In
his book: Baraheen-e-Qatiah, pg.
278, lines 13, 14 "This
is the meaning of Imkaan-e-Kizb (Possibility of
telling a lie) that Allah ta'ala has the power of telling
lies but this will not happen."
---
Terms
Imkan
e Kidhb = Allah
CAN lie ( possibility)
Waque
Kidhb = Allah
Lied ( astagfirullah)
Khlaf
e Wayid = Allah
( subhanahu ta'ala) with HIS mercy can put big
kafirs like Abu
Lahab also in
PARADISE
(
The usage by some deobandis is
to show Mercy of Allah and it is never said that it is IMkan a kidhb)
---
Imkan
/ Wuqu' al-Kidhb - Can or Did Allah Lie?
Imkan
al-Kidhb / Wuqu' al-Kidhb
The
fatwa which Imam
Ahmed Raza quoted was
a fatwa dealing
with "Waque
Kidhb", that
is Allah
Lied. (
Astagfirullah) and this
is different from Imkan
e kidh " Allah
CAN lie ".
The
incidence which you have quoted is absolutely correct.
Mawlana
Rashid Ahmed Gangohi died
13 years after the fatwa of kufr on
him was declared
due to his stand on Waque
kidhb.
As
long as he was
alive he and none of
the Deobandi denied this
fatwa which Imam Ahmed Raza put forward.
Insha
Allah I will provide the scan of this fatwa which was printed by the
great Mufti of India Mawlana Azmal in his book
" Radd e shahabus saqib'.
It
is known that "shahabus
saqib' was
written by Mawlana
Huseein Ahmed Tandvee , to
refute Hussamul
Harmain.
After Mawlana
Rashid Ahmed died , Deobandis took
a U turn
and started saying that
" when
this fatwa of Waque
Kidhb is
not in “fatwa
rashidiya”
and when we have not seen this fatwa , then
how can Imam
Ahmed Raza get
this Fatwa?
Insha
Allah , when
my internet service will be restored ( around week end) , I shall
post the scan and an analaysis of Deobandi stand on Imkan
e kidhb and Waque
Kidhb.
As
usual, everything will be from Deobandi
book itself.
Further,
I was much amused when
I read on some website that Deobandis are
trying to look for the original manuscript
of Ghayat
Al-Ma’mul supposedly
written by Shafi
mufti Sayyid Ahmed Al-Barzanji.
The
reason for the amusement is
that these Deobandis are
totally unaware of what they are talking or backing! I am sure they
know that when Imam
Ahmed Raza Khan met
Mufti Al
Barzanji, that time
mufti has lost his
eye sight!
That
is why he could not read Ad dawalatul Makkiyah , and
heard it when it was read in front of him. So how could he
'write" a book when he lost his eye sight?
And
if the deobandis say that it
was dictated by him and someone else wrote it , then
the least which the Deobandis must
do is to find out who was the Katib ( scribe)?
That
is the minumum criteria to accept any manuscript and deopbandis have
to establish the 'sama'at" for this , as stated by Imam suyuti
in the criteria for accepting manuscripts. To add more fun to the
story , we have Deobandis going to "middle east manuscript
centers" in search of this 'missing manuscript'! They do
not know that as per the Deobandi version of the story this original
manuscript was taken from Mufti Barzanji and brought
to India ! ( and it was never returned back!!).
read
full topic: Here
some
extracts from the Topic:
page1- page2-page3-page4-page5-page6-Page7
Imkan
/ Wuqu' al-Kidhb - Can or Did Allah Lie?
Imkan
al-Kidhb / Wuqu' al-Kidhb
Quote:
Regarding
Deobandis Bible: " AL
Muhannad "
Who
ever quotes Al
Muhannad on
any issue should know when was AL
MUHANNAD written.
When the fatwa was issued against Mirza
Qadyaani and 4
scholars of Deoand by
the scholars of Harmayn and 268 leading
Muftis of India , then AL
MUHANNAD was
written by Deobandis .
Deobandis never
present the original quotes of their scholars in any book.
In AL
MUHANNAD they have not mentioned the original
quotes from their scholars on the issue of Imkan
e Kidh (Allah can lie).
Those
who are interested in this topic should know that Deobandis always
confuse people between Khalfe
wayeed and Imkan e kidh.
This can be proved from their own books.
---
Quote : "If
you're asking for the actual use of the words "imkan al-kadhib"
that is besides the question, as what is meant by the phrase is
found in the references I gave. The references clearly say the
Ash'aris hold the view that flaws like falsehood are not rationally
impossible and they are within the Power. I'm sure that's clear for
all to see.
Yes,
Mawlana Thanawi said the like of this knowledge of ghayb is
attainable by all, but the
Qur'an says the Prophet is a man like [mithl] us; so if someone
paraphrasing the Qur'an says the Prophet is a man like us (wretched
sinful people) is that kufr? As I showed, to say that that particular
type of ghayb as possessed by the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa
sallam) is available to all, is in fact accurate [according to Razi's
division]; so as a factual statement, why is this disrespect and the
Qur'an's equivalence of the Prophet's and our humanity not?"Here
---
It
is not besides the question , as you are conviniently trying
to avoid! My respected brother, arent't we talking about imkan
kidhb being attributed to Qudrah of Allah?
Cant
we see deobandi quotes ( with scan) where they have used this very
word IMKANE E QIDHB ?
Did you not mention in your
first post the relation between Qudrah and Ilm of Allah?
So
now how can you avoid ? All I ask is show me the usage of that
word.
You gave all single and isolated statements from all
possible work which you can , ignoring the quotes present in the same
book. but why? Arent you trying to justify deobandi scholars? And if
yes , then please bring your PROOF . Let the forum members know which
scholar had this ugly and non sense belief of Attributing a
possibility of lie to the power of Allah.
Mawlana
Thanvee did not call prophet a man , he
compared the knowledge of prophet with animals and lunatics.
Be
just and tell me , if I say the knwoledge of such and such
Deobandi scholar is like the knowledge possed by pet, dog, and all
four legged animals , wil it sound disrespectful?
You
don't have to reply me on this point.
Please provide the
usage of IMKAN E KIDH WITH
attributed to Qudrah of Allah.
-----------------------------
Quote: Sidi,
the link you gave is not a scan from maulana gangohi's fatwa, it's a
scan from a book that quotes the alleged fatwa from a barelwi
scholar's book named "Radd e- Shihab ath thaqib".
Is
there any copy of a scan with the actual fatwa of Maulana Gangohi -
preferably in manuscript form?
------------------------------
How
can Barelwis have manuscript of that fatwa ?
This
fatwa was printed in 1908 from Meruth and Bombay.
Deobandis have not
printed this fatwa in Fatwa
Rashidiya.
If some one says , if
it is not in fatwa book, then how can we accept?
Then
please read that thread and we can start a discusiion and it will be
proved , Insha Allah , without doubt , this fatwa is
from Mawlan Rashid Gangohee.
Those
who can read urdu , kindly read that thrad so that we don't
have to start from basic.
If not , then am here ! Insha Allah
when am back in city , we can discuss this.
-----------
Quote: But
that is not the original fatwa is it? That is with radd.
Can
that really be accepted as a valid proof when we have a clear and
unambigous statement from him in his own printed fatawa which is
completely to the contrary?
Do they or you have anything other
than the fatwa 1) allegedly "printed in 1908 from Meruth and
Bombay ma'a radd" and reproduced in berailwi works and 2)
Reproduced in Deobandi works such as Sayyid Madani's Shihab
ath-thaqib and denounced as a forgery?
------------
The
fatwa was first printed in 1308 AH. Mawlana
Gangohi died in 1323
AH.
For
these 15 years there was no denial of
this fatwa from Mawlana
Gangohee or any of his
supporter.
Mawlana
Gangohee did not write any thing in which he
denied this" alleged fatwa"
, he did not publish any pamphlet denying this , did not conduct any
rally denying this fatwa ,did not challenge any sunni scholar asking
them to prove this fatwa.
The day Mawlana
Gnagohee died , his followers
started denying.
Insha
Allah , we will start from shihab ath thaqib and
then only we will proceed to this fatwa analysis. Every one must
know what exactly is " shihab ath thaqib". ?
-------------------------------------------------------
Imkan
Al Kidhb
This
is a detail refutation of a those who call
them self as muslim but
ascribe defect to Allah.
Before
we start refuting this sect it is necessary to
know deviant
belief
of some different cults.
Shia-
They say “Allah lies” (
astagfirullah)
Wahabis: They
say “ Allah has human attributes and
Allah is localized in a direction.”
Deobandis: They
say “Allah can lie.”
In
the present article, this belief of “ Allah
can lie” [ Imkan e Kizb]
will be refuted in detail.
To
understand this topic we must first know, what is the belief
of deobandi
scholars on
this topic?
Deobandi
belief:
1. Shah
Ismail Dehalvee writes : It
is possible for Allah to be a liar. If
you do not accept this , then
Human being's ability will be considered more than Allah's ability. (
It means , since Human can lie and if someone thinks Allah cannot lie
, then this will mean Allah's ability is less than Human ability.)
2. Khaleel
Ambaithwi writes : "This
issue of “imkan e kidhb is
not a recent issue, but in past people have discussed whether Khalf
e waid ”(Allah can give
Paradise to even sinners like Pharoah/
Abu Jahal, going against His
own ruling) is possible or not. Hence we find in Durrul
Mukhtar it is written Khalf
e waid is possible /permissible
( jayaz)or not, and Asharis are
in support of it because the Asharis do not consider it as an
imperfection , rather they consider it as a Mercy of Allah."
(Here
we see how Mawlana Khaleel Ambaithvee is bringing a quote from Durrul
Mukhtar on Khalf
e waid to
use it on Imkan
e kIdhb.!)
3. Khaleel
Ambethvee writes : "This
is the meaning of Imkaan-e-Kizb (possibility
of telling a lie) that Allah
Ta`ala has the power of telling lies but
this will not happen."
4. Rashid
Ahmed writes : " Hence
, it is now established that to
Lie is within the possibility of Allah subhanahu
wa taala"
5. Shaykh
Mahmoodul Hasan Al Deobandi writes: How
can we say that it
is out of the power of Allah that, He cannot perform bad acts.
All
the original scans of the above quote can be seen here:
Refuting Deobandi
Mufti: Part
1
Mawlana
Rashid Ahmed says
in his fatawa:
"Page No 97 ... "Pas Sabit Howa Key Kizb Dakhil-e-Qudarat-e-Bari Ta'ala Wa
Ala Hai"
Translation:"Hence, it is now established that
to Lie is within the possibility of Allah subhanahu wa taala" Scans: Here
--------------------------
THE BELIEF OF
AHLUS SUNNAH
Subhan'allah (Arabic سبحان
الله)
is an Arabic phrase often translated as "Exalted
is Allah."
Said
Mohammed bin Abee Bakr Abdul qader al-Razee, in
his book "Mukhtar
al-Sihah" one
of the classic Arabic-wordbooks:
The
meaning of subhanallah is, making Allah pure, and it is bound to its
original word (sabh, meaning void) as if he said, I verily absolve
Allah from all evil.
The
origin for
the word is sabh, voidness, or tasbeeh, making something void. So the
direct literal meaning of the phrase is Allah is void... And there is
a part that is unpronounced which is "void
of all evil".
And this is the way that it is used in the quran. For example it
says; "Subhanallah
amma yasiffon - Void/Free is Allah from that (evil) which they
ascribe (to Him)" and "Subhanalla amma yoshrikoon - Free is
Allah from those polytheistic deeds that they do."
A
WHITE LIE BY A DEOBANDI
SCHOLAR
Deobandi
scholar, Mawlana Hussein Ahmed
Tandvee says: " Mujaddid
Dhaleen ( Hussein
Ahmed Tandvee uses this term for Imam Ahmed Raza Rh)
says that Gangohi (rh)
made his belief of Imkan e
kidhb due to his being a
follower of (Ismail ) Shaheed rh
in this issue. This statement
(of Imam Ahmed Raza Khan ) is full of ignorance.
Mawlana
Gangohi has followed the salaf
as saliheen of this ummat in this issue.
All
the Asharis and the Maturidis were on this belief of Imkan e
kidhb and Mawlana
Gangohi has followed them on this issue.
The
books of Kalam are a witness to this fact and the writings of these
scholars are present in them. In “Sharah Mawafiq” this
issue (of Imkan e kidhb) has been dealt at three places.
In
“Masamirah’
also this issue has been explained. In the book’ Taqrirur
usool ‘ which is the sharah
of Tahreerul usool , muhaqqiq Ibn Hummam in Fatahul
qadeer and his student Amir al
haaj has stated this same view of Imakan
e kidhb and has stated that
this is the view of people of knowledge and Ahlus sunnah ,that
is Asharis and Maturidis, also
have the same belief ( which Ismaeel Dehalvee and Mawlana Rashid
Ahmed had) on this issue . Others
who are in between Asharis and the Maturidis have disagreed on this
issue due to the usage of the words and they have written commentary
on this issue." (End of quote from As Shihabuth
Thaqib, by Mawlana Hussein
Ahmed Tandvee, p110)
It
is very clear from this passage that Ismaeel
Dehalvee and Mawlana
Rashid Gangohi had the belief of Imkan
e kidhb.
This has been accepted and
explained by their student, Mawlana
Hussein Tandvee.
Not
only has Mawlana Hussein
Tandvee accepted this fact, but he has even
provided proof that this belief of Imkan
e kidhb , ( Allah
CAN lie) was the belief
of all the scholars of Ahlus sunnah. Let
us see how much truth Mawlana
Hussein Ahmed Tandvee has
provided. find
out/more: Here
---
Mawlana
Ismail Dehalvi wrote in his book 'Taqwiyatul
Iman"
"The glory of
that King is such that He can create a billion prophets, awliya,
jinns, angels, Muhammad and Jibril in a single moment with just a
‘kun’ [the command ‘Be.’] "
(taqwiyatu’l
iman, pg.37)
Allama Fazle Haq Khairabadi, student
of Shah Abdul Aziz Muhaddith Dihlawi, refuted this idea proving it
was against the Shari’ah. He wrote that according to the absolute
proofs of the Qur’an and hadith, Prophet Muhammad sallallahu
‘alaihi wasallam is the last and final Prophet, there can be no
other Prophet or Messenger after him. Conceiving another like the
Prophet Muhammad is now an impossibility and from those aspects which
is an impossibility according to the Shari’ah. To believe that
there can be another Muhammad would necessitate that Allah did
something apart from what He has stated in the Qur’an, that is,
that Allah ta`ala has lied. Lying is a flaw and it is impossible for
Allah to have a flaw.
For a detailed discussion on the
matter, refer to ‘Allama Fazle Haq Khairabadi’s Tahqeeq
al-Fatwa fi Ibtal al-Taghwa. The book is has many proofs
concerning the matter of ‘possibility of lying by Allah ta`ala’
and ‘Impossibility of another Muhammad to exist’ [Imkan-e-Kizb
and Imkan-e-Nazeer-e-Muhammadi.]
Shah
Isma’il Dihlawi wrote a monograph on this subject named
“Yak Roza” and his student Maulana
Haidar Ali Tonki provided support to his teacher’s
motif.
As an answer to this, ‘Allama Fazle Haq
Khairabadi wrote a book in Farsi (Persian) called “Imtina’un
Nazeer” which was published by ‘Allama Sayyid Sulaiman Ashraf
(President of Islamic Studies, Aligarh University) in 1908 from
Jaunpur.
