Majmu' al-Fatawa - Ibn Taimiya - (12/134)

Majmu' al-FatawaIbn Taimiya

Analogous to this is their disagreement concerning His actions, exalted is He, and questions of divine decree. The Muʿtazilah say that He acts for an intended wise purpose and out of a desire to show kindness to His servants, but they do not affirm any wisdom in His action whose end relates to Him Himself. The other group says that He does not act for any wisdom or purpose whatsoever. The former affirm wisdom, but not wisdom subsisting in Him; the latter affirm neither wisdom nor purpose as an attribute of His. Neither group affirms any wisdom or intended end that relates to Him Himself.

The same applies to “speech”: the former affirm speech that is His action but does not subsist in Him. The latter say that whatever does not subsist in Him cannot confer its corresponding attribute upon Him. Both groups deny that wisdom intended by Him can subsist in Him, just as both deny that speech and action that He wills can subsist in Him.

The former group’s position is closer to that of the early generations and the jurists, insofar as they affirm wisdom and benefit in His rulings and actions, and affirm speech that He utters by His power and will. The latter group’s position is closer to that of the early generations insofar as they affirm the attributes and say that He cannot be described merely on account of something created, separate from Him, that does not subsist in Him at all. Nor can any corresponding attribute be ascribed to Him on account of something that does not subsist in Him. Thus, He cannot be one who speaks by virtue of speech that does not subsist in Him, nor can He be wise, generous, and merciful by virtue of wisdom and mercy that do not subsist in Him—just as He cannot be knowing by virtue of knowledge that does not subsist in Him, or powerful by virtue of power that does not subsist in Him. Nor can He be loving, pleased, or angry by virtue of love, pleasure, and anger that do not subsist in Him.

Thus, both the Muʿtazilah and the Ashʿariyyah, concerning questions of Allah’s speech and Allah’s actions—indeed,

وَنَظِيرُ هَذَا اخْتِلَافُهُمْ فِي أَفْعَالِهِ تَعَالَى وَمَسَائِلِ الْقَدَرِ؛ فَإِنَّ الْمُعْتَزِلَةَ يَقُولُونَ: إنَّهُ يَفْعَلُ لِحِكْمَةِ مَقْصُودَةٍ وَإِرَادَةِ الْإِحْسَانِ إلَى الْعِبَادِ؛ لَكِنْ لَا يُثْبِتُونَ لِفِعْلِهِ حِكْمَةً تَعُودُ إلَيْهِ. وَأُولَئِكَ يَقُولُونَ لَا يَفْعَلُ لِحِكْمَةِ وَلَا لِمَقْصُودِ أَصْلًا. فَأُولَئِكَ أَثْبَتُوا حِكْمَةً لَكِنْ لَا تَقُومُ بِهِ وَهَؤُلَاءِ لَا يُثْبِتُونَ لَهُ حِكْمَةً وَلَا قَصْدًا يَتَّصِفُ بِهِ وَالْفَرِيقَانِ لَا يُثْبِتُونَ لَهُ حِكْمَةً وَلَا مَقْصُودًا يَعُودُ إلَيْهِ. وَكَذَلِكَ فِي " الْكَلَامِ " : أُولَئِكَ أَثْبَتُوا كَلَامًا هُوَ فِعْلُهُ لَا يَقُومُ بِهِ. وَهَؤُلَاءِ يَقُولُونَ مَا لَا يَقُومُ بِهِ لَا يَعُودُ حُكْمُهُ إلَيْهِ. وَالْفَرِيقَانِ يَمْنَعُونَ أَنْ يَقُومَ بِهِ حِكْمَةٌ مُرَادَةٌ لَهُ كَمَا يَمْنَعُ الْفَرِيقَانِ أَنْ يَقُومَ بِهِ كَلَامٌ وَفِعْلٌ يُرِيدُهُ وَقَوْلُ أُولَئِكَ أَقْرَبُ إلَى قَوْلِ السَّلَفِ وَالْفُقَهَاءِ إذْ أَثْبَتُوا الْحِكْمَةَ وَالْمَصْلَحَةَ فِي أَحْكَامِهِ وَأَفْعَالِهِ وَأَثْبَتُوا كَلَامًا يَتَكَلَّمُ بِهِ بِقُدْرَتِهِ وَمَشِيئَتِهِ وَقَوْلُ هَؤُلَاءِ أَقْرَبُ إلَى قَوْلِ السَّلَفِ إذْ أَثْبَتُوا الصِّفَاتِ وَقَالُوا: لَا يُوصَفُ بِمُجَرَّدِ الْمَخْلُوقِ الْمُنْفَصِلِ عَنْهُ الَّذِي لَمْ يَقُمْ بِهِ أَصْلًا وَلَا يَعُودُ إلَيْهِ حُكْمٌ مِنْ شَيْءٍ لَمْ يَقُمْ بِهِ فَلَا يَكُونُ مُتَكَلِّمًا بِكَلَامِ لَمْ يَقُمْ بِهِ وَلَا يَكُونُ حَكِيمًا كَرِيمًا وَرَحِيمًا بِحِكْمَةِ وَرَحْمَةٍ لَمْ تَقُمْ بِهِ كَمَا لَا يَكُونُ عَلِيمًا بِعِلْمِ لَمْ يَقُمْ بِهِ وَقَدِيرًا بِقُدْرَةِ لَمْ تَقُمْ بِهِ وَلَا يَكُونُ مُحِبًّا رَاضِيًا غَضْبَانَ بِحُبِّ وَرِضًى وَغَضَبٍ لَمْ يَقُمْ بِهِ. فَكُلٌّ مِنْ الْمُعْتَزِلَةِ وَالْأَشْعَرِيَّةِ فِي مَسَائِلِ كَلَامِ اللَّهِ وَأَفْعَالِ اللَّهِ؛ بَلْ