Hujaj al-Ashaira al-Amma ala ma nafawhu min al-Sifat wal-Uluw wal-Jawab an Adillatihim al-Aqliyya
- Author died
- -
- Editions
- Hujaj al-Ashaira al-Amma ala ma nafawhu min al-Sifat wal-Uluw wal-Jawab an Adillatihim al-Aqliyya
Hujaj al-Ash‘aira al-‘Amma ‘ala ma Nafawhu min al-Sifat wal-‘Uluw wal-Jawab ‘an Adillatihim al-‘Aqliyya (The General Arguments of the Ash‘arites for What They Denied of the Attributes and Divine Transcendence, and the Rebuttal of Their Rational Proofs) is a theological treatise by Dr. Abd al-Majid bin Muhammad al-Wa'lan analyzing and responding to the philosophical and rational proofs utilized by Ash‘arite theologians to negate or figuratively interpret divine attributes.
Origin and Scope
The book is an abridgment compiled, with slight adaptation, from sections of the larger work Mawqif Ibn Taymiyya min al-Asha‘irah (Ibn Taymiyyah’s Stance on the Ash‘arites) by Abd al-Rahman al-Mahmud. It focuses specifically on the underlying rational premises that led scholastic theologians (mutakallimun) to negate certain divine attributes and the attribute of divine transcendence (al-‘uluw). The author explains that their denial was not primarily rooted in textual assessments of the revealed texts—such as finding their meanings ambiguous—but was instead driven by rational proofs that they deemed definitive, which subsequently dictated their interpretive approach to revealed scripture.
Summary of Ash‘arite Arguments
The treatise categorizes the primary rational arguments of the Ash‘arites, drawing on Ibn Taymiyyah's synthesis, into three core premises:
- The Argument from Accidents and Temporal Origination (Dalil al-A‘rad wa-Huduth al-Ajsam): The deduction that physical bodies are temporally created because they are inseparable from temporal accidents (a‘rad) such as motion and rest. Scholastic theologians argued that affirming voluntary attributes (al-sifat al-ikhtiyariyya) for God implies that He is a body (jism), which they asserted would invalidate their proof for the universe's temporal creation and the existence of the Creator.
- The Argument from Anthropomorphism and Composition (Hujjat al-Tajsim wal-Tarkib): The assertion that affirming attributes like the Face, the Hands, ascending above the Throne (al-istiwa'), descent (al-nuzul), or transcendence necessarily entails corporeality (tajsim) or structural composition (tarkib). This is built on the premise that bodies are fundamentally similar and that composition implies dependence on constituent parts.
- The Argument from Particularization (Hujjat al-Iktisas): The claim that parts of the cosmos require a determinant (mukhassis) to specify their contingent forms, sizes, and boundaries, and that affirming spatial direction or boundaries for God would imply that He is dependent on an external determinant.
The work also outlines their stance on transmitted proofs (adillat al-sam‘): from an evidential standpoint, they deemed solitary-narrator hadiths (ahad) unauthoritative in matters of creed; from a semantic standpoint, they treated explicit texts of the Quran and hadith regarding these attributes as ambiguous (mutashabih), leaving only two interpretive paths: delegation of meaning (tafwid) or figurative interpretation (ta'wil).
Rebuttals and Theological Critique
The treatise presents comprehensive rebuttals against each of these rational structures:
Critique of the Argument from Accidents
The author argues that the proof of huduth al-ajsam is invalid and was not taught by the prophets or early generations (salaf). It points out internal divisions and disagreements among scholastic theologians themselves regarding its foundational premises, such as the indivisible atom (al-jawhar al-fard) and whether accidents can endure for more than one instant. Later Ash‘arite figures like Sayf al-Din al-Amidi and Fakhr al-Din al-Razi mutually critiqued each other's variations of this proof. Additionally, the treatise refutes the Ash‘arite claim that Prophet Ibrahim used this method of deduction when observing the setting of the celestial bodies in قَالَ لَا أُحِبُّ الْآفِلِينَ ("He said: I love not those that set" [Al-An‘am: 76]), clarifying that Ibrahim sought to establish God’s sole right to worship (tawhid) rather than the abstract proof of a Creator, and that setting (aful) linguistically denotes disappearance and concealment rather than mere movement.
Critique of Composition and Corporeality
The author highlights the semantic ambiguity (ijmal) surrounding terms such as "body" (jism) and "composite" (murakkab). The treatise notes that if by "composition" one means that God was assembled from previously separated parts or is subject to division, God is indeed exalted above such deficiencies. However, if it refers to God being distinct from creation, possessing distinct attributes, or existing independently, labeling these attributes "composition" is a technical terminology alien to both the Arabic language and religious scripture. The text further demonstrates how philosophers and mutakallimun, such as Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, al-Amidi, and al-Razi, encountered mutual contradictions when wielding these concepts against one another.
Answer updated