piece of evidence the opponent adduces to show that it is impossible to describe Him with what the word denotes, and that the inference is sound, we accept only insofar as it proves that the meaning applicable to a created being is ruled out in His case. Yet the true and obvious meaning of the word is a hand that befits the Creator—just as knowledge and power befit Him, indeed as do His very essence and existence.
Third Station:
I said to him, “Has it ever reached you—in the Book of Allah, in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), or from any of the leading scholars of the Muslims—that anyone declared, ‘The intended meaning of “hand” is other than its apparent sense,’ or, ‘The apparent sense is not intended’? Is there in the Qur’an a single verse that plainly denies His being described as having a hand, or even one that does so implicitly?
“The most that a speculative theologian can cite is His saying,
‘Say: He is Allah, One’ (Al-Ikhlāṣ 1),
His saying,
‘There is nothing like Him’ (Ash-Shūrā 11),
and His saying,
‘Do you know of any who can be named alongside Him?’ (Maryam 65).
These verses do no more than negate corporeality and likeness; they do not, in any respect, negate a hand that befits His Majesty.
“Likewise, does reason furnish any clear proof that the Creator possesses absolutely no hand—neither one appropriate to His Majesty nor one that resembles created limbs? Is there even the faintest rational indication to that effect? Since neither revelation nor reason contains anything that categorically denies the reality of the hand—and whatever is alleged to contradict it rests only on subtle arguments advanced by those who assert them, arguments that are in fact unsound doubts—,
“is it conceivable that the Book and the Sunnah should be replete with references to the hand— that Allah created with His hand, that both His hands are outstretched, that sovereignty lies in His hand, and countless other hadiths—yet the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) and those in authority after him never explained to the people that these words are not to be taken at face value? Must we wait until Jahm ibn Ṣafwān, after the era of the Companions had passed, steps forward to clarify for people what was revealed to their Prophet, followed by Bishr ibn Ghayāth and all who tread their path, every one of them branded with hypocrisy?
“And how could it be that our Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) taught us everything, even the etiquette of relieving oneself, and said,
‘I have left nothing that brings you nearer to Paradise without informing you of it, and nothing that drives you farther from the Fire without warning you of it,’
and,
‘I have left you upon a clear, radiant way; its night is like its day; no one deviates from it after me except one who is doomed,’
yet he would leave the Qur’an revealed to him and his luminous Sunnah filled with statements that, the opponent claims, outwardly imply anthropomorphism and corporeality, and that believing their apparent sense is misguidance—without ever clarifying or explaining the matter?
“And how could it be permissible for the early generations to say—”