Did the Salaf Believe 'The Qur'an Came into Existence From Non-Existence' - Confuting the Doubt of the Jahmite Ash'aris And an Illustration of Their Ignorance and Deception Regarding 'Muhdath', 'Haadith', 'Hudooth' and Allaah's Actions Tied To His Will
Posted by Abu.Iyaad on Wednesday, October, 07 2009 and filed under Articles
Key topics: Qur'an Kalam Nafsi Sifaat Fi'liyyah Af'aal Ikhtiyaariyyah Qur'an Kalam Nafsi Sifaat Fi'liyyah Af'aal Ikhtiyaariyyah


From the greatest of doubts of the Jahmites is that Allaah does not have actions tied to His will (mashee'ah) and power (qudrah) - and this denial is agreed upon by all factions and offshoots of the Jahmiyyah (the Mu'tazilah, Kullaabiyyah, Ash'ariyyah, Maturidiyyah) and this denial is necessitated by what they made to be the foundation of their deen, which is their intellectual proof borne out of the notions of Aristotelian Metaphysics - see here and here.

And following on from this is what they are spreading regarding whether the Qur'an (which is from Allaah's Speech) 'came into existence after non-existence'. And their intent behind this is to argue for the deen of Jahm bin Safwan - and whoever inherited it, or something from it, amongst the Mutakallimeen - that Allaah does not have actions tied to His will and power and this is the core underlying foundation behind the issue of the Qur'aan, and it is why they must say that the Qur'an (as we have it with us, recited, memorized, heard) is created.

So whilst making a fraudulent display of following the Salaf and claiming outwardly the "Qur'an is not created", these Jahmite Ash'aris hold secretly and inwardly, that this Qur'an that we have, which we memorize and recite and about which the Salaf unanimously said is uncreated, they (the Ash'aris) secretly hold it is created (makhlooq) and they admit that they are united with the Mu'tazilah on this issue, with their difference in reality being only one of wording and terminology. Go and read these three articles:

  • Imaam ul-Haramayn al-Juwaynee (d. 478H): We Agree With the Mu'tazilah That the Qur'an is Created - We Just Differ on a Matter of Wording Which Is On Account Of What Can We Call Allaah 'Mutakallim' (One Who Speaks) - (see here)
  • Muhammad Sa'eed Ramadan Buti: We (The Ash'aris) and the Mu'tazilah are United that the Qur'an Is Created And What the Mu'tazilah Call 'Knowledge (al-Ilm)' and 'Will (al-Iraadah)', We Simply Call 'al-Kalaam an-Nafsee' - (see here)
  • Fakhr ud-Deen ar-Razi (d. 606H): We Agree With the Mu'tazilah That the (Recited) Qur'an is Created And Our Dispute Is One of Wording Only - (see here)
  • The Haashiyah of al-Bayjoori: The Qur'aan We Memorize and Recite Is Makhlooq (Created) And Is From Hudooth - But We Only Say That In Private, Not Openly - (see here)

And alongside all of this, the Jahmites and anyone affected by them, or with sympathies to them, or whose mind has been corrupted by them, in their deception come out and start raising such doubts as to whether the Salafis claim that the Qur'an came into existence after non-existence or not - their intent behind it all to reject Allaah having actions tied to His will and power.

And these people (such as the Jahmee Baleed Abu Adam Naruiji, and his student trolls, as well as other breeds of 21st Century Jahmite) when you look at the limits of their knowledge and understanding and how they try to use some statements of the Salaf to argue for their Jahmee beliefs when those very same statements are in fact regarding them and in takfeer of them, you become astounded by the foolishness and level of ignorance of these people.

An example is what they have brought of statements from the Salaf regarding anyone who says the Qur'an is "Muhdath" - and this is the subject of this article. Their intent by this is to argue and fight for the deen of the Jahmites that Allah does not have actions tied to his will and to defend what they made the foundation of their religion, that false, corrupt, repugnant intellectual proof of "hudooth ul-ajsaam" - see their four doors here and the American Chestnut Tree here. They take these statements hoping to deceive and confuse Ahl us-Sunnah, whilst in their souls they know full well that when the Salaf refer to the "Qur'an", they are referring to this Qur'an whose words (Kalaam) we recite, memorize, hear, and that the Salaf held there is only one Qur'an, it is all the same no matter how it is found (memorized, recited, written) and they made takfeer of anyone who said this Qur'an is "makhlooq" and the Jahmite Ash'aris know that they hold (in private) this Qur'an to be created. So all of this is from their talbees (deception). Then they use statements from the Salaf which they wrongly try to apply to Allaah's actions which are tied to His will and power, when in reality those statements are in refutation of the Jahmites who hold the Qur'an is created - whether by saying "makhlooq" or the ambiguous word "Muhdath".

In this article we will be developing this issue and addressing this specific doubt of theirs inshaa'Allaah, we will lay down a lot of the foundations, build the context, and gradually ensnare and encircle the Jahmites from all angles, take them prisoner, force them back into that ditch of Khurasaan, from where their forefather originated, and then leave it to the sayings of the Salaf to finish them off - by Allaah's permission and aid.

Setting the Scene ...

So we have a lot of Jahmites running loose and trolling on the field, and they are creating havoc and confusion in different directions, its a field day and there's lots of fun. There's some "cherry-picking" going on and some play with words and definitions, and smugness is all around.

It is important then that we don't waste time in deciding which pegs and stakes should be driven into the ground around them first - we will just take the first stake at hand and as it comes and drive into the ground and eventually encircle them - and we can worry about the cosmetics later on - so don't worry if the order of the stakes doesn't make sense. We may put one in the far left of the field away from us, another one to the far right to towards us - so it might look a bit haphazard but eventually the encirclement will take place inshaa'Allaah - all gradually.

So in nor particular order:

The Intellectual Proof - Always Remember the Intellectual Proof

We have covered this extensively previously and it is necessary that in every issue discussion with the Jahmite Ash'aris that you remember where they are coming from and where they are going towards. These Jahmites Ash'aris thrive on the fact that most people do not know and understand what the bulk of their creed is based upon. It is based upon a rational proof devised by Jahm bin Safwan (ex. 128H), and then taken up by the Mu'tazilah, and later refined and formalized by one of the heads of the Mu'tazilah, Abu al-Hudhay al-Allaaf (d. 235H), and then later taken up by the Kullabis and Ash'aris, with a more refined version being outlined by al-Qadi Abu Bakr al-Baqillani (d. 403H). They made this corrupt, false proof to be the ultimate truth and made it the base for the bulk of their creed.

To the Ash'arites the universe is just a collection of events (hawaadith), and all the bodies (ajsaam) that make up the universe are events (hawaadith) because these bodies themselves have incidental attributes (a'raad) and states of being (akwaan) which render them to be events (hawaadith). And as this is the basic argument for demonstrating the existence of a creator, the creator in turn, must be declared free of whatevery they deem to be an events or occurrences (hawaadith). It is from this perspective that the Ash'arites deny that Allaah speaks by His will and power, even though they affirm speech for Allaah in the form of their innovated doctrine of "Kalaam Nafsee". So they affirm "speech" as an attribute of the essence, but not as an attribute tied to Allah's will and power, such that He speaks, when He wills, as He wills, however He wills. And all of Tawheed to these people is based around purifying Allaah of what they call "hawaadith" because they have used the very same rational for arguing against the atheists in proving a creator.

You should be familiar with this by reading these articles:

You see when you let the Jahmite Ash'ari know that you know where he is coming from and where he is going towards, the ball game changes. The Jahmee is now on the back foot, and he knows that you know what he is about. The smugness disappears very quickly, and the scenario is one where you are standing over the Jahmee whilst he is in a ditch below you, and the Jahmee is thinking to himself, "Shucks, they're onto us!".

The sifaat Ikhtiyaariyyah (Allaah's Actions Tied To His Will) and the Position of Ahl us-Sunnah and the Mutakallimoon

We need to understand the issue of whether Allaah has actions tied to His will and power or not. And this is the crucial point of difference between the Salaf and the Metaphysicists - (the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Kullaabiyyah, Ash'ariyyah and Maturidiyyah) - and the issue of the Qur'an follows on from that.

Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah) said in his treatise on this subject, "Risaalah Fee as-Sifaat al-Ikhtiyaariyyah":

في الصفات الاختيارية: وهي الأمور التي يتصف بها الرب عز وجل فتقوم بذاته بمشيئته وقدرته؛ مثل كلامه وسمعه وبصره وإرادته ومحبته ورضاه ورحمته وغضبه وسخطه؛ ومثل خلقه وإحسانه وعدله؛ ومثل استوائه ومجيئه وإتيانه ونزوله ونحو ذلك من الصفات التي نطق بها الكتاب العزيز والسنة

Concerning the sifaat Ikhtiyaariyyah: And these are the affairs that the Lord, Mighty and Majestic is described with and which are established with His Essence with His will and power, such as His speech (Kalaam), His hearing, His seeing, His will, His love, His pleasure, His mercy, His anger (ghadab and sakhat). And such as his creating (khalq), and benevolence (ihsaan) and justice (adl). And such as His ascent (istiwaa), and coming (majee') and arrival (Ityaan) and descent (Nuzool) and what is similar to that from the attributes that the Mighty Book and the Sunnah have spoken of.

The Salaf hold that Allaah has actions tied to His will and power and none of this was in dispute until there arose the likes of the Jahmiyyah and their offshoots (Mu'tazilah, Kullaabiyyah, Ash'ariyyah).

فالجهمية ومن وافقهم من المعتزلة وغيرهم يقولون: لا يقوم بذاته شيء من هذه الصفات ولا غيرها

The Jahmiyyah, and whoever agreed with them from the Mu'tazilah and others, say: None of these attributes, or others, can be established with His Essence.

And this is because it falsifies their intellectual proof called "hudooth ul-ajsaam" and these amount to a'raad (incidental attributes) and "hawaadith" (events, occurrences) and since they have argued to the athiests that the universe is created because all the bodies (ajsaam) that make up the universe are said to be created because they have sifaat (qualities), a'raad (incidental attributes) and occurrences (hawaadith) - then in order not to invalidate this proof of theirs and look foolish in front of the atheists for using a proof that only establishes the opposite of what they set out to prove - they had to deny all such matters that have come in the Book and the Sunnah, meaning what amounted to them as sifaat, a'raad and hawaadith.

والكلابية ومن وافقهم من السالمية وغيرهم يقولون: تقوم به صفات بغير مشيئته وقدرته؛ فأما ما يكون بمشيئته وقدرته: فلا يكون إلا مخلوقا منفصلا عنه لا يقوم بذات الرب

And the Kullaabiyyah and whoever followed them from the Saalimiyyah and others say: Attributes are established with Him without His will (mashee'ah) and power (qudrah). And as for what is with His will and power then it is not anything but what is created and separate from Him, it is not [something] established with the Essence of the Lord.

The Kullaabiyyah tried to take a middle path between the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah and Ahl us-Sunnah, so they affirmed attributes which are not tied to Allaah's will and power, such as life (hayaat) and knowledge (ilm) but denied those which are tied to His will and power, such as those mentioned earlier.

وأما السلف وأئمة السنة والحديث فيقولون: إنه متصف بذلك؛ كما نطق به الكتاب والسنة؛ وهو قول كثير من أهل الكلام والفلسفة أو أكثرهم كما قد ذكرنا أقوالهم بألفاظها في غير هذا الموضع

As for the Salaf and the Imaams of the Sunnah and Hadeeth, they say: Indeed He is described with [all of] that, just as the Book and the Sunnah have spoken with it. And it is the saying of many of the Ahl ul-Kalaam, and the Philsophers, or most of them, just as we have mentioned their sayings from their own words in other than this place.

The Salaf affirm what is affirmed in the Book and the Sunnah and their never turned to the innovated Ilm ul-Kalaam of the likes of the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah and their offshoots. And many of the Mutakallimoon and Philosophers could not deny these attributes as the proof was too compelling and many of them were forced into doubt and some of them, like al-Aamidee (d. 631H), admitted that they were not able to offer any response to the objections and criticisms laid against their viewpoint (for example on the issue of Kalaam nafsee) and he said, "perhaps the solution can be found with someone besides me", as he says in Abkaar ul-Afkaar (1/400).

