Some Hanafi scholars affirming attributes of Allah
Abdul Aziz Al-Bukhari and Al-Bazdawi affirming a hand and face for Allah
In “Kashful Asrar” of Abdul Aziz Al-Bukhari Al-Hanafi, Sharh of Usul Bazdawi, in chapter of Haqiqah and Majaz, Al-Bazdawi and Al-Bukhari rejected Mu’tazilah’s denial of Hand and Face for Allah.
Here are extracts:
“And the same as establishing Seeing Allah (Ar-Ruyah), establishing His Face (Wajh) and Hand of Allah are true for us. Because of His Saying we turn away from the saying of the one who says that we do not describe Allah with a face and hand, rather the meaning of face is satisfaction (rida) and essence (Zat) and similar to this, and meaning for Hand is power (Qudrah), Favour (Ni’mah) and similar to this. Then the Shaykh (Al-Bazdawi) said : rather He is described with the attribute (Sifat) of Face and Hand with purification of Him from the form present in the creation (Surah Al-Jariyah), because Face and Hand are attributes of perfection in the witnessed world, as one without Face or Hand is considered as defective, and He is described with attributes of perfection, so He is described by these two also, except that the form present (Surah Al-Jariyah) in the creation is impossible for Him, as establishing of Kayfiyah (is impossible), so you make Tashbih (comparison) with His description. So It is obligatory to accept them (attributes) upon their reality (I’tiqad Haqqiyah) without turning from it with Taweel (extrapolation).
“And it is not permitted to reject the foundation (Asl)”: It is not permissible (for someone) to say that seeing Allah (Ar-Ruyah), Hand and Face are false (Batil) because of his inability to understand the face, the eye, their reality…while the possibility of Ruyah and His description with face and hand is established with decisive proofs (Dalail Qat’iyah)…
“They (Mu’tazilah) rejected foundations (Usul)”: It is possible that the meaning (of words of Al-Bazdawi) are “They rejected the reality of Ruyah, of Face and Hand because of their ignorance”…and it is possible that the meaning is “ they rejected Usul meaning attributes”.
They called themselves people of Monotheism (Ahlul Tawhid) and they made their Tawhid Batil with their (invented) Tawhid…They became Mu’atilah (deniars of attributes).
End of quotes from Kashful Asrar
Note: Shaykh Al-Barrak in his notes on “Fathul Bari” said that the word that attributes of Allah are not according to “Surah Al-Jariah” (form present in creation) are from newly invented words and if meaning is to deny Tashbih between attributes of Allah and that of creation, then this meaning is correct but if someone means that the Hand of Allah does not grasp or does not have fingers and so to deny its reality, then this meaning is rejected.
Comment: we can see what these two great Hanafi scholars say that people who deny a hand and face for Allah have ruined their Tawhid and with their extrapolations have invented a new Tawhid.
Shabeer Ahmad ‘Uthmani affirming a hand, foot and eye for Allah
Shabeer Ahmad Uthmani wrote in his Tafsir of the Quran, on verse 64 of Surah Al-Maidah about Allah’s two Hands being outstretched and not tied as said by Jews:
“Where for Haqq Ta’ala hand, foot, eye and other attributes are mentioned, we should not even by forgetfulness have doubt that Ma’az Allah has a body (Jism) like creation or Jismani members. But just like God’s essence (Zat), existence (Wujud), life, knowledge, and other attributes of perfection have no comparison or similarity and Kayfiyat (how they are) cannot be known except by Him…( after quoting a poem in Farsi, ‘Uthmani gave it meaning in Urdu) His Sam’ (listening), Basar (seeing), Yad ( Hand) and others descriptions, attributes and meanings are also according to His essence (Zat) and saint status and our Kayf (How) and Kam (how many) and Ta’bir and explanation are far away from comprehending this…” End of Shabeer Ahmad Uthmani’s words
Comment: So this is a lesson for people who consider Shabeer Ahmad Uthmani as Shaykhul Islam. He compared the attributes of foot, eye and hand to seeing and hearing, and believed in all of them, and he said that Kayfiyah is not known.