Maulana
Ahmad Hasan Kanpuri (student of Mufti Muhammad Lutfullah
Aligarhi and Khalifa of Haji Imdadullah Muhajir Makki) wrote a book
on the topic of Imkan-e-Kizb called “Tanzeeh
al-Rahman ‘an Shee’at al-Kadhibi wa al-Nuqsan”.
On
the same subject matter,
Maulana
Hakeem Sayyid Barkat Ahmad Tonki wrote “al-Samsam
al-Qadib lira’asi al-Muftari ‘alallahi al-Kadhib” and Mufti
Muhammad Abdullah Tonki wrote “Ijalat al-Rakib fi
Imtina’yi Kadhib al-Wajib”. With these works, they
comprehensively refuted the idea of Imkan-e-Kizb with
utmost brilliance.
So whenever anyone raises this topic of
"Can Allah Lie" ?
Please
also ask" Can Allah send another prophet or Another
Mohammed ( sal lallahu alaihi wa sallam) ?
As
per Deobandis this
is 'possible', ignoring the
fact, Muhammad is not the father of any of
your men, but (he is) the Apostle of God, and the Seal of the
Prophets: and God has full knowledge of all things. S.
33:40
Followers of Ghulam Ahmed
Qadyan (died in loo) also twist this verse to prove their
claim.
In 1871, a debate took place in Shaikhopur,
Badayun, between Muhibbur Rasool Taajul Fuhool ‘Allama Abdul Qadir
Qadri Barkati Badayuni (d. 1319 AH / 1901 CE) and Maulana Ameer Ahmad
bin Molvi Ameer Hasan Sahsawani (d. 1306 AH / 1889 CE) on the matters
of Imkan-e-Kizb and Imkan-e-Nazeer.
Maulana
Nazeer Ahmad Sahsawani (d. 1299 AH / 1881 CE) has documented
this debate.
Maulana Ameer Ahmad and Maulana
Nazeer Ahmad both spent time with Maulana Muhammad
Ahsan Nanotwi. Using the Athar of Ibn-e-Abbas as evidence, they
not only believed that having Prophet’s like Adam, Nuh, Ibrahim,
Musa, Isa ‘alayhimu’s salam and Muhammad sallallahu `alaihi
wasallam was possible, they even believed that this was actually the
case.
Prof. Muhammad Ayyub Qadri (Karachi)
writes: “It is important to point out that the Ulema of
Bareilly and Badayun strongly opposed and disagreed with Maulana
Muhammad Ahsan’s (Nanotwi) viewpoint. In Bareilly, the foremost in
opposition was Maulana Naqi Ali Khan and in Badayun it was Maulana
Abdul Qadir, the son of Maulana Fazle Rasool Badayuni
Maulana
Abdul Haq Khairabadi, Maulana Sayyid Husain Muhaddith Rampuri,
Maulana Abdul Ali Rampuri, Mufti Noorun Nabi Rampuri and other Ulema
of the Ahlus Sunnah opposed the Athar of Ibn Abbas, proving it to be
against the Qur’an and a false belief. Hazrat Mufti Irshad Husain
Rampuri wrote that believing in it is against the creed of Ahlu’s
Sunnah. Because Khatam al-Nabiyyin means The final Prophet – that
is Muhammad sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam.
Maulana
Muhammad Qasim Nanotwi wrote a book named
“Tahzeerun Naas” in which he
wrote:
The
common folk, the general
populace thinks that the
meaning of the saying ‘RasulAllah
saws is the Seal’ means that
his time is after the time of the earlier prophets and that he is the
last of all the prophets.
However,
people of discerning know that there is no speciality in being
earlier or later.
Suppose if
there is a prophet born ever after the time of RasulAllah sallallahu
alayhi wa sallam, there shall be
no difference in his being the Seal. So it wouldn’t make any
difference if there is a prophet in his own time on a different
planet, or even on this very planet
In a
letter to: Maulana Muhammad Fazil,
Maulana
Muhammad Qasim Nanotwi wrote: “The
meaning of Khatam al-Nabiyyin according to those who look at literal
meanings is that the time of the Prophethood of Muhammad is after the
time of the Prophethood of all other Prophets and that no other
Prophet can come afterwards. However, you
know that this is something in which there is neither praise nor any
harm.
So as
per ' Elite Deobandi Scholars'
there "might" come
another Prophet .
I
recall a hadith in which prophet parised him self and put last stone/
brick in the wall and said ' my
position is like this brick , there will come no nabee after me"
So
When a Deobandi says" Allah
CAN lie ", he is actullay making his grounds for
supporting the stand of Qasim
Nanotwiti that Allah "can
also' send another prophet/ mohammed'!!!
May Allah
help us to be away from those'elite class scholars having such
belief". Ameen
The
main difference of opinion between Ahlus
sunnah and Deobandis is
not minor issues like Mawlid, tasawwuf, sama, tassaware
shaykh.
People
from outside the subcontinent should know that the real difference is
the words of Deobandi scholars from past in which they have
shown disrespect to Prophet,
the issue of Imkan e kidhb ( Allah
can lie), their stand on Ilm e
ghayb of prophet ,
their equating the ilm e ghyab of prophet
with the knowledge of any insane, animals etc and their remarks on
khatme nabuwat ( seal of prophet hood).
Now they
have started tampering their own books like Taqwiyatul
Iman (By Ismail Dehalvee). I am compiling a booklet on
this. Insha Allah when completed I shall post it here.
All
scans will be provided from different edition to show
the tampering in Taqwiyatul
Iman.
This is the same book Taqwiyatul
Iman , regarding which Mawlana
Rashid Ahmed Gangohi said in his fatawa that "
To keep ( in house) , To read and follow this book ( Taqwiyatul Iman)
is the Core of Islam ( ayn islam) and this leads to lots of benifits.
"
Deobandis should
quote all of their scholars on the issue of Imkan
e Kidhb.
Mawlana
Khaleel Ambaithwi writes
in his Book : Braheen
e Qaatiya,Page
: 6
Publisher :
Kutub Khana Imdadiya, Deoband [scan]
Translation Mawalana
Khaleel Ambethavi writes: "This
issue of “imkan e kidhb is
not a recentl issue, but in past people have discussed whether Khalf
e waid ”(Allah can give Paradise to even sinners like Pharoah/ Abu
Jahal, going against His own ruling) is possible or not. Hence we
find in Durrul Mukhtar it is written Khalf e waid is possible
/permissible ( jayaz)or not, and Asharis are in support of it because
the Asharis do not consider it as an imperfection , rather they
consider it as a Mercy of Allah." ( Hence in past
people said that if Allah gives paradise to a sinner , it will be due
to mercy of Allah)
Here
we see how Mawlana Khaleel
Ambaithvee is bringing a quote from Durrul
Mukhtar on Khalf e waid to use it on Imkan
e kIdhb!
More ever people
in Past called it as a mercy of Allah and not as a lie of
Allah. ( Mawalana Khaleel has himself quoted this )
Same
, Mawlana
Khaleel Ambethvee writes in his Book
: Braheen
e Qaatiya,Page :
274
Publisher :
Kutub Khana Imdadiya, Deoband
"This
is the meaning of Imkaan-e-Kizb (possibility of telling a lie) that
Allah Ta`ala has the power of telling lies but this will not happen."
Mahmood
Hassan writes
in his Book : Al
Jehd ul Muqil,Page
: 41
Publisher : Maktaba Madniyya Urdu Bazar Lahore that "Afaal
e kabeeha (bad acts) ko Qudrat e Qadeema Haq Taala Shanahu say kiun
kar khaarij keh saktay hain" Translation: “How
can we say that it is out of the power of Allah that , He cannot
perform bad acts. scan or
see below
-----------------------
Quote:
"Asharis and Maturidis,
also have the same belief
( which Ismaeel Dehalvee and Mawlana Rashid Ahmed had)
on this issue ."
Refuting
the Accusation that
Asharis Consider it Rationally
Possible for Allah to Lie
Deviant
accusation: the Asharis say that it
is rationally possible (jaa’iz `aqlan) for Allah to lie, but
contingently impossible (mustaheel `araadi), because He has told us
that He tells the truth.
To
say that it rationally possible that Allah
can lie, but does not, is
to say that He can have a flaw. This
is obvious to even the most simple minded Muslim. A believer will
feel ill for even hearing such words. Tell me, if this is
not kufr, then what is?
How
would you like to account for your deeds on the Day of Judgment
having believed, or said, that it is not absolutely impossible that
Allah could lie? Did they not hear Allah’s saying:
“وَتَقُولُونَ
بِأَفْوَاهِكُمْ مَا لَيْسَ لَكُمْ بِهِ
عِلْمٌ وَتَحْسَبُونَهُ هَيِّنًا وَهُوَ
عِنْدَ اللَّهِ عَظِيمٌ “
Meaning:
“And you say by your mouths what you have no
certain knowledge of, and you think it is a simple matter, while it
is in Allah’s judgment gruesome.” (An-Nuur ,15)
Similarly,
it was narrated by Ahmad, Al-Tirmidhi and others
that the Prophet said:
“إن
الرَّجُلَ لَيَتَكَلَّمُ بِالْكَلِمَةِ
لاَ يَرَى بها بَأْساً يهوي بها سَبْعِينَ
خَرِيفاً في النَّارِ”
“Verily
a man may speak a word he thinks is not bad, but due to it he falls a
fall that lasts seventy autumns into
the Hellfire.”
This
hadith was judged as good (hasan) by Al-`Asqalani. Al-Munaawi said
about the expression “seventy autumns into the Hellfire” in his
book Al-Taysir bi Sharh-al-Jaami-al-Saghir: “It means that he will
be forever rising and falling.” That is, the person became a
non-Muslim for saying this, because only non-Muslims go there
forever.
In
another aayah Allah said:
وَلِلَّهِ
الْأَسْمَاءُ الْحُسْنَى فَادْعُوهُ
بِهَا وَذَرُوا الَّذِينَ يُلْحِدُونَ
فِي أَسْمَائِهِ سَيُجْزَوْنَ مَا كَانُوا
يَعْمَلُونَ
Meaning: “Allah
is the one that has the most beautiful namings, so call Him by them,
and leave those who deviate with respect to His namings. They
will pay for what they have done.” (Al-’A`raaf, 180)
There
is no taqlid in such an issue, and finding a quote in some
book will not help one on the Day of Judgment in something like this.
Imagine yourself saying, “but I found this on page 256, volume 4 of
book so and so, that it is rationally possible that it is not
impossible in the minds eye that you could lie!”
