Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

"In a way that befits His majesty"

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
11 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

God is present everywhere, in every place and in everything, with His Person?

God is present, He is not absent. He simply cannot. It is His presence through which & by which things got existence. In other words existence is one single reality. 

الله نور السموات و الارض

Places, in & out, above & beneath, right and left are meaningless while discussing God. He is not relative to anything. 

هو الظاهر هو الباطن

Edited by Cool
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Nevertheless, he is one of your theologians, considered a member of your sect, a companion of your Imams, and a trustworthy narrator that has been praised. My original point was that the accusation of

Do you believe God is above us, such that if I look towards the sky, God will be there if I keep going up? Also, in a previous discussion you said God's power and knowledge are distinct. Where di

He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is All-Seeing by no visual means. He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is All-Hearing by no hearing means. He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) hears what He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) see

Posted Images

4 minutes ago, Cool said:

God is present, He is not absent. He simply cannot. It is His presence through which & by which things got existence. In other words existence is one single reality. 

الله نور السموات و الارض

Places, in & out, above & beneath, right and left are meaningless while discussing God. He is not relative to anything. 

سوال گندم جواب چنا

I didn’t ask you if God is present, I asked you is He omnipresent with His Person. First you said yes, now you are back peddling and saying “place is meaningless while discussing God”.

So do you believe God is omnipresent in His Person or not? Omnipresent in His Person means He is present in all places. You are confused, incoherent, and need to clarify your belief.

Edited by Cherub786
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Cherub786 said:

I didn’t ask you if God is present, I asked you is He omnipresent with His Person

Let me ask you a reverse question, is God absent from anywhere?

 

5 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

So do you believe God is omnipresent in His Person or not? Omnipresent in His Person means He is present in all places. You are confused and need to clarify your belief.

As I said, places, directions, ins & outs are meaningless for God for He is omnipresent. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Cool said:

Let me ask you a reverse question, is God absent from anywhere?

As I said, places, directions, ins & outs are meaningless for God for He is omnipresent. 

Looks like you’re still confused.

Perhaps you have a different definition of omnipresence.

Omnipresent means “present everywhere at the same time”

Everywhere necessarily includes every place. Therefore, it doesn’t make sense for you to say God is omnipresent while also saying God doesn’t exist in any place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Cherub786 said:

Omnipresent means “present everywhere at the same time”

Yes, He is present not absent. He is not relative to here & there, weather & time. 

Omnipresent means simply Present & not absent. Everywhere & time is relative to us not to God.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Cherub786 said:

According to which dictionary?

According to the dictionary of Allah.

فَأَيْنَمَا تُوَلُّواْ فَثَمَّ وَجْهُ اللّهِ

وَالظَّاهِرُ وَالْبَاطِنُ

 وَهُوَ مَعَكُمْ أَيْنَ مَا كُنْتُمْ

وَنَحْنُ أَقْرَبُ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ حَبْلِ الْوَرِيدِ

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cool said:

According to the dictionary of Allah.

Sorry, dude, but you lost the plot.

I asked you for the definition of an English word omnipresent. According to you “omnipresent means simply present & not absent”.

However, that is the definition of present “not absent”.

What is the definition of omnipresent according to the dictionary?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
7 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

I asked you for the definition of an English word omnipresent.

Omnipresent obviously means everywhere every time. But God is not relative to where & time. His presence simply means for us everywhere every time. For Him, He is not but Present. 

Perhaps it is getting difficult for you. Because you believe God is somewhere i.e., in the heavens & upon the throne.

Edited by Cool
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cool said:

Omnipresent obviously means everywhere every time.

Yes, why didn’t you say so earlier? Anyway, let's move on...

Quote

But God is not relative to where & time. His presence simply means for us everywhere every time. For Him, He is not but Present. 

So from our perspective, according to you, God is everywhere. Everywhere means every place that exists. The sewer is a place that exists. According to you, is God present in the sewer? معاذ الله

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

So from our perspective, according to you, God is everywhere. Everywhere means every place that exists.

Again why are you applying places & directions on God? 

6 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

The sewer is a place that exists. According to you, is God present in the sewer? معاذ الله

Places are relative to us, not to God. Time is relative to us not to God.

But lets say from our (human) perspective, everywhere including sewer. What do you recite while going to defecate? And why do you recite? Who listens to the creatures living in the sewer? who grants them rizq? Who do "infaq" to them? Who has created them? Who has made for them their dwelling place i.e., sewer? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@Cherub786 It is now clear that you assume that your God has a body, that's why you are expecting bodily presence and asking the same. And that's why you say His presence is limited to a place (heavens).

