From: hassan@cs.ubc.ca (Moustafa Hassan)
Subject: RE: Basic Points of Islamic belief
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Originator: Mughal@Romeo.Caltech.Edu (Asim Mughal -Moderator)
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 20:07:00 GMT



[Postmarked: 21 Jul 92 ]

************************************************
Note to the moderators:

Walid Dabbous replied to my article pointing out some of the mistakes
in G. Housseini's "Basic Points...".  I ask you to kindly post this 
rebuttal.  There are two primary reasons why I want this article posted:
1) Walid's article made me sound like a factionist, whereas I am a 
   member of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah.
2) There are differences of opinion among Sunni Muslim scholars.

If you read my article, you will find that it is not a flame, and that
I admit my mistakes.  I would greatly appreciate you posting this.  This
is probably one of the healthiest discussions I've seen on soc.religion.islam.
Jazakum Allahu Khair.
*************************************************

I bear witness that there is nothing worthy of worship other
than Allah, and that His messenger Muhammad is the seal
of all prophethood.  I am a believer in Allah and His messenger
Muhammad.  I am not a separatist or part of any faction.  I believe
in ijmaa' (consensus of Muslim scholars) and qiyas (analogy by
scholars).  I believe in strict adherence to the Qur'an and 
Sunnah, and its interpretation as it was interpreted by our
pious predecessors, the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (SAWS), 
may Allah be pleased with them all.

May Allah forgive us for our shortcomings and perfect our
Iman.


In article <711577512@lear.cs.duke.edu>, Walid.Dabbous@sophia.inria.fr writes:
|> -------------------------------

|> 
|> AsSalamu Alaykym wa rahmatu-llahi wa barakatuh.

Wa Alaykum as-Salam wa rahmatu-llahi wa barakatuh.

|> 
|> I)  First objection: about the use of the word spirit as an attribute of Allah

|> 
|> The word "roohina" here means the "ruh" which belongs to Us, that We
|> created and blessed (see the b) above). This word "roohina" does
|> not mean that Allah has a spirit (as an attribute).
|> 

This was a mistake on my part.  Jazak Allah for clarifying it.  It 
was due to my own extrapolation, and has nothing to do with the book
I cited in my original article.  As far as I can tell, the book I
cited (by Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaliq) is free from mistakes.  May
Allah forgive me.


|> 
|> 
|> II) Second objection about what he said concerning the speech of Allah
|> 
|> The author of the article then said:
|> 
|> >G Housieni writes: (His speech is without sounds, letters and
|> > languages).  Do you have any evidence for this?  What about
|> >the Qur-an?  What about when Allah spoke to Musa (check sura 20,
|> >ayah 11 and onward)?

How can this be an objection when I was asking a question?  It 
wasn't a rhetorical question in the least.  Thank you for clarifying
it though.


|> III) Third objection concerning what the author said
|>      concerning some ayat and ahadith mutashabihat.


Did you read the beginning of my article?  Allah has
attributes which befit His majesty.  These attributes do not
resemble the attributes of any creature real or imagined.  Suffice
it to say that Allah has attributes and we know of these attributes
only what He tells us or what His prophet Muhammad (SAWS) told us.
In many cases, all we know of the attributes of Allah are their names.
I completely agree with the scholars you cited;  why do you see a 
contradiction?  The ayah "laysa kamithlihee shay^" (there is nothing
like Him) cannot be used as a basis for denying the attributes of 
Allah.  This same ayah can be used to deny that Allah has an eye
or hands.  Let me clarify (once again):  Allah has attributes which
befit His majesty.  In some cases we know nothing about His attributes
other than the name.  As Muslims, we cannot say that these attributes
are similar to anything created or imagined, which would be kufr
(blasphemy).  At the same time, if one denies the attributes of Allah,
this is also kufr.  May Allah forgive us all for our shortcomings. 
Without the guidance of Allah, we would all be lost.

More specifically:

|> 
|> The third point I would like to refute in the article of M. Hassan
|> is the way the ahadith of the prophet were cited and interpreted,

In terms of the attributes (such as hands, ascension of the throne,etc):
As far as I know, what I said is exactly in accordance with the 'Salaf'
scholars.  Abdur-Rahman Abdul-Khaliq is salafi in his thinking.  Also,
he bases much of his work on Ibn-Teymiyyeh, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ibn 
Jawziyyah, Muhammad Abdul-Wahhab, and other scholars (all are 'salafi'
in their thinking).


|> 
|> 
|> The author also attributed motion to Allah:
|> this is also unfounded and contrary to Islamic beliefs.
|> Imam malik said about the hadith "yanzilou rabbuna
|> ila assama^i dunya": nuzul rahma la nuzul naqla.

Yes, that is Imam Malik's opinion.  Other great Islamic scholars
disagree with him on this point.  (See Ibn-Teymiyyeh,
or Ibn-Hajar).  Allah knows best.  According to the Arabic, we can
only extrapolate that Allah descends;  we do not know how He
descends or in which way.  If we interpret verbs (in *any* language)
in a way which implies the nature of a creation, then this verb
does not befit Allah.  Allah exists, but His existence does not 
resemble that of any creation real or imagined.  Thus, one could 
say that the verb 'to exist' does not befit Allah.  Clearly, this
is ridiculous.  The same applies for verbs like 'to descend' or
'to move towards' (cf. the Hadith Qudsee where Allah says: "Wa in
ataanee yamshee, ataytuhu harwala" meaning roughly "And if he (my
slave) moves to me walking, I move to him with speed").  These verbs
do not imply that Allah enacts the verb in a way similar to humans.

|> 
|> Concerning the attribute of "yad" we cannot translate it to hand
|> in English because the word yad in arabic has more than 14 meanings
|> (see fath al bari sharh sahih al bukhari, kitab altawhid). 

So does 'hand' in English.  I agree that a translation of the Qur'an
is not really possible.  Only tafseer should be translated.  Thus, in
a translation of tafseer, all the meanings of 'yad' should be given.
To deny, however, that Allah has a hand is to deny one of His attributes.
Again, this attribute does not resemble any human attribute.  

|> so we cannot choose the meaning hand in English which implies
|> resembling Allah to his creatures (tashbih). 

The word "yad" to the pagan Arabs also implied a human quality.
The point is to educate people that the attributes of Allah do
not resemble human attributes.  Allah used the word "yad" for a 
reason.  Allah knows best.


|> either adopt the salaf's way by saying it has a meaning which
|> corresponds the Allah's non resemblance to creatures

This is what I do.


May Allah forgive us all for any mistakes.  I ask Allah to guide 
Muslims and to help us perfect our Iman.  We Muslims are brethren;
we must learn to acknowledge our mistakes and learn from one another.
Walid: I love you as a Muslim brother, and I love you for correcting
a mistake in my last post.  Jazak Allah Khairun.

-- 
********************************************************************
* Moustafa Hassan          |                                       *
* hassan@cs.ubc.ca         |  Political correctness is a euphemism *  
* TEL/FAX: (604) 535-2826  |  for intellectual stagnation.         *
********************************************************************

Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam