Jahmite Intellectual Fraudster Abdullah Ali al-Amin (Nur uz-Zaman Institute, Philadelphia) Refuted by al-Baqillani, al-Bayhaqi and Early Kullaabi Ash'aris
Posted by Abu.Iyaad on Thursday, July, 01 2010 and filed under Articles
Key topics: Abdullah Ali Al-Amin Philadelphian Jahmites Nur Uz Zamaan Institute

We have previously exposed the academic and intellectual fraud of the Marifah staff in their attempts to throw their Jahmite filth onto the good name of Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari - see their intellectual fraud deconstructed here. The vast majority of today's Ash'arites are deceived and defrauded by their intellectual figures who do not inform or teach them that what they are upon (and which they refer to as "Ash'ariyyah") is in fact a hybrid of the usool of the Kullaabiyyah, Mu'tazilah and Jahmiyyah, and not what Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari and the early Kullaabi Ash'aris were upon.

Coming to the topic, then a Jahmite by the name of Abdullah Ali al-Amin, fraudulently posing as a follower of Abu al-Hasan al-Asha'ri, has claimed that affirming the attributes of "yadaan" (two hands) for Allaah (without ta'weel and tafweed and with the negation of any likeness to the creation) is from the (exclusive) sayings of the "Wahhaabiyyah"!

He blackened a PDF file with the following statement:

The Wahabis turn to this verse as a justification due to one part of the verse in particular, "with my two hands" or yadan. From this verse they develope the idea that He subhana wa ta'alaa only made Adam alayhi salaam and object of prostration for the Angels because He subhana wa ta'alaa created Adam alayhi salaam with "His two hands". For them this would be to reject the notion that the word in the verse, yadan, could mean one of its other definitions such as qudra (power) because of the reality that Allah's power is one not two. So the definition or modality if you will most be something other than this. As result they embrace the methodology of the mujassima (Anthropomorphists) without any hesitation by declaring the word yadan to mean literally "two hands" but soften the blow of these anthropomorphic statement by often following it with "by not like our hands" or "in a way that meets his essence". This belief is in fact an evil innovation and a vile deviancy from the path of Ahluls Sunnah wal Jamaat!

Al-Qadi Abu Bakr al-Baqillani's Refutation of This Jahmite

Al-Baqillaani (d. 403H) is the author of the book "at-Tamheed" which is considered the book that formalized the (early) Asha'rite madhhab. As we have explained elsewhere (see this series), the (early) Ash'ari creed was really the creed of Abdullah bin Sa'eed bin Kullaab (d. 240H) and al-Ash'ari took this from some of the Kullaabis of Basrah, and then it became popularized through the name of al-Ash'ari.

Let us take some quotes from al-Baqillani's book, "at-Tamheed", on pages 298-299, he writes as a chapter heading:

We have a chapter heading titled, "Detailing the Attributes of the Essence From the Attributes of Actions", and then under this al-Baqillani writes:

And if [someone] said: Distinguish [and detail] the Attributes of His Essence from the Attributes of His actions so that I may know that.

It is said to him: The Attributes of His Essence are those which He has never ceased, and will not cease to be described with and they are:

Life, knowledge, power, hearing, seeing, speech, iraadah, al-baqaa (remaining, everlasting), face, two eyes, two hands, and anger and pleasure which are [both] iraadah as we have described [previously] ...

Then, al-Baqillani refutes the ta'weels of the Mu'tazilah of "hand" being power or favor (qudrah, ni'mah) - which this Jahmite, Abdullah Ali al-Amin, from Philadelphia is trying to peddle - al-Baqillani said (p.98):

If they say: So what has led you to reject that the meaning in His saying, "...created with my own Two Hands..." is that He created him with His power (qudrah) or through His favour (ni'mah)? Because hand (al-yad) in the language can be with the meaning favour (an-ni'mah) and power (al-qudrah), as is said, "I have a white hand over so and so", meaning by it, a favour. And as is said, "This thing is in the hand of so and so, or under the hand of so and so", intending by it that it is under his power and ownership. And it is said, "rajulu aydin (a man of hands)" when he is capable (qaadir), as Allaah, the Most High, said: "We created for them from what Our Hands have created, cattle ..." (Yaaseen 36:71), meaning We have created with our power.

And the poet said: Whenever a flag is raised for glory, Uraabah takes it with the right hand [meaning with strength, quwwah].

It is said (in reply) to them: This is false (baatil) because His saying, "... with my own Two Hands..." necessitates the affirmation of Two Hands which are both an attribute for Him. If the intent by them had been power (al-qudrah), it would be imperative that He has two powers, and you (referring to the Mu'tazilah, Jahmiyyah), you do not assert that the Creator, the Sublime, has even a single power (i.e. does not have the attribute of qudrah), so how is it permissible for you to affirm two powers for him?

And the Muslims, from the affirmers of the Attributes and their deniers, are united upon it not being permitted that Allaah should have two powers, thus, what you have said is falsified.

Likewise, it is not permissible that Allaah, the Most High, created Aadam with two favours, because the favours of Allaah, the Most High, upon Aadam and others cannot be counted. And also because it is not permitted for a person to say, "I raised the thing with my two hands", or "I placed it with my two hands", or "I took possession of it with my two hands", meaning [by that] his favour. And likewise it is not permissible for it to be said, "I have two hands over so and so", meaning two favours, rather it is said, "I have two white hands over so and so" (with the meaning I have two favours over him), because the saying "al-yad (hand)" (on its own) is not used except for the hand that is an attribute of the essence.

What also indicates the corruption of their ta'weel is that if the affair had been as they have said, Iblees would not have been unmindful of that, and [unmindful] that he should say (when asked to prostrate), "What excellence does Aadam have over me that requires me to prostrate to him, when You created me with your Hand as well, which is your qudrah (power) and with your ni'mah (bounty, favour) you created me?" With the knowledge that Allaah, the Most High, favoured Aadam over him (Iblees) by creating him with His Two Hands is evidence of the corruption of what they have said.

Al-Qadi Abu Bakr al-Baqillani also said, rebutting the charge of Tajseem made by the Mu'tazilah and Jahmiyyah in that time against those affirming these attributes as attributes of the essence (in the same book "at-Tamheed", p.298):

And if someone said: What has led you to deny that His Face and Hand is a limb when you do not understand hand as an attribute, and face as an attribute except [in the form of a] limb? It is said to him: That is not necessitated, just like it is not necessitated when we do not understand a living, knowing, able (being) except to be a body (jism) that we, us and you, should judge Allah with the same.

And just like it is not necessitated when He is established by His own Essence (qaa'iman bi dhaatihi) that He is substance and body just because we, and you, do not find anything established by itself (qaa'imun bi-nafsihi) in what we (outwardly) observe except that it is like that (i.e. Substance and body).

And the answer to them is likewise if they say: It becomes necessary that His knowledge, life and speech and all of His attributes belonging to His Essence (dhaat) are non-essential incidental attributes (a'raad), genuses, or occurrences (hawaadith), or changes, or coalesce (merge) in Him, or are in requirement of a heart, and they used the existence (wujood) [that they observe] as argument [in this regard].

Is there anything clear and more apparent than these words of al-Baqillani and this refutation of his against this academic and intellectual fraudster, Abdullah Ali al-Amin?

Abu Bakr al-Bayhaqi's Refutation of This Jahmite

We find in the book "al-I'tiqaad" of al-Bayhaqi (d. 458H) - who is upon the way of the Ash'aris - (tahqeeq Ahmad bin Ibraaheem Abul-Aynayn, Dar ul-Fadeelah, 1st Edition, 1999):

Here al-Bayhaqi begins the section with, "Chapter: A Mention of the Verses and Narrations Reported Regarding the Affirmation of the Attribute of Face, Two Hands and Eye"

Then he brings the proofs from the Qur'an, and there is no need to translate it all, and within it he refutes the ta'weels of the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah that "yad (hand)" is qudrah or ni'mah (power, or favor), and he refutes the claims that these three are not attributes of the essence. Then after this section he brings a number of ahaadeeth affirming Allaah's Face, Hands and Eyes.

