Part 32

'’ A|-Baqillani, Abu Bakr Muhammad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ja‘far (338-403 A.H.), was a judge and a famous Ash‘arite theologian. [Al-Zirikli, vol. 7, p. 46.]

LITERAL MEANING AND FIGURATIVE MEANING 131

following the example of Abu al-Hassan al-Ash‘ari and most of his followers. As for Abu ‘Abbas al-Callowness, Abu ‘Ali al-Thaqafi,”” and Abu ‘Abd Allah Ibn Mujahid,”' the teacher of Judge Abu Bakr and a follower of Abu al-Hassan, all of them supported the doctrines of the pious ancestors. Ibn Kullab, al-Husayn Ibn alFadl al-Bajli,”* and others like them used to say: “Belief is both tasdiq, assent, and qawl, a saying,” which is in accordance with the views of Kufan jurisprudents such as Hammad Ibn Abi Sulayman”? and his followers, such as Abu Hanifah and others.

29 |-Thagafi, Abu ‘All Muhammad Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab (?-328 A.H.) was scholar of figh of the Shafi school. [Kitab al-Iman MZ, pp. 124-25.]

2 Abu ‘Abd Allah Ibn Mujahid, Muhammad Ibn Ahmad (?-370 A.H.), was a jurist of the Ash‘arite school and a student of al-Baqillani. [Kitab al-Iman MZ, p. 125.]

2 Aj-Husayn Ibn al-Fad] al-Bajli (7-282 A.H.) was a scholar of hadith and wrote a commentary on the Quran. [Kitab al-Iman MZ, p. 125.]

? Hammad Ibn Abi Sulayman, Abu Isma‘il (2-120 A.H.), was a scholar of hadith and narrated hadith from Anas Ibn Malik. [Kitab al-Iman MZ, p. 125.]

The Ash‘arites’ and Other Sects’ Opinions of Iman and A Refutation by the Author

Abu al-Hassan al-Ash ‘ari supported Jahm Ibn Safwan’s view of belief, although he also supported the well-known view transmitted on the authority of the people of the Sunnah, according to which if one states, that ana mu’ min, / am a believer, he must add the clause, in sha>a Allah, if Allah wills. This is because al-Ash‘ari supported the doctrine of the people of the Sunnah in that he did not declare any of the people of the Qiblah to be unbelievers or claim that they would remain forever in Hell. He also believed that intercession could be made on their behalf. Moreover, whenever a dispute over any matter arose between Ahl al-Hadith, the People of Hadith, and others, al-Asha‘ti always supported the view held by the People of Hadith. At the same time, however, he was not well versed in their arguments, and for this reason he tended to support their views on the basis of principles that he himself had adopted from others, the result of which was the appearance of contradictions that were disavowed by parties on both sides of the dispute. Something similar occurred with respect to the issue of belief, in which he supported the view of Jahm Ibn Safwan while at the same time supporting the position of istithan’, exception, when speaking of belief—that is, he added the conditional clause, “if Allah wills” whenever describing oneself or anyone else as having belief. On account of this he was opposed by many of his followers over the issue of exception, and we shall mention below the arguments upon which he based his view in this regard.’In his acceptance of Jahm’s view of belief, however, he was supported by most of his followers. Those who were only familiar with books presenting scholastic theology and who were not aware of the views of the pious ancestors and leaders of Orthodox Islam in this regard may think that the arguments they [the followers of al-Ash‘ari] cited represented the view of the people of the Sunnah, whereas in fact it is a view that was never held by any

THE ASH‘ARITES’ AND OTHER SECTS’ OPINIONS 133

Orthodox Muslim leader. As for Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Waki‘, and others, they declared all who supported Jahm’s and al-Ash‘ari’s views of belief to be unbelievers. To Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and his followers, Jahm’s view on belief was even more odious than that of the Murji’ites. For this reason, the Zaydites and Mut*tazilites sects, who held al-Shafi‘l in great honor, began to challenge many of the views that were attributed to him [Abu al-Hassan al-Ash‘ari], saying: “AlShafi‘ was neither a philosopher nor a Murji’ite, but here we have philosophers who were both Murji’ites and supporters of al-Ash‘ari.” Their purpose in saying so was to criticize the position of the Murji’ites, and we mention their argument because it was well known among many later thinkers who traced their views back to the Sunnah. This is the argument that serves as the basis for support of Jahm’s view on belief, and both the people of the Sunnah and others have offered various answers to this question.

THE ASH‘ARITES’ OPINION OF IMAN AS STATED BY AL-BAQILLANI

In the book of al-Tamhid, al-Qadi Abu Bakr [al-Baqillani] said that if they said: What is belief? Say: Belief is tasdiq, assent, in Allah; and it is knowledge. Assent exists in the heart. If they said: What is your evidence for this? Say: All Arab philologists agree that the meaning of belief is assent. This meaning was confirmed even before the revelation of the Qur’4n and the Message of the Prophet (pbuh). Philologists do not recognize any other meaning for Iman. This is confirmed by the saying of Allah: “. .. But you will never believe us! . . .” (12:17). That is, believe in what we say. Further support is deduced from their saying that this man believes in intercession but that man does not believe in the torment of the grave after death—that is, he does not acknowledge its reality. Hence, they regard the Iman in Islamic Law to be the same as the Iman known in the Arabic language. For Allah neither changed nor transformed the Arabic tongue. If he had done so our ancestors would have reported it and the Islamic community would have adhered to it and kept its continuity. Also, its usage would have dominated and this linguistic fact would not be hidden. But, to our knowledge, this did not happen, which indicates that speech as a whole and words that name things kept their continuity. A further indication is that the word Iman used in Islamic Law is the same as it is in the Arabic language. In support of this Allah says: “We never sent a Messenger except with the language of his own

people. . .” (14:4). He also says: “We have revealed it as an Arabic Qur’an . . .” (43:3). In this verse, Allah declares that He has revealed the Qur’an in the language of the Arabs and has named things in Arabic. Hence, it is not permissible to deny the apparent meaning of these verses without a strong argument, especially the declaration that the Qur’4n was revealed in Arabic. This indicates that Iman is the essence of belief in Allah apart from all acts of obedience, both supererogatory acts and required practices.

THE REPLY OF ORTHODOX MUSLIMS TO THE ASH‘ARITES

This is the argument that serves as the basis for support of Jahm’s views on Iman, and both the people of the Sunnah and others have offered various answers to this question:

There are some who disagree with Jahm’s view that the word Iman in the Arabic language is synonymous with tasdiq, assent. Yet he insists that Iman also means iqrar, verbal confession or acknowledgment of belief, as well as other meanings.

There are those who say that linguistically the word Iman means assent. Then such belief is manifested through the heart, the tongue, and all other parts of the body as well. This is supported by the saying of the Prophet (pbuh): “One’s tongue confirms or denies Iman.”

One may say that Iman is not absolute tasdiq, assent, but rather a specific assent that is conditioned by qualifications attached to the term itself. Moreover, this is neither a transmission nor a changing of the term, for Allah does not command us to exercise an absolute Iman, but rather a specific sort of belief that He has described and elucidated.

Even if Iman means tasdiq, perfect assent in the heart requires the obligatory deeds of the heart and other parts of the body. For negation of an obligation signals negation of the perfection of Iman. And we say: These requirements are sometimes included in the referent of the term “belief,” while, at other times, they are excluded from it.

THE ASH‘ARITES' AND OTHER SECTS’ OPINIONS 135

5. There are those who say that the term Iman retains the same meaning it has conveyed in the Arabic language, although the Prophet added regulations and restrictions to it.

6. There are those who say that the term Iman still has its linguistic meaning, but the Prophet (pbuh) used it in a metaphoric sense, so that it conveys a literal meaning from the legal point of view, and a figurative meaning from the linguistic point of view.

7. Some say that the term Iman is manqiil, transmitted.

We have enumerated seven different views, the first of which challenges the claim that the word Iman means assent in the Arabic language, stating instead that it means igrar, verbal confession.

Ibn Taymiyyah’s Refutation of the Ash‘arites’ Opinion

1. The Ash‘arites say that the people of the language [the Arabs] unanimously agreed that before the revelation of the Qur’an, Iman meant tasdiq, assent. Against this, the author asks them: Who transmitted this total consensus of opinion [on this matter]? And how do we know that? And in which book was it mentioned?

2. Do you mean by the “people of language,” the transmitters such as Abu <Amr,' al-Asma‘i,” al-Khalil,? and others or its speakers? On one hand, if they meant the transmitters, then one can argue that the transmitters did not transmit everything before Islam on the basis of a chain of authority. Instead, they transmitted what they heard from the Arabs living in their own times and what they heard from collections of poetry and the speech of the Arabs and others by chains of transmission. Hence, nobody knows

‘Abu ‘Amr, Ibn al-‘Al@? (2-154 A.H.), was a very well-known reciter of the Quran and a philologist. [Kitab al-Iman MZ, p. 128.]

2 Al-Asma‘, Abu ‘Abd al-Malik Ibn Qurayb (122-216 A.H.), was a famous philologist and a scholar of Arabic literature and poetry. [E/ 1, p. 717 and al-Zirikli, vol. 4, pp. 307-8.]

> Al-Khalil Ibn Ahmad al-Farahidi (2-175 A.H.) was a very famous Arab grammarian and

philologist and the first to develop the rules of Arabic prosody. His major work was the first Arabic dictionary entitled al-‘Ayn. [EI 2, vol.4, p. 963 and al-Fihrist, vol. 2, p. 1030.]

whether the term Iman was part of what they transmitted or not. On the other hand, if they meant the pre-Islamic speakers of the term Iman, then we did not hear them and none were transmitted.

3. It is not known that any of these [transmitters] said that the linguistic meaning of Iman is tasdiq, assent; in fact, we do not know that any of them stated that. And even if it were suggested that one or two of them did, it would not constitute a consensus of opinion concerning this matter.