Addressing Ash’ari Contentions 1
The Ash’aris state
“Addressing Various Wahhabi Contentions About Allah’s Wisdom”
So they say
Wahhabi(Sunni) Contention: If Allah’s wisdom must have a different meaning than human wisdom, why do the Asharis not apply this principle with all of His Attributes?
Sunni(Mu’atili) Response: Actually, we do apply this principle with all His attributes. Allah’s wisdom does not have the meaning of need, or achieving benefit, or avoiding harm, because He has no needs and nothing can harm or benefit Him. This is firmly based on the scriptures.
No you don’t. Please hang up the lying, it does not work with Sunnis. Allah’s Hearing, Creating, Rising, Eyes, etc is not in need of achieving benefit or avoiding harm. Infact, they have nothing to do with creational properties to begin with. The reality is All of Allah’s Attributes are in essence different than anything that is not Allah.
Wahhabi(sunni) Contention: What is the need for saying “Allah has perfect knowledge, and perfect action” and thus rejecting the attribute of wisdom?
Sunni(Mu’atili) Response: How does having perfect knowledge and perfect action reject wisdom? Moreover, can there be perfect wisdom without perfect knowledge? Beware that Ibn Faaris states in Al-Mujmal: “Al-hukm comes from the idea of prevention. Al-hikmah (wisdom) also comes from this, because it prevents ignorance.” So in Arabic hikmah is related to knowledge.
Firstly, how is this a Sunni (wahhabi) contention.
Wahhabi(Sunni) Contention: If you affirm that Allah has Wisdom (yet not like our wisdom), then why can you not then affirm that He has a hand (but not like our hand)?
Sunni(Mu’atili) Response: We affirm that Allah is attributed with “yad”, but we deny “limb,” or any other physical meaning. Note that Abu Hanifah prohibited translating “yad” (which you translated as “hand”) to Persian, even if one added “without a how.” This is mentioned in “Al-Fiqh Al-Akbar”. The difference between wisdom and “yad” is that the former has a known meaning, while the latter does not. Another difference is that “yad” in its literal translation means “hand” and a hand is literally a body, except in expressions like “Its not in my hands.” That is why you find the scholars saying “yad without a how” and they will not usually find it necessary to add “without a how” after “wisdom,” because when a person hears the word wisdom he does not usually think of something physical.
Author: Shaykh Abu Adam al Naruiji al-Zindeeq
we deny limb as well, but affirming yad does not by default imply limb. That is the same jahmi rhetorical reasoning used by the jahmis in the time of Ahmad. They said “our recitation is created” only to imply the qur’an is created. The logic is the same. One of your Ash’ari blind following cohorts stated to a sunni when the sunni asked him ‘Do you believe Allah has hands” and his reply was “I don’t believe Allah has limbs” thus signifying that He believes that when Allah narrated these ayaah, he can conceive of nothing other than limbs of a human body.
well, there are several problems with that, one being that ALlah is not like the creation. Secondly, the term “hands” have been used to describe things of totally different nature than the human limb called the hand. We call the pointing things on the clock “the HANDS of the clock” and yet the hands of a clock is not a limb. The same can be said for anything other than. That is why it is from illogic and lack of reason to conclude that the very meaning of hand is by default a limb. It is only lead to this by default if the speech of the speaker alludes to the thing that has a hand to be something that has limbs and organs, i.e. humans, animals, aliens, sea creatures.
Secondly, this is a lie and a half, to say that wisdom is known to have a meaning but yad does not. Wrong, everything has a known meaning and it is understood based upon its attribution to the entity it is ascribed to.
When Umar says “my hand was swolen” everyone understand from that a corperial limb of a human body
When Allah says “I have created Adam with my Two Hands” no one understands from that that He had two limbs with blood circulating in them with corpereality attached on a physical body.
Lastly, the without how had two implications that the salaf were steering away from
1. tajsim and tashbeeh
2. t’awil and tahreef
in other words, their statements “bilaa kayf” is refuting both the anthropomorphists (who’s madhab existed within the shi’a religion, not the wahhabis) and the followers of Aristotle (jahmis, mutazilis, maturidiyya, ash’aris, kullabis, qadari, jabari, murji, etc)
lastly, you have confused physicalness with reality (haqiqi). We believe Allah’s Hands is an absolute reality, that they exist. You take that belief and interpret it as “being physical like a bodily organ, a limb”. The first thing you need to do is to correct your perception of reality before you embark on trying to be the antagonists of the people of Allah