Darʾ Taʿâroud al-ʿAql wa-n-NaqlIbn Taimiya

contingency, coming into existence, afflictions, or imperfections. Contingency is a necessary attribute of whatever is not necessary in itself; coming into existence is a necessary attribute of what was nonexistent; and susceptibility to afflictions and imperfections is a necessary attribute of whatever can admit them.

These attributes are attributes of perfection that do not necessarily entail afflictions. Indeed, they may be incompatible with afflictions and imperfections. What is incompatible with something cannot be one of its necessary consequences; rather, it contradicts its necessary consequences. How, then, can what is incompatible with something be treated as inseparable from it?

The point is that the polytheists used to challenge the Messenger with what they imagined contradicted his words, even though nothing in their apparent meaning contradicted either reason or transmitted revelation. What, then, if the apparent meaning of his words were to contradict the clear dictates of reason affirmed by the foremost authorities on rational thought—especially if those rational principles were the very basis on which alone his truthfulness could be established? If he had openly stated something that undermined the proof and evidence of his truthfulness, then nothing would have been more appropriate than to challenge him on that basis.

Likewise, when he told them about the Night Journey and the tree of Zaqqūm, some of them denied this and claimed that reason ruled it out. Allah Most High revealed:

“We made the vision We showed you, and the accursed tree in the Quran, only a trial for people.”
[Al-Isrā’: 60]

It is reported in the Sahīh that Ibn ‘Abbās said:

“It was a vision seen with the eyes, shown to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, on the night he was taken on the Night Journey.”

الإمكان والحدوث والآفات والنقائص، فإن الإمكان من لوازم ما ليس واجباً بنفسه، والحدوث من لوازم المعدوم، وإمكان الآفات والنقائص من لوازم ما يقبل ذلك. وهذه الصفات صفات كمال لا تستلزم الآفات، بل قد تكون منافية للآفات والنقائص، والمنافي للشيء لا يكون من لوازمه، بل هو مناقض للوازمه، فكيف يجعل المنافي كالملازم؟ والمقصود أن المشركين كانوا يعارضون الرسول بما يتخيلونه مناقضاً لقوله، وإن لم يكن في ظاهر قوله ما يناقض: لا معقولاً ولا منقولاً، فكيف إذا كان ظاهر قوله يناقض صريح المعقول الذي عليه أئمة أرباب العقول، لا سيما إذا كان ذلك المعقول هو الذي لا يمكن تصديقه إلا به؟ فإذا كان قد أظهر ما يطعن في دليل صدقه وشاهده، كان معارضته بذلك أولى الأشياء. وكذلك أيضاً لما أخبرهم بالإسراء وشجرة الزقوم أنكر ذلك طائفة منهم، وزعموا أن العقل ينافي ذلك. وأنزل الله تعالى: {وما جعلنا الرؤيا التي أريناك إلا فتنة للناس والشجرة الملعونة في القرآن} [الإسراء: ٦٠] . وفي الصحيح عن ابن عباس أنه قال: «هي رؤيا عين أريها رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ليلة أسري به» .

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies