Part One
The creed of Ahl al-Sunnah wa-l-Jamāʿah in summary
First Issue: The Word Ḥadd (حَدّ) in the Language and in the Speech of the Salaf
Ḥadd in language is the dividing line between two things, which keeps one from mixing with the other. The boundaries of a house are its ḥudūd, the end of a thing is its ḥadd, and the punishments of the Sharīʿah are called ḥudūd because they hold people back from what lies beyond them. The root carries the meaning of prevention and separation: a thing with a ḥadd is distinct from what is outside it.
Al-Azharī said in Tahdhīb al-Lughah:
قلت: وَمِنْه أُخذ حُدُود الْأَرْضين، وحدود الْحرم. وَفِي الحَدِيث فِي الْقُرْآن: لكل حرف حدّ، وَلكُل حد مُطّلع.
قيل: أَرَادَ لكل حرف مُنْتَهى لَهُ نِهَايَة.
Ḥ-D: al-Layth said: What separates any two things is a ḥadd between them, and the end-point (muntahā) of every thing is its ḥadd. I [al-Azharī] say: from it are taken the boundaries (ḥudūd) of lands and the boundaries of the Ḥaram. And in the ḥadīth about the Qurʾān: 'Every letter has a ḥadd, and every ḥadd has a point of ascent (muṭṭalaʿ)'. It was said: he meant that every letter has an end-point, a limit.
al-Azharī, Tahdhīb al-Lughah 3/269
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
أَبُو الْعَبَّاس عَن ابْن الْأَعرَابِي قَالَ: الحُطُط: الْأَبدَان الناعمة، والحُطُط أَيْضا: مراكد السّفل.
عَمْرو عَن أَبِيه الحِطّة: نُقْصَان الْمرتبَة. وأديم محطوط: وَأنْشد:
تثير وتُبدي عَن عروق كَأَنَّهَا
أعِنّة خَرّاز تُحَطّ وتُبْشَر
أَبُو عَمْرو الحُطائط: الصَّغِير من النَّاس وَغَيرهم وَأنْشد:
وَالشَّيْخ مثل النسْر والحطائط
والنسوة الأرامل المَبَالط
وَيَقُول صبيان الْأَعْرَاب فِي أحاجيهم: مَا حُطَائط بُطائط يميس تَحت الْحَائِط، يعنون الذّرّة والحِطاط شِدة العَدْو. والكعب الحطيط: الأدرم. والحِطَّان: التيس. وحِطّان من أَسمَاء الْعَرَب.
طح: اللَّيْث: الطَحّ: أَن يضع الرجل عقبه على شَيْء ثمَّ يَسْحَجُه بهَا. قَالَ: والمِطَحَّة من الشَّاة: مُؤخّر ظِلْفها، وَتَحْت الظلْف فِي مَوضِع المِطَحّة عُظَيم كالفَلْكة.
وَقَالَ الْكسَائي: طحّان فعلان من الطّحّ: مُلْحق بِبَاب فعلان وفعلى، وَهُوَ السَحْج.
وَقَالَ أَحْمد بن يحيى: يُقَال لهنة مثل الفَلْكة تكون فِي رِجل الشَّاة تسحَج بهَا الأَرْض: المَطَحَّة.
أَبُو الْعَبَّاس عَن ابْن الْأَعرَابِي قَالَ: الطُّحُج: المَسَاحج.
وَقَالَ ابْن دُرَيْد: طححت الشَّيْء طَحّاً إِذا بسطت وَأنْشد:
قد ركبتْ منبسطاً مُنَطَحاً
تحسبه تَحت السراب الملحا
أَبُو زيد: مَا على رَأسه طِحْطِحة أَي مَا عَلَيْهِ شَعْرَة.
وَقَالَ اللحياني: أَتَانَا وَمَا عَلَيْهِ طِحْطِحة وَلَا طِحْربة.
وَقَالَ اللَّيْث: الطَّحْطَحة: تَفْرِيق الشَّيْء هَلَاكًا، وَأنْشد:
فيمسى نابذا سُلْطَان قَسْر
كضوء الشَّمْس طحطحه الْغُرُوب
ويروي بِالْخَاءِ: طخطخهُ. وَقَالَ رؤبة:
طحطحه آذِيّ بَحر مُتْأق
وروى أَبُو الْعَبَّاس عَن عَمْرو عَن أَبِيه قَالَ يُقَال: طحطح فِي ضَحِكه. وطخْطخ: وطهطه، وكتكت، وكدكد، وكركر بِمَعْنى وَاحِد.
(بَاب الْحَاء وَالدَّال)
(ح د)
حدّ، دحّ: مستعملان.
حد: قَالَ اللَّيْث: فصل مَا بَين كل شَيْئَيْنِ حَدّ بَينهَا، ومنتهى كل شَيْء حَدّه.
قلت: وَمِنْه أُخذ حُدُود الْأَرْضين، وحدود الْحرم. وَفِي الحَدِيث فِي الْقُرْآن: لكل حرف حدّ، وَلكُل حد مُطّلع.
قيل: أَرَادَ لكل حرف مُنْتَهى لَهُ نِهَايَة.
Al-Azharī gives one use of the word. Ibn Fāris gathers its two roots.
Ibn Fāris said in Maqāyīs al-Lughah:
فالحدّ: الحاجز بَيْنَ الشَّيئين (¬١). وفلان محدودٌ، إذا كان ممنوعاً. و «إنّه لَمُحارَفٌ محدود»، كأنّه قد مُنِع الرِّزْقَ. ويقال للبوَّاب حَدَّاد، لمنْعِه النّاسَ من الدخول. قال الأعشى:
فَقُمْنا ولَمَّا يَصِحْ دِيكُنا … إلى جَوْنَةٍ عند حَدّادِها (¬٢)
وقال النابغة فى الحدّ والمنْع:
إلاّ سليمانَ إِذْ قال المَلِيكُ له … قُمْ فى البرِيّة فاحدُدْها عن الفَنَد
Ḥ-D: the ḥāʾ and the dāl are two roots: the first is prevention (al-manʿ), and the second is the edge of a thing (ṭaraf al-shayʾ). So al-ḥadd is the barrier between two things. And 'so-and-so is maḥdūd' when he is prevented; and 'he is muḥāraf maḥdūd', as if he has been prevented from provision. And the doorkeeper is called ḥaddād, because he prevents people from entering. Al-Aʿshā said: 'So we rose, before our cock had crowed, to a dark wine-jar beside its keeper (ḥaddād)'. And al-Nābighah said, on ḥadd as prevention: 'Except Sulaymān, when the Sovereign said to him: Rise among creation and restrain it (fa-ḥdudhā) from folly'.
Ibn Fāris, Maqāyīs al-Lughah 2/3
Source, chain and authenticity
When the Salaf affirmed a ḥadd for Allah, they meant this meaning of distinction: that He is above His Throne, distinct from His creation, not mixed with it, not dwelling in it. Ibn al-Mubārak was asked how we know our Lord, and he said: above His heavens, upon His Throne, distinct from His creation; then, when he was asked whether with a ḥadd, he said: with a ḥadd. His purpose was to cut off the Jahmī saying that Allah is in every place, which removes the line between the Creator and the creature.
When the Salaf denied a ḥadd, they meant something else: that no creature knows the limit of Allah or can describe Him with a limit that the mind encompasses. Imām Aḥmad said that Allah is upon the Throne without a ḥadd and without a description that anyone could reach. The two statements meet: the affirmation is of His distinction from creation, and the denial is of any creature knowing His extent or modality. Whoever takes the denial and leaves the affirmation, or the reverse, has taken half of what the imams said.
The lexicons after them say the same, each in its own wording.
Al-Ṣāḥib ibn ʿAbbād said in al-Muḥīṭ fī al-Lughah:
فَصْلُ ما بَيْنَ كُلِّ شَيْئَيْنِ: حَدُّهُما.
وفُلانٌ حَدِيْدي في الضَّيْعَةِ: أي ضَيْعَتُه تُحَادُّ ضَيْعَتي.
وحَدُّ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ: طَرَفُ شَبَاتِه.
Ḥ-D: what separates any two things is their ḥadd. And 'so-and-so is my neighbour (ḥadīdī) in the estate', i.e. his estate borders (tuḥāddu) mine. And the ḥadd of every thing is the edge of its blade-point (ṭaraf shabātih).
al-Ṣāḥib ibn ʿAbbād, al-Muḥīṭ fī al-Lughah 2/305
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
وأتانا بِطَعامٍ فَحَطَطْنا فيه-مُخَفَّفٌ ومُشَدَّدٌ-: أي أكَلْنا.
وانْحَطَّ الشَّيْءُ وحَطْحَطَ: بمعنىً.
طح:
الطَّحُّ: أنْ يَضَعَ عَقِبَه على شَيْءٍ يُسَحِّجُه (¬١١٠) بها.
والمِطَحَّةُ من الشّاةِ: مُؤخَّرُ ظِلْفِها.
والطَّحْطَحَةُ: التَّفَرُّقُ وإهْلاكُ الشَّيْءِ (¬١١١).
وأتانا وما عليه طِحْطِحَةٌ: أي خِرْقَةٌ.
والطَّحْطَاحُ: من أسْماء الأسَد.
وطَحَّ الشَّيْءُ فانْطَحَّ: أي بَسَطَه فانْبَسَطَ.
والطَّحْطَحُ من الأرْضِ: بمنزلةِ الصَّحْصَح.
وما على رَأْسِه طِحْطِحَةٌ: أي شَعرةٌ.
الحاء والدال
حد:
فَصْلُ ما بَيْنَ كُلِّ شَيْئَيْنِ: حَدُّهُما.
وفُلانٌ حَدِيْدي في الضَّيْعَةِ: أي ضَيْعَتُه تُحَادُّ ضَيْعَتي.
وحَدُّ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ: طَرَفُ شَبَاتِه.
وحَدَّ السَّيْفُ واحْتَدَّ.
واسْتَحَدَّ الرَّجُلُ واحْتَدَّ؛ فهو حَدِيْدٌ، و [هم] (¬١١٢) أحِدّاءُ.
He adds the usage among neighbours. Two estates tuḥāddu one another (تُحَادُّ) when each ends where the other begins, and neither of them is inside the other.
Ibn Manẓūr said in Lisān al-ʿArab:
لِكُلِّ حَرْفٍ حَدّ وَلِكُلِّ حَدّ مَطْلَعٌ
؛ قِيلَ: أَراد لِكُلِّ مُنْتَهًى نِهَايَةٌ.
Ḥ-D-D: al-ḥadd is the separation between two things so that one of them does not mix with the other, or so that one of them does not encroach on the other; its plural is ḥudūd. And what separates any two things is a ḥadd between them. And the end-point of every thing is its ḥadd; from it is 'one of the boundaries of the lands' and 'the boundaries of the Ḥaram'. And in the ḥadīth describing the Qurʾān: 'Every letter has a ḥadd, and every ḥadd has a point of ascent'; it was said: he meant that every end-point has a limit.
Ibn Manẓūr, Lisān al-ʿArab 3/140. Parallel: Ibn Sīdah, al-Muḥkam 2/504 (9757/1034); al-Zabīdī, Tāj al-ʿArūs 8/6
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
حَتَّى أُنيخت لَدَى خَيْرِ الأَنام مَعًا، ... مِنْ آلِ حَرْب، نَمَاهُ مَنْصِبٌ حَتِد
الحَتِد: الْخَالِصُ مِنْ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ. وَقَدْ حَتِدَ يَحْتَدُ حَتَداً، فَهُوَ حَتِدٌ وحَتَّدْتُه تَحْتِيداً أَي اخْتَرْتُهُ لِخُلُوصِهِ وَفَضْلِهِ.
حدد: الحَدُّ: الْفَصْلُ بَيْنَ الشَّيْئَيْنِ لِئَلَّا يَخْتَلِطَ أَحدهما بِالْآخَرِ أَو لِئَلَّا يَتَعَدَّى أَحدهما عَلَى الْآخَرِ، وَجَمْعُهُ حُدود. وَفَصْلُ مَا بَيْنَ كُلِّ شَيْئَيْنِ: حَدٌّ بَيْنَهُمَا. وَمُنْتَهَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ: حَدُّه؛ وَمِنْهُ: أَحد حُدود الأَرضين وحُدود الْحَرَمِ؛ وَفِي الْحَدِيثِ فِي صِفَةِ الْقُرْآنِ:
لِكُلِّ حَرْفٍ حَدّ وَلِكُلِّ حَدّ مَطْلَعٌ
؛ قِيلَ: أَراد لِكُلِّ مُنْتَهًى نِهَايَةٌ. وَمُنْتَهَى كُلِّ شيءٍ: حَدّه. وَفُلَانٌ حديدُ فُلَانٍ إِذا كَانَ دَارُهُ إِلى جَانِبِ دَارِهِ أَو أَرضه إِلى جَنْبِ أَرضه. وَدَارِي حَديدَةُ دَارِكَ ومُحادَّتُها إِذا كَانَ حدُّها كَحَدِّهَا. وحَدَدْت الدَّارَ أَحُدُّها حَدًّا وَالتَّحْدِيدُ مِثْلُهُ؛ وحدَّ الشيءَ مِنْ غَيْرِهِ يَحُدُّه حَدًّا وحدَّدَه: مَيَّزَهُ. وحَدُّ كُلِّ شيءٍ: مُنْتَهَاهُ لأَنه يَرُدُّهُ وَيَمْنَعُهُ عَنِ التَّمَادِي، وَالْجَمْعُ كَالْجَمْعِ. وحَدُّ السَّارِقِ وَغَيْرِهِ: مَا يَمْنَعُهُ عَنِ الْمُعَاوَدَةِ وَيَمْنَعُ أَيضاً غَيْرَهُ عَنْ إِتيان الْجِنَايَاتِ، وَجَمْعُهُ حُدُود. وحَدَدْت الرَّجُلَ: أَقمت عَلَيْهِ الْحَدَّ. والمُحادَّة: الْمُخَالَفَةُ ومنعُ مَا يَجِبُ عَلَيْكَ، وَكَذَلِكَ التَّحادُّ؛ وَفِي حَدِيثِ
عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ سَلَامٍ: إِن قَوْمًا حَادُّونَا لَمَّا صَدَّقْنَا اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ
؛ المُحادَّة: الْمُعَادَاةُ وَالْمُخَالَفَةُ وَالْمُنَازَعَةُ، وَهُوَ مُفاعلة مِنَ الْحَدِّ كأَنّ كُلُّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا يُجَاوِزُ حَدَّهُ إِلى الْآخَرِ. وحُدُود اللَّهِ تَعَالَى: الأَشياء الَّتِي بيَّن تَحْرِيمَهَا وَتَحْلِيلَهَا، وأَمر أَن لَا يُتعدى شَيْءٌ مِنْهَا فَيَتَجَاوَزُ إِلى غَيْرِ مَا أَمر فِيهَا أَو نَهَى عَنْهُ مِنْهَا، وَمَنَعَ مِنْ مُخَالَفَتِهَا، واحِدُها حَدّ؛ وحَدَّ القاذفَ ونحوَه يَحُدُّه حَدًّا: أَقام عَلَيْهِ ذَلِكَ. الأَزهري: وَالْحَدُّ حَدُّ الزَّانِي وَحَدُّ الْقَاذِفِ وَنَحْوُهُ مِمَّا يُقَامُ عَلَى مَنْ أَتى الزِّنَا أَو الْقَذْفَ أَو تَعَاطَى السَّرِقَةَ. قَالَ الأَزهري: فَحُدود اللَّهِ، ﷿، ضَرْبَانِ: ضَرْبٌ مِنْهَا حُدود حَدَّها لِلنَّاسِ فِي مَطَاعِمِهِمْ وَمَشَارِبِهِمْ وَمَنَاكِحِهِمْ وَغَيْرِهَا مِمَّا أَحل وَحَرَّمَ وأَمر بِالِانْتِهَاءِ عَمَّا نَهَى عَنْهُ مِنْهَا وَنَهَى عَنْ تَعَدِّيهَا، وَالضَّرْبُ الثَّانِي عُقُوبَاتٌ جُعِلَتْ لِمَنْ رَكِبَ مَا نَهَى عَنْهُ كَحَدِّ السَّارِقِ وَهُوَ قَطْعُ يَمِينِهِ فِي رُبْعِ دِينَارٍ فَصَاعِدًا، وَكَحَدِّ الزَّانِي الْبِكْرِ وَهُوَ جَلْدُ مِائَةٍ وَتَغْرِيبُ عَامٍ، وَكَحَدِّ الْمُحْصَنِ إِذا زَنَى وَهُوَ الرَّجْمُ، وَكَحَدِّ الْقَاذِفِ وَهُوَ ثَمَانُونَ جَلْدَةً، سُمِّيَتْ حُدُودًا لأَنها تَحُدّ أَي تَمْنَعُ مِنْ إِتيان مَا جُعِلَتْ عُقُوبَاتٍ فِيهَا، وَسُمِّيَتِ الأُولى حُدُودًا لأَنها نِهَايَاتٌ نَهَى اللَّهُ عَنْ تَعَدِّيهَا؛ قَالَ ابْنُ الأَثير: وَفِي الْحَدِيثِ ذِكْرُ الحَدِّ والحدُود فِي غَيْرِ مَوْضِعٍ وَهِيَ مَحَارِمُ اللَّهِ وَعُقُوبَاتُهُ الَّتِي قَرَنَهَا بِالذُّنُوبِ، وأَصل الحَدِّ الْمَنْعُ وَالْفَصْلُ بَيْنَ الشَّيْئَيْنِ، فكأَنَّ حُدودَ الشَّرْعِ فَصَلَت بَيْنَ الْحَلَالِ وَالْحَرَامِ فَمِنْهَا مَا لَا يُقْرَبُ كَالْفَوَاحِشِ الْمُحَرَّمَةِ، وَمِنْهُ قَوْلُهُ تَعَالَى: تِلْكَ حُدُودُ اللَّهِ فَلا تَقْرَبُوها
؛ وَمِنْهُ مَا لَا يُتَعَدَّى كَالْمَوَارِيثِ الْمُعَيَّنَةِ وَتَزْوِيجِ الأَربع، وَمِنْهُ قَوْلُهُ تَعَالَى: تِلْكَ حُدُودُ اللَّهِ فَلا تَعْتَدُوها
؛ وَمِنْهَا الْحَدِيثُ:
إِني أَصبت حَدًّا فأَقمه عَلَيَّ
أَي أَصبت ذَنْبًا أَوجب عَلَيَّ حَدًّا أَي عُقُوبَةً. وَفِي حَدِيثِ
أَبي الْعَالِيَةِ: إِن اللَّمَمَ مَا بَيْنَ الحَدَّيْن حَدِّ الدُّنْيَا وحَدِّ الْآخِرَةِ
؛ يُرِيدُ بِحَدِّ الدُّنْيَا مَا تَجِبُ فِيهِ الحُدود الْمَكْتُوبَةُ كَالسَّرِقَةِ وَالزِّنَا وَالْقَذْفِ، وَيُرِيدُ بِحَدِّ الْآخِرَةِ مَا أَوعد اللَّهُ تَعَالَى عَلَيْهِ الْعَذَابَ كَالْقَتْلِ وَعُقُوقِ الْوَالِدَيْنِ وأَكل الرِّبَا، فأَراد أَن اللَّمَمَ مِنَ الذُّنُوبِ مَا كَانَ بَيْنَ هَذَيْنِ مِمَّا لَمْ يُوجِبْ عَلَيْهِ حَدًّا فِي الدُّنْيَا وَلَا تَعْذِيبًا فِي
Ibn Manẓūr states what the separation is for: so that one thing does not mix with the other. The Salaf used the word of the Creator and the creature in exactly this sense, against those who said that He is in every place and mixed with everything.
And al-Rāzī, the author of Mukhtār al-Ṣiḥāḥ, said:
Ḥ-D-D: al-ḥadd is the barrier between two things, and the ḥadd of a thing is its end-point (muntahāhu). And he 'ḥaddah' the house (from the pattern radda), and 'ḥaddadahā' too, taḥdīdan [i.e. marked its boundaries]. [The entry continues: al-ḥadd is prevention (al-manʿ), hence the doorkeeper is called ḥaddād… and the ḥadd of every thing is its end (nihāyatuh).]
al-Rāzī, Mukhtār al-Ṣiḥāḥ, s.v. ḥ-d-d: vol. 1 p. 53
Source, chain and authenticity
Every one of these books gives the same two senses, the barrier between two things and the end-point of a thing. When Ibn al-Mubārak was asked “With a ḥadd?” and answered yes, an Arab understood him to say that Allah is distinct from His creation, with a separation between Him and it, and is not mixed with it.
Part Two
The statements of the Salaf
Second Issue: The Ḥadd Affirmed: “above the Throne, with a ḥadd”
ʿAlī ibn al-Ḥasan ibn Shaqīq asked ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Mubārak how we are to know our Lord, and he answered: above the Throne, with a ḥadd. When this was reported to Imām Aḥmad he said that it had reached him and he was pleased with it. Ḥarb al-Kirmānī states the same in the creed he records as the consensus of the people of knowledge he met: Allah has a ḥadd, and Allah alone knows His ḥadd.
Ibn Taymiyyah reported in Darʾ Taʿāruḍ al-ʿAql wa-l-Naql:
Al-Khallāl said: Abū Bakr al-Marrūdhī narrated to us, saying: I heard Abū ʿAbd Allāh [Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal] — when it was said to him: “ʿAlī ibn al-Ḥasan ibn Shaqīq narrated from Ibn al-Mubārak that it was said to him, ‘How do we know Allah, Mighty and Majestic?’ He said: ‘Above the Throne, with a ḥadd (limit)’” — say: “That has reached me from him,” and it pleased him. Then Abū ʿAbd Allāh recited: “Do they await anything except that Allah should come to them in shadows of clouds…” [al-Baqarah 2:210]; then he recited: “And your Lord comes, and the angels, rank upon rank” [al-Fajr 89:22].
Ibn Taymiyyah, Darʾ Taʿāruḍ al-ʿAql wa-l-Naql 2/34, quoting al-Khallāl, Kitāb al-Sunnah. Parallel with full isnād: Ibn Baṭṭah, al-Ibānah al-Kubrā 7/158–159 no. 114
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
وما في الكلام من نفي تحديد الخلق وتقديرهم لربهم وبلوغهم صفته لا ينافي ما نص عليه أحمد وغيره من الأئمة، كما ذكره الخلال أيضاً، قال: (حدثنا أبو بكر المروزي، قال: سمعت أبا عبد الله - لما قيل له: روى علي بن الحسن بن شقيق عن ابن المبارك، أنه قيل له: كيف نعرف الله ﷿؟ قال: على العرش بحد - قال: قد بلغني ذلك عنه، وأعجبه، ثم قال أبو عبد الله: ﴿هل ينظرون إلا أن يأتيهم الله في ظلل من الغمام﴾ (البقرة: ٢١٠) ثم قال: ﴿وجاء ربك والملك صفا صفا﴾ (الفجر: ٢٢) .
قال الخلال: وأنبأنا محمد بن علي الوراق، حدثنا أبو بكر الأثرم، حدثني محمد بن إبراهيم القيسي، قال: قلت لأحمد بن حنبل: يحكى عن ابن المبارك - وقيل له: كيف تعرف ربنا؟ - قال: في السماء السابعة على عرشه بحد، فقال أحمد: هكذا هو عندنا.
وأخبرني حرب بن إسماعيل قال: قلت لإسحاق - يعني ابن راهويه -: هو على العرش بحد؟ قال: نعم بحد.
وذكر عن ابن المبارك قال: هو على عرشه بائن من خلقه بحد.
قال: وأخبرنا المروزي قال: قال إسحاق بن إبراهيم بن راهويه: قال الله ﵎: ﴿الرحمن على العرش استوى﴾ (طه: ٥)
Ḥarb, who took the creed from Aḥmad and Isḥāq, uses the word in plain terms.
Ḥarb al-Kirmānī said in the creed in Ijmāʿ al-Salaf fī al-Iʿtiqād kamā ḥakāhu Ḥarb:
* وله حد، الله أعلم بحده
And Allah, Mighty and Majestic, has a Throne, and the Throne has bearers who carry it. And He has a ḥadd; Allah knows best His ḥadd.
Ḥarb al-Kirmānī, the creed in Ijmāʿ al-Salaf fī al-Iʿtiqād kamā ḥakāhu Ḥarb (ed. ʿĀdil Āl Ḥamdān) p. 57; also Ṭabaqāt al-Ḥanābilah 1/29 (9543/31); al-Dhahabī, al-ʿArsh 1/254; Darʾ 2/23
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
* ولله [﷿] (¬٩) عرش، وللعرش حَمَلَةٌ يحملونه.
* وله حد، الله أعلم بحده (¬١٠).
Al-Dārimī wrote a chapter under the same heading, and he gave his own chain to Ibn al-Mubārak.
A thing that has no ḥadd, no extremity and no description is nothing at all.
Al-Dārimī gave his own chain to Ibn al-Mubārak in his reply to al-Marīsī:
al-Ḥasan ibn al-Ṣabbāḥ al-Bazzār narrated to us: ʿAlī ibn al-Ḥasan ibn Shaqīq narrated to us from Ibn al-Mubārak.
al-Dārimī, Naqḍ ʿalā al-Marīsī (ed. al-Almaʿī) 1/145; narrator index 2/967 no. 179 'al-Ḥasan ibn al-Ṣabbāḥ al-Bazzār 145'
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
فَمِنْ أَجْلِ ذَلِكَ كَرِهْنَا الْخَوْضَ فِيهِ، وَإِذَاعَةَ نَقَائِصِهِ٥ حَتَّى أَذَاعَهَا الْمُعَارِضُ فِيكُمْ، وَبَثَّهَا بَيْنَ أَظْهُرِكُمْ، فَخَشِينَا أَلَّا يَسَعَنَا إِلَّا الْإِنْكَارُ عَلَى مَنْ بَثَّهَا، وَدَعَا النَّاسَ إِلَيْهَا، مُنَافَحَةً٦ عَنِ اللَّهِ، وَتَثْبِيتًا لِصِفَاتِهِ الْعُلَى٧ وَلِأَسْمَائِهِ الْحُسْنَى، وَدَعَا إِلَى الطَّرِيقَةِ الْمُثْلَى، وَمُحَامَاةً عَنْ ضُعَفَاءِ النَّاسِ وَأَهْلِ الْغَفْلَةِ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ وَالصبيان أَن يضلوا بهَا، ويفتنوا٨ إِذْ بَثَّهَا فِيهِمْ رَجُلٌ كَانَ يُشِيرُ٩ بَعْضُهُمْ بِشَيْءٍ مِنْ فِقْهٍ وَبَصَرٍ، وَلَا يَفْطنُون لعثراته إِذْ هُوَ عَثَرَ١٠، فَيَكُونُوا مِنْ أَخَوَاتِهَا مِنْهُ على حذر.
So the saying reached al-Dārimī through al-Ḥasan ibn al-Ṣabbāḥ al-Bazzār, from ʿAlī ibn al-Ḥasan ibn Shaqīq, from Ibn al-Mubārak. Aḥmad's approval of it comes through his student al-Marrūdhī: Ibn Taymiyyah quotes it from al-Khallāl's al-Sunnah in Darʾ Taʿāruḍ 2/34, and Ibn Baṭṭah reports it in al-Ibānah 7/158 through ʿUmar ibn Rajāʾ, from Muḥammad ibn Dāwūd, from al-Marrūdhī.
Al-Dārimī, who wrote closest to the time of these imams, gave the whole explanation in the chapter he devoted to the ḥadd and the Throne:
فَقَالَ [٨/ظ] لَهُ قَائِلٌ مِمَّنْ يُحَاوِرُهُ: قَدْ عَلِمْتُ مُرَادَكَ بِهَا أَيُّهَا الأعجمي، وتعني أَن الله لَا شَيْءٌ؛ لأنَّ الخَلْقَ كُلَّهُم عَلِمُوا أَنَّه لَيْسَ شَيءٌ، يَقَعُ عَلَيْهِ اسْمُ الشَّيْءِ إِلَّا وَلَهُ حَدٌّ وَغَايَةٌ وَصِفَةٌ، وَأَنَّ لَا شَيْءٌ لَيْسَ لَهُ حَدٌّ وَلَا غَايَةٌ وَلَا صِفَةٌ, فَالشَّيْءُ أَبَدًا مَوْصُوفٌ لَا مَحَالَةَ، وَلَا شَيْءٌ يُوصَفُ بِلَا حَدٍّ وَلَا غَايَةٍ. وَقَوْلُكَ: لَا حَدَّ لَهُ يَعْنِي: أَنَّهُ لَا شَيْءٌ.
قَالَ أَبُو سَعِيدٍ: وَالله تَعَالَى لَهُ حَدٌّ لَا يَعْلَمُهُ أَحَدٌ غَيْرُه، وَلَا يجوزُ لأَحَدٍ أَن يتَوَهَّم لحدِّه غايةً فِي نَفْسِهِ، وَلَكِنْ يُؤْمِنُ بِالحَدِّ ويَكِلُ عِلْمَ ذَلِكَ إِلَى اللهِ، ولِمَكَانِهِ أَيْضًا حَدٌّ، وَهُوَ عَلَى عَرْشِهِ فَوْقَ سَمَاوَاتِهِ، فَهَذَانِ حَدَّانِ اثْنَانِ.
Abū Saʿīd [al-Dārimī] said: The opponent also claimed that Allah has no ḥadd, no ghāyah and no nihāyah. This is the foundation on which Jahm built all his errors and from which he derived his fallacies, and it is a word in which, as far as we know, no one in the world preceded Jahm. Someone among those debating him said to him: I know what you mean by it, O foreigner: you mean that Allah is not a thing, for all creatures know that there is nothing to which the name 'thing' applies but that it has a ḥadd, a ghāyah and an attribute, and that 'no-thing' has no ḥadd, no ghāyah and no attribute. A thing is always described, inevitably, and 'no-thing' is described as without ḥadd and without ghāyah; so your saying 'He has no ḥadd' means that He is not a thing. Abū Saʿīd said: And Allah, the Exalted, has a ḥadd which no one other than Him knows. It is not permissible for anyone to imagine in himself an extremity (ghāyah) for His ḥadd; rather, he believes in the ḥadd and leaves knowledge of it to Allah. And His place also has a ḥadd: He is upon His Throne above His heavens. So these are two ḥadds.
al-Dārimī, Naqḍ ʿalā al-Marīsī (ed. al-Shawāmī) p. 76, 'Bāb al-ḥadd wa-l-ʿarsh'; ed. al-Almaʿī 1/223–224
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
قَالَ أَبُو سَعِيدٍ: وَادَّعَى المُعَارِضُ أَيْضًا أَنَّهُ لَيْسَ لله حَدٌّ وَلَا غَايَةٌ وَلَا نِهَايَةٌ. وَهَذَا هُوَ الأَصْلُ الَّذِي بَنَى عَلَيْهِ جَهْمٌ جَمِيعَ ضَلَالَاتِهِ، وَاشْتَقَّ مِنْهَا أُغْلُوطَاتِهِ، وَهِيَ كَلِمَةٌ لَمْ يَبْلُغْنَا أَنَّهُ سَبَقَ جَهْمًا إِلَيْهَا أَحَدٌ مِنَ العَالَمِينَ.
فَقَالَ [٨/ظ] لَهُ قَائِلٌ مِمَّنْ يُحَاوِرُهُ: قَدْ عَلِمْتُ مُرَادَكَ بِهَا أَيُّهَا الأعجمي، وتعني أَن الله لَا شَيْءٌ؛ لأنَّ الخَلْقَ كُلَّهُم عَلِمُوا أَنَّه لَيْسَ شَيءٌ، يَقَعُ عَلَيْهِ اسْمُ الشَّيْءِ إِلَّا وَلَهُ حَدٌّ وَغَايَةٌ وَصِفَةٌ، وَأَنَّ لَا شَيْءٌ لَيْسَ لَهُ حَدٌّ وَلَا غَايَةٌ وَلَا صِفَةٌ, فَالشَّيْءُ أَبَدًا مَوْصُوفٌ لَا مَحَالَةَ، وَلَا شَيْءٌ يُوصَفُ بِلَا حَدٍّ وَلَا غَايَةٍ. وَقَوْلُكَ: لَا حَدَّ لَهُ يَعْنِي: أَنَّهُ لَا شَيْءٌ.
قَالَ أَبُو سَعِيدٍ: وَالله تَعَالَى لَهُ حَدٌّ لَا يَعْلَمُهُ أَحَدٌ غَيْرُه، وَلَا يجوزُ لأَحَدٍ أَن يتَوَهَّم لحدِّه غايةً فِي نَفْسِهِ، وَلَكِنْ يُؤْمِنُ بِالحَدِّ ويَكِلُ عِلْمَ ذَلِكَ إِلَى اللهِ، ولِمَكَانِهِ أَيْضًا حَدٌّ، وَهُوَ عَلَى عَرْشِهِ فَوْقَ سَمَاوَاتِهِ، فَهَذَانِ حَدَّانِ اثْنَانِ.
وَسُئِلَ ابْنُ المُبَارَكِ: بِمَ نَعْرِفُ رَبَّنَا؟ قَالَ: «بِأَنَّهُ عَلَى العَرْشِ، بَائِنٌ مِنْ خَلْقِهِ. قِيلَ: بِحَدٍّ؟ قَالَ: بِحَدّ».
(٢٨) حدّثنَاهُ الحَسَنُ بْنُ الصَّباح البَزَّارُ، عَنْ عَلِيُّ بْنُ الحَسَنِ بْنِ شَقِيقٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ المُبَارَكِ (١).
فَمَنِ ادَّعَى أَنَّهُ لَيْسَ للهِ حَدٌّ فَقَدْ رَدَّ القُرْآنَ، وَادَّعَى أَنَّهُ لَا شَيْءٌ؛ لِأَنَّ الله حَدَّ مَكَانَهُ فِي مَوَاضِعَ كَثِيرَةٍ مِنْ كِتَابِهِ فَقَالَ: ﴿الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَى (٥)﴾
Al-Dārimī calls the denial of any ḥadd the foundation on which Jahm built all his errors, and says that no one in the world said it before him. Those who forbid the word today therefore repeat Jahm's first premise. Then he draws the distinction on which everything depends. Allah has a ḥadd that no one other than He knows, and no creature can imagine an extent for it. The servant believes in the ḥadd and leaves the knowledge of it to Allah.
“That has reached me from him”, and it pleased him. Then he recited the verses of the Coming, so that he connected the matter with what the Book says of the Lord coming from above. He did not treat the word as a slip of Ibn al-Mubārak that had to be excused.
Third Issue: The Ḥadd Negated: “without a ḥadd and without a measure”
Al-Jāmiʿ li-ʿUlūm al-Imām Aḥmad preserves it from Ibn Baṭṭah:
قلت لأبي عبد اللَّه: والمشبهة ما يقولون؟ قال: بصر كبصري، ويد كيدي، وقدم كقدمي. فقد شبه اللَّه بخلقه وهذا كلام سوء، والكلام في هذا لا أحبه. وأسماؤه وصفاته غير مخلوقة؛ نعوذ باللَّه من الزلل والارتياب والشك، إنه على كل شيء قدير
… and He is upon the Throne without a ḥadd; and He said: 'then He rose over the Throne' — however He willed; the will is His, and the power. 'There is nothing like Him' — as He described Himself, All-Hearing, All-Seeing, without a ḥadd and without a measure. I said to Abū ʿAbd Allāh: And the mushabbihah — what do they say? He said: 'A sight like my sight, a hand like my hand, a foot like my foot.' Then he has likened Allah to His creation; this is evil speech, and I do not like speaking about this. His names and attributes are uncreated; we seek refuge in Allah from slipping, doubt and uncertainty; He is able to do all things.
al-Jāmiʿ li-ʿUlūm al-Imām Aḥmad — al-ʿAqīdah 3/394, citing Ibn Baṭṭah, al-Ibānah, K. al-Radd ʿalā al-Jahmiyyah 3/326–327 (252)
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
قلت لأبي عبد اللَّه: والمشبهة ما يقولون؟ قال: بصر كبصري، ويد كيدي، وقدم كقدمي. فقد شبه اللَّه بخلقه وهذا كلام سوء، والكلام في هذا لا أحبه. وأسماؤه وصفاته غير مخلوقة؛ نعوذ باللَّه من الزلل والارتياب والشك، إنه على كل شيء قدير (١).
"الإبانة" لابن بطة كتاب "الرد على الجهمية" ٣/ ٣٢٦ - ٣٢٧ (٢٥٢).
وقال في رواية أبي طالب: "قلب العبد بين أصبعين" (٢)، و"خلق آدم بيده" (٣) وكلما جاء الحديث مثل هذا قلنا به.
قال حنبل: قال أبو عبد اللَّه في الأحاديث التي تروى "إن اللَّه تبارك
In the report of Ḥanbal, Aḥmad says that Allah is upon the Throne without a ḥadd, and that He is as He described Himself, All-Hearing, All-Seeing, without a ḥadd and without a measure. In the same report he condemns the mushabbihah who say “a hand like my hand”. The negation here is aimed at likening and at creatures' delimiting of Allah.
Al-Khallāl reported from ʿUbayd Allāh, the son of Ḥanbal, what Imām Aḥmad said, and it is preserved in al-Jāmiʿ li-ʿUlūm al-Imām Aḥmad:
Al-Khallāl said: ʿUbayd Allāh ibn Ḥanbal informed me: my father, Ḥanbal ibn Isḥāq, narrated to me, saying: My uncle [Aḥmad] said: We believe that Allah, the Exalted, is upon the Throne however He wills and as He wills, without a ḥadd and without a description that any describer could reach or by which anyone could delimit Him. Allah's attributes are His and from Him, and He is as He described Himself. Sight does not grasp Him with a ḥadd or a ghāyah, and He grasps all sight; He is Knower of the unseen and the witnessed, Knower of hidden things. No describer's description reaches Him, and He is as He described Himself. Nothing of Allah, the Exalted, is delimited (maḥdūd), and no one attains knowledge of His power. He has overcome all things by His knowledge, power and authority. 'There is nothing like Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing' [al-Shūrā 11]. And Allah was before anything existed; Allah is the First and He is the Last; no one reaches the limit (ḥadd) of His attributes. [And upon us is] submission to Allah's command and contentment with His decree. We ask Allah for success and right guidance; He is capable of all things.
al-Jāmiʿ li-ʿUlūm al-Imām Aḥmad 3/395, from al-Khallāl's al-Sunnah. Also: Abū Yaʿlā, Ibṭāl al-Taʾwīlāt p. 598 no. 552 (730/583); Ibn Taymiyyah, Darʾ 2/30–33 and Bayān 2/621, 6/510–511 (with the addition 'wa-lā yuraddu ʿalā Allāh qawluh, wa-lā yūṣafu bi-akthar mimmā waṣafah bihi nafsah bi-lā ḥadd wa-lā ghāyah', via ʿAlī ibn ʿĪsā from Ḥanbal, per the Jāmiʿ editors' footnote); al-Dhahabī, al-ʿArsh 1/257; Ibn al-Qayyim, Ijtimāʿ p. 321
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
"إبطال التأويلات" ١/ ٤٥
قال المروذي: ذكرت لأبي عبد اللَّه حديث محمد بن سلمة الجراني، عن عبد الرحمن قال: حدثني زيد بن أبي أنيسة، عن المنهال، عن أبي عبيدة، عن مسروق قال: حدثنا عبد اللَّه بن مسعود، عن النبي ﷺ (٢). .، قال أبو عبد اللَّه: هذا حديث غريب لم يقع إلينا عن محمد بن سلمة. واستحسنه.
"إبطال التأويلات" ١/ ١٥٧
قال الخلال: أخبرني عبيد اللَّه بن حنبل، حدثني أبي -حنبل بن إسحاق- قال: قال عمي: نحن نؤمن بأنه تعالى على العرش كيف شاء، وكما شاء، بلا حد، ولا صفة يبلغها واصف، ويحده أحد، فصفات اللَّه له ومنه، وهو كما وصف نفسه؛ لا تدركه الأبصار بحد ولا غاية، وهو يدرك الأبصار، وهو عالم الغيب والشهادة، علام الغيوب، ولا يدركه وصف واصف، وهو كما وصف نفسه، ليس من اللَّه تعالى شيء محدود، ولا يبلغ علم قدرته أحد، غلب الأشياء كلها بعلمه وقدرته وسلطانه ﴿لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ﴾ [الشورى: ١١] وكان اللَّه
This is the sentence that is quoted against the others. Read to its end it explains itself: without a ḥadd “that any describer could reach or by which anyone could delimit Him”, and sight does not grasp Him with a ḥadd. He is negating that a creature reaches a limit of Him, in the same sentence in which he says that He is upon the Throne.
Part Three
The imams after them
Fourth Issue: Ibn Taymiyyah’s Reconciliation of the Two Statements on the Ḥadd
Ibn Taymiyyah reported in Bayān Talbīs al-Jahmiyyah:
نحن نؤمن بالله ﷿ على عرشه كيف شاء وكما شاء بلا حد ولا صفة يبلغها واصف أو يحده أحد فصفات الله ﷿ منه وله وهو كما وصف نفسه لا تدركه الأبصار بحد ولا غاية وهو لايدرَك وهو يدرك الأبصار وهو عالم الغيب والشهادة علام الغيوب ولا يدركه وصف واصف وهو كما وصف نفسه وليس من الله شيء محدود ولا يبلغ علمه وقدرته أحد غلب الأشياء كلها بعلمه وقدرته وسلطانه ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصير وكان الله قبل أن يكون شيء والله الأول وهو الآخر ولا يبلغ أحد حد صفاته
This which is preserved from the Salaf and the imams — the affirmation of a ḥadd for Allah in Himself — they explained along with it that the servants do not delimit Him nor comprehend Him. That is why their statements on this are not contradictory, as some people suppose: for they denied that anyone could delimit Allah, as Ḥanbal reported from him [Aḥmad] in Kitāb al-Sunnah wa-l-Miḥnah, and al-Khallāl narrated it in Kitāb al-Sunnah: ʿUbayd Allāh ibn Ḥanbal informed me: my father Ḥanbal ibn Isḥāq narrated to me, saying: My uncle [Aḥmad] said: “We believe in Allah, Mighty and Majestic, upon His Throne, however He wills and as He wills, without a ḥadd and without a description that a describer can attain or by which anyone could delimit Him. The attributes of Allah, Mighty and Majestic, are from Him and belong to Him, and He is as He described Himself: vision does not comprehend Him with a ḥadd or an extremity, and He does not get comprehended while He comprehends all vision; He is the Knower of the unseen and the seen, the All-Knower of the unseen. The description of no describer attains Him; He is as He described Himself. Nothing of Allah is limited (maḥdūd), and none attains [the extent of] His knowledge and power; He overcame all things by His knowledge, His power and His authority. ‘There is nothing like Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing.’ Allah was before anything was; Allah is the First and He is the Last; and none attains the limit (ḥadd) of His attributes.”
Ibn Taymiyyah, Bayān Talbīs al-Jahmiyyah 3/706–707
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
نحن نؤمن بالله ﷿ على عرشه كيف شاء وكما شاء بلا حد ولا صفة يبلغها واصف أو يحده أحد فصفات الله ﷿ منه وله وهو كما وصف نفسه لا تدركه الأبصار بحد ولا غاية وهو لايدرَك وهو يدرك الأبصار وهو عالم الغيب والشهادة علام الغيوب ولا يدركه وصف واصف وهو كما وصف نفسه وليس من الله شيء محدود ولا يبلغ علمه وقدرته أحد غلب الأشياء كلها بعلمه وقدرته وسلطانه ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصير وكان الله قبل أن يكون شيء والله الأول وهو الآخر ولا يبلغ أحد حد صفاته فالتسليم لأمر الله والرضا بقضائه نسأل الله التوفيق والسداد إنه على كل شيء قدير
Abū Yaʿlā attempted an explanation of Aḥmad’s words, and Ibn Taymiyyah holds him to what he said first.
Ibn Taymiyyah said in Bayān Talbīs al-Jahmiyyah:
[Ibn Taymiyyah, on Abū Yaʿlā's explanation:] What he mentioned in interpreting Aḥmad's words is not correct; rather Aḥmad's words are as he [Abū Yaʿlā] said at first: where he negated it [the ḥadd], he negated the delimiter's delimiting of Him and [creatures'] knowledge of His ḥadd; and where he affirmed it, he affirmed it in Himself. The word ḥadd is said of the reality of the delimited thing — its description, or its extent, or both — and is said of the knowledge and the statement that indicate the delimited thing.
Ibn Taymiyyah, Bayān Talbīs al-Jahmiyyah 3/736
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
Ibn Taymiyyah explains that the Salaf who affirmed a ḥadd for Allah in Himself explained with it that the servants do not delimit Him and do not comprehend Him. Their statements therefore do not contradict one another. Where Aḥmad negated a ḥadd, he negated the delimiting of Allah by anyone else and creatures' knowledge of His ḥadd; where he affirmed it, he affirmed it of Allah in Himself.
Ibn Taymiyyah said in Darʾ Taʿāruḍ al-ʿAql wa-l-Naql:
What occurs in [Aḥmad's] words by way of negating that creatures delimit their Lord, measure Him, or attain [knowledge of] His attribute does not contradict what Aḥmad and other imams explicitly stated, as al-Khallāl also reported…
Ibn Taymiyyah, Darʾ Taʿāruḍ al-ʿAql wa-l-Naql 2/34
Source, chain and authenticity
So the negation in Aḥmad's words falls on creatures delimiting their Lord, measuring Him, or attaining His attribute. Nothing in it touches what he stated elsewhere.
And Abū Yaʿlā gathered the reports in Ibṭāl al-Taʾwīlāt, more than two centuries before him:
٥٥٠ - وقال الأثرم: قلت لأحمد: يحكى عن ابن المبارك: نعرف ربنا في السَّماء السَّابعة، على عرشه بحدّ، فقال أحمد: هكذا هو عندنا (¬١).
٥٥١ - ورأيت بخط أبي إسحاق أنا أبو بكر أحمد بن نصر الرفا قال: سمعت أبا بكر بن أبي داود سمعت أبي يقول: جَاء رجل إلى أحمد بن حنبل، فقال له: للَّه ﵎ حَدُّ؟ قال: نعم لا يَعْلمه إلا هُو، قال ﵎: ﴿وَتَرَى الْمَلَائِكَةَ حَافِّينَ مِنْ حَوْلِ الْعَرْشِ﴾ [الزمر: ٧٥] يقول: مُحْدِقيَن. فقد أطلقَ أحمد القول بإثْباتِ الحدِّ لله تعالى.
٥٥٢ - وقد نفاه في رواية حنبل فقال: نحنُ نُؤمن بأن الله على العرش، كيفَ شَاء وكما شَاء، بلا حَدٍّ ولا صِفَةٍ يَبْلُغُها وَاصِف أو يحدُّه أَحَد.
فقد نفى الحَدَّ عنه على الصِّفة المذكورة، وهو الحد الذي يعلمه خلقه.
والموضع الذي أطلقه محمول على معنيين:
أحدهما: على معنى أنَّه تعالى في جهة مخصوصة، وليس هو تعالى ذاهِب في الجهات الستة، بل هو خَارج العالم مُمَيَّز عن خَلْقِه، مُنْفَصِل عنهم غير دَاخل في كل الجهات!.
وهذا معنى قول أحمد: له حدٌّ لا يعلمه إلا هو.
والثاني: أنَّه على صِفة يَبينُ بها عن غيره ويتميز، ولهذا سُمِّي البوَّاب حدادًا، لأنَّه يمنع غيره عن الدخول، فهو تعالى فَرْد واحد ممتنع عن الإشتراك له في أَخصِّ صفاته.
وقد منعنا من إطلاق القول بالحدِّ في غير موضعٍ من كتابنا، ويجب أنْ يجوز على الوجه الذي ذكرنا.
ويجب أنْ يحمل اختلاف كلام أحمد في إثبات الحدِّ، على اختلاف حالين: فالموضع الذي قال إنَّه (على) (¬١) العرش بحدٍّ، معناه: أن ما حاذى العَرش منْ ذَاته هو حدّ له، وجِهَة له.
والموضع الذي قال: هو على العرش بغير حَدٍّ، معناه: ما عَدَا الجهة المُحَاذِية للعَرش، وهي الفوق والخلف والأمام واليمنة واليسرة، وكان الفرق بين جهة التحت المحاذية للعرش، وبين غيرها مما ذكرنا: أن جهة التحت تُحاذي العرش بما قد ثَبَتَ من الدليل، والعرش محدود، فجاز أنْ يُوصف ما حَاذَاه من الذَّات أنَّه حد وجهة.
وليس كذلك فيما عَدَاه، لأنَّه لا يُحاذي ما هو مَحدود، بل هو ما دلَّ في اليمنةِ واليسرةِ والفَوقِ والأَمامِ والخلفِ إلى غير غاية، فلهذا لم يُوصف واحد من ذلك بالحدِّ والجهة.
وجهة العرش تحاذي ما قابله من جهة الذَّات، ولم يُحاذِ جميع الذات، لأنه لا نهاية لها.
549 — Aḥmad stated it without qualification in the report of al-Marrūdhī: Ibn al-Mubārak's statement was mentioned to him, “We know Allah upon the Throne with a ḥadd,” and Aḥmad said: “That has reached me,” and it pleased him. 550 — Al-Athram said: I said to Aḥmad: It is related from Ibn al-Mubārak: “We know our Lord in the seventh heaven, upon His Throne, with a ḥadd.” Aḥmad said: “That is how it is with us.” 551 — I saw in the handwriting of Abū Isḥāq: Abū Bakr Aḥmad ibn Naṣr al-Raffāʾ informed us, saying: I heard Abū Bakr ibn Abī Dāwūd [say]: I heard my father say: A man came to Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal and said to him: “Does Allah, Blessed and Exalted, have a ḥadd?” He said: “Yes, one that none knows but He. Allah, Blessed and Exalted, said: ‘And you will see the angels surrounding (ḥāffīn) the Throne’ [al-Zumar 39:75] — He says: encircling it (muḥdiqīn).” So Aḥmad stated the affirmation of ḥadd for Allah, Exalted is He, without qualification. 552 — And he negated it in the report of Ḥanbal, saying: “We believe that Allah is upon the Throne, however He wills and as He wills, without a ḥadd and without a description that a describer can attain or that anyone can delimit.” So he negated the ḥadd of Him in the manner mentioned, which is the ḥadd that His creatures would know. The place where he stated it without qualification is to be understood in two senses. The first: that He, Exalted is He, is in a specific direction and is not spread out in the six directions; rather He is outside the world, distinct from His creation, separate from them, not inside all the directions — and this is the meaning of Aḥmad's statement, “He has a ḥadd that none knows but He.” The second: that He is of a description by which He is distinct and differentiated from others — hence the doorkeeper is called ḥaddād, because he prevents others from entering; so He, Exalted is He, is singular, one, beyond sharing in His most specific attributes. We have forbidden the unqualified use of the word ḥadd in more than one place in our book, but it must be permitted in the sense we have mentioned. Aḥmad's differing statements on affirming the ḥadd must be understood as referring to two different respects: where he said He is [upon] the Throne with a ḥadd, it means that the part of His Essence facing the Throne is a ḥadd for Him and a direction for Him; and where he said He is upon the Throne without a ḥadd, it means what lies beyond the direction facing the Throne — above, behind, in front, right and left. The difference between the downward direction facing the Throne and the others is that the downward direction faces the Throne by established proof, and the Throne is limited, so it is permissible to describe what faces it of the Essence as a ḥadd and a direction; that is not so for the others, because they do not face anything limited, but rather extend to the right, left, above, in front and behind without end; hence none of them is described with ḥadd and direction. And the direction of the Throne faces what is opposite it of the Essence, not the whole Essence, because it has no end.
Abū Yaʿlā, Ibṭāl al-Taʾwīlāt pp. 598–599, nos. 549–552
Source, chain and authenticity
Abū Yaʿlā sets the reports of al-Marrūdhī and al-Athram one after the other, and they say the same: “it pleased him” and “that is how it is with us”. Aḥmad’s way of showing Yaḥyā’s gesture with his fingers belongs to the same matter, and it is given in the chapter on the Two Hands.
Fifth Issue: Did Imām Aḥmad Say: “whoever says a body unlike bodies has disbelieved”?
Later books attribute to Aḥmad a judgement on those who use the word jism (جِسْم). The way they transmit it shows what it is worth.
Al-Zarkashī said in Tashnīf al-Masāmiʿ:
And the author of al-Khiṣāl, of the Ḥanbalīs, transmitted from Aḥmad that he said: 'Whoever says “a body unlike bodies” has disbelieved'; and he transmitted from the Ashʿarīs that [such a one] is declared a sinner (yufassaq). This transmission from the Ashʿarīs is not correct.
al-Zarkashī (d. 794), Tashnīf al-Masāmiʿ bi-Jamʿ al-Jawāmiʿ 4/648
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
Al-Zarkashī has it from the author of al-Khiṣāl, who lived centuries after Aḥmad, and he gives no chain to Aḥmad here. He also rejects what the same author reports from the Ashʿarīs.
And Ibn Ḥamdān said in Nihāyat al-Mubtadiʾīn:
… and that He resembles nothing and nothing resembles Him. Whoever likens Him to His creation has disbelieved — Aḥmad stated this explicitly; and likewise whoever corporealises [Him], or says 'He is a body unlike bodies' — al-Qāḍī mentioned it.
Ibn Ḥamdān, Nihāyat al-Mubtadiʾīn p. 31
Ibn Ḥamdān separates what Aḥmad stated from what al-Qāḍī mentioned. The judgement on likening is Aḥmad's own, and the addition about the word “body” he attributes to al-Qāḍī. What is established from Aḥmad on this word is that he refused to enter into it. It is not in the Book or the Sunnah, so it is neither affirmed nor denied until the one who uses it says what he means, and that is the rule on the words that the texts did not bring, given in the chapter on the Highness.
Aḥmad's own conduct when the word was put to him is known from his account of the Miḥnah. Ibn Baṭṭah reported it in al-Ibānah al-Kubrā:
Abū ʿAbd Allāh said: They argued with something that my heart is not strong enough, nor my tongue free enough, to relate. They rejected the narrations and the reports, and I had not thought them to be upon this until I heard their statements. Burghūth began saying to me: 'The body (jism) is such-and-such', and speech that is disbelief in Allah the Mighty. So I kept saying: I do not know what this is, except that I know He is One, Self-Sufficient (Aḥad, Ṣamad), with no likeness and no equal, and He is as He described Himself. And he fell silent before me.
Ibn Baṭṭah, al-Ibānah al-Kubrā 6/253–256: 'laqad jaʿalah Burghūth yaqūlu yawmaʾidhin: al-jism wa-kadhā, wa-kalām lā afhamuh, fa-qultu: lā aʿrifu wa-lā adrī mā hādhā, illā annanī aʿlamu annahu aḥad ṣamad, lā shibha lahu wa-lā ʿidl, wa-huwah kamā waṣafah nafsah, fa-yaskutu ʿannī'; al-Dhahabī, Siyar 11/262
Source, chain and authenticity
Burghūth, one of the Jahmiyyah who debated him before the caliph, tried to draw him into arguing about the body. Aḥmad would not touch it.
Al-Dhahabī gave the same account in the Siyar, through Ḥanbal:
فَجعلتُ أَقُوْلُ: مَا أَدرِي مَا هَذَا، إِلاَّ أَنِّي أَعْلَمُ أَنَّهُ أَحَدٌ صَمَدٌ لاَ شِبْهَ لَهُ وَلاَ عِدْلَ، وَهُوَ كَمَا وَصفَ نَفْسَهُ
And Burghūth began saying: 'The Jabrī says such-and-such' — speech that is disbelief in Allah. So I began saying: I do not know what this is, except that I know that He is One, Self-Sufficient, with no likeness and no equal, and He is as He described Himself.
al-Dhahabī, Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ 11/262, Aḥmad's own account of the Miḥnah (via Ḥanbal)
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
وَقَالَ شُعَيْبٌ كَذَلِكَ أَيْضاً: تَقَلَّدْ دَمِي، فَلَمْ يَلْتَفِتْ أَبُو إِسْحَاقَ إِلَيْهِمَا.
وَقَالَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللهِ: لَمْ يَكُنْ فِي القَوْمِ أَشَدُّ تَكْفِيْراً لِي مِنْهُمَا، وَأَمَّا ابْنُ سِمَاعَةَ، فَقَالَ:
يَا أَمِيْرَ المُؤْمِنِيْنَ، إِنَّه مِنْ أَهْلِ بَيْتِ شَرفٍ ولَهُم قَدَمٌ، وَلَعَلَّهُ يَصيرُ إِلَى الَّذِي عَلَيْهِ أَمِيْرُ المُؤْمِنِيْنَ، فَكَأنَّه رقَّ عِنْدَهَا، وَكَانَ إِذَا كَلَّمنِي ابْنُ أَبِي دُوَادَ، لَمْ ألتفتْ إِلَى كَلاَمِه، وَإِذَا كلَّمنِي أَبُو إِسْحَاقَ، أَلَنْتُ لَهُ القَوْلَ.
قَالَ: فَقَالَ فِي اليَوْمِ الثَّالِثِ: أَجِبنِي يَا أَحْمَدُ، فَإِنَّه بَلَغَنِي أَنَّكَ تحبُّ الرِّئاسَةَ، وَذَلِكَ لَمَّا أوَغرُوا قَلْبَه عَلَيَّ.
وَجَعَلَ بَرْغُوْثُ يَقُوْلُ: قَالَ الجَبْرِيُّ: كَذَا وَكَذَا كَلاَمٌ هُوَ الكُفْرُ بِاللهِ.
فَجعلتُ أَقُوْلُ: مَا أَدرِي مَا هَذَا، إِلاَّ أَنِّي أَعْلَمُ أَنَّهُ أَحَدٌ صَمَدٌ لاَ شِبْهَ لَهُ وَلاَ عِدْلَ، وَهُوَ كَمَا وَصفَ نَفْسَهُ، فَسَكَتَ.
وَقَالَ لِي أَبُو إِسْحَاقَ: يَا أَحْمَدُ، إِنِّي لأُشْفِقُ عَلَيْكَ كَشفقَتِي عَلَى ابْنِي هَارُوْنَ، فَأَجِبْنِي، وَاللهِ لَودِدتُ أَنِّي لَمْ أَكُنْ عَرفتُكَ يَا أَحْمَدُ، اللهَ اللهَ فِي دَمِكَ.
فلَمَّا كَانَ فِي آخِرِ ذَلِكَ، قَالَ: لَعنكَ اللهُ، لَقَدْ طَمعتُ أَنْ تُجِيبَنِي.
ثُمَّ قَالَ: خُذُوهُ، وَاسحَبُوهُ.
فَأُخذتُ ثُمَّ خُلِّعتُ، وَجِيْءَ بِعُقَابَيْنِ وَأَسيَاطٍ، وَكَانَ مَعِي شعرٌ مِنْ شعرِ النَّبِيِّ ﷺ ثُمَّ صُيِّرتُ بَيْنَ العُقَابينِ، فَقُلْتُ: يَا أَمِيْرَ المُؤْمِنِيْنَ، اللهَ اللهَ، إِنَّ رَسُوْلَ اللهِ ﷺ قَالَ: (لاَ يَحِلُّ دَمُ امْرِئٍ يَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللهُ وَأَنِّي رَسُوْلُ اللهِ إِلاَّ بِإِحْدَى ثَلاَثٍ) ، يَا أَمِيْرَ المُؤْمِنِيْنَ، فِيمَ تَسْتحلُّ دَمِي؟ اللهَ اللهَ، لاَ تَلقَ اللهَ وَبَيْنِي وَبَيْنَكَ مُطَالَبَةٌ، اذكرْ يَا أَمِيْرَ المُؤْمِنِيْنَ وُقُوفَك بَيْنَ يَدَيِ اللهِ -تَعَالَى- كَوقُوفِي بَيْن يَدَيكَ، وَرَاقبِ اللهَ.
فَكَأَنَّهُ أَمسكَ، فَخَافَ ابْنُ أَبِي دُوَادَ أَنْ يَكُوْنَ مِنْهُ عطفٌ أَوْ رَأفَةٌ، فَقَالَ: إِنَّه كَافِرٌ بِاللهِ، ضَالٌّ مُضِلٌّ.
He said: I do not know what this is, except that I know He is One, Self-Sufficient, with no likeness and no equal, and He is as He described Himself. That is the method. The word was brought by the Jahmiyyah, it was they who pressed it on him in the Miḥnah, and he answered it with the Book.
Part Four
The claims of the opponents and their refutation
The later Ashʿarīs and Māturīdīs: “ḥadd is tajsīm” and “Aḥmad negated the ḥadd”
The claim
Said by Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī in Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb, and by the later Ashʿarīs and Māturīdīs
Affirming a ḥadd for Allah is likening Him to bodies; the Salaf never used the word. Imām Aḥmad said “without a ḥadd”, so he negated it absolutely.
Its origin The Jahmiyyah, who said Allah is in every place and has no limit separating Him from His creation, the very doctrine Ibn al-Mubārak's “with a ḥadd” was said to answer.
The response
Al-Rāzī said in Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb:
Moreover, if it were possible for a thing bounded on all sides to be eternal, without beginning, and the maker of the world, then why could it not be said that the Creator of the world is the sun or the moon or some other star? And that is false by agreement.
al-Rāzī, Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb 14/259, on al-Aʿrāf 7:54
Source, chain and authenticity
Read the page in the source edition (opens in a new tab)
The whole page in Arabic
إِذَا ثَبَتَ هَذَا فَنَقُولُ: الشَّيْءُ الذي هو محل السموات إِمَّا أَنْ يَكُونَ هُوَ عَيْنَ الشَّيْءِ الَّذِي هُوَ مَحَلُّ الْأَرَضِينَ أَوْ غَيْرُهُ فَإِنْ كَانَ الاول لزم كون السموات وَالْأَرَضِينَ حَالَّتَيْنِ فِي مَحَلٍّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْ غَيْرِ امْتِيَازٍ بَيْنَ مَحَلَّيْهِمَا أَصْلًا وَكُلُّ حَالَّيْنِ حَلَّا فِي مَحَلٍّ وَاحِدٍ لَمْ يَكُنْ أَحَدُهُمَا: مُمْتَازًا عن الآخر فلزم ان يقال: السموات لَا تَمْتَازُ عَنِ الْأَرَضِينَ فِي الذَّاتِ وَذَلِكَ بَاطِلٌ وَإِنْ كَانَ الثَّانِي: لَزِمَ أَنْ تَكُونَ ذَاتُ اللَّه تَعَالَى مُرَكَّبَةً مِنَ الْأَجْزَاءِ وَالْأَبْعَاضِ وَهُوَ مُحَالٌ. وَالثَّالِثُ: وَهُوَ أَنَّ ذَاتَ اللَّه تَعَالَى إِذَا كَانَتْ حَاصِلَةً فِي جَمِيعِ الْأَحْيَازِ وَالْجِهَاتِ فَإِمَّا أَنْ يُقَالَ: الشَّيْءُ الَّذِي حَصَلَ فَوْقُ هُوَ/ عَيْنُ الشَّيْءِ الَّذِي حَصَلَ تَحْتُ فَحِينَئِذٍ تَكُونُ الذَّاتُ الْوَاحِدَةُ قَدْ حَصَلَتْ دُفْعَةً وَاحِدَةً فِي أَحْيَازٍ كَثِيرَةٍ وَإِنْ عُقِلَ ذَلِكَ فَلِمَ لَا يُعْقَلُ أَيْضًا حُصُولُ الْجِسْمِ الْوَاحِدِ فِي أَحْيَازٍ كَثِيرَةٍ دُفْعَةً وَاحِدَةً؟ وَهُوَ مُحَالٌ فِي بَدِيهَةِ الْعَقْلِ. وَأَمَّا إِنْ قِيلَ: الشَّيْءُ الَّذِي حَصَلَ فَوْقُ غَيْرُ الشَّيْءِ الَّذِي حَصَلَ تَحْتُ فَحِينَئِذٍ يَلْزَمُ حُصُولُ التَّرْكِيبِ وَالتَّبْعِيضِ فِي ذَاتِ اللَّه تَعَالَى وَهُوَ مُحَالٌ.
وَأَمَّا الْقِسْمُ الثَّانِي: وَهُوَ أَنْ يُقَالَ: أَنَّهُ تَعَالَى مُتَنَاهٍ مِنْ كُلِّ الْجِهَاتِ. فَنَقُولُ: كُلُّ مَا كَانَ كَذَلِكَ فَهُوَ قَابِلٌ لِلزِّيَادَةِ وَالنُّقْصَانِ فِي بَدِيهَةِ الْعَقْلِ وَكُلُّ مَا كَانَ كَذَلِكَ كَانَ اخْتِصَاصُهُ بِالْمِقْدَارِ الْمُعَيَّنِ لِأَجْلِ تَخْصِيصِ مُخَصِّصٍ وَكُلُّ مَا كَانَ كَذَلِكَ فَهُوَ مُحْدَثٌ وَأَيْضًا فَإِنْ جَازَ أَنْ يَكُونَ الشَّيْءُ الْمَحْدُودُ مِنْ كُلِّ الْجَوَانِبِ قَدِيمًا أَزَلِيًّا فَاعِلًا لِلْعَالَمِ فَلِمَ لَا يُعْقَلُ أَنْ يُقَالَ: خَالِقُ الْعَالَمِ هُوَ الشَّمْسُ أَوِ الْقَمَرُ أَوْ كَوْكَبٌ آخَرُ وَذَلِكَ بَاطِلٌ بِاتِّفَاقٍ.
