User:RoyalMagic/sandbox

For Atharis the names and attributes of God are to be understood with the formula of bila kayfa (lit. “without how”, i.e., “without further enquiry” or “without further specifying their manner or modality”), which is to unquestioningly accept the Divine attributes of God without ta'wil (allegorical interpretation), or ta'til (lit. “suspension”, i.e., “divesting God of His attributes”), or tashbih (anthropomorphism, immanence or comparison, which is to believe that God resembles His creations, or attributing the attributes of human beings to God). Any anthropomorphic expressions of these names and attributes is negated using the admission that their meanings can never be known. Both meaning and modality are left to the knowledge of God Himself, and they simply say that the meaning is as befits His majesty and perfection. This method of tafwid is that of Ahmad ibn Hanbal (eponymous founder of Atharism), al-Ash'ari, Ibn Qudama, and Ibn Kathir.

Usually Atharis are vehemently opposed to engaging in ta'wil (allegorical interpretations) and reject batin (inner meaning) or hidden/esoteric (Sufi) interpretations of the Qur'an and God's divine attributes. In maintaining that one is not permitted to interpret the meaning of the Qur'anic verses or the Prophetic traditions that mention various attributes of God, Ibn Qudama (d. 620/1223) in his work Lum'at al-I'tiqad (“The Luminance of Creed”) is endorsing the principle of bila kayfa ('without [asking or knowing] how') in Islamic theology. According to this principle, one has to accept the sacred text as it is, indissolubly linked with tanzih (God's incomparability and transcendence), without trying to interpret its meaning. In other words, one must accept the sacred texts that refer to God without positively ascribing corporeal features to Him.

Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597/1201) took the question of people associating anthropomorphism with Hanbalism so seriously that he wrote a book, Daf' Shubah al-Tashbih bi-Akaff al-Tanzih (“Rebuttal of the Insinuations of Anthropomorphism at the Hands of Divine Transcendence”), refuting this heresy and exonerating Ahmad ibn Hanbal of any association with it. According to him, such words whose meanings could give the impression that God resembles His creations shouldn't be understood literally, such as God's face, hands, eyes, and the like.

Another book was written by the Shafi'i scholar, Taqi al-Din al-Hisni (d. 829/1426), titled Daf' Shubah man Shabbaha wa Tamarrad wa Nasaba dhalik ila al-Sayyid al-Jalil al-Imam Ahmad (“Rebuttal of the Insinuations of him who makes Anthropomorphisms and Rebels, and Ascribes that to the Noble Master Imam Ahmad”), defending Ahmad ibn Hanbal against the innovated beliefs later ascribed to him by Ibn Taymiyya and those who claimed to follow his school.

Ibn Kathir (d. 774/1373) appears to offer a definition similar to that of al-Ash'ari (d. 324/936) when he discusses tafwid in his exegesis of the Qur'anic verse (7:54) pertaining to God's istiwa'. He states: "People have said a great deal on this topic, and this is not the place to expound on what they have said. On this matter, we follow the good ancestors (i.e., the way of the earliest Muslims, dubbed the pious ancestors, in Arabic, al-salaf al-salih ): Malik, al-Awza'i, al-Thawri, al-Layth ibn Sa'd, al-Shafi'i, Ahmad, Ishaq ibn Rahwayh, and others among the imams of the Muslims, both ancient and modern—that is: to let it (the verse in question) pass as it has come, without saying how it is meant (min ghayr takyif), without likening it to created things (wa la tashbih), and without nullifying it (wa la ta'til). The external, literal meaning (zahir) that occurs to the minds of anthropomorphists (al-mushabbihīn) is negated of Allah, for nothing from His creation resembles Him: 'There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing' [Qur'an 42:11]."

Here Ibn Kathir is diverting the meaning of the text from its apparent meaning, and implicitly affirming that one valid definition of the term zahir is its literal linguistic meaning, which is anthropomorphic. However, some modern followers of Ibn Taymiyya claim that bi lā takyīf would only mean tafwid of modality not of meaning (ma'na), but according to the Ash'ari/Maturidi position, modality (kayfiyya) is a part of meaning and without detailing which aspect of meaning remains after de-anthropomorphizing a term, one ends up with tafwid. On the other hand, both Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328) and his student Ibn al-Qayyim (d. 751/1350) argued that the anthropomorphic references to God, such as God's hands or face, are to be understood literally and affirmatively according to their apparent meanings.  In their footsteps and following them come the Salafi groups of modern times such as the followers of Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1201/1787) who closely follow Ibn Taymiyya's approach regarding the Divine names and attributes.

The doctrine of the Salaf that Ibn Taymiyya derives from his traditionalist sources consists in describing God as He describes Himself and as His messenger describes Him, neither stripping the attributes away (ta'til) in the fashion of kalam (rational or speculative theology), nor likening (tamthil) them to the attributes of creatures because there is nothing like God [Q. 42:11]. For Ibn Taymiyya, this means that the Salaf knew the meanings of the Divine attributes, and they do not merely delegate them to God. However, certain formulaic statements attributed to them do not appear to support his position unequivocally. Ibn Taymiyya notes that al-Awza'i (d. 157/774), Sufyan al-Thawri (d. 161/778), and others said concerning the attributes, "Let them pass by as they came", and "Let them pass by as they came, without how". He explains that letting the attributes pass by (imrār) means leaving them intact and not stripping away their meanings, while affirming the attributes "without how" or "without modality" (bi-lā kayf) means not assimilating them to the attributes of creatures. With this, Ibn Taymiyya holds affirmation of the meanings of God's attributes together with denial of their likeness to creatures in a double perspective by drawing a distinction between the known meanings of the attributes and their inscrutable modalities.

Ibn Taymiyya does not clarify how modality (kayfiyya) and meaning (ma'na) relate to each other semantically. Rather, he deploys the two terms in tandem to maintain the seemingly paradoxical conviction that God is completely different and beyond human experience on the one hand while God's attributes do signify something real and meaningful in human language on the other. In denying knowledge of the modality and affirming knowledge of the meaning, Ibn Taymiyya does not resolve the paradox, nor even acknowledge it, but simply holds its two sides together in the conviction that this is the most faithful and rational set of beliefs.

It is often assumed that the question of God's nature has occupied the minds of early Muslims, and as such the Prophet Muhammad forbade them from thinking about it, as He said: "Think about God's bounties, but do not think about God's essence (dhat). Otherwise, you will vanish/perish." Accordingly, Muslims should not think about what God is, but about His attributes and His blessings granted to humanity, because God's essence (dhat) cannot be understood by the limited human capacity. In this regard it has been mentioned in some narrations that are ascribed to Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241/855), it has been reported that he said: "Whatever comes to your mind (i.e., regarding God and His nature), God is different than that." Or in the words: "God is completely different from whatever comes to your mind concerning Him."

According to al-Shahrastani (d. 548/1154) in his al-Milal wa al-Nihal (“Religious Sects and Divisions”), Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Dawud al-Zahiri (d. 270/884) and a group of imams of the Salaf, they followed the way of the early tradionalists (ashab al-hadith), such as Malik ibn Anas (d. 179/795). They took a safe path, saying "We believe in whatever is reported from the Book and the Sunna, and we do not try to interpret it, knowing for certain that God does not resemble any created things, and that all the images we form of Him are created by Him and formed by Him". They avoided anthropomorphism (tashbih) to such an extent that they said that if a man moved his hand while reading the Qur'anic verse that speaks of God's creating Adam using His own “hands” [Q. 38:75]; or if he pointed with his two fingers while reporting the hadith: "The heart of the believer is between the two fingers of al-Rahman (the Most Compassionate)", his hand must be cut off and the two fingers torn out.

These early scholars were often called the People of Tradition (Ahl al-Hadith), or Salaf such as Abu Hanifa, Malik, al-Shafi'i and Ahmad ibn Hanbal. They left the verses of the Qur'an in question as well as the related hadiths simply as they were, accepting the poetical statements just as they occurred, without applying much reason either to criticize or expand upon them. Their position was that these ambiguous verses must be understood in light of the Qur'anic dictum that, “There is nothing whatever like Him” [Q. 42:11] hence negating all possibilities of anthropomorphism. At the same time, they used and maintained the same phrases or terminology implied by the Qur'an with regards to God such as God's face without looking further into their meaning or exegesis. And this is what is being referred to by use of their phrase bila kayfa wa la tashbih, meaning without inquiring how and without anthropomorphism or comparison.

However, according to some scholars, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, like the other early Muslims, also gave some figurative interpretations (ta'wil) to scriptural expressions that might otherwise have been misinterpreted anthropomorphically, which is what neo-Salafis condemn the Ash'ari and Maturidi schools for doing. For example, Ibn Kathir reports that al-Bayhaqi (d. 458/1066) related from al-Hakim (d. 405/1014), from Abu 'Amr ibn al-Sammak (d. 344/955), from Hanbal [ibn Ishaq al-Shaybani] (d. 273/886), the son of the brother of Ahmad ibn Hanbal's father, that "Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241/855) figuratively interpreted the word of Allah Most High, ‘And your Lord comes...’ [Q. 89:22], as meaning ‘His recompense (thawab) shall come’." Al-Bayhaqi then said, "This chain of narrators has absolutely nothing wrong in it". Ibn Hazm (d. 456/1064) in his book al-Fasl fi al-Milal wa al-Ahwa' wa al-Nihal (“The Distinction Concerning Religions, Heresies, and Sects”) reported the same thing, but said that Ahmad ibn Hanbal figuratively interpreted ‘And your Lord comes...’ [Q. 89:22], as meaning "And your Lord's command/decree has come."

Among the most significant Athari theological works are:
 * Lawami' al-Anwar al-Bahiyya wa Sawati' al-Asrar al-Athariyya by Al-Saffarini (d. 1188/1774).
 * Bahjat al-Nazirin wa Ayat al-Mustadillin (The Delight of Onlookers and the Signs for Investigators) by Mar'i al-Karmi (d. 1033/1624), on cosmology and the affairs of the Last Judgment and the Afterlife.