Even
if you found supporting quotes in one
hundred books, by famous authors, this is not an excuse.
Every
sound minded person can understand that saying that it is not
absolutely impossible that Allah could lie is an ugly thing to say
about Allah. Actually, even the Christians and the Jews would
consider this ugly. The one who denies that this saying
is kufr, let alone blames
those who say it is kufr, is
himself a kaafir.
The
reason is that this person is saying that one can attribute
an obvious flaw to the creator, and still be a Muslim. When
one says something about Allah that is not of the most beautiful
names, then one has either sinned or fallen in kufr. This
is according to the aayahs and hadith mentioned above.
Now,
as the hadith says, if one might say something that one
thinks nothing of, and fall out of Islam, then what about saying
something that just about any human being, even
a kaafir, would consider an ugly thing
to say about Allah?
I
mean, the christians do not have
a problem saying that Allah has
a son, but they would
have a problem with this. This is because the word son does not
strike them as ugly, but
the latter does.
I
think it is clear enough then, that saying “believing
that lying is rationally possible for Allah, as long as one does not
believe that He does, does not make one a non-Muslim,”
is kufr in itself.
Having
said that, Allah’s kalaam (speech that is not letters, sounds,
language, words, or sequences of expressions) pertains to His
knowledge. It is a eternal attribute of Allah that He must be
attributed with, and it is neither an act, nor specified by a
will.
As-Sanusi said about the attribute of
kalaam:
والكلام
الذى ليس بحرف ولا صوت ويتعلق بما يتعلق
به العلم من المتعلقات
{Speech
(Al-Kalaam/الكلام),
without letter or sound, which pertains to whatever His Knowledge
pertains to.} That is, an attribute by which He informs without delay
the unlimited information that He knows, be it orders, prohibitions,
promises, threats, or other information.
To
say that Allah could lie is
to say that His knowledge is
flawed, this is
because to lie is to say
something that is not true.
Since
Allah’s attribute of Speech/Kalaam is an eternal attribute
pertaining to what His knowledge pertains to, then saying that He
says something untrue is to say that there is a mistake in His
knowledge. This is kufr of the highest degree.
Note: that Allah’s kalaam is an attribute that Allah must be attributed
with, not a possibility or an impossibility. So if you say that it
is possible that Allah lies, then you are also saying that
His kalaam is a possibility, and that is also impossible, because it
cannot be both a must and a possibility. This is because
a lie needs
specification, and what needs specification is a
possibility. In other words, telling a lie cannot
be without a beginning or end, because it needs specification.
A
speech telling a lie then
is a creation, and Allah’s speech is not created. So the
person who says it is possible that Allah
lies is saying that Allah’s kalaam is created, which
is another kufr.
See also this. Alternatively, such a person
is saying that Allah tells infinitely many lies, need I say
more?
It
is also incredible stupidity to say that it is only contingently
impossible (mustaheel `aradi) for Allah to lie, for
if it was not absolutely impossible that Allah should lie, then how
would one know it is mustaheel `aradi??? Mustaheel `arađiyy is when
something is possible, like the existence of any created thing, but
Allah tells us that it will not be, such as a mukallaf kaafir
entering Paradise.
That is, it is rationally
possible that a kaafir could go to Paradise, but contingently
impossible, because Allah has told us that this will never happen, as
this is His decree. So if it was not absolutely impossible that Allah
should lie, then how would they know that this information about Him
not lying was correct?
This is nothing less than
zandaqah, extremem kufr, it is to put doubt in the religion
as a whole, let alone contradicting that Allah’s kalaam is not
created.
As-Sanusi also
says:
وأما
الرسل عليهم الصلاة والسلام فيجب فى حقهم
الصدق والأمانة وتبليغ ما أمروا بتبليغه
للخلق ويستحيل فى حقهم عليهم الصلاة
والسلام أضداد هذه الصفات
{All
messengers must possess truthfulness, trustworthiness, and must have
delivered their messages entirely. It is impossible that they should
be attributed with the opposites of the above attributes.}
So
if it is not absolutely impossible that Allah lies, then
there is no way to say that the Prophet only tells the truth either,
and this is yet another kufr.
So
the claim that it is true that
Allah could lie, but He
does not do so, is a kufr that is kufr in itself since it
is to insult Allah, and a kufr that leads to accepting several other
kufr beliefs, such as that Allah’s Speech is created, or that He
tells infinitely many lies, or that He has a flaw in His Speech, or
that He has a flaw in His knowledge, and that the prophets could be
telling something that is not true about the religion. Allahu akbar.
Without
even getting into any of the above, we can simply say that lying,
which is to say something that isn’t true, is an obvious flaw, and
Allah is only attributed with complete perfection. It is also an
attribute of creation, and Allah does not resemble His creation. The
one who allows it rationally has made it rationally possible for
Allah to have a flaw and resemble His creation, so he is himself a
kaafir.
One
more thing. The purpose of `Ilm Al-Kalaam is to defend the religion
and support it with proofs. When engaging in kalaam leads to
conclusions that are destructive of the religion, then one can be
sure that one has gone wrong. The difference between Sunni kalaam and
that of the philosophers is that the Sunnis knew their conclusions
from the Prophet’s teachings before they looked for proofs, whereas
the others simply followed their opinion, wherever it took them.
In
light of this, let me say that the conclusion that we must reach is
that it is impossible that Aļļaah should lie, otherwise the entire
religion becomes a 50-50 proposition, and one would have said
something outrageous about Allah’s attributes that no sound minded
individual would accept. If one could not find an argument to get to
this conclusion, then one should keep looking, being sure that any
argument indicating otherwise must be wrong. This is the general rule
one should hold on to. If one does not, then I can tell you that
reading books of kalaam will get you into a great deal of trouble,
especially the larger works. This is why Al-Ghazali wrote about the
importance of restricting kalaam science to only a few very capable
individuals of great piety.
Do
you not see that piety would have prevented anyone from daring to say
that it is not rationally impossible for Allah to lie? Instead they
decided to rely on their minds, and ended up falling out of the
religion, along with those who said that they are not blasphemers.
Beware that I am not making takfir for any particular individual,
because we cannot make takfiir for people based on articles
attributed to them on the internet. What I am saying is that if
someone says that Allah lying is not mustaheel `aqli, but mustaheel
`aradi, and he understands these terms, then he is a kaafir, along
with the one who says he is not. I remind you of the aayah above:
وَلِلَّهِ
الْأَسْمَاءُ الْحُسْنَى فَادْعُوهُ
بِهَا وَذَرُوا الَّذِينَ يُلْحِدُونَ
فِي أَسْمَائِهِ سَيُجْزَوْنَ مَا كَانُوا
يَعْمَلُونَ
Meaning:
“Allah is the one that has the most beautiful
namings, so call Him by them, and leave those who deviate with
respect to His namings. They will be pay for what they have
done.” (Al-’A`raaf, 180)
Note that
this whole issue came up with the Mu`tazilah,
because a common debating technique in kalaam is to show the opponent
that what he claims to be true leads to saying something ridiculuous
that all agree is kufr. The Mu`tazailah wanted to show that you can
only say that it is impossible that Allah lies if you accept their
ideas about qabaa’ih, namely that it is impossible that Allah does
what they consider qabaa’ih, or “ugly acts.” The answer of
Sunnis was that lying is impossible, because Allah’s kalaam is not
created, it is not an act, but an attribute that Allah must be
attributed with and pertains only to what Allah’s knowledge
pertains to; it is not a created attribute. The same was their
technique on the concept of doing injust acts, as I mentioned earlier
when I narrated the debate between Al-Isfaraini and Qadi Abdul
Jabbaar. The Sunni answer was as you see there, that it is absolutely
impossible that Allah’s actions be injust, because He does not have
a judge.
The
same technique is used by the Christians also
when they say “could Allah have a son?”
They want to imply that saying no would lead to saying He is unable.
In this case our answer is again that it is rationally impossible for
Him to have a son, because if you said it was possible, then you are
saying that Allah could lose godhood, which is kufr. We also do not
say unable, because that would be insulting Allah, which is also
kufr. We say instead that it is impossible; it cannot ever be and
therefore has nothing to do with power.
Likewise
one does not say that it is not allowed for Allah to lie, because
this is to imply that He has obligations. Rather one says that it is
impossible that He could lie, as
explained above.
More
comments and questions on this issue
Question:
Someone wrote that if we say that lying is not possible for Allah, it
would then imply that humans could do something that Allah cannot do.
Is this logic valid?
Answer: No.
This is because Allah’s power pertains to the possible category of
things. It does not pertain to what cannot ever be, the rationally
impossible. It also does not pertain to what must be, such as Allah
existing and being one without a parter. Lying is a flaw of speech,
so saying that Allah can lie is to say that He can have a flaw. This
is kufr, like saying He can have a son or a partner.
Note that
it is also kufr to say that Allah
is unable to lie, because this is to insult Allah’s
attribute of Power. Furthermore, it is kufr to say
that Allah is obligated not to
lie, because a need to fulfill obligations is a flaw,
and attributing a flaw to Allah is blasphemy.
The
answer then is that lying is a flaw, and it is impossible for Allah
to have a flaw. Allah’s Power is only related to what could
possibly exist.
For
example, if Allah said that Fir`awn is
going to Hell, then it is impossible that Fir`awn never goes there.
This is because Allah’s Speech pertains to His Knowledge, that is,
He told us of what He knows, namely that Fir`awn will
enter Hell. If you say that it pertains to Allah’s Power
for Fir`awn not to enter Hell,
after knowing that Allah has said otherwise, then you are saying that
Allah’s Knowledge is flawed, or that His Will changes, which would
again mean flawed knowledge and change. This is all kufr.
Someone
asked: Can Allah act against His previous word or command?
Answer: It
is not obligatory for Allah to fulfill His promises, because He does
not have obligations. That does not make it possible in the mind’s
eye, however, quite the contrary. We say that it is not obligatory,
but it is impossible that Allah should not fulfill His promises, or
threats, because it is impossible that Allah should lie, because
lying is a flaw, and Allah is clear of flaws. Accordingly, if someone
says, “It is contingently possible for Allah to act against His
previous word,” then he has committed kufr, because he is
saying that Allah could have a flaw.
Deviant
said: “What you need to understand is that to say that it is
“impossible” for Allah to lie would necessitate that He has given
man the ability to do something that He himself does not have the
power to do. This is absurd to suggest.
