqeeda al-Waasitiyya’ and other books of his, such as Allah’s hand, foot, shin, and face being litteral attributes of Allah (Sifaatun Haqeeqiyyatun lillaah) and that He is established upon the Throne with His Essence (wa annahu mustawin ‘ala al-‘arshi bi dhaatihi). It was said to him that were this the case He would necessarily be subject to spatial confinement (al-tahayyuz) and divisibility (al-inqisaam). He replied: “I do not concede that spatial confinement and divisibility are (necessarily) properties of bodies (anaa laa usallimu anna al-tahayyuz wa al-inqisaam min khawass al- ajsaam),” whereupon it was adduced against him (ulzima) that he held Allah’s Essence to be subject to spatial confinement.”

Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn al-Jawzi (508-597), a Hanbali scholar, warned people of the ‘mujassima’ who speak in the name of Ahmad ibn Hanbal falsely in his “Daf shubah al-tashbih be akuff al-tanzih” (The repelling with hands of transcendence of the sophistries of likening Allah to His creation). The wahhabees are not the only mujassima in the history of Islam. The mujassima have existed before them and have been refuted by scholars of Ahl al-Sunna. For example, the scholar Ibn Hibban, who died in 354 AH, was expelled from Sijistan for refusing to assert limits to Allah. Wahhabees are only reving the tajseem of the mujassima of the past. Today and in the past, wahhabees have been refuted by scholars of Ahl al-Sunna as the mujassima in the past were refuted by the ulema in their times.

The Wahhabis are the mujassima of today, and mujassims like Bilal Philips, Abdl Aziz bin Abdullah bin Baaz, Muhammad Khalil Harras, and Muhammad Saleh al-Uthaymeen must be refuted in light of the proof provided by the Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jama'ah, the noble adherents of the Hanafi, Shafi’i, Maliki, and Hanbali schools of Jurisprudence.