The Ash'ari Clinic: 3rd Case Study of 'Ash'ari Burnout' - Psychologically Disturb

ed Lone Ash'ari Mujassim Stalks Blogs and Forums Asking Forbidden Questions
Filed under: The Clinic
Sunday, November 01 2009 - by TheClinic
Key topics: The Clinic Ash'ari Burnout Ahmed Cobra
Mail to a Friend Printer friendly
Just in! Third case of "Ash'ari Burnout". To learn more please see this page. "A
sh'ari Burnout" is a phenomenon arising when the inability to satisfactorily res
olve and come to terms with certain (historical) facts and information results f
irstly in "psychological denial" which disturbs the mental constitution, then de
nial of the denial secondly, and then finally, barely comprehensible, illogical,
irrational "outbursts" taking place mainly on blogs and forums.
Introduction And Backround Information For the Case
This case is fresh, and has just been reported. It appears a lone As'hari Burnou
t victim is letting loose and regurgitating the mutterings of the ancient Jahmit
es - [that the likes of Fudayl bin 'Iyaad (d. 187H) and Hammaad bin Zayd (d. 179
H) and Ishaaq bin Raahawaih (d. 238H) had to deal with in the late second and ea
rly third century hijrah - see their quotes in this article] - so he's making th
ese mutterings with a view to arguing the case for the Aristotelian Tawheed that
is centered around the notions of al-jawhar (substance) and al-'arad (incidenta
l attribute) - these terminologies and classifications being the foundations of
a [flawed, corrupt] intellectual proof called "hudooth ul-ajsaam" that is used t
o demonstrate that all the bodies (ajsaam) that make up the universe are a bunch
of events (hawaadith) because they have incidental attributes (a'raad) and occu
rrences (hawaadith) that take place in them, and since occurrences (hawaadith) m
ust have a beginning, there must be an originator for these events, a creator. A
nd once this is established, prophethood can now be argued for as can resurrecti
on against those same atheists from whom this language and terminology was borro
wed in the first place. And since they treated this proof to be the ultimate tru
th upon which the veracity of the religion itself depends upon, they are forced
to make all of their speech regarding Allaah to be nothing but a series of negat
ions based around these same terms.
Ibn Suraij as-Shafi'ee (d. 306H) said, as narrated from him by Abu Ismaa'eel al-
Harawi in "Dhamm ul-Kalaam" and as mentioned by Ibn Taymiyyah in "Bayaan Talbees
al-Jahmiyyah":

The Tawheed of the people of knowledge and the jamaa'ah of the Muslims is "I tes
tify none is worthy of worship except Allaah (alone) and that Muhammad is the Me
ssenger of Allaah". And the Tawheed of the people of falsehood is disputing abou
t al-a'raad (incidental attributes) and al-ajsaam (bodies) and the Prophet (sall
allaahu alayhi wasallam) was sent with the rejection of that.
Thus Tawheed is centered around nothing but purifying Allaah of the a'raad (inci
dental attributes) and occurrences (hawaadith) that are characteristic of bodies
(ajsaam) - so the language of Tawheed now becomes, "Allaah is not a jism, nor a
jawhar, nor an 'arad, nor above, nor below, nor within, nor without, He does no
t have a place, nor direction ...", and thus Tawheed becomes nothing but a serie
s of negations all aimed at ensuring that Allaah is not described with anything
that hints at Jismiyyah (being a body).
Thus Tawheed has gone from being:
Affirming whatever Allaah affirmed for Himself in His Book or upon the tongue of
His Messenger (alayhis salaam) and negating whatever Allaah and His Messenger n
egated from Him, and adhering to that language on the basis that Allaah is most
knowledgeable of His Self, the most eloquent in conveying and expressing that kn
owledge and His Messenger being the most sincere in intending guidance for the U
mmah. And affirming what is affirmed for Allaah in the revealed texts without ta
kyeef (asking or specifying how) and tashbeeh (resemblance to the creation).
and turned instead to:
Ensuring Allaah is not described with anything that falls under Aristotle's Ten
Categories (al-Maqoolaat al-Ashar), otherwise known as al-Jawhar wal-'Arad which
is the terminology of the atheist Philosophers for classifying the observable u
niverse - for if Allaah is described with what amounts to a'raad (incidental att
ributes) or events (hawaadith) it would mean that He is a body (jism) - and the
intellectual proof is invalidated, for it now means that Allaah is also just an
event and is created.
