Salafis believe that God is above the Heavens, upon the Arsh (Throne), and His Feet are at the level of the Kursi!
And there is nothing wrong with this according the Aqeedah of Ahlussunnah.
Wallahu A'lam."
Indeed Allah descends to the lowest sky and in each sky He has a Kursi (chair), so when he comes down to the lowest sky, He sits on His Kursi (chair)……….. then when the morning comes, He ascends and elevates and goes and sits on His Kursi (chair). [Ma`aarij ul- Qubul, V. 1, p. 256]
"He is literally encompassing the world
Sky God
Sky God
Mushrik.
Sky God is 'compassionate, merciful ...etc
“The problem with your dose of medicine is that it improperly placed "majaaz" in the wrong side of the bed. His point on Allah being "alal arsh" is not what should be made into majaaz, rather it is his point of "being contained in the six directions" that should be made into majaaz.
WHY?
because the six directions that the philosophers made mention of were
1. up 2. down 3. left 4. right 5. front 6. back
whereas "above" IS NOT a direction within the confines of the philosophical spectrum of the meaning of direction, rather it is a "state".
Thirdly, at-Tahawee constricted his creedal statement in point 38 by saying"He is not CONFINED (bound) by the six direction"
YET affirmed Allah's literal elevation of "Aboveness" or fawqiyyah, 'uloow, etc.
In other words, at-Tahawee is saying that Allah is NOT BOUND and confined into direction and not that it negates His highness.
WHY? because we, the people of Islam and the prophetic guidance say that it is the creation that is confined and limited to a spatial direction and NOT Allah and when Allah created the creation, it would only be natural for an existent God to create another created thing thatexist beneath Him and it would not befit the Majesty of Allah that He would create a creature and place the creature above Him. So it is the creation that is confined into a spatial direction whereas Allah is above and beyond such limitations.
LASTLY
There is no single person on the planet who interprets the following ayaah and hadeeth
“Do you feel secure that He, Who is over the heaven (Allah), will not cause the earth to sink with you, and then it should quake?
17. Or do you feel secure that He, Who is over the heaven (Allah), will not send against you a violent whirlwind? Then you shall know how (terrible) has been My Warning” [al-Mulk 67:16-17]
And the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Do you not trust me, when I am the trustee of the One Who is above the heaven and the news of heaven comes to me morning and evening?” Narrated by al-Bukhari (4351) and Muslim (1064). And he also said: “Show mercy to those who are on earth so that the One Who is in heaven will show mercy to you.” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi (no. 1924) – he said it is hasan sahih. And he also said: “When Allah created the universe, he wrote in His Book, which is with Him above the Throne: “My mercy prevails over My wrath.” Narrated by al-Bukhari (3194) and Muslim (2751). as if what is meant here is highness in "status".
the arabic language does not support this nor does any logical deduction of what is being stated factor such a far fetched interpretation for something so clear." Here
[End of wahabi/salafi Bigot Quote]
{Aļļaah is above} the status of {having limits, extremes, corners, limbs or instruments}. It would have been enough to say limits, for denying that Aļļaah has any limits necessarily entails denying the other elements mentioned. Aţ-Ţaĥaawiy wanted, however, to make it absolutely clear that Aļļaah is not something that is attributed with physical attributes, such as size, volume, weight, composition, place, or a beginning or an end of any kind, because these all have limits in space or amount.
By his categorical denial of any limit to Aļļaah, he also wanted to make it clear that Aļļaah is not attributed with limits related to time, such as a beginning or an end, starting or stopping, changes or sequences. He also meant that Aļļaah does not have a limit in any of His attributes, such as His Power or Knowledge.
|
{The six directions} up, down, front, back, left and right {do not contain Him} because that would make Him {like all created things} as they are either bodies in a place or something that exists in a body. This statement details even further the denial of limits to Aļļaah, for being in a direction necessarily entails having at least a lower limit. Attributing the physical direction up to Aļļaah then, is an attribution of flaw to the Creator, and is therefore blasphemy that makes one a non-Muslim. Aţ-Ţaĥaawiy hereby made the blasphemy of this belief explicit, because he said earlier:
“Whoever attributed to Allaah an attribute that has a meaning that applies to humans has committed blasphemy,”
and then stated here that having a direction applies to
“all created things.”