ومثل هذا الكلام، فإن السلف وأئمة السنة والحديث يقولون: إنه يتكلم بمشيئته وقدرته؛ وكلامه ليس بمخلوق؛ بل كلامه صفة له قائمة بذاته ... وسائر أهل السنة والحديث - متفقون على أنه يتكلم بمشيئته وأنه لم يزل متكلما إذا شاء وكيف شاء

And an example of this is [the attribute of] speech (Kalaam). For the Salaf and the Imaams of the Sunnah and Hadeeth say: He speaks with His will and power, and His speech is not created, rather His speech (Kalaam) is a sifah (attribute) of His, established with His Essence.... and all of the people of the Sunnah and Hadeeth are unanimously agreed that He speaks with His will, and that He has never ceased to be one who speaks, when He wills and however He wills.

This is what the Salaf and the Imaams of the religion are upon, and they say: Allaah has never ceased to be one who speaks (mutakallim) and He speaks when He wills to speak, however He wills, whenever He wills. And the evidence for this is manifest in the Qur'an and the Sunnah.

وقد سمى الله القرآن العزيز حديثا، وقال: الله نزل أحسن الحديث وقال: ومن أصدق من الله حديثا. وقال ما يأتيهم من ذكر من ربهم محدث وقال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم "إن الله يحدث من أمره ما يشاء " وهذا مما احتج به البخاري في صحيحه وفي غير صحيحه؛ واحتج به أيضا غير البخاري كنعيم بن حماد وحماد بن زيد. ومن المشهور عن السلف: أن القرآن العزيز كلام الله غير مخلوق منه بدأ وإليه يعود.

And Allaah has called the Mighty Qur'an "hadeeth", and He said: "Allaah has sent down the best statement (hadeeth)" (Az-Zumar 39:23). And He said: "And who is truer in statement (hadeeth) than Allaah?" (An-Nisa 4:87). And He said: "Comes not unto them an admonition (dhikr) from their Lord as a recent revelation (Muhdath)..." (Al-Anbiya 21:2).

And the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, "Indeed Allaah brings forth (yuhdithu) from His command whatever He wills". And this is from that which al-Bukhaaree has used as proof in his Saheeh and in other than his Saheeh [in other books], and likewise others besides al-Bukhaaree such as Nu'aym bin Hammaad and Hammaad bin Zayd have used it as proof also. And it is well-known from the Salaf [their saying]: That the Mighty Qur'an is the speech of Allaah, uncreated, it originated with Him and to Him shall it return.

What has been raised here by Ibn Taymiyyah will be covered in detail later inshaa'Allaah, when we look at some of the quotes that the Jahmites have brought recently, but it does get us to the crux of the issue and the doubts of the Jahmites.

We'll put the issue here in a nutshell.

A Clarification Regarding Allaah's Speech, His sifaat Ikhtiyaariyyah, The Qur'an And The Terms "Haadith", "Muhdath"

Ahl us-Sunnah hold that Allaah has actions tied to His will and following on from that regarding the attribute of "Kalaam" (speech), Allah has always been described as "mutakallim" (one who speaks) from eternity and alongside that Allaah speaks when He wills, however He wills. And we can illustrate with just one proof that is sufficient, which is:

إِنَّ مَثَلَ عِيسَى عِندَ اللّهِ كَمَثَلِ آدَمَ خَلَقَهُ مِن تُرَابٍ ثِمَّ قَالَ لَهُ كُن فَيَكُونُ

Verily, the likeness of 'Iesa (Jesus) before Allaah is the likeness of Adam. He created him from dust, then (He) said to him: "Be!" - and he was. (Aali Imran 3:59)

Here, Allaah created him from dust and after that He said, "Be!", and so Allaah's saying "Be!" occurred after the creation of Adam from dust. So this is an instance of Allaah's speech in the Qur'an which could not have occurred in eternity - as the Kullaabi Ash'aris say - because Aadam did not exist then, and neither did Eesaa. And it is upon this, that Ahl us-Sunnah say that Allaah's speech is tied to His will. Allaah spoke to Moses, "Indeed I am your Lord, so remove your shoes..." and Allaah says He will say to Hellfire "Are you filled?". So are these two instances of speech the same? No, they are said by Allaah whenever He wills. But the Kullaabi Ash'aris claim all of this was said in eternity - when there was no Aadam and no Hellfire.

