3- Pronunciation of Quran 1

8/11/2019 3- Pronunciation of Quran 1

1/6

The Ash'ari Clinic: 2nd Case Study of 'Ash'ari Burnout' - Concerning Ibn Hajr, Imaam Bukhaaree, The Kullaabiyyah and the Pronunciation of the Qur'anFiled under: The ClinicWednesday, October 28 2009 - by TheClinicKey topics: The Clinic Ash'ari BurnoutMail to a Friend Printer friendly

We are pleased to present our second case study of "Ash'ari Burnout". To learn more please see this page. "Ash'ari Burnout" is a phenomenon arising when the inability to satisfactorily resolve and come to terms with certain (historical) facts and information results firstly in "psychological denial" which disturbs themental constitution, then denial of the denial secondly, and then finally, barely comprehensible, illogical, irrational "outbursts" taking place mainly on blogsand forums. Our first case (see here) was met with good acceptance, and readershave expressed their eagerness to read further cases. Today's case is a bit more complicated.Case Involving Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani's Comments Regarding Imaam al-Bukhaaree andthe Kullaabiyyah

First let us document the symptoms that manifested in the "intellectual dump" ofthe victim:

Case Diagnosis, Notes and Comments

Compound Ignorance Is the Fabric of That Delusion Which Lies Behind Much of "Ash'ari Burnout"

We have mentioned repeatedly - and will continue to mention repeatedly until itsinks into the heads of today's deluded (Jahmite) Ash'aris - that the foundationof the deen of the Mutakallimoon (people of Kalaam, the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah,Kullabiyyah, Ash'ariyyah, Maturidiyyah) is based around an intellectual proof called "hudooth ul-ajsaam" which is based generally around language and terminology derived from Aristotle's "al-Maqoolaat al-Ashar", or "the Ten Categories" - which aims to provide a framework for characterizing all bodies (ajsaam) in observable existence. Read more about that here. This proof argues for the createdness

of the universe based upon the presence of qualities (sifaat), incidental attributes (a'raad) and actions (what they call hawaadith, events or occurrences) inbodies. The presence of these things in bodies indicate (to the Mutakallimoon) that the bodies (ajsaam) themselves are events (hawaadith, i.e. came to be afternot being) and events cannot be infinite in the past - and from this the presence of a creator is deduced, and then following on from this, the possibility andlikelihood of prophethood and resurrection. This proof is a vile, corrupt, falseproof, and it is the utmost falsehood because it actually proves the opposite of what they set out to use it for. As a result of it, they were forced to deny,to varying degrees, what Allaah has affirmed for Himself in order not to invalidate this proof - which they wrongly believed to be something upon which the veracity and truthfulness of the very religion of Islaam depended upon.

It is for this very reason that they abandoned speaking about Allaah with the methodology of the Book and the Sunnah which is to affirm specifically and to negate generally and instead took to describing Allaah with negating specifically and affirming only generally or what their intellects found acceptable to their intellectual proof. Thus, Allaah is "not a jism (body), not a jawhar (substance),not an 'arad (incidental attribute), not above, nor below, nor inside the creation, nor outside of it, nor in a place, or a location, nor in a direction..." andso on. They were forced to use the same language in describing Allaah that theyused for their corrupt intellectual proof for demonstrating the universe to becreated - and this is what they made Tawheed to be comprised of.


2/6

As we said in the previous case, most, if not all cases of "Ash'ari Burnout" occur within the context of complete and compound ignorance of what actually instigated the Mutakallimoon - [people of theological speculation using the metaphysical classification and terminology of the atheist philophers] - to the compellingneed to deny Allaah's Names, attributes and Actions, which is this very intellectual proof called "hudooth ul-ajsaam". The Jahmiyyah (Jahm bin Safwaan, ex. 128H) and Mu'tazilah (Abu al-Hudhayl al-Allaaf, d. 235H) were the pioneers of thisproof, and the Ash'aris were just the blind-followers, they did not originate it, they "borrowed" it. It was the Mu'tazilah who incorporated "Atomism" into thecrude version of "hudooth ul-ajsaam" of the Jahmiyyah to allow them to better argue for the whole universe being created, and the Ash'aris acquired all of thisand simply made refinements to this intellectual proof, differing with the Mu'tazilah in subsidiary details - al-Baqillani (d. 403H) being the first to codify it and formalize it in his book "at-Tamheed".

See this article for more details on this subject:

The Usool of the Ash'ariyyah Are the Usool of the Mu'tazilah: Part 1 - The Intellectual Proof of hudooth ul-ajsaam (Createdness of the Universe) - Read articlehere.So all deluded As'hari burnout victims suffer from an underlying condition whichis compound ignorance. Whenever they speak on a matter, this compound ignoranceis always the background fabric to their delusion and psychological illness.

Analysis of the Victim's "Burnout"

This burnout took place in response to an article of ours in which we quoted ash-Shahrastani (an Ash'ari of the 6th century hijrah) corroborating that Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari took the bulk of the creed of the speculative theologian, Ibn Kullaab (d. 240H) who preceded al-Ash'ari in refuting the Mu'tazilah. We have alsocovered elsewhere that the creed of Ibn Kullaab was to affirm the Names and attributes (inclusive of the sifaat dhaatiyyah, such as Face, Hands, Eyes etc.) butto reject those attributes tied to Allaah's will and power, the Sifaat Fi'liyyah- since in the view of the Kullaabites, these attributes invalidated the intellectual proof of "hudooth ul-ajsaam" and would have signified change (taghayyur)in Allaah - and that this creed was basically that of the Early Ash'aris.

The Later Ash'aris, from al-Juwaynee (d. 478H) onwards reverted back to many ofthe views of the Mu'tazilah and Jahmiyyah, they rejected the sifaat dhaatiyyah that the Early Ash'aris affirmed and utilized the very ta'weels of the Jahmiyyahand Mu'tazilah that the Early Ash'aris refuted! Go and take a look at this article for an illustration.

In light of the quote from ash-Shahrastani, the victim attempted to portray IbnKullaab (and his followers) to be within the ranks of Ahl us-Sunnah, seeing thatthe real and true origin of Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'aris creed was bought to light.As part of this attempt the victim brought the above statement of Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani. So what the the victim is attempting by his outburst above can be summarized as follows:

Al-Ash'ari took his creed from Ibn Kullaab. Imaam al-Bukhaaree took from Ibn Kullaab according to Ibn Hajr. Therefore, the Ash'ari creed must be the absolute truth.This is clearly an attempt to defend al-Ash'aris adoption of the bulk of the creed of Ibn Kullaab through this statement of Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani, and through this, to argue for the creed of the later (Jahmite) Ash'aris which constitute allof todays Ash'aris.

Ibn Kullaab and The Kullaabiyyah on the Qur'an


3/6

Ibn Kullaab and his followers were from the Ahl ul-Kalam that were condemned bythe leading Imaams of the Salaf, such as Imaam Ahmad (rahimahullaah). This is because these Imaams of the Salaf knew their speech was directed towards rejectingAllaah's actions that are tied to His will and power, amongst which was "Kalaam" (speech) since Ahl us-Sunnah held that Allaah speaks as He wills when he wills, however He wills. The Kullaabiyyah, denying that Allaah speaks according to His will and power, were saying that Allaah's speech is just the "Kalaam Nafsee" and that this Qur'aan we have with us is just a "quotation" (hikaayah) of that "Kalaam Nafsee" and is created. The Ash'aris came along after and said the "KalaamNafsee" is a singular, indivisible meaning (ma'naa waahid) with the Self of Allaah and it is uncreated, but that this Qur'an we have with us, recited, heard, memorized, in letter and word, is created. The ancestors of the Ash'aris in thissaying were none other than the Kullaabiyyah, the likes of Haarith al-Muhasibi and Hussain al-Karaabeesee, who were the "Lafdhiyyah".

It was these people (the Kullaabiyyah) who started saying "My recitation of theQur'an is created", and their intent was to arrive at the saying that the Qur'anis created - following on from their rejection of Allaah's actions tied to Hiswill and power, meaning that Allaah does not speak with His will and power - asthis would entail hawaadith (events, occurrences) with Allaah's Essence according to them, which are proof of something being a body (jism) according to the TenCategories of Aristotle (al-Maqoolaat al-Ashar).

As a [Jahmite] Ash'ari, you should always be grateful for being guided to your f

orm of Tawheed: Thanks Aristotle for laying down the foundations for the true Tawhid - how else would we have understood this Tawheed and proved the existence of a creator without your Metaphysics as a foundation? Thanks once more.Between Imaam Ahmad and Imaam al-Bukhaaree

Both Imaam Ahmad and Imaam al-Bukharee were upon the same creed and they both refuted two different types of factions.

Imaam Ahmad refuted those Ahl ul-Kalaam who held the Qu'ran to be created - because Allaah speaking according to His will and power would mean Allaah is a jism(body) according to them - since instances of speech that are other than each other are hawaadith (events, occurrences) and this is proof of something being a body (jism), according to Aristotle's Ten Categories, thus this has to be rejecte

d. These innovators then moved to the statement, "My recitation of the Qur'an iscreated" and they intended by this to reach their saying that the Qur'an itselfis created. So Imaam Ahmad declared the Lafdhiyyah (those saying this statement) to be Jahmites, and likewise he declared anyone who said, "My recitation of the Qur'an is not created" to be Innovators - since neither of these statements are from the Salaf and each of these two statements lead to what is falsehood.

However, some people wrongly thought that when the likes of Imaam Ahmad said, "Whoever says 'My recitation of the Qur'an is created' is a Jahmee" that the actual voices of the servants, when reciting the Qur'an are not created and are eternal and others exaggerated and extended this to even the ink and the paper upon which the Qur'an was written. This opened up the door to the saying that the actions of the servants are uncreated (i.e. their reciting of the Qur'an)

So Imaam al-Bukhaaree stood to refute this faction and this is why he authored the book "Khalq Af'aal il-Ibaad" (the Creation of the Servants' Actions). Thus heestablished that the Qur'an is the uncreated Speech of Allaah, and that when the servants recite the Qur'an, then their voices and actions are created and arenot eternal, whilst that which is recited (Allaah's words) is uncreated, and indoing so he refuted those who claimed that their voices (and the ink and paper)are eternal and uncreated.

So Imaam Ahmad was refuting one particular faction and Imaam al-Bukharee was ref


4/6

uting another faction - and both of their views concerning the Qur'an were in agreement with each other.

Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani explains in Fath ul-Bari in "Kitaab ut-Tawheed", the chapter on "Do Not Set Up Rivals for Allaah":

Which translates as:

And [one] other than him (meaning other than al-Bayhaqi) said [that] some of them thought al-Bukhaaree opposed Ahmad, and [the affair] is not like that. Rather,whoever reflects upon his speech will not find any difference in meaning. But the affair of the scholar is such that when he is put to trial in refuting an innovation, most of his speech is [focused] on refuting it [specifically] as opposed to its opposing [counterpart].So when Ahmad was put to trial with those who said "The Qur'an is created", mostof his speech was in refutation of them, until he exaggerated in that regard and showed rejection against anyone who withheld, neither saying "[The Qur'an is]created", and nor saying, "[The Qur'an is] not created", and likewise, [Ahmad showed rejection] against the one who said, "My pronunciation of the Qur'an is created", so that the one who said, "The Qur'an, with my pronunciation, is created"could not use it as armour [protection, for the saying that the Qur'an is created] - whilst the difference between these two sayings was not hidden from him [Ahmad]. However, [the difference] may be hidden from some [other people].

As for al-Bukhaaree, then he was put to trial with those who said that the voices of the servants [in reciting the Qur'an] are not created, until some of them exaggerated and said that the ink and paper, after the writing [is uncreated too]. So most of his speech was in refutation of them and he exaggerated (i.e. wentto great lengths) in providing evidence that the actions of the servants are created from verses and ahaadeeth, and he was excessive in doing so until it was ascribed to him that he was from the "Lafdhiyyah" (those who said that their recitation of the Qur'an was created).

Alongside [the fact] that the saying of whoever said, "That which is heard fromthe reciter is the eternal voice" is not known from the Salaf and Ahmad and noranyone from the leading Imaams from his companions said it. The reason for that

being attributed to Ahmad was his saying, "Whoever said my pronunciation of theQur'an is created is a Jahmee". So they thought that he equated between the lafdh (wording, pronunciation) and the sawt (Voice).

And what has been quoted from Ahmad regarding the lafdh (pronunciation of the wording) has not been quoted regarding the Sawt (Voice). Rather, he has stated explicitly in places that the Voice heard from the recitor is the Voice of the recitor, and it is supported by the hadeeth, "Beautify the Qur'an with your voices",and it will come shortly [in this chapter]. And the difference between them isthat the wording (al-lafdh) is ascribed to the one speaking with it initially. So it is said regarding the one who reported a hadeeth with its wording, "This isits wording (lafdhahu)", and [it is said] regarding the one who reported the hadeeth with other than its wording, "This is its meaning (ma'naa) and its wording

(lafdh) is such and such". And in all of that, it is not said about anything that "This is its Voice (Sawt)". So the Qur'an, is the speech of Allaah, its wording (lafdh) and its meaning (ma'naa), it is not the speech of other than Him.

Ibn Hajr also said, just after the above:

:()

Which translates as:


5/6

And the result of what has been quoted from the people of Kalaam on this matteris five sayings:The first: The saying of the Mu'tazilah, that it is created.

The second: The saying of the Kullaabiyyah that it is eternal with the essence of the Lord, it is not letters and voices, and that which is present amongst thepeople [the Qur'an] is an expression (ibaarah) of it, and not the actual thing itself.

This is correct except that the Kullaabiyyah said it is a quotation (hikaayah) and not an expression (ibaarah). The latter is the view of Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari who did not like the use of the word quotation (hikaayah) because it implied that what we have with us (in letter and word), if it is quoted, is exactly the same as what is with Allaah, and this would imply letter and word and would implydivisibility with Allah and other meanings that would not conform to the requirements of the intellectual proof of hudooth ul-ajsaam. So he changed it to expression (ibaarah) because this allows for it to be understood that it is differentto what is with Allaah, whereas "quotation" (hikaayah) implies it is the same.This second saying that Ibn Hajr has mentioned here is the very saying of the Ash'aris.

Ibn Hajr continues:

The third: The saying of the Saalimiyyah that it is letters and voices, and [that these very letters and voices] are eternal, and that it [the Qur'an] is thesevery written letters and heard voices.The fourth: The saying of the Karraamiyyah that it is Muhdath (occurred after not occurring) but not created, and more detailed speech regarding it will come regarding this in the chapter that is after this.

The fifth: That it is the speech of Allaah, uncreated, that He has not ceased tobe one who speaks when He wills. Ahmad textually stated this in the book "ar-Radd alal-Jahmiyyah", and his associates split into two factions: Amongst them arethose who said that it (the Qur'an) is inherent, imperative to His essence, andthat the letters and voices are simultaneous and not successive, and that He causes whomever He wills to hear His speech. But the majority of them (associates

of Ahmad) said that He is one who speaks (mutakallim) with whatever He wills, whenever He wills and that He called out to Moses (alayhis salaam) when He spoke to him, and had not called out to him previously.

Immediately after this, Ibn Hajr says something surprising:

And that which the saying of the Ash'ariyyah became established upon is that theQur'an is the speech of Allaah, uncreated, written in the masaahif (copies of the Qur'an), memorized in the hearts, recited with the tongues.This is clearly incorrect and a mistake from Ibn Hajr, the Ash'ariyyah do not hold that, unless Ibn Hajr is speaking of a small, isolated, rare faction amongstthe Ash'aris. The saying of the Ash'ariyyah is the saying of Ibn Kullaab that Ibn Hajr has already pointed out above.

Ibn Hajr continues:

Allaah, the Most High, said: "...then grant him protection, so that he may hearthe Word of Allah (the Qur'an)..." (At-Tawbah 9:6)And the Most High said: "Nay, but they, the clear signs (verses) are preserved in the breasts of those who have been given knowledge" (Al-Ankabut 29:49)

And in the agreed upon hadeeth from Ibn Umar, as has preceded in the [chapter on] jihaad, "Do not travel with the Qur'an to the land of the enemy", disliking th


6/6

at the enemy obtain it. And the intent (behind this prohibition in this hadeeth)is not what is [memorized] in the breasts, but rather what is in the mushaf (incase the enemy takes it). And the Salaf are unanimously agreed that that whichis in between the two covers is the speech of Allaah.

Here Ibn Hajr is establishing that no matter how the Qur'an is present and foundwith us, written, memorized, heard (i.e. the words - not the Voice, paper and ink) - then it is all the uncreated speech of Allaah - and this is the position of the Salaf, it is not the position of the Mutakallimoon.

To the Kullaabiyyah and Ash'ariyyah, what we have with us, written, memorized and heard is but the quotation (hikaayah) or created expression (ibaarah) of the Qur'an and not the uncreated Qur'an which they believe is the "Kalaam Nafsee" that is eternally present with Allaah's Self.

Summarizing the Above

The intent behind all the above was to point out the major difference in creed between Ahl us-Sunnah and the Kullaabiyyah. Ahl us-Sunnah affirm Allaah has actions tied to His will and power (Sifaat Fi'liyyah) amongst which is speech (Kalaam), and that with respect to this particular attribute, in addition to Allaah being one who speaks (mutakallim) and who has always been as such, then Allaah speaks with His will and power as, when and however He wills - this is denied by theKullaabiyyah due to their rejection of Allaah having actions tied to His will a

nd power (being followed in that by the Ash'ariyyah)....

3- Pronunciation of Quran 1

Documents

Transcript of 3- Pronunciation of Quran 1