to Abū ‘Abd Allāh: ‘We were with Sufyān ibn ‘Uyaynah in Mecca, and he related to us that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “Do not revile Time.” Fath ibn Sahl stood up and said: “Abū Muhammad, should we say, ‘O Time, provide for us’?” I heard Sufyān say: “Seize him, for he is a Jahmite.” And he fled.’ Abū ‘Abd Allāh then said: ‘These people reject the reports from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, but we believe in them and do not reject what the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, has said.’”

Al-Qādī said: “This apparently indicates that he accepted the hadith’s apparent meaning. It is possible, however, that his statement, ‘We believe in them,’ referred to reports concerning the divine attributes in general, rather than to this particular hadith.”

He said: “Our shaykh Abū ‘Abd Allāh, may Allah have mercy on him—meaning Ibn Hāmid—mentioned this hadith in his book and said: ‘It is not permissible to call Allah “Time.”’ The matter is as he stated, for some transmitted versions of the hadith contain wording that precludes taking it in this apparent sense. By contrast, nothing has been transmitted in the other reports concerning the divine attributes that indicates they should be understood otherwise than in their apparent sense. Hence the requirement to understand them according to their apparent meaning. For one version of this hadith reads: ‘The son of Adam offends Me: he reviles Time, yet I am Time. All affairs are in My hand; I alternate the night and the day.’