The Islamic Personality by Sheikh Taqīuddīn An-Nabahānī

Before the emergence of the Scholastics [Mutakallimūn] the issue of Allah's attributes was not known; it did not have a part in any study from amongst the studies. The expression ‘Sifāt Allah’ [attributes of Allah] has not come in the Noble Qur’ān or in the ahādith. It is not known that any of the sahābah mentioned or spoke about the phrase ‘Sifāt Allah’. Everything that has come in the Qur’ān which the Scholastics [Mutakallimūn] say is the ‘attributes of Allah’ must be understood in the light of His saying,

And His  saying,

And His  saying,

Then the description of Allah  is taken only from the Qur’ān and as it is mentioned in the Qur’ān. Thus, (the description of His) knowledge is taken from the like of His  saying,

And the (description of His) life is taken from the like of His  saying,

The (description of His) power/ability [qudrah] is taken from the like of His  saying,

And the (description of His) hearing is taken from the like of His saying,

And the (description of His) seeing is taken from the like of His  saying,

And the (description of His) speech is taken from the like of His  saying,

And the (description of His) Will [irādah] is taken from the like of His  saying,

And the (description of His) Creation is taken from the like of His  saying,

These attributes have been mentioned in the Noble Qur’ān just as other attributes like divine Unity [wahdaniyya] and Eternal Pre-existence [qidam] have been mentioned. There was no difference between the Muslims that Allah  is One, Eternal, Living, Able and that He Hears, Sees, Speaks, Knowing and excersing Divine Will.

When the philosophers came and the thoughts of philosophy infiltrated the Muslims, The differences between the scholastics [Mutakallimūn] about the attributes of Allah  crept in. So, the Mu'tazila said: The Essence [dhat] of Allah  and His attributes are the same thing. Thus, Allah  is Living, Knowledgable and Able/Powerful in His Essence. He  does not have Knowledge, Power, Life external to His Essence. Because, if Allah  was Knowldgable due to a knowledge external to His Essence, and Living due to life that is external to His Essence as is the case with human beings. Then, this inevitably necessiates that there is a description [sifa] and one that is described [mawsuf], a carrier [hamil] and the carried [mahmul], and this is the state/condition of (corporeal) objects/bodies. And Allah  is free of all such corporealist anthroporphomism [jasmiyya]. If we say the attribute exists by itself then there will be more than one Eternal Pre Existent Being, in other words there will be more than one god. The Ahl al-Sunnah said: 'Allah  has eternal attributes which exist in His Essence. They (the attributes) are: neither He but not other than He' (la huwa wala ghairuhu). As for Him  having attributes, this is due to the fact that it has been proven that He  is knowledgable, living, able etc. It is known that knowledge, life and power etc in their entriety, indicate an external meaning to the concept of Absolute Being [Wajib al-wujud]. Not all the words are synonymous in meaning. It cannot be as the Mu'tazila say that He  is knowledgable without knowledge and Able [qadir] without power etc. This is obviously impossible, and it is similar to us saying that a thing is black without any blackness.The texts have stated the evidence for His  Knowledge, Ability etc. The issuance of exact and precise actions indicate the presence of His  Knowledge and Power and not just a mere designation of knowledgable and powerful. As for His attribute being eternal, this is due to the impossibility of new entites existing in His  Essence. Since, it is inconceivable that a new entity would exist in the Pre-Existent and Eternal Being [al-Qadim al-Azali]. As for the attributes existing in His  Essence, that is because it is from the neccesary things required for existence. Because there is no meaning to describing the attribute of a thing except if it (the attribute) exists in the thing. As for the attributes being 'neither He or other than He'. The attributes of Allah  are not the Essence itself. Because the mind dictates that the description/attribute is other than the thing described. It is a meaning external to the Essence. Because it is an attribute of Allah  and not other than Allah . It is not a thing, essence or substance but only a description of the Essence. Though it is not the Essence of Allah , it is not other than Allah . Rather it is an attribute of Allah. As for the view of the Mu'tazila; if every attribute was made to exist by itself then there would be more than one Pre-existent Being. This would have been the case if the attribute was an Essence. As for when it is a description of the Essence, the description of the Essence by such an attribute does not necesitate that there is a plurality of essences. Rather it necesitates that there are more than one description of the One Essence. That does not negate Allah's Oneness [wahdaniyyah] or mean the plurality of gods. In this manner the Ahl al-Sunnah proved rationally that Allah  has attributes which are other than His Essence but not other than He , because the description is other than the thing described but not detached from the thing described. Then they explained the meaning of each of these eternal attributes. Thus, they said the attribute of Knowledge is the eternal attribute which reveals the known things that relates to it and the attribute of Ability is an eternal attribute which effects the things decreed. And Life is an eternal attribute which necesitates the health [sihhat] of the living. And Ability is power. And Sam' (hearing) is an eternal attribute that relates to things that are heard. And seeing/sight is an eternal attribute relating to the seen things. Through them he has a complete understanding, not one that is by way of imagination or delusion or by way of being effected by sensation or arriving at a whim. The 'wish' (iradah) and 'will' (desire) are both expressions of the attribute of life that requires one of the decreed (matters) specifically occurs at one moment, though the qudrah (power) over all of them (decreed matters) is the same. The attribute of speech (kalam) is an eternal attribute which is expressed by the composition called the Qur’ān. Allah  speaks with words; it is one of His eternal attributes and not of the category of letters and sounds. It is an attribute which is opposite to silence and aafah (deficiency). Allah  speaks with this attribute. With this attribute He  orders, forbids, informs; and anyone who orders, forbids and informs expresses a meaning in oneself.

In this manner the Ahl al-Sunnah explained what the attributes meant after proving that Allah  has eternal attributes. However, the Mu'tazila denied that these meanings are for the attributes of Allah  since they rejected that Allah  has attributes external to His Essence. They said; It is proven that Allah  is Able, Knowledgable and All-incompassing and that the Essence of Allah  and His attributes are not effected by change, because change is the attribute of created things and Allah  is free of that. If something is present at a specific point in time and did not exist before that point, then it will disappear after its existence, the Ability and Will of Allah  has affected that. He created something which had not previously existed and He made it non existent after it had existed. We must ask how can Divine and Eternal Ability relate to a created thing, and thus create it, and why it created it at this moment, when no moment is preferable to another one to the Power of Allah . So for the Power (qudra) to initiate a thing which previously had not been initiated constitutes change in the Qudra, though it has been proven that Allah  is not effected by change, for He is the Pre-Existent Being (al-qadeem al-azali). Similarly regarding the Will (iradah), the same can be said for the attribute of Knowledge ('Ilm). Knowledge is the revealing of the known matter (ma'lum) as it is. The known matter may change from one time to another, so the leaf of the tree falls after it was not falling (i.e It was fixed); the damp thing changes to dry, and the living becomes dead. The knowledge of Allah (‘ilmu Allah) is that by which the thing is revealed as it is, so He  is knowedgable of the matter before it is as it would be. He  is also knowledgable of the matter if it was that it was. He  is also knowledgable of the matter if it became non-existent, that it became non-existent. So how can the Knowledge (‘ilm) of Allah change with the change of the existent things (al-mawjoodat)? And the knowledge that changes with change in realities is a recent knowledge, and Allah’s  knowledge is not recent because what is linked to the recent is itself is recent. The Ahl as-sunnah refuted them saying: “The Qudra has two links, one of them is eternal (azali), upon which the actual existence of the decreed thing –pre-determined (magdoor) - does not depend; and the recent link, upon which the actual existence of the decreed thing (maqdoor) depends. So when the Qudra is related to the thing it brought it into existence and it (the Qudra) existed before it was related to the thing. Its relationship (linkage) to the thing by bringing it into existence does not make it recent. The Qudra’s exercise over the thing after it did not do such exercise is not considered a change in the qudra, so the qudrah is always the same, it only related to the thing, and thus brought it into existence. So the destined is what changes, as for the Qudra its does not change.

As for the knowledge (‘ilm), anything with which the knowledge (‘ilm) is related (linked) is actually known (ma’loom). For the one who is entitled to knowledge is the essence of Allah , while the knowns are the things and the relation of the essence to all things is the same. Knowledge does not change in regard to the essence, while its relation (to the thing) is that which changes, a matter which is allowed/possible. What is impossible (on the side of Allah) is the change of the knowledge and the pre-establishment (qadeem) attributes themselves, such as the qudra and knowledge and the like thereof, and it is not necessary that it being Qadeem (Eternal) means its links are old. So they are pre-existent (qadeem) attributes, and are linked to the created things.

Thus, the polemics between the scholastic Mu'tazila on one side and the Ahl al-Sunnah on the other flared up regarding the attributes of Allah , just as it flared up in other issues such as qadā’ and qadār. What is strange is that the points of disagreement provoked by the Mutakallimūn, are the same points provoked by the Greek philosophers before. Thus, the Greek philosphers had instigated these points in relation to the attributes of the Creator. Then the Mu'tazila came and responded to them. But the response was within the limits of their belief in Allah  and within the limits of their views on Tawheed (Oneness of Allah ). The Ahl al-Sunnah opposed them to control their following of the Greek philosophers and the specultive asumptions and issues of logic understood by them. But they fell in the same trap the Mu'tazila had fallen in. So they responded on the same echelon, which is that the mind was made a basis for discussion and dialectics in matters comprehended or not comprehended by it, and in matters sensed or not sensed by human beings. They quoted verses of the Qur’ān and ahadīth to support their views. And they explained away verses and hadīth which contradicted their opinions. Thus, all the Mutakallimūn from the Mu'tazila, Ahl al-Sunnah and others came to be on the same level in making the mind the basis and making the ayāt of Allah  to support what their minds had lead to or interpret away so that they are understood according to what the mind of the one comprehending has lead to.

It appears that what led the Mutakallimūn to tread in this path in study are two factors; First, they did not know the definition of the mind. Second, they did not distuguish between the methodology of the Qur’ān in the comprehension of truths and the methodology of the philosophers in comprehending the truths. As for the issue of them not comprehending the definition of the mind, it is obvious from their own definition of ration. It has been reported about them that they used to say:

Which according to them means

Some of them say:

They also say:

The one who carries such an understanding regarding the mind, it would not be strange for him to give himself a free reign in these matters. So they arranged, theoretically, various issues and came out with a result that did not exist. And they said regarding themselves that they came to comprehend this result with their mind. Consequently, the rational study for them did not have a limit at which it stopped. They could dive into any study and arrive at results which they called a rational study and rational results. Therefore, it is not strange that the Mu'tazila would say:

They considered that to be a rational investigation and a rational result....

And the Ahl as-Sunnah say at the same time that connecting the ability of Allah  with the decreed matter does not make the qudra (ability) change and nor does it make it a created thing. This is because what makes the qudra created is change in the qudra and not the change in the decreed matter. And they considered that to be a rational investigation and a rational result.....this is because the mind according to them, was the soul or an instinct followed by knowledge of things known by necessity. Therefore they allowed the mind to investigate everything. Had they truly understood the meaning of the mind they would not have involved in these suppositional investigations and results which are not known to exist. These were just things from other matters which followed and they called these rational truths.

The meaning of the mind is clear to us in this age. We realise that as long as the things which are necessary for the mind to conduct a study are not available then we cannot call it a rational discussion. And in such a case, it is not allowed to permit ourselves to study. We know that the mind is

Every rational discussion must have four things first, a brain, second, the senses, third, the reality and fourth, the previous information relating to this reality. If one of these four things is missing, there can be no rational discussion at all. Even though it is possible to have a discussion based on logic and it is possible for there to be imagination and supposition. None of this has any value, because it does not come under the comprehension of the mind or the mind's comprehension of its source. So the scholastics [Mutakallimūn's] lack of understanding of the meaning of the mind made them give themselves a free reign in many discussions which cannot be sensed, further they did not have any previous information reagarding them.

As for the scholastics [Mutakallimūn] not distuinguishing between the method of the Qur’ān from the method of the philosophers in the rational discussion, this is because the Qur’ān discussed theology and the philosophers discussed theology. As for the theological discussion of the philoshopers, it is that the philosphers looked into the Absolute Being and whatever was necessary for its Essence. They did not study the universe but what was beyond the universe. They began to arrange proofs with their logical premises and from these proofs they arrived at results. Then they derived other results from these results. They proceeded in this manner until they arrived at what they considered to be the truth of this Essence and the requirement of this Essence. All of them despite arriving at different results in their study, they followed one method which is the discussion of the supernatural, establishing proofs resulting in speculative assumptions or other proofs and arriving at results they considered definite and believed in.

This method of study contradicts the method of the Qur’ān because the Qur’ān discusses the universe itself, in respect to existents: the earth, sun, moon, stars, animals, human being, riding animals, camels, mountains and other such percieved things from which the listener arrives at understanding the creator of the universe, creator of the exixtents and the creator of the sun, camel, mountains, humankind etc through his comprehension of these existing things. When the Qur’ān discusses the supernatural which cannot be sensed and cannot be comprehended by comprehending the existent things it decribes a reality and determines a fact and orders that it be believed as a definite matter without drawing the attention of human beings to understand it or drawing their attention to something from which they should comprehend it. And that is like the attributes of Allah , the Paradise, Hellfire, Jinns, shaytans etc. And this is the method understood and followed by the Sahabah  who advanced into lands carrying the message of Islam to the people in order to bless them with it as they had been blessed by this message. The situation remained like this until the elapse of the first century. Then the philosophical thoughts from the Greek philosophy and other philosophies seeped in and the Mutakallimūn came to exist. And the method of rational study became altered and the polemics over the Essence of Allah  and the attributes of Allah  began. Far from being a deep discussion it cannot be considered a rational discussion at all because it is the study of a thing that cannot be sensed. And anything that cannot be sensed, it is outside the scope of the mind to study it in any way whatsoever. Since the discussion in the attributes of Allah  is whether it is the Essence itself or other than the Essence, it is a study of the Essence and the study of the Essence is prohibited in origin and impossible to do. That is why the study of all of the Mutakallimūn is misplaced and purely mistaken. The attributes of Allah  is tawqeefiya (fixed by the Lawgiver). Whatever has been mentioned in the definite texts we have mentioned it according to the extent mentioned in the definite texts and not in anything else. It is not allowed to add an attribute which has not been mentioned and we should not try to explain an attribute with anything other than what has been mentioned in the definite text.