Sunday, 13 November 2011

Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdasi (d.620AH)

Salafi theologian Muhammad ibn Ibrahim 
said about al-lum'ah:

(128- قول صاحب اللمعة ( ) وجب الايمان به لفظًا)
واما كلام صاحب اللمعة فهذه الكلمة مما لوحظ في هذه العقيدة، وقد لوحظ فيها عدة
كلمات أخذت على المصنف، إذ لا يخفى ان مذهب أَهل السنة والجماعة هو الايمان بما ثبت
في الكتاب والسنة من أَسماء الله وصفاته لفظًا ومعنى، واعتقاد أَن هذه الأَسماءَ
والصفات على الحقيقة لا على المجاز، وأَن لها معاني حقيقة تليق بجلال الله وعظمته.
وادلة ذلك أَكثر من أَن تحصر. ومعاني هذه الأَسماء ظاهرة معروفة من القرآن كغيرها
لا لبس فيها ولا اشكال ولا غموض، فقد أخذ أَصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عنه
القرآن ونقلوا عنه الأَحاديث لم يستشكلوا شيئًا من معاني هذه الآيات والأَحاديث
لأَنها واضحة صريحة، وكذلك من بعدهم من القرون الفاضلة، كما يروى عن مالك لما سئل
عن قوله سبحانه: (الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَى) ( ) قال: الاستواءُ معلوم،
والكيف مجهول والايمان به واجب، والسؤال عنه بدعة. وكذلك يروى معنى ذلك عن ربيعة
شيخ مالك، ويروى عن أُم سلمة مرفوعًا وموقوفًا.
أما كنه الصفة وكيفيتها فلا يعلمه إلا الله سبحانه، إذ الكلام في الصفة فرع عن
الكلام في الموصوف، فكما لا يعلم كيف هو -إلا هو- فكذلك صفاته. وهو معنى قول مالك:
والكيف مجهول.
أَما ما ذكره في ((اللعمة)) فانه ينطبق على مذهب المفوضة وهو من شر المذاهب
واخبثها. والمصنف رحمه الله إمام في السنة ومن أَبعد الناس عن مذهب المفوضة وغيرهم
من المبتدعة. والله أَعلم. وصلى الله على محمد وآله وصحبه وسلم.
ص-ف 328 في 28-7-85هـ).

The shaykh ended the answer by saying:
"As for that which is mentioned in ((Al-Lum'ah)) then it is in accordance with the way of the mufawwidah which is the worst and most disgusting of ways. The author, may Allah have mercy upon him is an Imam of the Sunnah and from the furthest people away from the mufawwidah and other than them from the people of innovation. Allah knows best and may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon Muhammad, his Family and his Companions."


The following is also an interesting scan from:
page 57 of "Fundamentals of the Salafee Methodology:
An Islaamic Manual for Reform" ascribed to the late Nasir al-Albani with numerous footnotes (which was provided elsewhere by Abul Hasan):

[page 57 of "Fundamentals of the Salafee Methodology: An Islaamic Manual for Reform" ascribed to the late Nasir al-Albani]

One of the quotes mentioned therein is from the Salafi theologian 
Abdar Razzaq Afifi who mentioned in a fatwa that Imam ibn Qudama was a Mufawwid based on what is in his Luma al-I'tiqad:

عبد الرزاق عفيفي - -
عن بعض عبارات الامام ابن قدامة في لمعة الاعتقاد التي يفهم منها التفويض ؟
مذهب السلف هو التفويض في كيفية الصفات لا في المعنى ، وقد غلط ابن قدامة في لمعة
الاعتقاد ، وقال : بالتفويض ولكن الحنابلة يتعصبون للحنابلة ، ولذلك يتعصب بعض
المشايخ في الدفاع عن ابن قدامة ، ولكن الصحيح ان ابن قدامة مفوض
فتاوى ورسائل عبد الرزاق عفيفي
الطبعة الثانية - ص 347 - فتاوى العقيدة سؤال رقم 4

Salafi theologian
answer to a question in the book Sharh Lum'atul Itiqad follows:

Q: Is it true that Ibn Qudama in Rawdatun Nadhir say that the Ayat of Sifat are from the Mutashabih? And his words over there (in that book) the same over here?