And whenever a Sunni Muthabbit speaks with the language of the Messengers and re
stricts himself to that, nothing more and nothing less, when speaking in the aff
air of Tawheed, and says for example, as Allaah said, and the Messenger said, an
d the Companions said, and all the Salaf said, and the early Kullaabi Ash'aris s
aid, "Allaah is above the Throne" except that this Sunni Muthabbit is assaulted
by an Aristotelian tail-end - "Hey that's location (makaan) and that's kufr!" -
and so the revealed texts became subject to evaluation by the language, terminol
ogy and classification of the atheist Philosophers, and were of little value in
providing knowledge about Allaah, the Most High.
Case Involving Lone Ash'ari Mujassim Attempting To Make the Revealed Texts Subse
rvient and Subject to the Rules and Necessities of Aristotelian Tawheed
Inshaa'Allaah we will be give special care and attention to this case, and we ad
vise all those who come in the vicinity of this victim to just keep quite and to
back off and not to make any further interaction with the victim. Let's first s
tart with the "intellectual dump" of this burnout victim.
With his brain obviously fizzled and mashed and unable to escape that asylum of
Aristotelian language and terminology (al-jawhar wal-arad - al-maqoolaat al-asha
r (the ten categories) - see here) which he has been defrauded to believe to be
the ultimate criterion for what constitutes Tawheed, we are seeing those same sy
mptoms that were observed by the Salaf from the early Jahmites of the mid-second
century hjrah of asking questions about the Nuzool - "Does Allaah enter the cre
ation?", "Does He leave the Throne?", "Does He become under the Throne?".
These types of questions and problems with that which has come in the authentic
narrations is not surprising since Jahm bin Safwan (ex. 128H) utilized the same
notions (of the language and terminology of the atheist philosophers) to devise
a crude version of that intellectual proof against the Indian Materialist Philos
ophers (the Sumaniyyah) and as a result of which he had to deny much of what cam
e in the Book and the Sunnah. This was out of the fear of invalidating his intel
lectual proof against the Atheists by describing Allaah with such things (that c
ame in the revealed texts) that would have amounted to - [in accordance with his
intellectual proof using the notions of jawhar (substance) and 'arad (incidenta
l attribute)] - Allaah being a jism (body).
The victim's question question is similar to what the Jahmites started asking ar
ound the mid-second century pertaining to Allaah's Nuzool. The first course of a
ction with this victim is to put him in a straight-jacket. This is because despi
te being a burnout victim, he's actually trying to be smart and sophisticated an
d intending to make mockery of the revealed texts, those which the Salaf took wi
th unanimous acceptance. So the straight-jacket is the only way to deal with cas
es like these. And while the victim becomes comfortable in the straight-jacket,
we can start explaining some background to the observers.
Are the Deniers of the attributes Mushabbihah and Mujassimah?
The answer is yes, as has been said by Ahl us-Sunnah that the Mu'ttilah (deniers
of the attributes) first made tashbeeh (in their hearts and minds), and then th
ey made ta'teel. Take a good read of what has been narrated by Imaam at-Tirmidhi
of the concensus of the Salaf on the subject of the attributes. At-Tirmidhee (d
. 279H) said in his Sunan (1/128-129):

It has been stated by more than one person from the People of Knowledge about su
ch ahaadeeth, that there is no tashbeeh (resemblance) to the attributes of Allaa
h, and our Lord - the Blessed and Most High - descends to the lowest heaven ever
y night. So they say: "Affirm these narrations, have eemaan (faith) in them, do
not deny them, nor ask how." The likes of this has been related from Maalik ibn
Anas, Sufyaan ath-Thawree, Ibn Uyainah and Abdullaah Ibn al-Mubaarak, who all sa
id about such ahaadeeth: "Leave them as they are, without asking how." Such is t
he saying of the People of Knowledge from the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah. Howeve
r, the Jahmiyyah oppose these narrations and say: This is tashbeeh!
