Al-Radd ʿalā man qāla bi-fanāʾ al-Janna wa-al-Nār - Ibn Taimiya - (50)

Al-Radd ʿalā man qāla bi-fanāʾ al-Janna wa-al-NārIbn Taimiya

because, they insist, such accidents can subsist only in a body. (1)

Next, some of them declared that He began to speak by His will after previously not speaking by His will. Among these, a group held that speech does not inhere in Him; it is therefore a created entity existing apart from Him. Others maintained that speech does inhere in His essence, which would make the very genus of His speech originated.

Those who sided with the early generations in affirming that He has always been speaking nevertheless accepted Jahm’s basic premise. They said: His speech is eternal in itself, and He does not speak by His will and power; rather, it is inseparable from His essence, like life itself. Some of them added that this speech is a single, indivisible meaning that comprises every command and every prohibition—that it is, in essence, the Torah, the Gospel, the Psalms, and every discourse by which He addresses His believing servants, His angels, and others. Others countered that it consists of letters, or of letters and sounds, that are eternal, never beginning and never ceasing, forever inherent in His essence and unrelated to His will and power.

Each of these four factions includes many speculative theologians counted among the foremost dialecticians and scholars, people who see themselves as defenders of Islam and the Sunnah. Yet the root of their view is their agreement with Jahm’s assertion that an endless succession of events is impossible, and that it is inconceivable for Allah to have been eternally speaking whenever He willed and doing whatever He willed. Accordingly, they concurred with him that the Lord’s speech (2) and action cannot be perpetual by His power and will, and that Allah’s words cannot be without end.

But Allah, exalted is He, has said:

Say, “If the sea were ink for [writing] the words of my Lord, the sea would surely be exhausted before the words of my Lord were exhausted,”
up to His words,
“even if We were to bring the like of it as a supplement.” (3)

(1) This is the method adopted by the innovators in affirming the Lord’s transcendence (tanzih al-rabb), which is unsound both legally and rationally. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya discussed this approach and demonstrated its invalidity—see his al-Safadiyya, vol. 2, pp. 33–53. His remarks here clearly judge it erroneous and refute it. (2) In the original text, “Allah” is written above it, indicating that it appears thus in another manuscript. (3) Qur’an, surah al-Kahf (18:109).

لا تقوم بإلا بجسم (١) ، ثم منهم من قال: إنه صار يتكلم بمشيئته، بعد أن لم يكن يتكلم بمشيئته، وهؤلاء منهم من قال: الكلام لا يقوم به، فيكون مخلوقا بائنا عنه، ومنهم من قال: بل يقوم بذاته، فيكون جنس كلامه حادثا، والذين وافقوا السلف على أنه لم يزل متكلما وافقوا الجهم على أصله، قالوا: إن كلامه قديم العين، وهو لا يتكلم بمشيئته وقدرته، بل هو لازم لذاته كالحياة، ثم من هؤلاء من قال: إنه معنى واحد، هو الأمر بكل مأمور، والنهي عن كل منهي، وهو معنى التوراة. والإنجيل، والزبور وكل كلام يكلم به عبادة المؤمنين، ملائكته وغيرهم. ومنهم من قال: بل هو حروف، أو حروف وأصوات أزلية، لم تزل ولا تزال لازمة لذاته، لا تتعلق بمشيئته وقدرته فهذه الطوائف الأربعة قد دخل في كل طائفة كثير من أهل النظر المعدودين من أكابر النظار، وأهل العلم، الناصرين للإسلام، أو للإسلام، والسنة وأصل أمرهم موافقتهم لجهم على قوله بامتناع دوام الحوادث، وأن الله يمتنع أن يكون لم يزل متكلما إذا شاء، فعالا لما يشاء، فوافقوه على أن كلام الرب (٢) وفعله يمتنع أن يكون دائما بقدرته، ومشيئته، وعلى أن يمتنع أن يكون كلمات الله لا نهاية لها، وقد قال تعالى: {قُلْ لَوْ كَانَ الْبَحْرُ مِدَاداً لِكَلِمَاتِ رَبِّي لَنَفِدَ الْبَحْرُ قَبْلَ أَنْ تَنْفَدَ كَلِمَاتُ رَبِّي} إلى قوله: {وَلَوْ جِئْنَا بِمِثْلِهِ مَدَداً} (٣) .

(١) هذه هي الطريقة التي سلكها المبتدعة في تنزيه الرب، وهي لا تصح شرعا ولا عقلا، وقد ناقش شيخ الإسلام هذا المسلك، وبين بطلانه - انظر: كتاب "الصفدية" ٢/٣٣-٥٣، وكلامه هنا واضح في الحكم بتخطيئته ورده. (٢) فوقه بالأصل "الله" مشارا إلى كونه هكذا في نسخة أخرى. (٣) سورة الكهف، الآية: ١٠٩.