Al-Tisʿīniyya - Ibn Taimiya - (3/952)

Al-TisʿīniyyaIbn Taimiya

and a prohibition (1), a declarative statement, and an interrogative?’ Abū Muḥammad replied, ‘This is not the first objection that has been levelled against al-Ashʿarī’s doctrine.’

Moreover, in the matter of qadar—predestination (2)—they make no distinction between will, love, pleasure, and the like. They interpret His saying, “And He is not pleased with disbelief for His servants” (3) to mean (4) “He does not will it for them,” while maintaining that He is nonetheless pleased with it and loves it for the one in whom it occurs. Thus every instance of disbelief, immorality, and disobedience that actually takes place is, according to them, something Allah both loves and is pleased with, whereas every act of obedience, righteousness, and faith that does not take place is something He neither loves nor approves. Yet when they discuss the principles of jurisprudence with the rest of the scholars, they affirm that the recommended act (mustaḥabb) is whatever Allah and His Messenger love—that is, whatever He has commanded by way of recommendation, whether He has decreed its occurrence or not. A full treatment of this inconsistency would take us too far afield.

Fifteenth Demonstration (5): It may therefore be said (6) that these very maxims which you have elevated to the rank of foundational doctrines—imagining that through them you have truly believed in Allah, His Messenger, and the Last Day, and boasting that by means of them you have outstripped the early generations of this community and its leading imams, and that by them

(1) In the original text the word “ayn” appears, but it is meaningless. The reading confirmed by manuscripts S and T is preferred. (2) The Ashʿaris maintain that God wills obedience, disobedience, and all events; thus, in their view, He wills everything His servants do, implying that He must love and be pleased with all their actions, even disbelief and sin. Their proofs are weak and collapse under scrutiny. The Shaykh (may God have mercy on him) will expose the falsity of this position on pp. 975–976. For a study of this erroneous opinion, see: Al-Lumaʿ by Abu al-Hasan al-Ashʿari, pp. 47–59; Al-Tamhid by Abu Bakr al-Baqillani, pp. 280–285; Al-Irshad by Abu al-Maʿali al-Juwayni, pp. 237–239. (3) Qur’an 39 (Az-Zumar):7. (4) In manuscript S the phrase “liʿibadihi” (for His servants) is added after the verse, while manuscript T inserts “ay” (namely). The passage is coherent without these additions. (5) The word “ashr” (ten) is omitted in manuscript S. (6) The particle “in” is omitted in both manuscripts S and T.

ونهي (١) وخبر واستخبار؟ فقال له أبو محمد: ما هذا بأول إشكال ورد على مذهب الأشعري. و-أيضًا- فهم في مسألة القدر (٢) يسوون بين الإرادة والمحبة والرضا ونحو ذلك ويتأولون قوله: {وَلَا يَرْضَى لِعِبَادِهِ الْكُفْرَ} (٣) بمعنى (٤) لا يريده لهم، وعندهم أنه رضيه وأحبه لمن وقع منه، وكل ما وقع في الوجود من كفر وفسوق وعصيان فالله يرضاه ويحبه، وكل ما لم يقع من طاعة وبر وإيمان فإن الله لا يحبه ويرضاه، ثم إنهم إذا تكلموا مع سائر العلماء في أصول الفقه، بينوا أن المستحب هو ما يحبه الله ورسوله، وهو ما أمر به أمر استحباب سواء قدره أو لم يقدره، وهذا باب يطول وصفه. الوجه الخامس عشر (٥) : أن يقال: إن (٦) هذه القواعد التي جعلتموها أصول دينكم، وظننتم أنكم بها صرتم مؤمنين بالله وبرسوله وباليوم الآخر، وزعمتم أنكم تقدمتم بها على سلف الأمة وأئمتها، وبها

(١) في الأصل: عين. ولا معنى لها. والمثبت من: س، ط. (٢) الأشاعرة يقولون: إن الله مريد للطاعة والمعصية وسائر الحوادث، فعندهم هو مريد لكل ما يفعله العباد، فيجب أن يكون محبًا راضيًا لكل ما يفعلونه حتى الكفر والفسوق، ويستدلون لذلك بأدلة واهية لا تثبت أمام التمحيص. وسوف يبين الشيخ -رحمه الله- فساد هذا القول في ص: ٩٧٥، ٩٧٦. وللاطلاع على هذا الرأي الباطل، يراجع: اللمع -لأبي الحسن الأشعري- ص: ٤٧ - ٥٩. والتمهيد -لأبي بكر الباقلاني- ص: ٢٨٠ - ٢٨٥. والإرشاد -لأبي المعالي الجويني- ص: ٢٣٧ - ٢٣٩. (٣) سورة الزمر، الآية: ٧. (٤) في الأصل، س: بعد الآية الكريمة: أي: لعباده بمعنى. . وفي ط: أي: بمعنى. والكلام يستقيم بدون الزيادة. (٥) عشر: ساقطة من: س. (٦) إن: ساقطة من: س، ط.