Comment: This
is ignorance. Lying is an attribute of Speech, and Allah’s Speech
is a must, an attribute of perfection, it is not something that
pertains to Allah’s Power. If you say that it pertains to Allah’s
Power, then you are saying that it is created, which is kufr, as
stated by the four a’immah.
Deviant
said: Furthermore, it is practically an ijma’ that Allah’s speech
is known as a result of revelation, not reason, so it makes no sense
to say that we only know that Allah has the capacity to communicate
to us because of scripture, but it is rationally impossible for Him
to lie, when we didn’t even know that He could speak until the
revelation came. Hence, the impossibility of lying on Allah is a
judgment of scripture, not reason, although reason further emphasizes
that lying would be a sign of imperfection….
Answer: This
is nonsense. By the agreement of the Ash`aris Allah’s attribute of
Speech is a must, not a created attribute. Regardless of whether it
can be known by the mind alone or not. Once it is established that
Allah’s Speech is not created, but a must, and that not having a
speech is a flaw, then you cannot say that Allah’s Speech is also a
possibility!
Moreover,
you either say that Allah has a Speech or not.
If
you say He does not, then lying is impossible, because lying without
speech is impossible.
If
you say He does, then you either say it is created or not.
If
you say that it is created, then you are saying that the “Kalaam
Allah” is like saying “Bayt Allah.” This means that Allah does
not in reality have a Speech that is an attribute of His Self, so
that means in the end that Allah in actual reality does not speak,
according to this idea, which means lying would be impossible.
If
you say that Allah’s Speech is not created, but a necessary, i.e.
eternal, attribute of He Himself, then you are either saying that it
changes, e.g. by involving sequential meaning being told one after
another, or does not.
If
you say it does, like the Wahabis, then you are saying that it is
created, because change needs a creator, which would mean again that
it is not a necessary attribute, and something cannot be both
necessary and not at the same time. So in such a case lying is also
impossible, because the attribute proposed is impossible.
Finally,
if you say that it is necessary and does not change, then we have
arrived at what we want, namely that Allah has an attribute by which
He informs. You either say that it pertains to what He knows or not.
Since Allah’s knowledge is infinite, it pertains to all that must
be, as well as what cannot be and what could be. What could be
includes what has been, what is now, and what will be in the future,
as well as what could have been in the past, now and in the future.
If
you say that Allah’s speech pertains to lying then you are saying
that if A is going to be at point in time B, then Allah says both
that A is going to be at point B and that it is not going to be at
point B. This is a contradiction and therefore impossible. Note that
this is not impossible in the case of our speech, because it is a
sequential action, i.e. something created, whereas Allah’s Speech
is not an action and does not change.
There
is no question then, that it is rationally impossible that Allah
should lie.
Deviant
said: Perhaps if you looked at the fact that a “square-circle” is
not actually something that can exist while “lying” is, it would
help you in your confusion. We know that lying does exist, while we
know that it is not compulsorily existent (wajib). It is possibly
existent (ja’iz). If it is ja’iz al-wujud, it falls within the
realm of Allah’s qudrah, which are the ja’izat (possible things)
and is exactly what His power pertains to. His power does not pertain
to a “square-circle” because of square-circle just cannot
possibly exist. As for “kadhib” (lying), it not only possibly
exists. It “actually” exists.
Answer: This
is ignorance. Lying does exist, yes, but as an attribute of creation!
Does possible attributes of creation necessitate that Allah also has
them? This is one of the ugliest examples of tashbih I have seen in
my life.
Deviant
said: Allah’s qudra pertains to lying just as it pertains to truth
(sidq). Hence, lying is something that He can possibly do “actually”
and “rationally” speaking. The only thing is that He has chosen
not to lie and He does not have to lie, because He has nothing to
fear from telling the truth, since He has power over all things and
cannot be subdued or controlled by anyone.
Answer: This
is pure i`tizaal. He is saying that Allah’s speech is created and
is something that pertains to His Power. If not, then what is lying
except something pertaining to speech?
Deviant
said: He also does not lie because He has made it His way not to do
so as He indicated to us in scripture…
Answer: This
is stupidity. If Allah telling lies was a possibility, as he claims,
then there is no way to tell whether the indication in the scripture
is true!
Someone
said: Allah has the power to lie or speak truth. His power
encompasses both possibilities. Nothing limits his choice and will.
If you can show how what I say is flawed, I’m more than open to see
how. However, the flaw is really in exactly what I have explained.
Your view necessitates that Allah’s qudra is limited and that He
has the power to give the power to lie to man but He doesn’t have
the power to do it His self.
Answer: His
statement “Allah has the power to lie or speak truth” is pure
i`tizaal, it is a plain statement saying that Allah’s Speech is
created.
Someone
said: Faqid al-shay la yu’ti (one who lacks something cannot give
it to another). This would then place man’s power more expansive
than the Creator’s own. This is why your logic is flawed and why I
say that you have misunderstood the text…
Answer: This
man does not have mind. He is a kafir and an ignorant fool. According
to this, if someone rides on a mosquito, as Ibn Taymiyyah’s
followers say, then it is possible that Allah should ride a
mosquito…. Need I say more?
--------------
Deobandis not
only give the possibility of
Lying and cruelty to the Power
of Allah , but they also give the possibility
of ALL BAD ACTS ( afaal’ e
qabeeha) in
this Book: Al Jahd Al Muqeel
.png)