What is considered is what's written here, however he divided the Sifat into two kinds, one is Wadih (clear) other Mushkil (difficult/ambigious), and this is wrong, All of the Sifat of Allah ta'ala are clear, there's no difficulty/ambiguity found in it. As for what's in the Rawdat, indeed he divided it according to the method of the later scholastic theologans such as the 'Asharis and others. And it's said (Yuqal) that Rawdah is taken from the book of al-Ghazali, and Ghazali is 'Ashari. And sometimes he (ibn Qudamah) missed this point.
(Page 296-297 of Sharh Luma'at)


Ibn Qudama al-Hanbali

A Mufawwid

A – ‘Allama Ibn Qudama considers the Ayat of Attributes to be from the Mutashabihat, as is stated in Rawdatun Nadhir. After stating this position, he says the correct stoppage in the ayah that talks about Muhkamat and Mutashabihat is “No one knows it’s interpretation except Allah ta’ala. Those grounded in knowledge say we believe in it…

The point where Ibn Qudama considers the correct stopping point is after except Allah ta’ala, meaning He’s the only one that knows the Mutashabihat, and no one else. And Ibn Qudama has stated that from the Mutashabihat is the Ayat on Sifat, thus concluding that the knowledge of Sifat is only known to Allah ta’ala, just like the Huruf al-Muqat’at.
It’s clear from his statement his position on it.

This is the position of Tafwid al-Ma’ana, as propounded by the Ash’irah and Maturidiya and in opposition to todays salafi scholars whom I will quote regarding their statements on the Mutashabihat.

B – Another indication of tafwid al-Ma’ana is Ibn Qudama’s statement in Lum’atul Itiqad, wherein he states, “What is difficult from those (ayat of Sifat) affirmation of it’s wording is necessary, and to leave delving into it’s meaning, and we leave it’s knowledge to the one who Spoke it (Allah ta’ala), we place it’s responsibiltiy on the one who transmited it, following the path of those grounded in knowledge, about whom Allah ta’ala praised in His Clear Book by His statement, “and Those firmly grounded in knowledge say we believe in it, all of it is from our Lord.”

C – It’s clear from his statement where he says we affirm the wording, yet we relegate the meaning to Allah ta’ala. Ibn Qudama goes on to say Allah ta’ala censures those who seek the interpretation of the Mutashabih (the ayat of sifat amongst them), “He said regarding the censure of those who seek interpretation of the Mutashabih of Quran, “As for those who have deviancy in thier hearts because of which they go after the Mutashabih, intending to spread fitnah and seeking it’s interpreation, and no one knows it’s interpretation except Allah ta’ala. Ayah”

Clearly the intent of Ibn Qudama is to drive home the point that only Allah alone knows the Mutashabihat, and the Ayat of Sifat are from the Mutashabihat according to Ibn Qudama. And thus we don’t know it’s interpreations.

D – Another passage he states after the hadith “Allah ta’ala will be seen on the day of judgement”, “and similar to these ahadith, we believe in them, and affirm them, without modality and meaning, and we don’t reject any of it…’ Again Ibn Qudama is driving home the point that the meaning as well as the modality is unknown.
The rules of arabic grammar state that when Waw is used, as it’s used in Ibn Qudama’s words, the default meaning of it is dissimilarity between the thing before and after the particle waw. So, Kayf and Ma’ana are two different things, not same, as some of tried to distort.
In response to these passages, it’s interesting to note what salafi scholars have said, and their criticism of Ibn Qudama.

Shaykh Salih’s criticism of Ibn Qudama:
Shaykh Salih Fawzan says regarding point B mentioned above, “this sentence isn’t accepted from the Shaykh (ibn Qudama), Allah ta’ala have mercy on him, it’s as if he’s dividing the texts of the Attributes into two kinds, one kind the meaning and interpreation is apparent, and this we believe in, as well as it’s meaning and interpretation, and the second kind, the meaning isn’t apparent to us, and this we relegate to Allah ta’ala, and this is wrong. Because meaning is known of all of the text of the Names and Attributes. Nothing from them is obscure or from the Mutashabihat, so the text of Names and Attributes aren’t from the Mutashabih nor do they enter into the category of Mutashabih, as Ibn Taymiyya explained…”

On Page 75 Shaykh Muni’ says, “What is correct is that the Ayat of Sifat aren’t from the Mutashabihat.”
Disparity regarding Ibn Qudama’s quote of Imam Ahmed’s words:
 “Without Modality and Meaning”:

Shaykh Fawzan says regarding “without Meaning”: “the meaning that the innovators have given, and that is ta’wil”, while Shaykh Muni’ says, “it means the essence, we don’t delve into the essence of the attribute.”
Shaykh Fawzan answering question regarding Sifat from Mutashabih, pg 296;
Q: “Is it true that Ibn Qudama in Rawdatun Nadhir mentioned the Ayat of Sifat in the Mutashabih, and are his words there the same as here (in Luma’)?
Answer: The correct and considered opinion is his words here, however he divided the Sifat into two categories, clear and obscure/difficult, and this wrong. All of the Attributes are clear, nothing from it is difficult. As for what’ in the Rawdah, he agreed with the later Usulis such as the Asharis and others, and it’s said that rawdah is taken from Mustasfah of Imam Ghazali, and Imam Ghazzali is Ashari’, it’s possible that he missed this note (him being an Ashari’?).

Shaykh Muhammed bin Ibrahim Aal as-Shaykh says regarding Ibn Qudama:
As for what he mentioned in al-Luma’, it’s in agreement with the Madhab of Mufawwidah (relegating it’s meaning to Allah ta’ala), and this is from the worst of Madhahib, and the author is an Imam in regards to the Sunnah, and he’s the most distant of people from the Mufawwidah madhab and other innovative groups. And Allah ta’ala knows best.”

Shaykh ‘Afifi affirming Ibn Qudama to be a Mufawwid –
An objection is raised regarding Ibn Qudama’s statements above and his other statements regarding leaving it upon the dhahir (the apparent). The only way to reconcile this contradition, as it’s well known Ibn Qudama considers the Ayat of Sifat to be from the Mutashabih and only Allah knows their meaning, is that the position of Ibn Qudama is to leave the words alone. Not to give explantion of it (it’s meaning) nor it’s interpreation that would take away the apparent meaning, such as Qudrah for Yad.
So ibn Qudama’s position is we leave Yad alone without saying it means such as such, and also we leave it’s interpreation being Qudrah, as that would nullify the Sifah.
As for those who say, we know the meaning of Yad for humans, as well as for Allah ta’ala. I ask, the meaning for yad for humans is a limb consisting of flesh and bone, what is the meaning, if you say you know it, of Yadullah?
Another posting will be done regarding Salafis opinion on the Mutashabih and the Hanbali scholars, as well as the argument why would Allah ta’ala reveal something of which we don’t understand, InshAllah.

Works cited:
Sharh Luma’atul Itiqad by Shaykh Salih Fawzan
Sharh Luma’tul Itiqad by Muhammed bin Ahmed al-Muni’
Sharh Luma’tul Itiqad by Shaykh Uthaymin

(Posted by muhammedm on July 5, 2010)

Quote 1:
والصحيح: أن المتشابه: ما ورد في صفات الله -سبحانه- مما يجب الإيمان به، ويحرم التعرض لتأويله، كقوله تعالى: {الرحمن على العرش استوى} {بل يداه مبسوطتان} {لما خلقت بيدي} {ويبقى وجه ربك} {تجري بأعيننا} ونحوهفهذا اتفق السلف -رحمهم الله- على الإقرار به، وإمراره على وجهه، وترك تأويله؛ فإن الله -سبحانه- ذم المتبعين لتأويله وقرنهم -في الذم- بالذين يبتغون الفتنة وسماهم أهل زيغ
[روضة الناظر وجنة المناظر، ج ١ ص ٢٧

“And the correct opinion is that the ambiguous [verses] revealed regarding the attributes of Allāh, Glory be to He, are those which it is compulsory to have faith in and impermissible [to occupy oneself] in seeking its interpretation; for example, the statement of Allah, the Exalted,
“The Most Merciful above the Throne is established” (Qur’ān, 20:5),
“Rather, both His Hands are extended” (Qur’ān, 5:64),
“…which I created with my Hands…” (Qur’ān, 38:75),
“And there will remain the Face of your Lord” (Qur’ān, 55:27),
“Sailing under Our observation” (Qur’ān, 54:14) and similar to them.
So, the Salaf (pious predecessors), may Allāh have mercy upon them, have agreed upon their affirmation [ie. belief in them], passing them as they have come and leaving of interpretating them. For indeed Allāh, Glory be to He, has rebuked those who seek their interpretation and included them, in reprimanding, with those who seek strife and He has labelled them the people of aberration.”
[Rawat al-Nāir wa Jannat al-Manāir, 1/27]

Quote 2:
ومذهب السلف رحمة الله عليهم الإيمان بصفات الله تعالى وأسمائه التي وصف بها نفسه في آياته وتنزيله أو على لسان رسوله من غير زيادة عليها ولا نقص منها ولا تجاوز لها ولا تفسير ولا تأويل لها بما يخالف ظاهرها ولا تشبيه بصفات المخلوقين ولا سمات المحدثين بل أمروها كما جاءت وردوا علمها إلى قائلها ومعناها إلى المتكلم بها 
“The Madhab of the Salaf, Allāh’s Mercy be upon them, is to have firm belief (Īmān) in the Attributes of Allāh, The Most High, and His Names with which He described Himself in the Qur’ān and His revelation, or upon the tongue of His Prophet, without any additions, any removal from it, not exceeding the bounds of it, without any explanation or interpretation that opposes its apparent, nor making any resemblance with the attributes of the creation or the qualities of contingencies; rather, they passed them on (narrated them) as they came and consigned the knowledge of them to its speaker (Allāh) and the meaning of them to the One that spoke them.”

وقال بعضهم ويروى ذلك عن الشافعي رحمة الله عليه آمنت بما جاء عن الله على مراد الله وبما جاء عن رسول الله على مراد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم 
“And some said it was related from Imām al-Shafi’ī: ‘I believe in what has been transmitted regarding Allāh according to the intent of Allāh, and what has come from the Messenger (Rasūl) of Allāh according to the intent of Rasūl Allāh (peace be upon him).'”

وعلموا أن المتكلم بها صادق لا شك في صدقه فصدقوه ولم يعلموا حقيقة معناها فسكتوا عما لم يعلموه وأخذ ذلك الآخر والأول ووصى بعضهم بعضا بحسن الإتباع والوقوف حيث وقف أولهم وحذروا من التجاوز لهم والعدول عن طريقهم وبينوا لهم سبيلهم ومذهبهم ونرجوا أن يجعلنا الله تعالى ممن اقتدى بهم في بيان ما بينوه وسلوك الطريق الذي سلكوه 
[ذم التأويل ج ١ ص ١١
“And they (the Salaf) knew that the One who spoke them (Allāh) was truthful without doubt, so they believed Him. And they did not know the reality of their meanings [i.e. the Attributes], so they were silent about what they did not know. The later and the earlier ones adhered to this. Thus, they strongly advised one another of good obedience and stopping where their formers stopped. And they warned from exceeding their bounds and diverging from their [i.e. the Salaf’s] path. Furthermore, they elucidated their methodology and doctrinal positions. We hope to Allāh that He makes us from the ones who followed them in explaining what they explained and following the path that they traverse.”
[Dhamm al-Ta’wīl, 1/11]

Quote 3:
قال الإمام أبو عبد الله أحمد بن محمد بن حنبل رضي الله عنه في قول النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: «إن الله ينزل إلى سماء الدنيا» ، أو «إن الله يرى في القيامة» ، وما أشبه هذه الأحاديث نؤمن بها، ونصدق بها بلا كيف، ولا معنى، ولا نرد شيئا منها، ونعلم أن ما جاء به الرسول حق، ولا نرد على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، ولا نصف الله بأكثر مما وصف به نفسه بلا حد ولا غاية {ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصير
[لمعة الإعتقاد ج ١ ص ٦-٧
“The Imām Abū Abd’ Allāh Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn anbal, may Allāh be pleased with him, said regarding the statements of the Prophet(s): ‘Indeed Allāh descends to the sky of the world’ or, ‘Indeed Allāh will be seen on the Day of Judgement’, and those Ahādīth of this nature, that we believe in them, we affirm them without a modality or meaning. We do not avert anything from them, and we know that what has come from the Prophet is true, we do not confute upon the messenger of Allāh(s) and we have not described Allāh with more than what He has described unto Himself, without a limit and without a boundary. ‘There is nothing like unto Him and He is the All-Hearing, All-Seeing.’(Qur’ān, 42:11)”
[Lum’at al-I’tiqād, 1/6-7]


From the above statements of the Imām, it has been argued that he intended by his words: “take them as they have come” or “pass them on their Dhāhir,” that they should be taken upon the apparent meaning.

This however, will be disproven by turning our attention to his other statements which will now be brought to the noble reader’s attention.

The Imām says:
وما أشكل من ذلك وجب إثباته لفظا، وترك التعرض لمعناه ونرد علمه إلى قائله 
[لمعة الإعتقاد ج ١ ص ٦
“And whatever is ambiguous from these [verses referring to the Sifāt of Allāh], it is compulsory to affirm its words, to leave the seeking of its meaning and consign its knowledge to the One [Allāh] who said it.”
[Lum’at al-I’tiqād, 1/6]

Here the Imām has very clearly stated that the affirmation of these Attributes of Allāh are upon their words and their meanings are consigned, which gives validity to the fact that wherever he says Dhāhir, his intent is the apparent words and not the apparent meaning.

He says elsewhere:
لو كان تأويل ذلك واجبا لبينه النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لأمته فإنه لا يجوز تأخير البيان عن وقته ولأنه لو وجب علينا التأويل لوجب عليه صلى الله عليه وسلم فإنه صلى الله عليه وسلم مساو لنا في الأحكام ولو وجب عليه لما أخل به ولأنه صلى الله عليه وسلم حريص على أمته لم يكتم عنهم شيئا أمره الله به وقد قال الله تعالى {يا أيها الرسول بلغ ما أنزل إليك من ربك وإن لم تفعل فما بلغت رسالته}
[تحريم النظر في كتب الكلام، ص ٥٠
“If there was an explanation for it (i.e. the texts of the Attributes), it would have been compulsory for the Prophet to explain it to his Ummah for indeed, it is not permitted to delay an explanation from its time; and also because if it was compulsory for us to know it’s explanation, then it surely would have been compulsory for the Prophet ; for verily he is an equivalent for us in the rulings. If it was compulsory upon him, he would not have left any deficiency in it [to withhold the explanation] and because he is desirous [of goodness] for his Ummah, he would not conceal from them anything that Allāh had ordered him with. Indeed, Allāh has said: ‘O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord, and if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message…’ (Qur’ān, 5:67).”

What Imām ibn Qudāmah is saying in essence is that since there is no explanation or direct meaning of the Sifāt from Rasulullah , and had there been a meaning known to him, he surely would have informed us of it and since he didn’t, then there’s no need for us to know the meaning either. This is further explained in the next statement:
لا حاجة لنا إلى علم معنى ما أراد الله تعالى من صفاته جل وعز فإنه لا يراد منها عمل ولا يتعلق بها تكليف سوى الإيمان بها ويمكن الإيمان بها من غير علم معناها فإن الإيمان بالجهل صحيح فإن الله تعالى أمر بالإيمان بملائكته وكتبه ورسله وما أنزل إليهم وإن كنا لا نعرف من ذلك إلا التسمية 
[تحريم النظر في كتب الكلام، ص ٥١
“There is no need for us to know the meanings of what Allāh Ta’ālā intended from His Attributes Jalla wa ‘Azza, for indeed, He has not intended any action by them and neither has He attached any responsibility regarding them besides believing in them. It is possible to believe in them without knowledge of their meanings and therefore, indeed faith with ignorance [of the meanings] is correct. Verily, Allah has ordered us to have faith in His angels, His books, His messengers and what He had revealed unto them even if we do not know of them except their names.”
[Tahrīm al-Nar fī Kutub al-Kalām, pg. 51]

In the aforementioned quote, he is clearly saying there’s no need for us to know the meanings intended by Allāh in regards to His attributes as belief in them without meaning is possible just as in other matters. Therefore, it categorically cannot be argued that the Imām meant taking the Attributes on their outward meanings since he dismisses the need for a meaning outright.
وهي الإيمان بالألفاظ والآيات والأخبار بالمعنى الذي أراده الله تعالى والسكوت عما لا نعلمه من معناها وترك البحث عما لم يكلفنا الله البحث عنه من تأويلها ولم يطلعنا على علمه واتباع طريق الراسخين الذين أثنى الله عليهم في كتابه المبين حين قالوا {آمنا به كل من عند ربنا
[تحريم النظر في كتب الكلام، ص ٥١]

While explaining the way of the Salaf, he says:
“It is to have faith in the words, the verses and reports with the meaning that Allāh Ta’ālā has intended (i.e., to say something similar to what has been reported by Imām Shafi’i which has been mentioned above), silence upon what we do not know regarding its meanings, to leave searching for what Allāh has not burdened us with and searching for their explanations as well as what He has not informed us from His Knowledge and to follow the path of those who are steadfast (al-Rāsikhīn) whom Allāh has commended in His clear Book wherein they say: “We believe in all that has come from our Lord.” (Qur’ān, 3:7)
[Tahrīm al-Nar fī Kutub al-Kalām, pg. 51]

Here the Imām clearly espouses the view of Tafwī al-Manā, stating that the Salaf did not know the meanings of the Attributes, nor did they seek them and thus simply remained silent about them.

As for those who object to this, then the Imām has responded to them further along:
وإن عاب السكوت عن التفسير أخطأ فإننا لا نعلم لها تفسيرا ومن لم يعلم شيئا وجب عليه السكوت عنه وحرم عليه الكلام فيه قال الله تعالى {ولا تقف ما ليس لك به علم
وذكر الله تعالى في المحرمات {وأن تقولوا على الله ما لا تعلمون}… وأيضا فإن عائب هذه المقالة عائب على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فإنه كان يؤمن بالله وكلماته ولم يفسر شيئا من ذلك ولا بين معناه 
[تحريم النظر في كتب الكلام، ص ٥٤]
“And if one finds fault in silence regarding the explanation, he is erroneous; for indeed, we do not know an explanation for them and the one who does not know anything, it is necessary upon him to remain silent regarding it and it is impermissible for him to speak on it. Allāh Ta’ālā has said: ‘And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge…’ (Qur’ān, 17:36) and Allāh Ta’ālā has mentioned from among the impermissible things: ‘… and to say about Allāh what you do not know.’ (Qur’ān, 2:169)… and also, if one faults this position, then one faults the Prophet ; for, indeed, he believed in Allāh and His Words and did not explain anything from them [the ambiguous Attributes] and he did not explain their meanings.” [Tahrīm al-Nar fī Kutub al-Kalām, pg. 54]

Admission of the Figureheads from the Opposing View
After presenting the above statements of Imām ibn Qudāmah, the fact of him being a Mufawwi has been explicitly elucidated.
 If however, any mind is still in doubt then they may see below how some of the figureheads of the proponents of Ithbāt al-Manā alal Dhāhir have conceded that Imām ibn Qudāmah was a Mufawwi.

Sh Muhammad ibn Sālih al-‘Uthaymīn states in his explanation of the statement in Lum’at al-I’tiqād (first quote in further explanatory quotes mentioned above):
أما ما ذكره في “اللمعة” فإنه ينطبق على مذهب المفوضة، وهو من شر المذاهب وأخبثها، والمصنف -رحمه الله- إمام في السنة، وهو أبعد الناس عن مذهب المفوضة وغيرهم من المبتدعة، والله أعلم 
[تعليق مختصر على لمعة الإعتقاد للعثيمين ج ١ ص ٣١
“As for what he mentioned in al-Lum’ah‘, then indeed, he was an adherent upon the methodology of the Mufawwiah, it is from the worst of methodologies and the filthiest of them. The author, may Allāh have mercy on him, is an Imām in the Sunnah and he is the furthest of the people from the methodology of the Mufawwiah and others beside them from the innovators. And Allāh knows best.
[Ta’liq Mukhtasar ‘alā Kitāb Lum’at al-I’tiqād al-Hādī ilā Sabīl al-Rashād, 1/31]

Although Sh Muhammad ibn Sālih al-‘Uthaymīn admits that this is what Imām ibn Qudāmah adhered to, he also attempts to repel the position from him since he considers him an Imām of what he considers to be the Sunnah, the reason for this is explained by another proponent of the view opposing Tafwī al-Manā:
Shaykh ‘Abd al-Razzāq ‘Afīfī said:
مذهب السلف هو التفويض في كيفية الصفات لا في المعنى، وقد غلط ابن قدامة في لمعة الاعتقاد، وقال: بالتفويض ولكن الحنابلة يتعصبون للحنابلة، ولذلك يتعصب بعض المشايخ في الدفاع عن ابن قدامة، ولكن الصحيح أن ابن قدامة مفوض 
[فتاوى ورسائل سماحة الشيخ عبد الرزاق عفيفي
“The methodology of the Salaf was consignment regarding the modality (kayfiyyah), not in the meaning (ma’nā), and indeed ibn Qudāmah erred in Lum’at al-I’tiqād as he said with Tafwī; but the anābila are partisan to the anābila. Therefore, some Mashā’ikh are extreme when it comes to defending ibn Qudāmah.
However, what is correct is that ibn Qudāmah was a Mufawwi.
[Fatāwa wa Rasā’il Samāhat al-Shaykh ‘Abd al-Razzāq ‘Afīfī]

Finally, here is the verdict of the late Shaykh Nāsir al-Dīn al-Albānī from the footnotes of a book attributed to him entitled Fundamentals of the Salafee Methodology: An Islamic Manual for Reform“.
[ see above scan ]


"The Imaam of Al-Hanabilah"

Ibn an-Najjaar describes him as: "The Imaam of Al-Hanabilah (Hanbalis) in Damascus Mosque, he was a trust worthy, noble figure, extremely generous, of a clean character, a cautious worshipper, follower of the Salaf in methodology, emitting light (of knowledge and piety) and respectful. One may benefit from his sighting before even hearing his speech! [Sharh Lum`atul-I`tiqaad]

Ibn Taymiyyah said about him, "No one possessing more understanding of the religion entered Shaam, after Al-Awzaa'ee, other than Shaykh al Muwaffaq (Ibn Qudamah)" [ Siyar A'laam An-Nubalaa']

Ibn Kathir said about him , "He was the Shaikh ul Islam, an Imaam, a Scholar, outstandingly proficient. there was not found in his time nor before it by a long span of time, anyone possessing more Fiqh than him." [al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah]
Ibn Rajab said about his books "He generated benefit to all the Muslims on a general level, and to the scholars of the (Hanbali) Madhab on a specific level. These books spread widely and grew very popular, according to the nobility of his intention and sincerity when writing them." [ Dhayl Tabaqaatil-Hanabilah’ Volume # 2 Page # 133]

Ibn Qudamah al Maqdisi one of the greatest Athari/Hanbali scholars, known for his Mughni, plainly explains the athari methodological approach, which does include a negation of qualities of contingencies, which of course includes things like directions, space, etcetera



Imam Muwaffaq ad-Din Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdisi, the mujtahid of the Hanbali madhab, in his book “Al Wasiyyah”, writes under the subheading “Talab al Haja (request of need)”:
وإذا كانت لك حاجة إلى الله تعالى تريد طلبها منه فتوضأ ، فأحسن وضوءك ، واركع ركعتين ، وأثن على الله عز وجل ، وصلَ على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ، ثم قل : لا إِلَهَ إِلاَّ الله الحَلِيمُ الكَريمُ، سُبحَانَ رَبِّ العَرشِ العَظيمِ الحَمْدُ للهِ رَبِّ العَالمِينِ، أَسأَلُكَ مُوجِبَاتِ رَحمَتِكَ وَعَزَائمَ مَغفِرَتِكَ وَالغَنيمَةَ مِنْ كُلِّ بِرٍّ، وَالسَّلامَةَ مِنْ كُلِّ إِثْمٍ، لا تَدَعْ لي ذَنباً إِلاَّ غَفَرْتَهْ وَلا هَمَّاً إِلاَّ فَرَّجْتَهْ، وَلا حَاجةً هِيَ لَكَ رِضاً إِلاَّ قَضَيتَهَا يَا أَرحَمَ الرَّاحمين وإن قلتاللهم إني أسألك وأتوجه إليك بنبيك محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم نبي الرحمة يا محمد إني أتوجه بك إلى ربي فيقضي لي حاجتي،وتذكر حاجتك وروي عن السلف أنهم كانوا يستنجحون حوائجهم بركعتين يصليهما ثم يقول : اللهم بك أستفتح وبك أستنجح ، وإليك بنبيك محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم أتوجه ، اللهم ذلل لي صعوبة أمري ، وسهل من الخير أكثر مما أرجو ، واصرف عني من الشر أكثر مما أخاف .
“When seeking for a need to be fulfilled from Allah ta’ala then perform the ablution and two units of nawafil prayer, relying on Allah ta’alaa and sending salutations on the Prophet (s) and say the following …
“O Allah, I ask you and turn to you by Your Prophet Muhammad (s), the Prophet of Mercy. 
Ya Muhammed!!! I turn by you to my Lord and your Lord aza wajjal for Him to settle my need for me. The early Muslims [i.e. the Salaf] had their needs fulfilled by saying this” 

Scans :Here

Edited by ADHM