So the difference here is that the Kullaabi Ash'aris say the Qur'an is eternal (qadeem) and this saying was the innovation of Ibn Kullaab (d. 240) - and what they mean by this is very different to what Ahl us-Sunnah say that the Qur'an is from Allaah's knowledge, it is Allaah's knowledge, which is eternal and Allaah spoke the Qur'an as and when He willed, so this is different to what is intended by the Kullaabiyyah that the Qur'an is "qadeem" since they have an innovated definition for "Kalaam" - and Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari, when he sat in the circles of the Kullaabis, he blindly followed this saying. And they hold Allaah's Kalaam is an attribute of the essence (sifah dhaatiyyah) only and is not a sifah fi'liyyah, meaning it is not tied to his will and power. And this poses a huge problem for them, because it means - and refuge is from Allaah - that when Allaah spoke in eternity (according to them) with His Kalaam Nafsee, "Allaah has indeed heard the saying of she who disputes ..." (Mujaadilah 58:1), it means Allaah is not telling the truth - because how can Allaah have already heard she who disputes when she who disputes is not even in existence yet? And likewise with the verse, "Allaah has indeed heard the saying of those who said, "Indeed Allaah is poor and we are rich!" (Aali Imraan 3:181) - was Allaah telling the truth in eternity, before those who said this were even created - because this is supposed to be the eternal meaning that resides with Allaah's self, and is not speech tied to Allaah's will and power, according to them. So when the Kullaabi Ash'aris deny that Allaah's speech is tied to His will, repugnant sayings and implications are necessitated by this.

And some used the word "Muhdath" which occurs in the verse in Surah al-Anbiyaa (21:2) in reference to this particular meaning (i.e. Allaah's speech is tied to His will, and He speaks whenever He wills). However Imaam Ahmad did not like that - as the Jahmites were using this verse and the word "Muhdath" to argue that the Qur'an (that we have which we memorize, recite and hear) is created. And for this reason Imaam Ahmad spoke against Daawud al-Asbahani who had this saying. And this saying also contains an ambiguity that allows for it to be said that Allaah became "one who speaks" (mutakallim) after not being "one who speaks" (mutakallim) - which is incorrect, since it implies Allaah acquired the attribute after not having it. Rather Allaah has always been "one who speaks", and in addition to that Allaah speaks when He wills, however He wills, whenever He wills and this is the creed of the Salaf. So because the Jahmites were using this verse that contains the word "Muhdath" to argue that the Qur'an is created and also because this word contains an ambiguity that allows for it to be said that Allaah became "one who speaks" (mutakallim) after not being "one who speaks" (mutakallim) Imaam Ahmad, and others spoke against its use, and it particular they scorned Dawud adh-Dhaahiree for using it.

So there is a difference between the saying of Ahl us-Sunnah that Allaah has always been described as "one who speaks" (mutakallim), and that He speaks when He wills, however He wills. And that the Qur'an is from the speech of Allaah, since Allaah's speech is more than just the Qur'an, and Allaah spoke the Qur'an when He willed, and in the Qur'an there is mention of things that Allaah said and will say (such as on the Day of Judgement) - so none of this necessitates that the Qur'an is created, and nor that Allaah became "one who speaks" after not being "one who speaks". So there is a difference between this and between what the Kullaabiyyah and Ash'ariyyah are upon, which is that Allaah does not have actions tied to His will, and Allaah's Kalaam (speech) is only a meaning that is present with Allaah from eternity, and as for what we have of the Qur'an, which we recite, memorize and hear, then it is a quotation (hikaayah) or an expression (ibaarah) and it is created, its letters and words are created and is not the speech of Allah, it is a created speech - and their opposition to the truth in this regard is manifest and clear.

But then they try to cover this up and play with words and definitions, all in order to argue for the deen of the Jahmites, Mu'tazilah and Kullaabiyyah, that if Allah has actions tied to His will, it would mean He is subject to hawaadith (events, occurrences), and would therefore be a body (jism) and therefore the intellectual proof of "hudooth ul-ajsaam" against the Atheists goes out of the window, as it would mean Allaah himself is created, and the Atheist Philosophers are on the floor, in stitches, out of laughter, scorning us Mutakallimoon - and we can't allow that - so instead we'll just allow the revealed texts to be accommodated by our intellectual proof and reject, distort, or explain away from them what goes against our intellectual proof, and thus Allaah's speech is only the "Kalaam Nafsee" and Allaah's Pleasure (ridhaa) is merely His intent (iraadah) to reward, and His anger (ghadab) is merely His intent (iraadah) to punish, and His istiwaa (ascent over the Throne) is merely His domination and His Nuzool (descent) is really the descent of His mercy and so on. So everything which implies "hawaadith" is figuratively explained away. Why? Because the proof that we (Mutakallimoon) devised through the language, terminology and classification of the atheist Philosophers is the ultimate truth and it is decisive and definitive over the revealed texts which are nothing but ambiguities giving the presumption of tashbeeh and Tajseem for the most part to the dumb commoners.

And this matter will be elaborated upon in more detail further below inshaa'Allaah.

The Jahmite Mutakallimoon Have Their Own Devised Meanings For Terms Such as "Qadeem" and "Haadith" Different to What is in the Qur'an and the Language of the Arabs

Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said in "Dar' at-Ta'aarud" (1/374)

كل ما يحتج به النفاة يدل على نقيض قولهم ... وكذلك إحتجاجهم على أن القرآن أو عبارة القرآن مخلوقة بقوله تعالى ما يأتيهم من ذكر من ربهم محدث إلا استمعوه بينت أن دلالة هذه الآية على نقيض قولهم أقوى فإنها تدل على أن بعض الذكر محدث وبعضه ليس بمحدث وهو ضد قولهم والحدوث في لغة العرب العامة ليس هو الحدوث في اصطلاح أهل الكلام فإن العرب يسمون ما تجدد حادثا وما تقدم على غيره قديما وإن كان بعد أن لم يكن كقوله تعالى كالعرجون القديم وقوله تعالى عن إخوة يوسف تالله إنك لفي ضلالك القديم وقوله تعالى وإذ لم يهتدوا به فسيقولون هذا إفك قديم وقوله تعالى عن إبراهيم أفرأيتم ما كنتم تعبدون أنتم وآباؤكم الأقدمون

Which translates as

Everything which the negators use as proof actually indicates the opposite of their saying ... And likewise their use of the verse: Comes not unto them an admonition (dhikr) from their Lord as a recent revelation but they listen to it... (Al-Anbiya 21:2) as proof that the Qur'an, or the expression (ibaarah) of the Qur'an (i.e. it's words) is created. I explained that the indication of this verse [to something that is] opposite to their saying is stronger, because it indicates that part of the dhikr (remembrance) is Muhdath (meaning recent, new), and some of it is not Muhdath (meaning recent, new). And the "Hudooth" (occurrence, happening, recency) in the language of the Arabs in general is not the "Hudooth" in the terminological usage of the speculative Theologians (Ahl ul-Kalaam), for the Arabs call something that recurs (yatajaddad, meaning occurs again and again) as "haadith" (occurring), and also whatever precedes what is besides it is "qadeem", even if this thing (being referred to as qadeem) is something that existed after not having existed, such as [in] His saying, the Most High: ...till it (the moon) returns like the old (qadeem) dried curved date stalk. (Ya-Sin 36:39). And His, the Most High's saying regarding the brothers of Yusuf: They said: "By Allah! Certainly, you are in your old (qadeem) error." (Yusuf 12:95). And His, the Most High's saying: And when they have not let themselves be guided by it (this Qur'an), they say: "This is an ancient (qadeem) lie!" (Al-Ahqaf 46:11). And His, the Most High's saying, regarding Ibraaheem: He said: "Do you observe that which you have been worshipping, You and your ancient fathers? (al-aqdamoon)" (Ash-Shu'ara 26:76).

So we see that "al-hudooth" and "al-qidam", and what is "haadith" and "qadeem" in the language of the Jahmite Ash'aris (and all the Ahl ul-Kalaam) is not based upon the language of the Qur'an and the language of the Arabs. Rather the Mutakallimoon devise their own meanings for these terms - and their terminological usage is all geared towards the Metaphysics they made to be the foundation of their religion in proving the existence of a creator.