Then after all of this he says at the end of the chapter:

The Ustaadh, the Imaam, rahimahullaah said: And in this, there is a negation of the deficiency of being one-eyed from Allaah, the Sublime, and affirmation of Eye for Him as an attribute, and we know from His saying, the Mighty and Majestic, "There is nothing like unto Him..." and through the evidences of the intellect that it is not a pupil [like in the eye of the creation] and that the Two Hands are not limbs, and that the Face is not a soorah [figure, form, like that in the creation] - and that they are attributes of the essence (sifaat dhaat), we affirm them through the Book and the Sunnah without tashbeeh, and with Allaah is success.

There are number of things in this statement of al-Bayhaqi:

Firstly: Though he affirms these as attributes of the essence (sifaat dhaatiyyah) in agreement with those who preceded, in his methodology however, he departs from the way of the Salaf in that he makes specific negations that are not reported in the Book and the Sunnah. And the way of Ahl us-Sunnah is to affirm what Allaah affirmed for Himself in the Book or upon the tongue of His Messenger and to negate what He negated from Himself in His Book or upon the tongue of His Messenger. And in the Book and the Sunnah we find that affirmation is very specific and that negation is done only generally. So the way of Ahl us-Sunnah - in corroborrating and affirming their creed - is to adhere to that methodology and not to depart from it, this being a means of safety in their creed and as a means of not speaking about Allaah with that which He did not speak about Himself, whether in affirmation or negation. Thus, it is not from the methodology of the Salaf to say, in negation, "His eye is not a pupil, and His hand is not a limb and His face is not a figure, or form". Rather they say, "We affirm the attributes of face, hands and eyes and they are unlike the face, hands and eyes found in the creation" - and between the two there is a clear difference. And we are speaking here as it relates to affirming and corroborating one's creed. In any case, al-Bayhaqi is much better than those who came later from the Ash'aris and who simply adopted much of what the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah were upon in this topic - since he refutes their ta'weels and corroborates that "face", "hands", "eyes" are attributes of the Essence (dhaat) and are unlike what is found in the creation.

To see a good clarification on this particular point refer to this detailed article on the statement of al-Khatib al-Baghdadi (d. 463H) which helps to remove the Jahmiyyah (posing as Ash'aris) from the pit of confusion that their contradictory creed puts them in.

Secondly: And this is the point we want to make, his exposition of the great fraud perpetrated by these later Jahmite Ash'aris in their claim that these attributes are not said to be attributes, whereas al-Bayhaqi - and he is upon the way of the Ash'aris himself - affirms they are attributes of the essence and refutes the false ta'weels of the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah (as did al-Baqillani).


We have quoted from two early Ash'ari Scholars, al-Baqillani (d. 403H) and al-Bayhaqi (d. 458H) to indicate that they (just like Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari himself) affirm the attributes of "Two Hands" as being attributes of the essence (dhaat). They both refute the ta'weels pioneered by the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah that "hand" refers to "qudrah" or "ni'mah", and al-Baqillani rebuts the presumption of Tajseem and tashbeeh made by the Mu'tazilah. al-Bayhaqi, while being in perfect agreement with the Salaf in affirming these attributes as attributes of the essence departs slightly in that he makes specific negations that are not from the way of the Salaf when speaking about this subject from the point of view of making affirmation of the creed.

The above establishes for us the following:

Readers should know with certainty that what we have today are in reality Jahmiyyah posing as "Ash'aris", tainting the good name of Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari (rahimahullaah), who adopted the Kullaabi aqidah after he left the Mu'tazilah, and thereafter he adopted the aqidah of Imaam Ahmad (rahimahullaah). But the Later Ash'aris (al-Juwaynee, al-Ghazali, ar-Razi) simply hybridized that early Kullaabi aqidah with that of the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah. That is why you will find the early (Kullaabi) Ash'aris affirming the sifaat dhaatiyyah (like Face, Hands, Eyes) without ta'weel and tafweed, and refuting the ta'weels of the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah, yet the later ones, adopting the ta'weels of the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah and negating these attributes as attributes of the Essence!!