The Middle Path (Al-Wasatiyyah) Between Ta'til and Tashbih

One of Ibn Taymiyyah's most important contributions in Al-Aqeedah al-Hamawiyyah is his articulation of the middle path (al-wasatiyyah) in the matter of divine attributes — a path that avoids two opposite errors that have afflicted Muslim theological discourse. The first error is ta'til, which means the negation or emptying of Allah's attributes of their real meanings. The second error is tashbih, which means likening Allah's attributes to those of created beings. The Athari position, which Ibn Taymiyyah defends as the position of the Salaf, navigates between these two extremes with precision.

Ta'til manifests in different degrees. At its most extreme, it involves denying that Allah has any attributes whatsoever — a position associated with the Jahmiyyah and the Mu'tazilah, who argued that affirming attributes for Allah necessarily implies multiplicity and composition, which they believed contradicted divine unity. A less extreme form of ta'til appears in the later Ash'arite and Maturidi traditions, where certain attributes — particularly those related to Allah's actions, such as His descent, His coming, and His settling over the Throne — are interpreted metaphorically so that they refer to something other than what the words appear to say.

Ibn Taymiyyah argues that both forms of ta'til are innovations. They arose from importing Greek philosophical concepts into Islamic theology and then attempting to harmonize revelation with those concepts. When the texts of the Quran and Sunnah seemed to conflict with Aristotelian notions of divine simplicity and incorporeality, the theologians who had adopted those philosophical frameworks chose to reinterpret the texts rather than question the philosophical assumptions.

Tashbih, on the other hand, is the error of the Mushabbihah — those who affirm Allah's attributes in a way that makes them identical in nature to human attributes. This too is rejected categorically. Allah's statement "There is nothing like unto Him" (42:11) is an explicit negation of any resemblance between the Creator and the created. When Allah says He has a Hand, this does not mean a hand like the hands of human beings or jinn or angels. When He says He settles over the Throne, this does not mean a settling like the settling of a body on a surface.

The Athari position, as Ibn Taymiyyah presents it, combines two moves simultaneously: full affirmation of the attribute in its reality, and complete negation of any likeness to creation. This is not a tension or contradiction — it is the very thing that Quran 42:11 teaches. The verse affirms two attributes (Hearing and Sight) in the same breath as it negates likeness. The Salaf read this as a template for all attribute discussions: affirm in reality, negate in likeness.

Practically, this means a Muslim says: Allah truly settled over His Throne, but not in the manner that a king settles upon a throne. Allah truly descends to the lowest heaven, but not in the manner that a creature descends from one place to another. The modality (kayfiyyah) is unknown and unknowable — it is not our place to ask "how," because our minds have no basis for imagining it. But the reality of the attribute is affirmed because Allah Himself has affirmed it.

This chapter of the treatise explains why the Salaf consistently refused to engage in speculative discussion of the "how" of divine attributes. Their refusal was not evasion or ignorance — it was the theologically mature recognition that affirming the attribute and suspending judgment on its modality is the only honest and reverent response to revelation. Ibn Taymiyyah presents this wasatiyyah not as a compromise between two positions, but as the original and correct position that the other two deviate from.