Can we see Allah? - An Ashari Perspective.

ABU'L HASAN AL ASHARI'S EXPLAINATION OF THE SIGHT OF ALLAH ON THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT.

⇸Imam Abu Musa Al Ashari wrote a master piece named "Al Ibanah An Usul Ad Diyanah". In that book is the Chapter containing the Kalam to Prove the visibility of God to sight (absār) in the next world." He Writes,

God has said, “ On that day shall faces beam with light,” -meaning “shall shine,”—“ looking towards their Lord,”—“meaning “seeing.” The vision can be only one of the following kinds: (a) God means the regard of scrutiny as when He says, “ Can they not look up to the clouds, how they are created? or (b) He means the regard of expectation, as when He says, “They await but a single blast",[1] or (c) He means the regard of sight. Now God cannot mean the regard of reflection and scrutiny, because the next world is not the abode of scrutiny, and He cannot mean the regard of expectation, because, since “vision" and “face” are mentioned together, “vision” means the vision of the eyes, which are in the face (just as, when the lexicographers mention the vision of the heart and say, “Look upon this thing with thine heart,” its meaning is not the vision of the eyes) and if this is true, since “vision” and “face” are mentioned together, “vision” does not mean the regard of expectation that is in the heart. Besides, surely the regard of expectation does not exist in Paradise, because expectation is accompanied by misgivings and uncertainty, while those who dwell in Paradise possess there such peaceful, pleasant, enduring life as neither eye has seen nor ear heard, and since this is so, they cannot be in a state of expectation, for whenever they think of anything, it is theirs by the very thought. Since that is true, God cannot have in mind the regard of fellow-feeling (ta‘attuf)[2] because creatures cannot entertain this sentiment towards their Creator. Since three kinds of vision fail to answer the purpose, the fourth kind is certain, namely, that the meaning of His words “looking towards their Lord” is that they are seeing, they see their Lord. 

Among the things that invalidate the belief of the Mu'tazilah that God meant, by His words “looking towards their Lord,” the regard of expectation, is the fact that He said “looking towards their Lord,” whereas the regard of expectation as they understand it cannot be connected with His use of the word “towards,” because, among the Arabs, it is not correct to say “towards ” with reference to the regard of expectation. Do you not agree that God, when He said, “They await but a single blast,” did not say “towards,” since His meaning was expectation! He has quoted from Bilqis: “and await what my envoys bring back” and thus, since she meant expectation, she did not say “towards.” 

Imru' 'l-Qays says: 

If you two will await me but an hour,  Beside Umm Jundub you’ll afford me time)" [3]

Therefore, since he meant expectation, he did not say “towards.” Hence, since God said “looking towards their Lord,” we know that He did not mean expectation, but meant only the regard of sight; and since God connected the vision with the mention of the face, He meant the vision of the eyes that are in the face, just as He has said, “We have seen thee turning thy face towards every part of heaven; but We will have thee turn....” [4] and thus He mentioned the face, but meant only the turning of his eyes towards heaven in expectation of the descent of the angel upon him, when God shifted him from the Qiblah of Jerusalem to the Ka‘abah. 

If anybody says, “Why do you not say that, by His words ‘looking towards their Lord,’ He meant only ‘looking towards the reward of their Lord?,” the answer is: The reward of God is something other than Himself. God said “looking towards their Lord,” but He did not say “looking towards something other than Himself.” The Qur'an is to be understood literally, and it is not for us to understand it in any other way, except by proof; otherwise it is to be understood literally. Do you not think that, since God said, “Pray to Me and serve Me,” nobody can say He meant something other than Himself and understand these words in any but a literal way? Wherefore, if that is so, since He says “looking towards their Lord,” we cannot, without proof, understand the Qur'an in any but a literal way. Furthermore, it may be said to the Mu‘tazilah: If you may think that by God’s words “looking towards their Lord,” He meant only that they were looking towards something other than Himself, why not somebody else say that by His words “ The eyes do not reach Him,”[5] God meant “They do not reach something other than Himself,” and did not mean that they do not reach Him! And this is a distinction they have not the capacity to make.  n

⇸Note:- Mutazila believe that God will not beheld by sight but they disagree as to whether or not He will be beheld by the hearts. Abu'l Hudayl and most of the Mutazila say, "We shall see God with our hearts, in the sense that we shall know Him through our Hearts."

[1] Al Qur'an, 36:49.

[2] Affection.

[3] Diwan Al Shafa'i.

[4] Al Qur'an, 2:139.

[5] Al Qur'an, 6:103.

Where is Allah? Refuting the Anthropomorphists!

 IBN JAHBAL'S REFUTATION OF HAMAWIYYA 

OF IBN TAYMIYYA

Ibn Jahbal, a celebrated Shafa'i jurist, who wrote a spectacular refution of Ibn Taymiyya's Hamawiyya titled Al Raddu ala Man Qala bil Jiha was recently translated by one of the most influential scholar of Sunni Islam in 20th century, Shaykh Dr.Gibril Haddad. The following passages are taken from this book, which contains the explaination of one of the highly quoted verse by the anthropomorphists to establish their falsehood:

Ibn Taymiyya quotes the saying of Allah : {Have you taken security from Him Who is in the heaven that He will not cause the earth to swallow you} (67:16), restricting the meaning of “him” to Allah alone[1]. Perhaps he does not allow that its meaning is the Angels of Allah. Perhaps he denies that the angels do such things, and that Gibril عليه سلام caused the earth to swallow the people of Sodom. Consequently he used this verse for his proof, and it may be the “explicit text” he was referring to[2]. Then he followed up with the saying of Allah: {The angels and the Spirit ascend (ta‘ruju) unto Him} (70:4). Ascension (‘uraj) and ascent (su‘ud) are one and the same meaning. There is no proof in this verse that the ascension is to a heaven or to a throne or to any of the things which he has claimed whatsoever. For the literal meaning of “ascension” used in the language of the Arabs refers to the displacement appropriate to material bodies (al-ajsam). The Arabs do not know any other meaning of the word. Would that he had openly declared the material sense and relieved himself from the trouble of covering it up! 

↠The Verse of Istiwa and its interpretation:

The Arabs also understand istiwa as the straightness of the arrow-shaft and the antonym of crookedness. The Hashwiyya invoke this meaning to exonerate themselves of the charge of attributing a body to Allah. At the same time, they close the door to any explanation other than “sitting.” Yet they do not close the door when it comes to the saying of Allah: {And He is with you wheresoever you may be} (57:4) and {We are nearer to him than his jugular vein} (50:16). So you Hashwiyya should not say that Allah is with us “with His knowledge.” If you say that, then why do you allow this [interpretive method] one time and you forbid it the next? And how do you know that istiwa is not one of His acts in connection with the Throne? If they say: “This is not in the language of the Arabs,” then we reply: Neither is the meaning of istawa which you yourselves forward unless we apply it to a body[4].

[1] Hamawiyya (p. 216-217) Majma Al-Fatawa (5:12-13). 

[2] Fakhr Al-Din Al-Razi, Tafsir (3:69): “It is the anthropomorphists who used this verse to claim that Allah Himself is in the sky." Abu Hayyan Al-Andalusi said the some thing in his Bahr Al-Muhit (8:302) and Nahr Al-Mādd (2:1131-1132). Al-Nawawi in his commentary on Sahih Muslim agreed with Al Qadi Iyad that the words “in the heaven' are interpreted metaphorically. Al-Zamakhshari: “From Him Whose sovereignty is in the Heaven.‘ When “Whose sovereignty" is omitted the pronoun “Him" remains instead. There are many instances of this turn of speech in the Quran: “And ask the town." that is: “And ask the people of the town', “And your Lord come.” that is: “And your Lord’s order came" interpreting Allah's Words 'He Who is in the Heaven” in Islamic Belief: and Doctrine According to Ahl Al-Sunna (p. 144-148).  

[3] Hamawiyya (p. 217), Majma Al Fatawa (5:13). 

[4]Ibn Al Jawzi in Daf Shubah Al Tashbih (1998 Al Kawthari repr.p.23): "Whoever interprets (and He is with you) (57:4) as meaning "He is with you in knowledge," permits his opponent to interpret Istiwa as subduing (Al Qahr) or sovereignty.