|
What
the scholars said about their belief
Further
to the point that those who believe Aļļaah to be a body i.e. occupy
a location are not Muslims, as mentioned in "The
difference between the Wahabi creed and Islam",
here are some quotes by well known scholars testifying to that
: Al-ˆAsqalaaniyy
said they are not Muslims:
قال
حذاق المتكلمين ما عرف الله من شبهه بخلقه
أو أضاف إليه اليد أو أضاف إليه الولد
فمعبودهم الذي عبدوه ليس هو الله وإن سموه
به (فتح
الباري,
ابن
حجر العسقلاني,
دار
المعرفة – بيروت ، 1379,
3 / 359)
The
brilliant kalaam scholars said: "The one that likened Aļļaah
to His creation, or ascribed a hand to Him (i.e. in the sense of a
part or limb) or a child; what he worships is not Aļļaah, even if
he called it Aļļaah.
An-Nawawiyy
and Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ said they are not Muslims:
قوله
صلى الله عليه و سلم (
فليكن
أول ما تدعوهم إليه عبادة الله فإذا عرفوا
الله فأخبرهم إلى آخره )
قال
القاضي عياض رحمه الله هذا يدل على أنهم
ليسوا بعارفين الله تعالى وهو مذهب حذاق
المتكلمين في اليهود والنصارى أنهم غير
عارفين الله تعالى وان كانوا يعبدونه
ويظهرون معرفته لدلالة السمع عندهم على
هذا وان كان العقل لا يمنع أن يعرف الله
تعالى من كذب رسولا قال القاضي عياض رحمه
الله ما عرف الله تعالى من شبهه وجسمه من
اليهود أو اجاز عليه البداء أو أضاف إليه
الولد منهم أو أضاف إليه الصاحبة والولد
وأجاز الحلول عليه والانتقال والامتزاج
من النصارى أو وصفه مما لا يليق به أو أضاف
إليه الشريك والمعاند في خلقه من المجوس
والثنوية فمعبودهم الذى عبدوه ليس هو
الله وان سموه به اذ ليس موصوفا بصفات
الاله الواجبة له فاذن ما عرفوا الله
سبحانه فتحقق هذه النكتة واعتمد عليها
وقد رأيت معناها لمتقدمى أشياخنا وبها
قطع الكلام ابوعمران الفارسى بين عامة
اهل القيروان عند تنازعهم في هذه المسألة
هذا آخر كلام القاضي رحمه الله تعالى.
(المنهاج
شرح صحيح مسلم بن الحجاج ,
النووي
,
دار
إحياء التراث العربي ,
1392, 1 / 199-200)
The
saying of the Prophet (صلى
الله عليه وسلم)
"let the first you call them to be the worship of Aļļaah, then
when they know Aļļaah tell them…" etc. Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ
(رحمه
الله)
said: "This (i.e. the foregoing statement of the Prophet (صلى
الله عليه وسلم))
indicates that they (the Christians) do not know Aļļaah, and this
is the saying of the brilliant kalaam scholars regarding the jews and
the Christians; that they do not know Aļļaah (تعالى)
even if they worship Him (i.e. call what they worship by His name)
and making it appear as if they know Him, based on what they narrate
amongst themselves, even though it is not impossible in the mind’s
eye that someone who disbelieves in a messenger does know Aļļaah."
Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ (رحمه
الله)
said: The one that likened Aļļaah to His creation, or believed Him
to be bodily among the jews and Christians, or believed that He gains
knowledge over time, or claimed He has a child, or a female companion
and a child, or said he could exist in created things, or move from
one place to another, or be mixed with creation, among the Christians
or attributed to Him what is not befitting, or associated with Him a
partner or opponent in creating among the Magians an dualists; what
they worship is not Aļļaah, even if they called it that. This is
because it is not attributed with the attributes that are necessarily
His. Accordingly, they do not know Aļļaah (سبحانه),
so realize this point well, and depend on it, and I have seen this
point made by our predecessor shaykhs."
Imam Ar-Raaziyy
said they are not Muslims:
الدليل
دل على أن من قال إن الإله جسم فهو منكر
للإله تعالى وذلك لأن إله العالم موجود
ليس بجسم ولا حال في الجسم فإذا أنكر
المجسم هذا الموجود فقد أنكر ذات الإله
تعالى فالخلاف بين المجسم والموحد ليس
في الصفة بل في الذات فصح في المجسم أنه
لا يؤمن بالله أما المسائل التي حكيتموها
فهي اختلافات في الصفة فظهر الفرق وأما
إلزام مذهب الحلولية والحروفية فنحن
نكفرهم قطعاً فإنه تعالى كفر النصارى
بسبب أنهم اعتقدوا حلول كلمة اللَّهِ في
عيسى وهؤلاء اعتقدوا حلول كلمة اللَّهِ
في ألسنة جميع من قرأ القرآن وفي جميع
الأجسام التي كتب فيها القرآن فإذا كان
القول بالحلول في حق الذات الواحدة يوجب
التكفير فلأن يكون القول بالحلول في حق
جميع الأشخاص والأجسام موجباً للقول
بالتكفير كان أولى (مفاتيح
الغيب – دار الكتب العلمية,
16 /24)
"Proofs
tell us that the who says that God is a body is a disbeliever in God
(who is greatly above and clear of flaws). The reason is that the God
of the World exists, and He is not a body, or stationed in a body. So
if the one who believes that God is a body denies this non-bodily
existence, then he has disbelieved in God Himself. This means that
the disagreement between the one that believes that God is a body,
and the monotheist (i.e. in the Islamic sense, namely that God does
not have a partner, part or a like in His self of attributes), is not
based on a disagreement regarding attributes, but regarding the self
(i.e. the identity of the one attributed with godhood.) It is sound
to say then, that the one who believes that God is a body does not
believe in Aļļaah….
As
for the ĥuluuliyyah (those who believe that Aļļaah settles in
created things, such as the sky or a human body) and ĥuruufiyyah
(those who believe that Aļļaah’s attribute of kalam/speech
consists of letters and sounds) sects, we say that they are
unequivocally disbelievers. This is because Aļļaah declared the
christians blasphemers for believing that Aļļaah’s speech entered
into Jesus, whereas the ĥuruufiyyah believe that it settles in the
tongue of all those who recite Qur’aan, and in all physical things
that the Qur’aan was written on. Accordingly, if the belief in its
settlement in one single body (Jesus) is blasphemy, then it is even
more blasphemous to believe that it settles in all shapes and
bodies."
As-Subkiyy
calls them idol worshipers: As-Subkiyy
in his Tabaqaatu-sħ-Sħaafiˆiyyatu-l-Kubraa says regarding
scripture texts that appear to be referring to bodily
attributes:
طبقات
الشافعية الكبرى :
إنما
المصيبة الكبرى والداهية الدهياء الإمرار
على الظاهر والاعتقاد أنه المراد وأنه
لا يستحيل على الباري فذلك قول المجسمة
عباد الوثن الذين في قلوبهم زيغ يحملهم
الزيغ على اتباع المتشابه ابتغاء الفتنة
عليهم لعائن الله تترى واحدة بعد أخرى ما
أجرأهم على الكذب وأقل فهمهم للحقائق
طبقات الشافعية الكبرى ج 5
ص
192
"the
saying of the mujassimah (anthropomorphists), worshipers of the idol,
makes them always focus on ambiguous aayahs."
Al-Qurţubiyy
and Ibn Al-ˆarabiyy
الصحيح
القول بتكفيرهم ، إذ لا فرق بينهم وبين
عباد الأصنام والصور.
Similarly,
Al-Qurtubīy in his commentary in the Qur’ān narrates from his
Shaykh Ibn Al-‘Arabīy regarding the those who say Allāh has a
body: "The sound verdict is that they are blasphemers, because
there is no difference between them and those that worship idols and
pictures." (Tafsiir Al-Qurţubiyy, 4/14).
---
