like created phenomena. Beyond that, he consigns the matter and refuses to explain it, declaring that any attempt at explanation is aberration. According to Abū Zahrah, Ibn Taymiyyah thinks that by doing so he combines interpretation with tafwīd: he explains the text according to its apparent sense, declares Allah free of resemblance to contingent beings, and then consigns the ‘how’ and the detailed description to Allah.

That is the gist of his statement, and—as you can see—it is rife with confusion, clumsiness, and blatant falsehood about the Shaykh. One of two things must therefore be true: either he did not understand the Shaykh’s words, or he did understand them but chose to twist and obscure them.

For the Shaykh—may Allah have mercy on him—states throughout his works that the creed of the salaf, which he himself believes in and worships Allah upon (and which every seeker of truth likewise believes in and worships upon), is that the scriptural passages on the divine attributes are to be taken according to their outward wording and explained by the meanings their expressions indicate, without allegorical reinterpretation or distortion. As for their modality (kayfiyya), it must be consigned to Allah alone, for none knows it but Him. This is exactly what the scholars of the early generations affirm in their books and transmit with sound chains: “The meaning is known, the how is unknown” with regard to every attribute.

Consequently, tafwīd applies only to the modality; the meanings are known and explained—there is no consigning, no obscurity. Affirming Allah’s attributes with the meanings indicated by revelation does not entail likening Him to His creation, for Allah has attributes unique to Him and befitting Him, while created beings have attributes unique to them and befitting them. The shared generic concept that exists in the mind between the Creator’s attributes and the creature’s attributes does not require sharing the actual reality or external modality. Allah Himself affirmed these attributes for Himself and, at the same time, denied any likeness to created things, saying, “There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing” (42:11). He thus affirmed for Himself hearing and sight while denying that anything resembles Him—and the same holds true for all the other attributes. Hence, affirming