Darʾ Taʿâroud al-ʿAql wa-n-Naql - Ibn Taimiya - (10/313)

Darʾ Taʿâroud al-ʿAql wa-n-NaqlIbn Taimiya

meaning is a religious obligation only when the term occurs in the Quran, the Sunnah, or the statements of the scholars whose consensus is binding.

For knowing what Allah intends, what His Messenger intends, and what the scholars intend by their consensus is obligatory, because the statements of Allah and His Messenger, and the consensus of the scholars, are protected from error and must be followed. Unless the meaning of an expression used therein is known, what they intended cannot be known. Hence, we must accept as true every expression found in the speech of an infallible authority, even if its meaning is not known.

As for expressions found in the speech of someone who is not infallible, we are not obliged to affirm or deny them until their meaning is known. If their meaning is something affirmed by an infallible authority, we affirm it; if it is something denied by such an authority, we deny it.

The term “body,” whether in reference to Allah or in the proofs pointing to Him, occurs neither in Allah’s Book, nor in His Messenger’s Sunnah, nor in the statements of any of the early generations or the leading scholars. None of them said, “Allah is a body or a substance,” or, “He is neither a body nor a substance.” Nor did any of them say, “He can be known only through the method based on bodies and accidents.” Indeed, none of them argued for knowledge of Allah through any of these methods: neither the method based on composition, nor that based on accidents and temporal occurrences, nor that based on particularization.

Since this is so, those who dispute over the referent of the term “body” are disputing over something that is not part of religion—neither its rulings nor its proofs. The same applies to their dispute over the referent of the term “accident” and similar expressions.

This differs from their dispute over affirming or denying the meaning intended by the term “body,” for that does concern religion. Whatever belongs to religion has been explained by Allah in His Book and the Sunnah of His Messenger, unlike what does not belong to it.

If it is said: “But every dispute between two people concerning religion must be settled.”

معناه من الدين الواجب إذا جاء في الكتاب والسنة وكلام أهل الإجماع. فإن معرفة مراد الله ومراد رسوله ومراد أهل الإجماع واجب، لأن قول الله ورسوله وقول أهل الإجماع قول معصوم عن الخطأ يجب اتباعه. فاللفظ الوارد في ذلك إن لم يعرف معناه لم يعرف ما أرادوا، ولهذا كان الواجب أن كل لفظ جاء في كلام المعصوم وجب علينا التصديق به، وإن لم يعرف معناه. وما جاء في كلام غير المعصوم لم يجب علينا إثباته ولا نفيه حتى يعرف معناه. فإن كان مما أثبته المعصوم أثبتناه، وإن كان مما نفاه نفيناه. ولفظ الجسم في حق الله، وفي الأدلة الدالة عليه، لم يرد في كتاب الله، ولا سنة رسوله، ولا كلام أحد من السلف والأئمة. فما منهم أحد قال: إن الله جسم، أو جوهر، أو ليس بجسم ولا جوهر. ولا قال: إنه لا يعرف إلا بطريقة الأجسام والأعراض، بل ولا استدل أحد منهم على معرفة الله بشيء من هذه الطرق: لا طريقة التركيب ولا طريقة الأعراض والحوادث، ولا طريقة الاختصاص. وإذا كان كذلك، فالمتنازعون في مسمى الجسم، متنازعون في أمر ليس من الدين: لا من أحكامه، ولا دلائله. وهكذا نزاعهم في مسمى العرض، وأمثال ذلك. بخلاف نزاعهم في إثبات المعنى المراد بلفظ الجسم ونفيه. فإن هذا يتعلق بالدين، فما كان من الدين فقد بينه الله في كتابه وسنة رسوله، بخلاف ما لم يكن كذلك. فإن قيل: فلا بد من فصل النزاع بين كل اثنين في الدين.