Al-Tafsīr al-Qayyim - Ibn al-Qayyim - (524)

Al-Tafsīr al-QayyimIbn al-Qayyim

Now that the distinction between the name and the named entity is clear, naming remains to be considered. This is what those who hold that the name and the named entity are identical took into account. Naming is the act of the one who names and his assigning a name to the named entity, just as adornment is the act of the one who adorns and his placing an ornament upon the one adorned.

There are thus three distinct realities: a name, a named entity, and naming—just as there are an ornament, one adorned, and adornment; or a mark, something marked, and marking. No two of these expressions can be made synonymous, denoting a single meaning, because the realities they signify are distinct. If you make the name identical with the named entity, one of these three realities must necessarily be eliminated.

If it is said: “Then resolve for us the objection raised by those who hold that the two are identical, so that the proof may be complete. Having established your proof, you must answer the opposing argument.

“One such objection is that Allah alone is the Creator, and everything other than Him is created. If His names were other than Him, they would be created. It would also follow that He had neither name nor attribute in eternity past, since His names are attributes. This is the greatest objection, which led the theologians who affirm the divine attributes to say that the name is the named entity. How, then, do you refute it?”

The answer is that the error in this matter arises from using an ambiguous expression that admits two meanings: one sound and the other false. The dispute can therefore be resolved only by distinguishing these meanings and applying the expressions accordingly. There is no doubt that Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He, has always been and will always be characterized by the attributes of perfection from which His names are derived. With His names and attributes, He has always been one Lord and one God, possessing the most beautiful names and the loftiest attributes. His names and attributes are included in what His name denotes, although an attribute is not called a god that creates and provides. Thus, His attributes and names are not other than Him, nor are they God Himself. These people’s difficulty arises from the word “other,” which is used in two senses.

The first is that which is distinct from the Essence named Allah. Whatever is wholly distinct from Allah in this sense can only be created.

وإذا ظهر الفرق بين الاسم والمسمى. فبقي هاهنا التسمية. وهي التي اعتبرها من قال: باتحاد الاسم والمسمى. والتسمية: عبارة عن فعل المسمّي ووضعه الاسم للمسمّي، كما أن التحلية: عبارة عن فعل المحلّى، ووضعه الحلية على المحلّى. فهنا ثلاث، حقائق: اسم ومسمى، وتسمية، كحلية، ومحلّى، وتحلية. وعلامة ومعلم، وتعليم. ولا سبيل إلى جعل لفظين منها مترادفين على معنى واحد، لتباين حقائقها. وإذا جعلت الاسم هو المسمى: بطل واحد من هذه الحقائق الثلاث ولا بد. فإن قيل: فحلوا لنا شبهة من قال: باتحادهما ليتم الدليل. فإنكم أقمتم الدليل فعليكم الجواب عن المعارض. فمنها: أن الله وحده هو الخالق، وما سواه مخلوق. فلو كانت أسماؤه غيره لكانت مخلوقة. وللزم أن لا يكون له اسم في الأزل، ولا صفة. لأن أسماءه صفات. وهذا هو السؤال الأعظم، الذي قاد متكلمي الإثبات الى أن يقولوا: الإسم هو المسمى. فما عندكم في دفعه؟ والجواب: أن منشأ الغلط في هذا الباب من إطلاق اللفظة مجملة لمعنيين. صحيح وباطل. فلا ينفصل النزاع إلا بتفصيل تلك المعاني، وتنزيل ألفاظها عليها. ولا ريب أن الله ﵎ لم يزل ولا يزال موصوفا بصفات الكمال المشتقة أسماؤه منها. فلم يزل بأسمائه وصفاته: رب واحد، وإله واحد، له الأسماء الحسنى والصفات العلا. وأسماؤه وصفاته داخلة في مسمى اسمه، وإن كان لا يطلق على الصفة أنها إله يخلق ويرزق. فليست صفاته وأسماؤه غيره. وليست هي نفس الإله، وبلاء القوم من لفظة «الغير» فإنها يراد بها معنيين. أحدهما: المغاير لتلك الذات المسماة بالله. وكل ما غاير الله مغايرة محضة بهذا الاعتبار. فلا يكون إلا مخلوقا.