Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ - Shams al‑Din al‑Dhahabi - (10/202)

Siyar Aʿlām al-NubalāʾShams al‑Din al‑Dhahabi

—ʿAbd Allah said, “He was no man of proof; he was only a man of grand speeches.”

Abu Bakr al-Athram related: Aḥmad was asked about performing prayer behind Bishr al-Marīsī, and he answered, “Do not pray behind him.”

Qutaybah said, “Bishr al-Marīsī is an unbeliever.”

I say: News of his statements reached the ḥadith master ʿUthmān ibn Saʿīd al-Dārimī, who then composed a full volume refuting him. (1)

He died at the end of the year 218 AH, having nearly reached eighty years of age. Thus, Bishr is the “Bishr of evil,” whereas Bishr al-Ḥāfī (2) is the “Bishr of good,” just as Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal is the “Aḥmad of the Sunnah,” and Aḥmad ibn Abī Dāwūd is the “Aḥmad of innovation.”

Whoever is branded an unbeliever because of an innovation—even a serious one—is not like an original unbeliever, nor like a Jew or a Magian. God has refused to equate a person who believes in God, His Messenger, and the Last Day, who fasts, prays, performs the pilgrimage, and pays the alms—even though he may commit major sins, go astray, and innovate—with someone who defies the Messenger, worships an idol, discards the revealed laws, and disbelieves outright. Nevertheless, we declare our disavowal before God of every innovation and its people. (3)

(1) The book also circulates under the title “Refutation of Bishr al-Marisi for the novel interpretation he devised on behalf of the Jahmiyya,” and it has been printed. Al-Dhahabi comments: “It contains remarkable debates with al-Marisi in which the author is exceedingly forceful in affirming the divine attributes; yet keeping silent about such matters would be closer to the way of the early generations, past and present.” Shaykh Muhammad Hamid al-Fiqi adds: “Driven by the vehemence of rebuttal and his zeal to affirm God’s names and attributes—attributes that Bishr al-Marisi and his followers were eager to deny—the author used certain expressions, such as ‘body,’ ‘place,’ and ‘space.’ It would have been better to avoid these terms and confine oneself to what is established by the Quran and sound Sunnah. I do not agree with their use, nor do I deem it permissible, for they are found in neither the Book of God nor any authentic hadith.” (2) His biography will appear on page 467 of this volume. (3) This statement springs from fairness, sound judgment, and knowledge. May Allah have abundant mercy on the author, for he constantly strives for impartiality in his biographical notices—something seldom equaled by others.

عَبْدِ اللهِ: مَا كَانَ صَاحِبَ حُجَجٍ، بَلْ صَاحِبَ خُطَبٍ. وَقَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ الأَثْرَمُ: سُئِلَ أَحْمَدُ عَنِ الصَّلاَةِ خَلْفَ بِشْرٍ المَرِيْسِيِّ، فَقَالَ: لاَ تُصَلِّ خَلْفَهُ. وَقَالَ قُتَيْبَةُ: بِشْرٌ المَرِيْسِيُّ كَافِرٌ. وَقُلْتُ: وَقَعَ كَلاَمُهُ إِلَى عُثْمَانَ بنِ سَعِيْدٍ الدَّارِمِيِّ الحَافِظِ، فَصَنَّفَ مُجَلَّداً فِي الرَّدِّ عَلَيْهِ (١) . وَمَاتَ: فِي آخِرِ سَنَةِ ثَمَانِي عَشْرَةَ وَمائَتَيْنِ، وَقَدْ قَارَبَ الثَّمَانِيْنَ، فَهُوَ بِشْرُ الشَّرِّ، وَبِشْرٌ الحَافِي (٢) بِشْرُ الخَيْرِ، كَمَا أَنَّ أَحْمَدَ بنَ حَنْبَلٍ هُوَ أَحْمَدُ السُّنَّةِ، وَأَحْمَدَ بنَ أَبِي دُوَادَ أَحْمَدُ البِدْعَةِ. وَمَنْ كُفِّرَ بِبِدْعَةٍ - وَإِنْ جَلَّتْ - لَيْسَ هُوَ مِثْلَ الكَافِرِ الأَصْلِيِّ، وَلاَ اليَهُوْدِيِّ، وَالمَجُوْسِيِّ، أَبَى اللهُ أَنْ يَجْعَلَ مَنْ آمَنَ بِاللهِ وَرَسُوْلِهِ، وَاليَوْمِ الآخِرِ، وَصَامَ، وَصَلَّى، وَحَجَّ، وَزَكَّى - وَإِنِ ارْتَكَبَ العَظَائِمَ، وضَلَّ، وَابِتَدَعَ - كَمَنْ عَانَدَ الرَّسُوْلَ، وَعَبَدَ الوَثَنَ، وَنَبَذَ الشَّرَائِعَ، وَكَفَرَ، وَلَكِنْ نَبْرَأُ إِلَى اللهِ مِنَ البِدَعِ وَأَهْلِهَا (٣) .

(١) وسماه كتاب " الرد على بشر المريسي فيما ابتدعه من التأويل لمذهب الجهمية " وهو مطبوع. وقد قال فيه الامام الذهبي: فيه بحوث عجيبة مع المريسي، يبالغ فيها في الاثبات، والسكوت عنها أشبه بمنهج السلف في القديم والحديث. وقال الشيخ محمد حامد الفقي: إنه أتى فيه ببعض ألفاظ دعاه إليها عنف الرد، وشدة الحرص على إثبات صفات الله وأسمائه التي كان يبالغ بشر المريسي وشيعته في نفيها، وكان الأولى والاحسن أن لا يأتي بها، وأن يقتصر على الثابت من الكتاب والسنة الصحيحة كمثل الجسم والمكان والحيز، فإنني لا أوافقه عليها، ولا أستجيز إطلاقها، لأنها لم تأت في كتاب الله ولا في سنة صحيحة. (٢) سترد ترجمته في الصفحة ٤٦٧ من هذا الجزء. (٣) هذا كلام صادر عن إنصاف وتعقل وعلم، فرحم الله المؤلف رحمة واسعة، فانه يتوخى دائما جانب الإنصاف في التراجم، وقلما تجد من يقاربه في ذلك.