“Fawatih Ar-Rahmut” and “Muthalam uth-Thubut”on attributes, Istiwa and Nuzul
It is written in “Fawatih Ar-Rahmut” that is an explanation of “Muthalam uth-Thubut” of ‘Allamah Al-Bahari, a reference in Usul ul Fiqh for Ahnaf:
“This is among Mutashabih (unclear) like the letters at the beginning of Surah and hand” mentioned in His saying (Ta’ala): “The Hand of Allah is above their hands”. “And the Eye” mentioned in His saying (Ta’ala): “So that you grow under My eye”, “And the Nuzul (descent of Allah to the lower Heavens)” as it is narrated in the authentic Sunnah that our Lord descends every night in the heaven of this world, “and other than these” like “The most Merciful rose (istiwa) over His throne”.
Now that the Madhab of the Salaf about these verses and Ahadith is to believe in them and not to ask about their Kayfiyah (how they are), this is why Imam Malik said: “belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is forbidden”.And their saying is not that the ruling intended of this is general, so it is among the necessities that the meaning of the hand of Allah being above their hands means Ghalbah (superiority) and likewise Nuzul and Istiwa mean mercy (Mercy of Allah rising or descending), rather this generality is only in establishing these attributes. The late scholars (mutaakhirun) did Tawil (extrapolations) of all of these texts, and some of the Sufis said about them that they are among those believe in some and disbelief in some of that.”
Comment: So for the author of “Fawatih Ar-Rahmut” the extrapolations of late scholars are disbelief in some of the Book and belief in some parts.
Anwar Shah Al-Kashmiri affirming a voice for Allah
Anwar Shah Al-Kashmiri said in his “Faydhul Bari” in first chapter related to how the revelation would descend to the Prophet (saw):
“This is why I say that this sound of the bell (Silsilah) is the voice of Allah, contrary to what other explainers (of Sahih Al-Bukhari) said. Know that there are two points here:
First: establishing a voice for Al-Bari (Ta’ala) and there is no doubt in its existence, but it is not like the voices of the creation, He is glorified and elevated, and Al-Bukhari also chose this at the end of his book.
Second: Is this bell the voice of Al-Bari, may His name be honoured, or not? I decide about this that this is the voice of Al-Bari (Ta’ala), and Allah is more knowledgeable about the reality of it” End of Al-Kashmiri’s words
Comment: Shaykh Abdul Mannan An-Nurpuri said in reply that without doubt Allah speaks with a voice, but there is no proof that the sound of this bell is the voice of Allah. Yet Al-Kashmiri clealry affirmed a voice for Allah and this is a clear refutation of the people of Kalam.
Some words of Shah Walliyullah on the attributes of Allah
Shah Walliyullah wrote in his “Hujjatullah Al-Balighah”:
“Without exception all of the heavenly religions agree that the Divine Attributes should be explained in this way, and that these expressions should be applied according to their proper meaning, and that nothing more should be discussed about them beyond this usage. In this way the upright generations (close to the time of the Prophet) passed away, then a group of Muslims became engrossed in discussing the Attributes, and in investigating their meanings without a revealed textual basis and without conclusive, demonstrative proof.
The Prophet, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him, said “Speculate about the creation, not about (the nature of) the Creator,” and he interpreted God’s, may He be Exalted, saying, “Your Lord, He is the utmost limit,” (53 : 42) by “there should be no speculation about the Lord.”‘
The Divine Attributes are not created, temporally originated things, and speculating about them lies in asking “How is God qualified by them?” and therefore this is speculation about the Creator.
Al-Tirmidhi- said concerning the hadith “The hand of God is full,”‘ that the religious leaders had said concerning this hadith that they believed it as it was given without interpreting or making conjectures about it. Likewise, more than one Imam, among them Sufyan al-Thauri,’ Malik ibn Anas, Ibn ‘Uyayna,’ and Ibn al-Mubarak,” said that these things have been transmitted (in the hadith) and they believed them, and there was no scope for asking “how.”
On another occasion he (Tirmidhi) said, “The application of these attributes, as they are, is not anthropomorphism. Rather it is anthropomorphism to say, ‘Hearing is (literally) hearing (like our hearing) and seeing is (literally) seeing.”…
I hold that there is no difference among hearing, seeing, having power, laughing, speaking, and sitting; for regular speakers of the language understand these in a fashion inappropriate to the Holy. Is there any inconsistency in laughing except that it requires a mouth, and likewise so does speech? Is there any incompatibility in falling and descending other than that they require a hand and a leg? And likewise seeing and hearing require eyes and ears, and God knows better.
These speculators behaved contemptuously toward the People of the Hadith calling them corporealists and anthropomorphists and saying that they sought refuge in the formula of “without asking how” (bi la kaif). It has become eminently clear to me that this contempt of theirs is unfounded and that they err in their sayings both from the viewpoint of tradition and of reason and that they err in slandering the leaders of the true religion.
There is in the Holy Enclave an order which they desire to establish among mankind, so that if people are in conformity with it (the order) they will be joined to the Highest Council and are taken out of the darkness into the light of God and His bounty, and they are given joy in their souls and other humans and the angels are inspired to treat them well. If they oppose it (the order), they remain separate from the Highest Council and are struck by their (the Council’s) hatred and punished in a way that has been mentioned above. Therefore it must necessarily be said that God is “pleased” and “gives a reward of thanks,” or is “angered” and “bestows curses;” all (of this), derives from the running of the universe according to the requirement of the beneficial purpose (al-maslaha). Sometimes the creation of the thing which is prayed for turns out to be part of the order of the universe, and this is called “the answering of prayer.” Since “vision,” according to our usage, is the disclosure of what is seen in the most perfect way; and since people, when they are transported to certain states which they had been promised at the Resurrection, will attain the theophany” which stands in the center of the World of Images, so that all of them will see Him with their eyes;” it is necessary to say that, “you will see Him as you see the full moon,” and God knows better.” End of Shah Waliyullah’s words.
Comment: So Shah Waliyullah refuted the people of Kalam who attacked Ahlul Hadithd declaring them to be antropormorphists because they established the attributes without asking how (Kayfiyah). Also Shah Waliyullah also said that the believers will see Allah with their eyes.
Ashraf Ali Thanvi saying that late scholars followed the Jahmiyah
Ashraf Ali Thanvi wrote in his “Taqrir Tirmidhi” in the chapter of “Bab Ma Ja fi fadl Sadaqah” p 187 and after, Idarah Talifat Ashrafiyah:
“Maulana Sahib (Rahmatullah Aleyhi) said that many people of knowledge say that these Ahadith should be taken upon their apparent (Zahir) meaning, it will be said that Allah (Ta’ala) possesses a hand, a foot , an eye and an ear, He possesses all these things but we are not aware of their Kayfiyah (how they are). Like God has no similarity and like his essence (Zat) cannot be comprehended as it is, in the same manner it is impossible to comprehend His attributes, and this was the Madhab of the Salaf us Salihin and previous scholars (Mutaqaddimun) and the Jahmiyah, which is an Islamic sect, performs tawil (extrapolation) of all of these matters, for instance they say that in the verse “The hand of Allah is above their hands”, hand means power.
Late scholars (Mutaakhir) chose the Madhab of these innovators, and this because of a particular need, as it was resembling the Christians…
Ahlus Sunnat nowadays chose Tanzih (purification), meaning Haqq (Ta’ala) is free from space and time, and the Sufis nowadays say that neither Allah is purified in all ways neither resembling in all ways, but all of this is true.
Maulana said that is someone asked himself in his heart: where did these Sufis invent this Barzakh? Either Allah (Ta’ala)’s hand and food will be similar (to that of creation) or they won’t exist, then one should reply in his heart that our hands and feet and others are Majazi (metaphorical) and those of Haqq (Ta’ala) are real (Haqiqi), like He is God, in the same way His hand and foot will be. End of His Taqrir
Comment: The people Ashraf Ali Thanvi tells to be Ahlus Sunnah are in fact Ash’aris and Maturidis and they are not from Ahlus Sunnah as they opposed the Madhab of the Salaf and choose the extrapolations of the Jahmiyah. Also Thanvi told us that Madhab of Sufis is different from the people of Kalam, as for them Allah can have a foot and hand different from creation.
Compiled by Ali Hassan Khan
May Allah send Salah and Salam on the Prophet 9saw), his family, companions and those who follow them