Kabla ya kuibuka kwa Wanatheolojia wa Kiskolastiki [Mutakallimūn], suala la sifa za Mwenyezi Mungu halikujulikana; halikuwa na nafasi yoyote katika taaluma zozote miongoni mwa taaluma. Msemo ‘Sifāt Allah’ [sifa za Mwenyezi Mungu] haujakuja katika Qur’ani Tukufu wala katika Hadith. Haijulikani kwamba yeyote miongoni mwa Maswahaba alitaja au kuzungumzia msemo ‘Sifāt Allah’. Kila kitu kilichokuja katika Qur’ani ambacho Wanatheolojia wa Kiskolastiki [Mutakallimūn] wanasema ni ‘sifa za Mwenyezi Mungu’ lazima kieleweke kwa kuzingatia kauli Yake,

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,

Na kauli Yake,

And His  saying,

Na kauli Yake,

And His  saying,

Kwa hiyo, sifa ya Allah inachukuliwa kutoka katika Qur'ani pekee na kama ilivyotajwa katika Qur'ani. Hivyo, (sifa ya) elimu Yake inachukuliwa kutoka katika mfano wa kauli Yake,

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,

Na maelezo ya maisha yake yanachukuliwa kutokana na mfano wa kauli yake,

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

Uwezo Wake (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) unatokana na mfano wa kauli Yake,

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

Na (maelezo ya) kusikia Kwake yanatokana na mfano wa kauli Yake,

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

Na (maelezo ya) kuona Kwake yanachukuliwa kutoka kwenye mfano wa kauli Yake,

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

Na (maelezo ya) kauli Yake yanatokana na mfano wa kauli Yake,

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

Na (maelezo ya) Mapenzi Yake [irādah] yanachukuliwa kutoka mfano wa kauli Yake,

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

Na (maelezo ya) Uumbaji Wake yanatokana na mfano wa kauli Yake,

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

Sifa hizi zimetajwa katika Qur-ani Tukufu, kama zilivyotajwa sifa nyingine kama vile Umoja wa Mungu [wahdaniyya] na Kuwepo kwake tangu milele [qidam]. Hakukuwa na tofauti kati ya Waislamu kwamba Mwenyezi Mungu ni Mmoja, wa Milele, Hai, Mwenye uwezo, na kwamba Husikia, Huona, Husema, Ni Mjuzi, na hutekeleza mapenzi Yake.

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.

Wakati wanafalsafa walipokuja na mawazo ya falsafa yakaingia miongoni mwa Waislamu, tofauti kati ya wanatheolojia wa kimantiki [Mutakallimūn] kuhusu sifa za Allah zikaibuka. Hivyo, Mu'tazila walisema: Dhati ya Allah na sifa zake ni kitu kimoja. Kwa hiyo, Allah ni Mwenye Uhai, Mwenye Elimu na Mwenye Uwezo katika Dhati yake. Hana Elimu, Uwezo, wala Uhai vilivyo nje ya Dhati yake. Kwa sababu, kama Allah angekuwa Mwenye Elimu kwa sababu ya elimu iliyo nje ya Dhati yake, na Mwenye Uhai kwa sababu ya uhai ulio nje ya Dhati yake, kama ilivyo kwa binadamu, basi hilo lingelazimu kuwepo kwa sifa [sifa] na kitu kinachoelezwa [mawsuf], mbebaji [hamil] na kinachobebwa [mahmul], na hii ndiyo hali ya vitu/miili yenye mwili. Allah yuko mbali na aina zote za kuchukulia Mungu sura ya kimwili [jasmiyya]. Tukisema sifa hiyo inasimama yenyewe, basi kutakuwa na Viumbe zaidi ya mmoja wa Kale Aliyekuwepo Tangu Zamani, yaani kutakuwa na miungu zaidi ya mmoja. Ahl al-Sunnah walisema: 'Allah ana sifa za milele zilizopo katika Dhati yake. Nazo ni: si Yeye wala si nyingine isiyokuwa Yeye' (la huwa wala ghairuhu). Kuhusu Yeye kuwa na sifa, hii ni kwa sababu imethibitika kwamba Yeye ni Mwenye elimu, mwenye uhai, mwenye uwezo n.k. Inajulikana kwamba elimu, uhai na uwezo kwa jumla yake, vinaonyesha maana ya nje kwa dhana ya Kuwepo Kwa Lazima [Wajib al-wujud]. Maneno yote hayana maana sawa. Haiwezekani, kama Mu'tazila wanavyosema, kwamba Yeye ni Mwenye elimu bila elimu na Mwenye uwezo [qadir] bila uwezo n.k. Hili ni dhahiri kuwa haliwezekani, na ni sawa na sisi kusema kwamba kitu fulani ni cheusi bila weusi wowote. Maandiko yameeleza ushahidi wa Elimu Yake, Uwezo Wake n.k. Kutendeka kwa matendo sahihi na kamilifu kunaonyesha kuwepo kwa Elimu Yake na Uwezo Wake, wala si tu kuitwa kwake mwenye elimu na mwenye uwezo. Kuhusu sifa Yake ya kuwa ya milele, hii ni kwa sababu haiwezekani kwa viumbe vipya kuwepo ndani ya Dhati Yake. Kwani haiwezekani kufikiriwa kwamba kiumbe kipya kingekuwepo ndani ya Kiumbe cha Kale na cha Milele [al-Qadim al-Azali]. Kuhusu sifa kuwepo ndani ya Dhati Yake, hilo ni kwa sababu ni miongoni mwa mambo ya lazima yanayohitajika kwa kuwepo. Kwani hakuna maana ya kuelezea sifa ya kitu isipokuwa ikiwa (sifa hiyo) iko ndani ya kitu hicho. Kuhusu sifa kuwa "si Yeye wala si kingine isipokuwa Yeye". Sifa za Allah si Dhati yenyewe. Kwani akili inaamuru kwamba maelezo/sifa ni tofauti na kitu kinachoelezwa. Ni maana iliyo nje ya Dhati. Kwa kuwa ni sifa ya Allah na si kitu kingine isipokuwa Allah. Si kitu, dhati wala dutu, bali ni maelezo tu ya Dhati. Ingawa si Dhati ya Allah, si kitu kingine isipokuwa Allah. Bali ni sifa ya Allah. Kuhusu maoni ya Mu'tazila: kama kila sifa ingefanywa kuwepo kwa yenyewe, basi kungekuwa na zaidi ya Kiumbe kimoja cha Kale. Hilo lingetokea kama sifa ingekuwa dhati. Lakini inapokuwa maelezo ya Dhati, kuelezewa kwa Dhati kwa sifa kama hiyo hakulazimishi kuwepo wingi wa dhati. Bali kunalazimisha kuwepo maelezo zaidi ya moja ya Dhati Moja. Hilo halipingi Umoja wa Allah [wahdaniyyah] wala halimaanishi wingi wa miungu. Kwa namna hii, Ahl al-Sunnah walithibitisha kwa hoja za akili kwamba Allah ana sifa ambazo ni tofauti na Dhati Yake, lakini si tofauti na Yeye, kwa sababu maelezo ni tofauti na kitu kinachoelezwa, lakini hayajatengana nacho. Kisha wakaeleza maana ya kila moja ya sifa hizi za milele. Hivyo, walisema kuwa sifa ya Ujuzi ni sifa ya milele inayodhihirisha mambo yanayojulikana yanayohusiana nayo, na sifa ya Uwezo ni sifa ya milele inayotekeleza mambo yaliyoamuriwa. Na Uhai ni sifa ya milele inayolazimu afya [sihhat] ya viumbe hai. Na Uwezo ni nguvu. Sam' (kusikia) ni sifa ya milele inayohusiana na vitu vinavyosikika. Na kuona ni sifa ya milele inayohusiana na vitu vinavyoonekana. Kupitia sifa hizi Yeye ana ufahamu kamili, si ufahamu unaotokana na dhana au udanganyifu, wala kwa kuathiriwa na hisia, wala kwa kufuata matamanio. Irada (kutaka) na mashiko (kupenda kwa hiari) ni maneno yanayoonyesha sifa ya uhai inayohitaji kwamba mojawapo ya mambo yaliyoamuliwa litokee kwa wakati mmoja maalumu, ingawa uwezo juu ya yote (mambo yaliyoamuliwa) ni uleule. Sifa ya kalam (usemi) ni sifa ya milele inayodhihirishwa kupitia mpangilio wa maneno unaoitwa Qur’ān. Mwenyezi Mungu anasema kwa maneno; ni mojawapo ya sifa zake za milele na si ya jamii ya herufi na sauti. Ni sifa inayopingana na ukimya na upungufu (aafah). Mwenyezi Mungu anasema kwa sifa hii. Kwa sifa hii anaamuru, anakataza, anaarifu; na yeyote anayeamuru, anayekataza na kuarifu, huonyesha maana ndani ya nafsi yake.

Ambayo kwa mujibu wao inamaanisha

Which according to them means

Baadhi yao husema:

Some of them say:

Pia wanasema:

They also say:

Mtu anayebeba fahamu kama hii kuhusu akili, haitashangaza kumwona akijipa uhuru usio na mipaka katika mambo haya. Hivyo basi, kwa nadharia, walipanga masuala mbalimbali na kufikia matokeo ambayo hayakuwepo. Wakasema kuhusu nafsi zao kwamba walifikia kuelewa matokeo haya kwa akili zao. Matokeo yake, utafiti wa kiakili kwao haukuwa na kikomo cha kusimama. Waliweza kuingia katika utafiti wowote na kufikia matokeo ambayo waliyaita utafiti wa kiakili na matokeo ya kiakili. Kwa hiyo, si ajabu kwamba Mu'tazila wangesema:

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:

Walizichukulia hilo kuwa uchunguzi wa kiakili na matokeo ya kiakili....

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

Na Ahl as-Sunnah wanasema kwa wakati mmoja kwamba kuunganisha uwezo wa Allah na jambo lililoamriwa hakufanyi qudra (uwezo) ibadilike, wala hakuufanyi uwe kitu kilichoumbwa. Hii ni kwa sababu kinachofanya qudra iwe kitu kilichoumbwa ni mabadiliko katika qudra yenyewe, si mabadiliko katika jambo lililoamriwa. Nao wameona kwamba hiyo ni uchunguzi wa kiakili na matokeo ya kiakili... kwa sababu akili, kwa mujibu wao, ilikuwa nafsi au silika inayofuatwa na ujuzi wa mambo yanayojulikana kwa lazima. Kwa hiyo waliruhusu akili ichunguze kila kitu. Lau wangeelewa kweli maana ya akili, wasingeshiriki katika uchunguzi na matokeo haya ya kudhania yasiyojulikana kuwepo. Haya yalikuwa mambo yanayofuatana na mambo mengine, nao wakayaita kweli za kiakili.

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.

Maana ya akili yanaeleweka wazi kwetu katika zama hizi. Tunatambua kwamba mradi vitu vinavyohitajika kwa akili kufanya utafiti havipo, basi hatuwezi kuiita hiyo mjadala wa kiakili. Na katika hali kama hii, hairuhusiwi kujiruhusu kufanya utafiti. Tunajua kwamba akili ni

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

Kila majadiliano yenye mantiki lazima yawe na mambo manne kwanza: la kwanza, akili; la pili, hisi; la tatu, uhalisia; na la nne, taarifa zilizotangulia zinazohusiana na uhalisia huu. Ikikosekana mojawapo ya mambo haya manne, hakuna majadiliano ya kimantiki kabisa. Ingawa inawezekana kuwa na majadiliano yanayotegemea mantiki, na inawezekana kuwepo na mawazo ya kufikirika na dhana, hakuna chochote kati ya haya kina thamani yoyote, kwa sababu hayaingii katika ufahamu wa akili wala katika uelewa wa akili kuhusu chanzo chake. Kwa hiyo, wanazuoni wa Kalam [Mutakallimūn] hawakuelewa maana ya akili, jambo lililowafanya wajipe uhuru usio na mipaka katika majadiliano mengi yasiyoweza kuhisiwa, na zaidi ya hayo hawakuwa na taarifa zozote zilizotangulia kuhusu mambo hayo.

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.

Kuhusu wanazuoni wa kalam (Mutakallimūn) kutotofautisha kati ya mbinu ya Qur'ani na mbinu ya wanafalsafa katika majadiliano ya kiakili, hii ni kwa sababu Qur'ani ilijadili theolojia, na wanafalsafa nao walijadili theolojia. Kuhusu majadiliano ya kitheolojia ya wanafalsafa, ni kwamba wanafalsafa walichunguza Kiumbe Kisicho na Mipaka (Absolute Being) na kila kilichokuwa cha lazima kwa Dhati yake. Hawakusoma ulimwengu, isipokuwa yale yaliyokuwa nje ya ulimwengu. Walianza kupanga hoja kwa kutumia dhana zao za kimantiki, na kutokana na hoja hizi walifikia matokeo. Kisha wakatoa matokeo mengine kutokana na matokeo hayo. Waliendelea hivyo hadi wakafika kwenye kile walichokiona kuwa ukweli wa Dhati hii na mahitaji ya Dhati hii. Wote, licha ya kufikia matokeo tofauti katika utafiti wao, walifuata mbinu moja, nayo ni majadiliano ya mambo ya kimaumbile yasiyoonekana (supernatural), kuanzisha hoja zinazozaa dhana za kubahatisha au hoja nyingine, na kufikia matokeo waliyoyaona kuwa ya hakika na kuyaamini.

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.