To them, "haadith" means "makhlooq" (created), and "qadeem" is the opposite of what they understand to be "haadith". And this is different to what is in the Book, the Sunnah and the language of the Arabs. And following on from this the word "Muhdath", this needs to be looked at in more depth, and we will do that a little later inshaa'Allaah, but this matter should be understood well, "qadeem" does not equal uncreated, otherwise why has Allaah referred to the withered date-stalk, and people, and the actions that emanate from people, and the sayings that emanate from people as "qadeem" - when these are all created things. And likewise, "haadith" does not equal created (makhlooq) either.

So here, with this stake in the ground, we have confiscated these toys from them, and reined them in with the Book and the Sunnah and the language of the Arabs, and all of a sudden, the smugness has disappeared.

The Positions of the Jahmites and Their Offshoots Regarding the Qur'an

The second stake we are going to drive into the ground is to accurately characterize the view of all the factions of the Jahmiyyah so that we can see where these 21st Century Jahmees who are trolling on the field, where exactly they fit in.

Because Jahm argued against the Sumaniyyah (Indian Materialist Philosophers) that an entity having attributes (sifaat) and incidental attributes (a'raad) and actions (af'aal) is proof of its "Hudooth" (meaning to him createdness), then he was unable to describe Allaah to them with what is in the Qur'an otherwise that would have falsified his proof for a Creator. Thus, he deemed his proof to be decisive and instead rejected all of what is in the revealed texts of Names, Attributes and Actions for Allaah. And it was out of the necessity of this rejection that ta'weel, tafweed and tahreef were born and this then became the overall concern in the deen of the Mutakallimeen. To protect from invalidation what they thought to be the ultimate truth - their corrupt and false proof for the existence of a creator.

And amongst the specific views necessitated by this intellectual proof was: To deny Allaah spoke to Moses as this would amount to a "haadithah" and necessitate Allaah is a created body (jism) subject to an "event". And also to claim that the Qur'an that is memorized and recited is created (makhlooq) and is not Allaah's speech - again for the same reason, to negate "Hudooth" and "Jismiyyah" from Allaah - otherwise this would falsify the proof against the atheists. Thereafter, the offshoots of the Jahmiyyah inherited this saying, and we can summarize the sayings of the various factions:

The Jahmiyyah

And the saying of the Jahmiyyah is that the Qur'aan is created, that Allah does not have the attribute of "Kalaam" (speech) to begin with, and He is not "mutakallim", and they interpret "Kalaam" to mean something within the creation, separate from Allaah. So Allaah created the "Qur'aan" and He therafter called it "His Speech" in the same manner that it can be said, "Baytullaah" about the Ka'bah, and "Naaqqatullaah", the She-Camel of Allaah and so on.

The Mu'tazilah

And the Mu'tazilah took up this deen of the Jahmites and their view is the same of the Jahmites that the Qur'aan is created with the only difference being that Allaah created it in the self of Jibreel (alayhis salaam) and Jibreel expressed it in his own words, or that he simply "quoted" the Qur'an that was created in his self. And that the speech of Allaah can be created in different situations, so for example, with Moses, the Kalaam (speech) was created in the tree and so on.

The Kullaabiyyah

And the saying of the Kullabiyyah is that this Qur'an we have is created and it is a "hikaayah" (quotation, narrative) of the meaning (ma'naa) that exists with Allaah's self, and it is the Qur'an that is present with Allah's self as a meaning that is not created, and he was the first to innovate this saying, and the Ash'aris took this from him. And this saying of theirs is based upon the fact that they do not affirm attributes of Allaah that are tied to His will and power - so whilst they affirm "Kalaam" as an eternal attribute of the essence, they reject that it is also tied to Allaah's will and power - as this would invalidate their intellectual proof.

The Ash'ariyyah

And the saying of the Ash'ariyyah is the same as that of the Kullaabiyyah save that they say that this Qur'an we have is created and is an "ibaarah" (expression) of the meaning (ma'naa) that exists with Allaah's self, and it is the Qur'an that is present with Allah's self as a meaning that is not created.

This article is continued in the follow up to this series in this article here: