It is impossible that Aļļaah should be in time
The arguer thinks Aļļaah’s knowledge is something that can be divided over moments of time, so that the concepts of past, present and future applies to it.
That cannot be true, however, because Aļļaah’s existence is not a possibility, but an existence that is intrinsically necessary (Waajibu-l-Wujuud).
To clarify: something that exists is either intrinsically (i.e. with respect to itself alone) possible in its existence, or intrinsically necessary. There is no third judgment for what exists. The possible in existence accepts non-existence, while the necessary does not.
Aļļaah is necessarily existent, but everything else is possible, because what is possible in existence needs something other than itself to exist. If it did not, then it would be intrinsically necessary.
If Aļļaah’s existence was divisible into time periods, then His necessary existence would be in a state of renewal, moment by moment, and what is renewed is not necessary in existence, rather it is only possible in the next moment, i.e. possible after having existed. In other words, renewal of existence does not apply to what is necessary in existence, because it does not need renewal. After all, if it needed renewal, it would not be necessary in existence. Consequently, it does not have moments of existence.
Another way to say this is that if Aļļaah’s existence had been divisible into moments of time, then this would either be with Him having a beginning, which none of us believe, or with Him having no beginning. However, if his existence was divisible into moments of time, without a beginning, then this would mean that an infinite number of moments passed before the world came into existence. An infinite number of moments cannot pass, however, because infinity cannot be completed.
Therefore, since an infinite amount of moments cannot pass, it must be true that Aļļaah’s existence is not divisible into moments of time.
Accordingly, His knowledge is not either, because it is an eternal, necessary, and thus non-renewing, attribute of Aļļaah. We know He has this attribute, because He specified and brought everything into existence, and since He specified it, He must definitely know it also.
Our knowledge, on the other hand, is a knowledge that is renewed over time, so our knowledge existing at 1:27 differs from our knowledge at 1:28. This is because it is changing, and because it is not necessary in existence, and is therefore divisible into moments of existence.
Beginningless Eternity is not a time
One important point needs to be stressed:
Beginningless Eternity is not a past time. Rather, it is an expression by which we mean the existence of Aļļaah with the non-existence of time, place and all creation.
The mind wants to know what this precedence of the Creator with respect to His creation is.
It is not in time, however, because time is possible in existence, as it is parts (moments) following each other in sequence, and these parts are definitely not eternal.
The whole of time then, is dependent on possible parts, and what depends on the possible is surely only possible in existence. Accordingly, the precedence of its Creator cannot be in time, not the least because that would make Him both in time and not in time, which is self-contradictory.
The reality of this, however, is not something the mind can grasp, because anything that enters the mind is in a situation of time. That is why Aļļaah being precedent is known by us in general, but not in detail or comprehensively.
For example, Aļļaah’s precedence of beginninglessness indicates a distinction between His beginninglessness and His endlessness. Beginningless eternity, however, is not something other than Aļļaah (but not Him Himself either.) Moreover, distinction between the two meanings would require a beginning for endlessness, but this is impossible, because any hypothesized beginning would have endlessness before it, as there is no beginning before that. That is, distinction between beginninglessness and endlessness would require the completion of beginninglessness, and that is impossible, because what does not begin cannot finish.
This means that our minds are incapable of distinguishing between the concepts of beginninglessness, endlessness and eternity. The reason is that the mind only knows what the mind encompasses.
So what is apparent is that Aļļaah is first in that everything that has a beginning depends on Him for their existence. If one tries to understand the reality of that firstness, however, one is completely unable, because the mind cannot encompass what has no limit.
Now we are back to the point that the reality of Aļļaah’s existence is not comprehensible to humans, but at an even deeper level than previously. A further indication of this fact, is that a human being does not conceptualize something except if he perceives in his mind inner feelings, such as pain and pleasure, or input from his senses, such as light, color, shape, sound, voice, taste, smell, temperature and softness. Anything beyond that is difficult for a human to conceptualize.
Since Aļļaah’s reality is not like what we perceive through our senses, we are not able to conceptualize Him.
Yet another indication of this incomprehensibility, is that what we know about Him, is either in the sense of negation, like in the sense that He is neither a body, nor a particle, or in terms of meanings that pertain to Him, such as, “He is the one that has all rights to judge.” In fact the most apparent fact we know about Him is: “He is the Creator of the world,” and that therefore He precedes it. Yet we cannot know the reality of this precedence, because it is not one of time.
We are compelled, nevertheless, to speak about this meaning in a figurative way, because language has been established to speak about things that are in time and place, and we do not have special vocabulary to express exactly what we want to say. For this reason, the feeble minded will think that we are saying something other than what we intend, such as when we say “before Aļļaah created the worlds.” We not mean by this to say that Aļļaah was in time.
In this regard, the Imam of Guidance, Abu Manşur Al-Maturidiy says:
“A fundamental belief principle is that whenever Aļļaah is ascribed an attribute, then this attribute is eternal. One says that He is attributed with knowledge, power and providing eternally without a beginning and without an end. If He is mentioned with regard to His management of creation and orders to it, then time is stated, but this time is for creation, not for Him.
For example, it is said,
“Aļļaah knows eternally that you are sitting here,” or “(sitting here) at this time.”
I.e. Aļļaah knows eternally without a beginning or an end that the person is sitting now…. This is all to prevent people from thinking “How were the created things in eternity? (Ta’wiilaat Ahlu-s-Sunnah 9/473)”
Having said that, what the arguer is describing, is a change of information over time for something in time. Time is something relative to one’s frame of reference, as one relates to all other things in space. Even in modern, generally accepted physics, they teach that the order of things is a matter of one’s reference point in space, and now the trend is that the phenomena of time is related to mass. Strange, but since Aļļaah is not in a place, unlike what Wahhabis believe, this helps us to accept also that time is not something He passes through as He does not have a reference point in space nor does He have mass, because He is not a body.
Rather, all places at all times pertain to Him with no difference between them, because He is not in a place and does not change. It is what His Power to create pertains to that is in time and place with respect to each other, not that He Himself is in time.
Accordingly, Aļļaah knows eternally without a beginning or end, or change or renewal, the fact that “the time is 1:28 when the time is 1:28″ and He knows the relation of that particular time to all other times. For example, He knows the time at which this time is present in itself, and when it is passed, and when it is future, just as He knows that time’s relation to the beginning of time, and so on. In other words, He knows everything that has to do with that time, both what we know, and what we do not know. So if that time comes, in relation to us, as we pass through time, and He is not, then Aļļaah did not increase His knowledge, because He knows eternally everything that has to do with it.
Further explanation
The ambiguity of what the wahabi said is made clearer if we hypothesized that a prophet asked his Lord, “what time is it now?” and Aļļaah revealed to him that the time is so and so. Is this revelation that was revealed to Him something that happened to Aļļaah’s knowledge, or something that He knows without beginning or end?
The answer is without doubt that it is something that Aļļaah knows eternally, because the word “now” is a word of relativity (relative to what passes through time) that Aļļaah (who is not in time) knows by His beginningless and endless knowledge. In other words, it is true that the time, at that particular point in time, is called “now” relative to things that are renewed or that change (i.e. things that could intrinsically, with respect to themselves, in the mind’s eye, be non-existent after existence.) So it is true that it is “now” with respect to that prophet when he asks. Based on this we can rephrase the hypothesized request as follows:
“What is the time now, relative to myself?” or, “What is the time now, relative to what passes through time?”
As for the Eternal, the relation of all different places is one to Him, in the sense that no place is closer or further from Him than another, because He is not in place, neither in one place, nor in all places. Likewise, all different times have one relation to Him, in the sense that one time is not nearer to Him than another. This is indicated in the aayah:
هُوَ الْأَوَّلُ وَالْآخِرُ [الحديد : 3]
Literally translated: “He is the First and the Last.”
Since Aļļaah does not have a beginning, it is true, based on the aayah, that He is First and Last without a beginning, i.e. without a past time, i.e. without being last after having been first. So the meaning of being last is not after being first and being first is not before being last. We consequently know that He is not bound by time, and that all different times have one relation to Him, because created things (i.e. what passes through time) cannot be last unless they have a past time. There is no question, however, that comprehending this is utterly beyond the capability of our minds.
The origin of this doubt-spreading point brought forward by the wahabi is his thinking that Aļļaah passes through time, just as creation does.
So he thought that the relation of “now” to Aļļaah is the same as the relation of “now” to us, His creation. This thinking stems from his failure to define time properly, and failure to differentiate between the Creator and the created. If he was really trying to get to the truth, he would have solved this problem by defining time properly. Alternatively, he could have believed Aļļaah’s saying about Himself:
وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ وَهُوَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ [الأنعام : 101]
Meaning: “He created everything, and He knows everything.” After all, time is definitely other than Aļļaah, so He is its Creator, and He is not passing through it.