وأما القسم الثالث: وهو أن يقال: أنه مُتَنَاهٍ مِنْ بَعْضِ الْجَوَانِبِ وَغَيْرُ مُتَنَاهٍ مِنْ سَائِرِ الْجَوَانِبِ فَهَذَا أَيْضًا بَاطِلٌ مِنْ وُجُوهٍ أَحَدُهَا: أَنَّ الْجَانِبَ الَّذِي صَدَقَ عَلَيْهِ كَوْنُهُ مُتَنَاهِيًا غَيْرُ مَا صَدَقَ عَلَيْهِ كَوْنُهُ غَيْرَ مُتَنَاهٍ وَإِلَّا لَصَدَقَ النَّقِيضَانِ مَعًا وَهُوَ مُحَالٌ. وَإِذَا حَصَلَ التَّغَايُرُ لَزِمَ كَوْنُهُ تَعَالَى مُرَكَّبًا مِنَ الْأَجْزَاءِ وَالْأَبْعَاضِ وَثَانِيهَا: أَنَّ الْجَانِبَ الَّذِي صَدَقَ حُكْمُ الْعَقْلِ عَلَيْهِ بِكَوْنِهِ مُتَنَاهِيًا إِمَّا أَنْ يَكُونَ مُسَاوِيًا لِلْجَانِبِ الَّذِي صَدَقَ حُكْمُ الْعَقْلِ عَلَيْهِ بِكَوْنِهِ غَيْرَ مُتَنَاهٍ وَإِمَّا أَنْ لَا يَكُونَ كَذَلِكَ وَالْأَوَّلُ بَاطِلٌ لِأَنَّ الْأَشْيَاءَ الْمُتَسَاوِيَةَ فِي تَمَامِ الْمَاهِيَّةِ كُلُّ مَا صَحَّ عَلَى وَاحِدٍ مِنْهَا صَحَّ عَلَى الْبَاقِي وَإِذَا كَانَ كَذَلِكَ: فَالْجَانِبُ لِلَّذِي هُوَ غَيْرُ مُتَنَاهٍ يُمْكِنُ أَنْ يَصِيرَ مُتَنَاهِيًا وَالْجَانِبُ الَّذِي هُوَ مُتَنَاهٍ يُمْكِنُ أَنْ يَصِيرَ غَيْرَ مُتَنَاهٍ وَمَتَى كَانَ الْأَمْرُ كَذَلِكَ كَانَ النُّمُوُّ وَالذُّبُولُ وَالزِّيَادَةُ وَالنُّقْصَانُ وَالتَّفَرُّقُ وَالتَّمَزُّقُ عَلَى ذَاتِهِ مُمْكِنًا وَكُلُّ مَا كَانَ كَذَلِكَ فَهُوَ مُحْدَثٌ وَذَلِكَ عَلَى الْإِلَهِ الْقَدِيمِ مُحَالٌ فَثَبَتَ أَنَّهُ تَعَالَى لَوْ كَانَ حَاصِلًا فِي الْحَيِّزِ وَالْجِهَةِ لَكَانَ إِمَّا أَنْ يَكُونَ غَيْرَ مُتَنَاهٍ مِنْ كُلِّ الْجِهَاتِ وَإِمَّا أَنْ يَكُونَ مُتَنَاهِيًا مِنْ كُلِّ الْجِهَاتِ أَوْ كَانَ مُتَنَاهِيًا مِنْ بَعْضِ الْجِهَاتِ، وَغَيْرَ مُتَنَاهٍ مِنْ سَائِرِ الْجِهَاتِ فَثَبَتَ أَنَّ الْأَقْسَامَ الثَّلَاثَةَ بَاطِلَةٌ فَوَجَبَ أَنْ نَقُولَ الْقَوْلُ بِكَوْنِهِ تَعَالَى حَاصِلًا فِي الْحَيِّزِ وَالْجِهَةِ مُحَالٌ.وَالْبُرْهَانُ الثَّالِثُ: لَوْ كَانَ الْبَارِي تَعَالَى حَاصِلًا فِي الْمَكَانِ وَالْجِهَةِ لَكَانَ الْأَمْرُ الْمُسَمَّى بِالْجِهَةِ إِمَّا أَنْ يَكُونَ مَوْجُودًا مُشَارًا إِلَيْهِ وَإِمَّا أَنْ لَا يَكُونَ كَذَلِكَ وَالْقِسْمَانِ بَاطِلَانِ فَكَانَ الْقَوْلُ بِكَوْنِهِ تَعَالَى حَاصِلًا فِي الْحَيِّزِ وَالْجِهَةِ بَاطِلًا.
أَمَّا بَيَانُ فَسَادِ الْقِسْمِ الْأَوَّلِ: فَلِأَنَّهُ لَوْ كَانَ الْمُسَمَّى بِالْحَيِّزِ وَالْجِهَةِ مَوْجُودًا مُشَارًا إِلَيْهِ فحينئذ/ يكون
His proof from finitude is set out in full and answered, point by point, in the chapter on the Istiwāʾ. What follows is on the word itself and on what Imām Aḥmad said.
The word was used by the Salaf themselves: Ibn al-Mubārak said that Allah is above the Throne with a ḥadd, Imām Aḥmad was pleased with it, and Ḥarb records it in the creed he took from the people of knowledge. What they meant is shown by the language: separation and distinctness from creation. Al-Dārimī identifies the opposite, that Allah has no ḥadd, no extremity and no end, as the foundation of Jahm's errors, because what has no distinctness from anything is not a thing at all.
The same Aḥmad approved Ibn al-Mubārak's “with a ḥadd”. A scholar's words are read together: in the report of Ḥanbal the negation stands beside his rejection of “a hand like my hand”, so it is aimed at likening and at creatures' delimiting of Allah. Ibn Taymiyyah states it exactly: where Aḥmad negated, he negated the delimiting of Allah by others and their knowledge of His ḥadd; where he affirmed, he affirmed it of Allah in Himself.
The Salaf's two statements answer two different errors. “With a ḥadd” answers the Jahmī who mixes the Creator with the creation; “without a ḥadd” answers whoever imagines that a creature can know the extent of Allah. The opponents take the second to cancel the first, and so they return to the doctrine that the first was said against: a Lord with no distinction from His creation. Their judgement is the judgement the Salaf passed on that doctrine.
Those who say that the Salaf negated the ḥadd absolutely should see who taught that negation first.
Imām Aḥmad reported what the Jahmiyyah said, in al-Radd ʿalā al-Jahmiyyah wa-l-Zanādiqah:
…the Jahmiyyah. When people ask them about Allah's word 'There is nothing like Him', they say: There is nothing like Him among things; He is beneath the seven earths just as He is upon the Throne; no place is devoid of Him; He is not in one place to the exclusion of another; He did not speak and does not speak; no one looks at Him in this world or the next; He is not described and not known by any attribute; He does not act; He has no extremity (ghāyah) and no end-point (muntahā)…
al-Radd, p. 98. Also Bayān Talbīs 3/455–456
Source, chain and authenticity
“He has no extremity and no end-point” is Aḥmad's own report of the Jahmiyyah, and it sits in one list with “He is beneath the seven earths”, “He did not speak”, and “no one looks at Him”. The later books repeat the first of these under the name of transcendence while rejecting some of the others, and they have no answer to the Jahmī who says that he took them all from one premise.
Sources
- Abū Yaʿlā, Ibṭāl al-Taʾwīlāt
- Ibn Fāris, Maqāyīs al-Lughah
- Ibn Manẓūr, Lisān al-ʿArab
- Ibn Taymiyyah, Bayān Talbīs al-Jahmiyyah
- Ibn Taymiyyah, Darʾ Taʿāruḍ al-ʿAql wa-l-Naql
- Ibn Ḥamdān, Nihāyat al-Mubtadiʾīn
- Scan (edition unidentified). Parallel: Ibn Baṭṭah, al-Ibānah al-Kubrā
- al-Azharī, Tahdhīb al-Lughah
- al-Dhahabī, Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ
- al-Dārimī, Naqḍ ʿalā al-Marīsī (ed. al-Almaʿī)
- al-Dārimī, Naqḍ ʿalā al-Marīsī (ed. al-Shawāmī)
- al-Jāmiʿ li-ʿUlūm al-Imām Aḥmad
- al-Jāmiʿ li-ʿUlūm al-Imām Aḥmad — al-ʿAqīdah
- al-Radd
- al-Rāzī, Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb
- al-Rāzī, Mukhtār al-Ṣiḥāḥ, s.v. ḥ-d-d: usul.ai digital text vol.
- al-Zarkashī (d.
- al-Ṣāḥib ibn ʿAbbād, al-Muḥīṭ fī al-Lughah
- Ḥarb al-Kirmānī, the creed in Ijmāʿ al-Salaf fī al-Iʿtiqād kamā ḥakāhu Ḥarb (ed. ʿĀdil Āl Ḥamdān)