Allaah the Most High, has mentioned in various places in His Book, the Attribute
of al-yad (Hand), as-Sama' (Hearing), and al-Basr (Seeing) - but the Jahmiyyah
make ta'weel of these aayaat, explaining them in a way, other than how they are
explained by the People of Knowledge. They say: Indeed, Allaah did not create Aa
dam with His own Hand - they say that Hand means the Power of Allaah. Ishaaq ibn
Ibraheem [ar-Raahawaih] said:
Tashbeeh is if it is said: "Hand like my hand, or similar to my hand", or it is
said: "Hearing like my Hearing,or similar to my hearing", then this is tashbeeh.
But if what is being said is what Allah has said: Hand, Hearing, Seeing and it
is not asked how, nor is it said: "Like my hearing, or similar to my hearing" -
then it is not tashbeeh. Allaah, the Most Blessed, Most High, said in His Book (
ash-Shooraa 42:11): "There is none like unto Him, and he is the all-Hearing, the
all-Seeing"
This statement of at-Tirmidhi and what at-Tirmidhi has quoted from Ishaaq bin Ra
ahawaih, shows the Jahmiyyah presumed that whatever has come in the revealed tex
ts of such attributes is inherently tashbeeh and tajseem. It is for this reason
they resorted to pure ta'teel or ta'weel. So the i'tiqaad (belief) of tashbeeh r
egarding the texts, originated with them. The Ash'aris clearly state this in the
ir books, and its no hidden matter - the opponent cannot deny it - for they say
that when any text gives the presumption of tashbeeh or Tajseem, then it is obli
gatory to make ta'weel or tafweed. So when they see in the revealed texts, "yad"
, "wajh", "istiwaa" and the likes, they immediately think these are only the att
ributes of bodies. Thus, the i'tiqaad (belief) of tashbeeh and Tajseem is the st
arting point for them, and as such they are the Mushabbihah and Mujassimah in re
ality. When this thought of tashbeeh and Tajseem hits their hearts and minds (be
cause that is what they presume about the revealed texts), it disturbs them and
so they are forced to deny these attributes - even though they deceptively claim
they affirm the attributes. What they really mean is "We affirm the existence o
f the words yad, and wajh and Nuzool in the revealed texts" - and this is not th
e same as making an affirmation of existence for the actual attributes themselve
s. See al-Khatib al-Baghdadi dealing with their deception in this regard in this
article.
Tashbeeh and Tajseem occurs at two levels:
The first is when one exaggerates in affirmation of what has come in the texts a
nd says "hand like my hand" and "seeing like my seeing" and "hearing like my hea
ring". This is the Tajseem of the Mushabbihah who believe that they cannot have
really affirmed these attributes or believed in these texts without doing so upo
n the kaifiyyah found in the creation. This is their false presumption. Thus, th
ey exaggerated in ithbaat (affirmation) in this manner, thinking that only this
type of ithbaat (affirmation) signifies an actual acceptance of what Allaah affi
rmed for Himself. These people fell into ta'teel through their tashbeeh, because
in likening the attributes of Allaah with those of the creation they denied the
reality of Allaah's attributes as they really are. This is why it is said, "Eve
ry Mushabbih is a Mu'attil".
The second is when one fails to separate between the meaning (ma'naa) on the one
hand and the kayf, haqeeqah (true reality) on the other, with respect to what h
as come in the revealed texts. So in essence they hold that the kayf is the mean
ing and is synonymous to it and inseparable from it - and this is from their jah
l (ignorance) and also from their deception, for they are able to affirm "hearin
g" and "seeing" as meanings in the mind devoid of the takyeef that is found for
them in the creation and on this basis accept them as attributes.