[1]This is because measuring time is estimating renewal or change by renewal or change in something else. For example, days are measured in terms of changes in the sun or moon’s positions. If a sunrise is followed by a sunset, we say that a day has passed, and if this happens seven times, then we say that a week has passed and so on.
Elements and bodies are in a constant state of renewal, because their existence in every new moment is only a possibility; you do not know with absolute certainty whether they will exist in the next moment or not. They are therefore in a continuous state of renewal of existence.
That is why the concept of time always applies to them; they cannot break free of it. They are in a state of continuous state of existence after existence instead of non-existence, as long as they exist. This is what it means to pass through time.
This is not so with Aļļaah, because Aļļaah’s existence is a must, and it is therefore impossible that He should cease to exist. In other words, His existence is not in time, because His existence is not in a state of renewal. It is also clear then that He is not measurable in terms of time, because time is a measure of relative change or renewal between two things, and Aļļaah is not attributed with change or renewal. He is, after all, the Creator of time, because time is other than Aļļaah, and He said in His Book that He created everything.
Wahhabis
Wahhabi/Salafis will go out of their way to try to prove that Allaah is like His creation, even use philosophical arguments, something they simultaneously claim to be against.
You can notice a difference between wahabis and Sunnis in that the former always insist on ascribing limits, change, time, place, limbs, emotional states, etc. to Aļļaah.
Allah Exists Without Place or Direction
---
Imam ash-Shafi'i (d. 204AH/820CE) rahimahullah has stated:
"If it is said that "Allahu ta'ala said "Rahman did istiwa over Arsh," " then the following response is given:
These (types of) ayats are among the mutashabihat that perplex those who don't have the desire to achieve depth in ilm when answering these and others like them. That is, they should accept these ayats as they are and they should refrain from research and talking about them. This is because, one cannot ensure avoiding doubt and danger when he does not have rusukh [deep understanding] in ilm. He must believe in Allahu ta'ala's attributes as we have mentioned. No makan can contain Allahu ta'ala. Time does not pass over Him. He is exalted beyond having limits and end points; He is mustaghni [independent] from makan and directions. "There is nothing like Him." (42/11)"
Source: Imam ash-Shafi'i, al-Fiqh al-Akbar, 17. Quoted by: Dr. Ebubekir Sifil, Milli Gazete [daily newspaper in Turkish], Jan 8, 2006. Dr. Sifil states: See Kashf al-Zunun, II, 1288. Katib Chalabi points out the doubt about the attribution of this book to Imam ash-Shafi'i. However, Professor Fuad Sezgin reports that a copy of this book written in the year 292 is present in the al-Azhar Library and states: "If this date is correct, the doubt about the attribution of this book to Imam ash-Shafi'i is removed."(Tarikh al-Turath, I, 491)
Imam al-Baqillani said in his book al-'Insaf page 65:
"And we do not say that the `arsh (throne) is a place of settlement or rest for Allah, because Allah existed and there was no place, and when He created the place, He did not change".
He also said: "Allah is clear from being in directions, or resembling the creations, and also He is not attributed with transformation or movement, nor with standing or sitting, because such attributes are of the creations, and Allah (the creator) is clear from that". قال القاضي أبو بكر محمد الباقلاني المالكي الأشعري (403) ما نصه: "ولا نقول إن العرش له- أي الله- قرار ولا مكان، لأن الله تعالى كان ولا مكان، فلما خلق المكان لم يتغير عما كان" اهـ. وقال أيضا ما نصه: "ويجب أن يعلم أن كل ما يدل على الحدوث أو على سمة النقص فالرب تعالى يتقدس عنه، فمن ذلك: أنه تعالى متقدس عن الاختصاص بالجهات، والاتصاف بصفات المحدثات، وكذلك لا يوصف بالتحول والانتقال، ولا القيام ولا القعود، ولأن هذه الصفات تدل على الحدوث، والله تعالى يتقدس عن ذلك" اهـ
"And we do not say that the `arsh (throne) is a place of settlement or rest for Allah, because Allah existed and there was no place, and when He created the place, He did not change".
He also said: "Allah is clear from being in directions, or resembling the creations, and also He is not attributed with transformation or movement, nor with standing or sitting, because such attributes are of the creations, and Allah (the creator) is clear from that". قال القاضي أبو بكر محمد الباقلاني المالكي الأشعري (403) ما نصه: "ولا نقول إن العرش له- أي الله- قرار ولا مكان، لأن الله تعالى كان ولا مكان، فلما خلق المكان لم يتغير عما كان" اهـ. وقال أيضا ما نصه: "ويجب أن يعلم أن كل ما يدل على الحدوث أو على سمة النقص فالرب تعالى يتقدس عنه، فمن ذلك: أنه تعالى متقدس عن الاختصاص بالجهات، والاتصاف بصفات المحدثات، وكذلك لا يوصف بالتحول والانتقال، ولا القيام ولا القعود، ولأن هذه الصفات تدل على الحدوث، والله تعالى يتقدس عن ذلك" اهـ
Imam al-Suyuti [rh] says:
His statement:
His statement:
“And Allāh Almighty is above that.”
Al-Tībī said: “The Prophet (S) meant to direct them away from lower-worldly matters to higher worldly ones (min al-sufliyyāt ilā al-‘uluwiyyāt), and make them reflect on the dominion of the heavens and the Throne. Then they rise up to the knowledge of their Creator, and they reject idol worship with loathing, ceasing to associate anything with Allāh in worship. Therefore, he rose with them from the clouds, then the heavens, then the ocean, then the aw‘āl, then the Throne, up to the Owner of the Throne. This rising is in the sense of magnificence (al-‘az.ama), not location (al-makān). For, verily, Allāh is beyond taking the Throne as His dwelling (manzil) and settlement (mustaqarr). Rather, Allāh is its Creator, and He is Transcendent beyond direction and place.”
[Al-Suyūtī et al., Sharh. Sunan Ibn Mājah (p. 18).]
Ibn Hajar’s Commentary:Al-Kirmānī (d. 668) said: “Allāh is Transcendent beyond indwelling a place. However, since the direction of elevation is nobler than any other direction, Allāh predicated it to Himself to indicate the loftiness of His Essence and Attributes.”
[Al-Suyūtī et al., Sharh. Sunan Ibn Mājah (p. 18).]
Ibn Hajar’s Commentary:Al-Kirmānī (d. 668) said: “Allāh is Transcendent beyond indwelling a place. However, since the direction of elevation is nobler than any other direction, Allāh predicated it to Himself to indicate the loftiness of His Essence and Attributes.”
Others than al-Kirmānī addressed in similar terms the expressions that came down concerning aboveness (al-fawqiyya).
Al-Rāghib said:
The word “above” (fawq) can be used for place, time, body, number, rank (al-makāna), and dominance (al-qahr). If used for place, it is in terms of height (‘uluw) and its counterpart is “under” (tah.t). For example: (Say: He is able to send punishment upon you from above you or from beneath (tah.t) your feet) (6:65); or it is in terms of ascent (al-s.u‘ūd) and descent (al-inh.idār). For example: (When they came upon you from above you and from below (asfal) you) (33:10). If used for number: (If there be women more (fawq) than two) (4:11). If used for largeness and smallness, for example: (even of a gnat or whatever is bigger) (2:26). If used for rank, it can be either in terms of worldly precedence: (and We raised some of them above others in rank that some of them may take labor from others) (43:32). Or it can be in terms of other-worldly precedence: (But those who keep their duty to Allāh will be above them on the Day of Resurrection.) (2:212) If used for dominance: (He is the Omnipotent over (fawq) His slaves) (6:18, 6:61), (They fear their Lord above them) (16:50).
[Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bārī (1959 ed. 13:412 #6986).]
What is meant by the mention of the Throne [in the hadīth of the mountain-goats] is to establish that the Throne is created, for it is established that it has a top and a bottom, and they are attributes of creatures.”
[Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bārī (1959 ed. 13:414 #6987).]
The word “above” (fawq) can be used for place, time, body, number, rank (al-makāna), and dominance (al-qahr). If used for place, it is in terms of height (‘uluw) and its counterpart is “under” (tah.t). For example: (Say: He is able to send punishment upon you from above you or from beneath (tah.t) your feet) (6:65); or it is in terms of ascent (al-s.u‘ūd) and descent (al-inh.idār). For example: (When they came upon you from above you and from below (asfal) you) (33:10). If used for number: (If there be women more (fawq) than two) (4:11). If used for largeness and smallness, for example: (even of a gnat or whatever is bigger) (2:26). If used for rank, it can be either in terms of worldly precedence: (and We raised some of them above others in rank that some of them may take labor from others) (43:32). Or it can be in terms of other-worldly precedence: (But those who keep their duty to Allāh will be above them on the Day of Resurrection.) (2:212) If used for dominance: (He is the Omnipotent over (fawq) His slaves) (6:18, 6:61), (They fear their Lord above them) (16:50).
[Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bārī (1959 ed. 13:412 #6986).]
What is meant by the mention of the Throne [in the hadīth of the mountain-goats] is to establish that the Throne is created, for it is established that it has a top and a bottom, and they are attributes of creatures.”
[Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bārī (1959 ed. 13:414 #6987).]
Ibn Hajar al-Haytami rahimahullah writes:
"When a Jew asked Sayyidina Ali radiallahu ta'ala anh:"Since when is the existence of our Allah?"
Sayyidina Ali's color changed and he said:"He existed without how when there was no makan and nothing. He does not have a "before" or an "end" with respect to time. Everything other than Him comes to an end."
Source: Al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, Section on Imam Ali's virtues (Section 9, Part 4: The part on Sayyidina Ali's Karamats, Judgements, Knowledge, Wisdom and Zuhd). Translated from Turkish.
"When a Jew asked Sayyidina Ali radiallahu ta'ala anh:"Since when is the existence of our Allah?"
Sayyidina Ali's color changed and he said:"He existed without how when there was no makan and nothing. He does not have a "before" or an "end" with respect to time. Everything other than Him comes to an end."
Source: Al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, Section on Imam Ali's virtues (Section 9, Part 4: The part on Sayyidina Ali's Karamats, Judgements, Knowledge, Wisdom and Zuhd). Translated from Turkish.
Al-Hakim al-Samarqandi, Abu'l-Qasim Ishaq b. Muhammad (d.342AH/953CE) stated:
46th MATTER:
The following is the correct position on this issue: One must know that Allahu ta'ala is not in a makan [place], that He does not need a makan, and that Arsh stands only with His power; one must not ascribe attributes like going and coming to Him. This is because going and coming are considered from three perspectives:
1. A person goes near something which he is unable to see from a distance.
2. Comes near an activity when he is unable to do what he is to do from a distance.
3. One approaches towards a sound when he is unable to hear that sound .
Thinking like these about Allahu ta'ala is kufr.
Source: Al-Sawad al-A'zam 'ala Madhhab al-Imam al-A'zam Abu Hanifah.
46th MATTER:
The following is the correct position on this issue: One must know that Allahu ta'ala is not in a makan [place], that He does not need a makan, and that Arsh stands only with His power; one must not ascribe attributes like going and coming to Him. This is because going and coming are considered from three perspectives:
1. A person goes near something which he is unable to see from a distance.
2. Comes near an activity when he is unable to do what he is to do from a distance.
3. One approaches towards a sound when he is unable to hear that sound .
Thinking like these about Allahu ta'ala is kufr.
Source: Al-Sawad al-A'zam 'ala Madhhab al-Imam al-A'zam Abu Hanifah.
Imam al-Sharani rahimahullah (d. 973AH/1565CE) writes:
"Allahu ta'ala does not have a limit and He does not have directions."
Source: Al-Uhud al-Qubra, cf. two sections titled "Not to look upwards when praying" (285th Promise) and "Not to raise our eyes towards the sky when praying (314th Promise)."
"Allahu ta'ala does not have a limit and He does not have directions."
Source: Al-Uhud al-Qubra, cf. two sections titled "Not to look upwards when praying" (285th Promise) and "Not to raise our eyes towards the sky when praying (314th Promise)."
Imâm Rabbânî Mujaddid Alf- Thânî rahimahullah wrote:
Allâhu ta'âlâ is not with time, with place or with direction. He is not at a place or at any side. He created time, places and directions. An ignorant person thinks that He is up on the Arsh. .... He created all these afterwards. Can something which has been created afterwards ever be a place for One who is eternal and always exists?...
Allâhu ta'âlâ is not a substance, an object or a state. He is not limited; He does not have dimensions. He is not long, short, wide or narrow. We say that He is Wâsi, that is, wide. But this wideness is different from what we know and understand. He is Muhît; that is, He surrounds everything. But this surrounding is not like what we understand. He is Qarîb; that is, He is close to us, together with us, but unlike what we understand from it! We believe that He is wâsi, muhît, qarîb, and together with us. But we cannot know what these attributes mean. We say that everything which comes to the mind is wrong.
Maktubat, volume 2, letter 67.
Know that Allâhu ta'âlâ is neither inside nor outside the âlam. He is neither separated from nor adjacent to the âlam. Allâhu ta'âlâ exists. But He is not inside or outside, adjacent to or separated from it.
Volume 2, letter 34.
---
IMAM
IBN HIBBAN (d. 354AH):
ALLAH
IS NOT IN TIME OR PLACE
Imam
Abu Hatim Muhammed ibn Hibban (271-354H) was an early hadith scholar and a
Shafi jurist. From among his teachers were hadith scholars Imam An-Nasai and
Imam Ibn Khuzaimah.
His famous work “Sahih Ibn Hibban” is said to
be the most authentic collection of hadiths after Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim
and Sahih Ibn Khuzaimah. In this work, Imam Ibn Hibban at times provides his
commentary to the narrations, some of which are quoted below and roughly
translated.
Allah
is not in time or place
قَالَ أَبُو حَاتِمٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ: «وَهِمَ فِي هَذِهِ
اللَّفْظَةِ حَمَّادُ بْنُ سَلَمَةَ مِنْ حَيْثُ فِي غَمَامٍ إِنَّمَا هُوَ فِي
عَمَاءٍ، يُرِيدُ بِهِ أَنَّ الْخَلْقَ لَا يَعْرِفُونَ خَالِقَهُمْ مِنْ حَيْثُ
هُمْ، إِذْ كَانَ وَلَا زَمَانَ وَلَا مَكَانَ، وَمَنْ لَمْ يُعْرَفْ لَهُ
زَمَانٌ، وَلَا مَكَانٌ وَلَا شَيْءٌ مَعَهُ، لِأَنَّهُ خَالِقُهَا، كَانَ
مَعْرِفَةُ الْخَلْقِ إِيَّاهُ كَأَنَّهُ كَانَ فِي عَمَاءٍ عَنْ عِلْمِ
الْخَلْقِ، لَا أَنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ فِي عَمَاءٍ إِذْ هَذَا الْوَصْفُ شَبِيهٌ
بِأَوْصَافِ الْمَخْلُوقِينَ»
“….He
means the creation does not know where the Creator is, as He was without time
and without place, and one does know of time or place or anything with him….”
This
is similar to what Imam Ibn Hibban has said in his book “Ath-thiqah” (Volume 1,
page 1) :
الحمد لله الذي ليس له حد محدود فيحتوى, ولا له أجل معدود فيفنى, ولا يحيط
به جوامع المكان, ولا يشتمل عليه تواتر الزمان
“Praise be to Allah, Who is free of limits … who
is not situated by any of the places and who is not subject to the passage of
time ”
Wahhabi sheikh
says:
Quote:
“I noticed that many are asking about the reality of
“time” and “place”.
“time” and “place”.
So let us discuss both concepts beginning with “place”
What is “place”?
A place of something is a mere concept that only exists in our minds. There is nothing outside the mind that is “place”.
Wahhabi/Salafi says: "Let me explain …
Hmmm...
The “Day of Misaq” ?
[And they ask you concerning the soul. Say: "The soul is one of the things, of which the knowledge is only with my Lord. And of knowledge, you (mankind) have been given only a little."] (Al-Israa' 17:85)
-------------------------------------------
Wahhabi scholar says:
"The answer is that you would not have a place, because you do not exist.
Wahhabi scholar says:
"It is not that Allah created a place for us, and then put us into this place!
This Wahhabi "sheikh" says:
Therefore, it is ridiculous to ask:
"how could Allah assume a place when a place is a creature of Allah?”
This is what the Mutakallimeen ^ask.
It is ridiculous, because a place is not something that you assume.
It is a concept that results from your existence.
A relationship between you and the universe.
*A “place” of something cannot exist in our minds if that something did not exist.
---
Quote:
"So it makes no sence to say “Allah exists without a place”."
It will result in making Allah SWT into a mere mental being that has no existence outside the mind."
---
First of all why are Wahhabi/salafi scholars comparing their place of existence and non-existence with the Creator?
Allah's existence is eternal without a beginning, and therefore does not resemble anything that has a beginning
“He does not resemble anything, and He is All-Hearing, All-Seeing.”
If God has a place he dwells in a place, where was he before he created the place?
Isn't this place,space and time all his creation?
Where was He before He created the place?
Anyone that believes that Allāh settled in a place, or was in contact with it or anything else that has a beginning, such as the ‘Arsh or Kursīy, or the sky, or the earth, or anything else – he is a blasphemer absolutely and without a doubt.
Allah existed before the ‘Arsh or the sky.
Was He sitting, according to them, on the non existing ‘arsh before it existed?
Was He (according to them) in the sky before it existed?
Did He exist before creating all places all spaces, all time and all directions
How come he existed before a place and then comes and dwells in a place?
Does that not entail: he is a matter a mass that occupies space but isn't he the creator of matter, masses, and spaces and places…etc at the end of the day?
Allah created change he cannot be subject to his creation otherwise the creation would be the creator not the other way round
The creation does not subjugate the Creator but the Creator is the one who subjugates the change and what ever change changes!
----
Imam Ibn Hamdan al-Hanbali on one who says Allah ta’ala in a place!
“Whoever says He is, with His essence, in every place or in a place is a Kafir, because the statement necessitates pre-eternity of place…” [Nihayatul Mubtadi’in li Ibn Hamdan Pg. 33]
As the hadith states, “Allah ta’ala was, and nothing was with Him…” If someone says He was in a place always, we ask him for textual proof, for if Makan was always there, it means place which is besides Allah ta’ala, was pre-eternal as well. And if someone says He wasn’t always in place, but put Himself in place then he has put Allah ta’ala in creation, both of which are impossible.
----
Al Imam At Tahawi(RA) was born 239 AH and died 321 AH
He said in his ‘Aqeedah:
"He is exalted from having boundaries and limits; or sides, limbs, and body parts. The six directions do not encompass Him as they do all created things."
He also said in the same 'Aqeedah:
“Whoever describes Allah with a MEANING from the MEANINGS of the human beings, has committed kufr.”
Al Imam At Tahaawi is actually saying:
-Whoever affirms a description for Allah, believing in the MEANING that applies to human beings including bodily limbs, parts, directions, and limits has actually disbelieved in Allah.
---
Imam Al Khattaabi, who was born 319 years after the Hijra and died 388 AH was closer to the time of the Salaf than anyone else who explained Bukhaari after him.
Al Imam Al Khattaabi (RA) who wrote the first explanation of Saheeh Al Bukhaari
“And the statement of the Muslims, Allah is ‘alal ‘arsh (upon the throne) does not mean that He is touching it or is in the place above it, or that He is located in a direction from it. But He is separate from all of His creations” (A'laamul Hadeeth pg. 1474)
----
Wahhabi sheikh says:
"Now as for “time” …
Time is a measure of action, and the measurements of the series of actions makes Time (uppercase).
The duration of an action locates it in Time, just as the place of an object locates it in space.
So time is not something that exists outside the human mind. It is only associated with actions. If there is no action there would be no time.
Wahhabi/Salafi sheikh says:
"Allah SWT has always existed, so there was always a “place”,
and He has always acted, so there was always “Time”.
"To say that “time” and “place” are creatures of Allah is not correct.
They are mental beings that exist as an extension to the existence of action and matter, respectively. Wallahu A’lam.
"My comments: The 'time' and 'place' in the context of the above is referring to metaphysical concepts”
^Quote:
"If Allah (SWT) is ultimately perfect, why does he act?!
If He was ultimately perfect (with no room for added perfection) before acting, then why does He act?!
Does He increase in perfection?!
"The simple answer was presented by Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (RA) and others.
"Allah (SWT) is never free from ultimate perfection. Prior to His action, the ultimately perfect thing was for Him (SWT) not to perform this action.
---
Allaah is not in Time, let alone time itself!
Volume 8, Book 73, Number 200:
Narrated Abu Huraira:Allah's Apostle said, "Allah said, "The offspring of Adam abuse the Dahr (Time),
and I am the Dahr; in My Hands are the night and the day." !
http://www.usc.edu/d…tml#008.073.200
Book 027, Number 5585:
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: None of you should abuse Time for it is Allah Who is the Time, and none of you should call 'Inab (grape) as al-karm, for karm is a Muslim person.
http://www.usc.edu/d…t.html#027.5584
Book 56, Number 56.1.3:
Malik related to me from Abu'z-Zinad from al-Araj from Abu Hurayra that the
Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "Let none of you complain about time, for Allah is time.
http://www.usc.edu/d…html#056.56.1.3[1]
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: None of you should abuse Time for it is Allah Who is the Time, and none of you should call 'Inab (grape) as al-karm, for karm is a Muslim person.
http://www.usc.edu/d…t.html#027.5584
Book 56, Number 56.1.3:
Malik related to me from Abu'z-Zinad from al-Araj from Abu Hurayra that the
Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "Let none of you complain about time, for Allah is time.
http://www.usc.edu/d…html#056.56.1.3[1]
First, the word dahr means in Arabic "a long time."
Are they then going to tell us that Allah is "a long time???"
Second, the ĥadith is not of the kind that one affirms attributes by!
Third, an obvious understanding is as the first narration says:
Third, an obvious understanding is as the first narration says:
Allah's Apostle said, "Allah said, "The offspring of Adam abuse the Dahr (Time),
and I am the Dahr; in My Hands are the night and the day." !
So it means, don't cuss time, because it is not time that gives you afflictions, it is Allah that creates them, just as He is the creator of everything.
So it means, don't cuss time, because it is not time that gives you afflictions, it is Allah that creates them, just as He is the creator of everything.
Volume 8, Book 73, Number 200:
Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, "Allah said, "The offspring of Adam abuse the Dahr (Time), and I am the Dahr; in My Hands are the night and the day." !
Book 027, Number 5585:
Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: None of you should abuse Time for it is Allah Who is the Time, and none of you should call ‘Inab (grape) as al-karm, for karm is a Muslim person.
Book 56, Number 56.1.3:
Maalik related to me from Abu’z-Zinad from al-Araj from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said,"Let none of you complain about time, for Allah is time.’
Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, "Allah said, "The offspring of Adam abuse the Dahr (Time), and I am the Dahr; in My Hands are the night and the day." !
Book 027, Number 5585:
Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: None of you should abuse Time for it is Allah Who is the Time, and none of you should call ‘Inab (grape) as al-karm, for karm is a Muslim person.
Book 56, Number 56.1.3:
Maalik related to me from Abu’z-Zinad from al-Araj from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said,"Let none of you complain about time, for Allah is time.’
The ˆArabs were in the habit of blaming the passage of night and day for the bad things that happened to them, so they would say, the disasters of time have hit me. In reality, however, everything that happens is by the will and creation of Aļļaah. Accordingly, the one who blames time for what happens to him, it is as if he blames its creator. Aļļaah said about the Arab idolaters:
“وَقَالُوا مَا هِيَ إِلَّا حَيَاتُنَا الدُّنْيَا نَمُوتُ وَنَحْيَا وَمَا يُهْلِكُنَا إِلَّا الدَّهْرُ وَمَا لَهُمْ بِذَلِكَ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِنْ هُمْ إِلَّا يَظُنُّونَ [الجاثية : 24]”
Meaning: “They said: ‘This is only our worldly life, we die and we live, and nothing destroys us other than time,‘ and they have no certain knowledge of this, they are only thinking that this is so.”[2] (Al-Jaatħiyah, 24) . (Tafsiiru-n-Nasafiyy, 4/198).
The Prophet (ˆalayhissalaam) therefore forbade them from this practice, and said that what you claim is time, is not time at all. It is the Creator that has willed and created whatever happens to you.
This essence of this problem is that people do not know Aļļaah, because they have not learned. Consequently, whenever they are told something like this, they have no firm principles to understand that it is not literally meant, so they can avoid falling in kufr before asking scholar what the real meaning is.
Now bring a literal translation, and you have brought it out of the context of the Arabic language as well, which leaves little or no room for a sound figurative understanding.
A true recipe for disaster."
“وَقَالُوا مَا هِيَ إِلَّا حَيَاتُنَا الدُّنْيَا نَمُوتُ وَنَحْيَا وَمَا يُهْلِكُنَا إِلَّا الدَّهْرُ وَمَا لَهُمْ بِذَلِكَ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِنْ هُمْ إِلَّا يَظُنُّونَ [الجاثية : 24]”
Meaning: “They said: ‘This is only our worldly life, we die and we live, and nothing destroys us other than time,‘ and they have no certain knowledge of this, they are only thinking that this is so.”[2] (Al-Jaatħiyah, 24) . (Tafsiiru-n-Nasafiyy, 4/198).
The Prophet (ˆalayhissalaam) therefore forbade them from this practice, and said that what you claim is time, is not time at all. It is the Creator that has willed and created whatever happens to you.
This essence of this problem is that people do not know Aļļaah, because they have not learned. Consequently, whenever they are told something like this, they have no firm principles to understand that it is not literally meant, so they can avoid falling in kufr before asking scholar what the real meaning is.
Now bring a literal translation, and you have brought it out of the context of the Arabic language as well, which leaves little or no room for a sound figurative understanding.
A true recipe for disaster."
---
Edited By ADHM
