The Sheikh of Islam said - may Allah have mercy on him:
Section:
The objector said regarding "The Beautiful Names":
"The Light, The Guide must necessarily be interpreted; as light is a quality inherent in physicality and it is the opposite of darkness, and Allah, Glorified be He, is exalted above having an opposite;
and if He were light, it would not be permissible to attribute it to Himself in His saying:
{The example of His light}
for it would be like attributing something to itself, which is not permissible.
And His saying:
{Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth}
The interpreters said: it means the Guide of the inhabitants of the heavens and the earth, and this is weak because mentioning the Guide afterwards would be redundant. It was also said: He is the Illuminator of the heavens with the stars, and it was said: with the clear evidences and proofs. And light is a subtle, transparent body; thus it is not permissible to attribute it to Allah. The interpretation is narrated from Ibn Abbas, Anas, and Salim, and this invalidates his claim that interpretation nullifies the apparent meaning and was not transmitted from the predecessors. And if He were truly light - as the anthropomorphists say - it would also be necessary for there to be illumination day and night continuously.
قَالَ شَيْخُ الْإِسْلَامِ -
رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ:
فَصْلٌ:
قَالَ الْمُعْتَرِضُ فِي
" الْأَسْمَاءِ الْحُسْنَى "
النُّورُ الْهَادِي يَجِبُ تَأْوِيلُهُ قَطْعًا؛ إذْ النُّورُ كَيْفِيَّةٌ قَائِمَةٌ بِالْجِسْمِيَّةِ وَهُوَ ضِدُّ الظُّلْمَةِ وَجَلَّ الْحَقُّ سُبْحَانَهُ أَنْ يَكُونَ لَهُ ضِدٌّ؛
وَلَوْ كَانَ نُورًا لَمْ تَجُزْ إضَافَتُهُ إلَى نَفْسِهِ فِي قَوْلِهِ:
{مَثَلُ نُورِهِ}
فَيَكُونُ مِنْ إضَافَةِ الشَّيْءِ إلَى نَفْسِهِ وَهُوَ غَيْرُ جَائِزٍ.
وَقَوْلُهُ:
{اللَّهُ نُورُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ}
قَالَ الْمُفَسِّرُونَ: يَعْنِي هَادِيَ أَهْلِ السَّمَوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَهُوَ ضَعِيفٌ لِأَنَّ ذِكْرَ الْهَادِي بَعْدَهُ يَكُونُ تَكْرَارًا وَقِيلَ: مُنَوِّرُ السَّمَوَاتِ بِالْكَوَاكِبِ وَقِيلَ: بِالْأَدِلَّةِ وَالْحُجَجِ الْبَاهِرَةِ. وَالنُّورُ جِسْمٌ لَطِيفٌ شَفَّافٌ؛ فَلَا يَجُوزُ عَلَى اللَّهِ. وَالتَّأْوِيلُ مَرْوِيٌّ عَنْ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ وَأَنَسٍ وَسَالِمٍ وَهَذَا يُبْطِلُ دَعْوَاهُ أَنَّ التَّأْوِيلَ يُبْطِلُ الظَّاهِرَ وَلَمْ يُنْقَلْ عَنْ السَّلَفِ. وَلَوْ كَانَ نُورًا حَقِيقَةً - كَمَا يَقُولُهُ الْمُشَبِّهَةُ - لَوَجَبَ أَيْضًا أَنْ يَكُونَ الضِّيَاءُ لَيْلًا وَنَهَارًا عَلَى الدَّوَامِ.