Failing to distinguish between the ma'naa (meaning) and the kayf (how something
is, its reality) is what the Mu'attilah in general (Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Ash'a
riyyah) are guilty of. So when they come across "hearing (as-sam')" or "seeing (
al-basr), or "hand (al-yad)", immediately in their minds they hold the belief of
Tajseem and tashbeeh because they treated the kaifiyyah to be the actual meanin
g itself - meaning that they do not understand these attributes except with the
kayf, haqeeqah and tahdeed (definition in words of the kayf, haqeeqah) of what i
s in the creation - bypassing the verse, "There is nothing which is a likeness u
nto Him". Built upon this presumption and belief of Tajseem and tashbeeh in thes
e revealed texts, they reject the attributes in a number of ways (despite claimi
ng to affirm them):
The way of ta'weel - which is to give it a meaning other than the one it came wi
th
The way of tafweed - which is to first abolish the meaning that it came with, an
d then to claim the real meaning (whatever it is) is only known to Allaah.
And they take either of these two steps for no other reason except that initiall
y, at the very start, they held the belief and presumption of Tajseem and tasbee
h regarding the revealed texts. Then they justify their rejection of these attri
butes in this manner (ta'weel or tafweed) through the very verse that should hav
e prevented them from holding that presumption of Tajseem and tashbeeh in the fi
rst place, which is "There is nothing which is a likeness unto Him", and which w
ould have otherwise prevented them from playing around and fooling with the text
s, even though they had been commanded by the Salaf, "Leave them as they have co
me, without asking how...". So these people made tashbeeh first, and due to it t
hey made ta'teel, and this is why it is said, "Every Mu'attil is a Mushabbih".
As for the way of Ahl us-Sunnah then it is what has been stated by Imaam at-Tirm
idhee, and you can also refer to this article on the statement of al-Khateeb al-
Baghdaadee (d. 463H) which contains a nice explanation of the entire subject. An
d it is to affirm whatever Allaah affirmed for Himself in His Book or upon the t
ongue of His Messenger, with an affirmation of an actual existence of the attrib
ute (not just an affirmation of the existence of the text of the attribute), to
affirm that the attribute has a meaning (ma'naa) which is known to us and has a
reality (haqeeqah) which is unknown to us and is impossible for us to know, and
that this haqeeqah is unlike what we see and observe in the creation, and to aff
irm all of that, and to leave the texts as they have come, without tashbeeh, tam
theel and takyeef and without ta'weel and tahreef, and that the principle regard
ing the attributes (sifaat) is like the principle regarding the essence (dhaat).
Following on from this, the burnout victim who should have gotten comfortable in
the straight-jacket by now, has presumed that whatever Allaah has described Him
self with of attributes such as Face, Hands, Eyes, Nuzool and so on, must be lik
e that which is in the creation. This sickness originated in his own mind. And t
hus when the victim wrote:
Literal descent & entering creation. assalaamu alaikum Do salafees believe Allah
's dhaat is in the lowest sky when believing Allah literally descended/moved to
the lowest sky?
The victim only wrote this because of his presumption that Allaah's Nuzool must
be of the type that is found within the creation. And all of these doubts of the
Jahmiyyah that have been raised in the past such as:
Does Allaah leave His Throne or not when He descends?
How can Allaah descend in the last third of every night for all people in all pa
rts of the earth?
Does Allaah enter the creation when He descends?
Is His essence (dhaat) in the lowest heaven?
Does the Throne become above Him?
These questions only arise when it is presumed that the kaifiyyah of Allaah's De
scent is like the descent of created beings, for when you presume that, then the
likes of these questions arise - and the Salaf never entertained any of these q
uestions because they negated knowledge of the kaifiyyah, and the only ones who
raised such questions were the Jahmiyyah.
And this is the response of Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah to such presumptions
of such Jahmites, as occurs in "Sharh Hadeeth in-Nuzool" (p. 459):
Which translates:
And that which it is obligatory [to speak with] definitively: Is that Allaah, th
ere is nothing that is a likeness to Him in everything that He has described Him
self with. Thus, anyone who describes Him with the likeness of the attributes of
the creation in anything from amongst the things, then he is errant, definitive
ly, absolutely. Such as the one who says, "He descends, undergoing motion and mo
vement (yataharrak, yantaqil) just like a person descends from the roof to the l
owest part of the house" and like the saying of the one who says, "His Throne be
comes unoccupied of Him, and so His descent is vacating one space and occupying
another", and this is baatil (false), it is obligatory to free the Lord from thi
s, as has preceded.
And in another place (p. 320) Ibn Taymiyyah says, in response to another objecti
on related to the Nuzool, on account of which some people made ta'weel of the Nu
zool to something else:
This [objection] that they mentioned: Is only valid if the Nuzool is made to be
of the type of Nuzool of the bodies of people from the roof to the ground, and t
his resembles the saying of the one who said, "His Throne becomes unoccupied of
Him" such that some of the created things become above Him, and some of them bel
ow Him.
The point being here is that if you presume Allaah's Nuzool to be like that of t
he Nuzool of the created bodies - which this victim has - and at the same time,
your brain is already fizzled, popped and whacked out with that Aristotelian Taw
heed of al-Jawhar wal-Arad, then you are going to start spluttering questions re
garding the "kayf" that the Salaf prohibited you from and which first originated
with the Jahmites of old.
And the above sayings of Ibn Taymiyyah apply to both those who actually say such
things or those who presume such things in their minds and as a result of such
false presumptions of tashbeeh reject Allaah's Nuzool - which is the way of toda
y's Jahmite Ash'aris such as our poor burnout victim who has now found himself i
n a straight-jacket for his folly.
The Jahmite Ash'aris are Intellectual Fraudsters
We have stated something previously which is extremely appropriate here and it s
hows how these people (including this victim of ours) are dishonest and fraudule
nt in their discussions. Previously a dumb-witted Gutter Press-Jahmee brought a
similar type of doubt. And irrespective of whether one says:
Does Allaah leave His Throne or not when He descends?
How can Allaah descend in the last third of every night for all people in all pa
rts of the earth?
Does Allaah enter the creation when He descends?
Is His essence (dhaat) in the lowest heaven?
Does the Throne become above Him?
It is all the same, all these objections are the same, there is no difference be
tween them in reality. So while our victim is still comfortable in that straight
-jacket, we will say something similar to what was said previously:
Firstly: This Issue Is of No Concern To The Psychologically Disturbed Victim Bec
ause He Does Not Affirm There Is A Deity Above the Throne To Begin With, Thus It
Is Falsehood For Him To Even Raise This Issue
The Jahmiyyah tried to deny the Nuzool because it relates to their bid'ah in a n
umber of ways. First the Nuzool requires that Allaah is above the heaven, above
the Throne (something which contradicts Him being everywhere) and secondly it is
an action tied to Allaah's will, which to the Jahmites is a "haadithah" (event,
occurrence) and this would mean to them that Allaah is a body, as only bodies u
ndergo occurrences (hawaadith).
So the Jahmites began raising doubts about the Nuzool, and from amongst their qu
estions was "Does Allaah's Throne become unoccupied when He descends or not?" -
so they are the ones who innovated this as they were not content with those ahaa
deeth. They tried to cast doubts upon these narrations by making it necessary th
at Allaah would have to enter His creation if He descended according to the ahaa
deeth, upon their presumption that Allaah's Nuzool is just like the Nuzool of cr
eated bodies, so they raised these doubts and the Salaf responded that Allaah de
scends however He wills, meaning that He is able to descend exactly as He said w
ithout the false necessities arising in the corrupt minds of the Jahmites.
...