We believe that God doesn't have a body, He is immaterial. So when we believe His power and knowledge are everywhere, why should we deny his presence (omnipresence)? 

If every event, everywhere, takes place by God's power, and if He has exhaustive knowledge of everything His power has brought to pass, then certainly He is not absent, but present in each event, though His presence is not quite the same as presence of physical beings. So God's omnipotence and omniscience imply his omnipresence.

قَالَ لَا تَخَافَا إِنَّنِي مَعَكُمَا أَسْمَعُ وَأَرَى

20:46 

Edited by Cool
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Cherub786 said:

Why has the Quran listed these attributes separately when they are identical?

Even the philosophers, the ones who prove that God's attributes are all identical to God, had to list out attributes separately (for example if you read Ed Feser's five proofs, he mentions in one premise that God is omnipotent, but in another premise he mentions God is fully good, and in another premise he mentions another attribute etc.). 

The reason this is done is because these terms are not synonymous. Now you might ask, how do these terms have different meanings, yet are all identical in God? We have to go a couple steps back to a few points: our knowledge of God is through creatures. Our understanding of terms like knowledge and power and life are derived from creatures. Thus, all these terms fall short in truly representing God. This is because, all these attributes are different in creatures and we conceive of them as different properties. Also, although these properties may be actualities in creatures, they are limited as they are not purely actual. So, these different terms are just our limited point of view in signifying one and the same wholly perfect purely actual simple divine essence, under different aspects. Thus, they are not synonymous.

Maybe my explanation here was unclear, this may be a better one:

Quote

we know God through creatures, and we know God's perfections as they are divided up in many and various ways in the perfections of creatures. We describe God through those perfections which are each imperfect realizations of God’s perfections, imperfect each in their own way. Those different perfections are not described by synonyms even though they derive from a perfectly simple being. The different points of view are not useless because they each represent the single reality in a different imperfect but complementary way.

23 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

Is it correct to say “Allah hears what is visual (the color of my skin) and sees what is audible (the sound of my voice)?”

No, because the terms hears and sees are not synonymous. 

Although, God does hear with what He sees, and He sees with what He Hears i.e. His essence. His hearing is His seeing, which are both identical to His knowledge, which are all just identical to Him. Even though they are all identical to God, they each say something different about God according to our limited point of view in signifying one and the same wholly perfect purely actual simple divine essence

Hearing and seeing according to our point of view are different. Our knowledge of God comes from the limited actualities of creatures. Hearing for us relates to audible things, and seeing relates to visual things. This is because, for us to hear, another creature makes a sound, and then the sound waves travel to our ears. For us to see, light needs to be reflected off an object, and then travel to our eyes. Now, God really does have the actualities/perfections of hearing and seeing, he just has them in a more excellent way than we do. Thus, hearing and seeing are not synonymous, so saying God hears and sees is not just saying God hears and hears, or God sees and sees. But again, in God, His hearing is the same His sight, and they are both different ways to signify His knowledge (which is identical to God), and God does not need to receive anything like sound waves. 

On 9/14/2020 at 1:37 PM, Cherub786 said:

What does the Quran mean when it says “Allah has already heard the saying of her that disputes with you” (58:1)

Can it also be said Allah saw the “saying of her that disputes with you” with no difference in meaning?

I don't interpret it as sound waves travelling to God or God receiving sound. 

I would interpret hearing in this verse as God having knowledge of the caller, and uses the term 'heard' because that is how we have knowledge of audible things.

I do not think we can just replace the terms 'heard' in the verse with the term 'saw', because again, these are not synonyms. 

On 9/14/2020 at 1:37 PM, Cherub786 said:

Are all God’s properties extrinsic, or are some intrinsic?

Some are extrinsic and some are intrinsic. From my understanding, extrinsic properties are referred to as attributes of action or Cambridge properties, and intrinsic properties are referred to as attributes of essence. 

On 9/14/2020 at 1:37 PM, Cherub786 said:

How do you determine which properties are extrinsic and which are intrinsic?

If creation is involved, or a relation with creation rather, then it is extrinsic. For example, God being the Sustainer, or Punisher, or Forgiving, all are extrinsic properties. 

Shaykh al-Mufid mentions other ways to determine which are intrinsic, and which are extrinsic. 

On 9/14/2020 at 1:37 PM, Cherub786 said:

The Quran says Allah spoke to Moses particularly or directly (4:164). What does it mean?

Why was Moses singled out for direct speech with God?

This is Ayatullah Ja'far Subhani's explanation:

Quote

As we have seen in the verse cited above [42:51], the Qur'an establishes the fact that God speaks to His slaves according to three modes of self-disclosure. It is impossible for the speech of God to reach man except by the following three modes: (a) ‘unless [it be] by revelation’—in other words, by divine inspiration; (b)‘or from behind a veil’—in other words, that man can hear God’s speech, but cannot see Him (God’s speech to Moses took this form); (c) ‘or [that] He sendeth a Messenger’—in other words, an angel is sent by God to man to convey the inspiration. In this verse, the speech of God has been explained as having been brought into being by God, either directly without intermediary, or indirectly through the intermediary of an angel. According to the first mode—divine inspiration—God sometimes casts His words directly into the heart of the Prophet, and sometimes He causes His words to enter the heart after having first been heard by the ear. In all three modes of speech, however, the words of God are brought into being. The speech of God is therefore to be considered as one of the attributes of Divine Activity.

  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

 to believe He is omnipresent is a disgusting heresy.

Do you believe God is above us, such that if I look towards the sky, God will be there if I keep going up?

Also, in a previous discussion you said God's power and knowledge are distinct. Where did you get this from? Th Qur'an or Sunnah? The salaf? Ibn Taymiyyah? 

Edited by Follower of Ahlulbayt
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
5 minutes ago, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

Where did you get this from? Th Qur'an or Sunnah? The salafi? Ibn Taymiyyah? 

It appears that he is a fan of ibn Taymiyyah :D

Quote

The Omnipresence Of The Divine Knowledge
6:3 And He is Allâh (to be worshipped Alone) in the heavens and on the earth, He knows what you conceal and what you reveal, and He knows what you earn (good or bad).
*Note:1 [Ibn kathir inteprets this verse under the title "All Praise is Due to Allah for His Glorious Ability and Great Power"-(And He is Allah in the heavens and the earth, He knows what you conceal and what you reveal, and He knows what you earn.) Meaning, it is He Who is called Allah, throughout the heavens and the earth, that is, it is He who is worshipped, singled out, whose divinity is believed in by the inhabitants of the heavens and the earth. They call Him Allah, and they supplicate to Him in fear and hope, except those who disbelieve among the Jinns and mankind. In another Ayah, Allah said;(It is He Who is God in the heavens and the earth.)﴿43:84﴾ meaning, He is the God of those in heaven and those on earth, and He knows all affairs, public and secret.(And He knows what you earn) all the good and bad deeds that you perform.]
*Note :2 Those who deny that Allaah is above His 'Arsh, dubiously argue that this verse supports their argument. Their argument is refuted by realizing that this verse refers to the knowledge of Allaah, according to the renowned exegetes, not His essence

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

So from our perspective, according to you, God is everywhere. Everywhere means every place that exists. The sewer is a place that exists. According to you, is God present in the sewer? معاذ الله

Here is the response of Ahlul Sunnah for this question:

https://islamreigns.wordpress.com/2016/10/28/a-response-to-akhi-if-allah-is-everywhere-then-is-he-also-in-filthy-places/

And here is what they say about omnipresence:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/islamreigns.wordpress.com/2017/01/18/what-does-omnipresence-of-allah-taala-mean/amp/

 

Edited by Cool
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
9 hours ago, Cool said:

@ShiaMan14 is not denying that Allah is Al-Sami, Al-Baseer. He believes that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is not "mohtaj" of ears & eyes for listening & watching. He is not "mohtaj" of organs to speak. 

 

Thanks and exactly.

9 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

Let him speak for himself. He clearly and emphatically denied, twice, that God hears and sees. He is now also denying that God speaks.

I never asked him about eyes and ears, I asked him quite simply “Does God see and hear?” and he answered “no!” with an exclamation mark, twice.

So let's let the cat out of the bag.

The answer to the question "does God see, hear, speak?" varies depending on who is asking.

Simple-minded sunnis think that because:

  • Allah sees, He must have eyes;
  • Allah hears therefore He has ears;
  • Allah speaks therefore He has a tongue.

In order to ensure that they don't go down the path of shirk and start attributing human features to Allah, the answer HAS to be NO.

Seeing involves:
First, light passes through the cornea (the clear front layer of the eye). The cornea is shaped like a dome and bends light to help the eye focus.
Some of this light enters the eye through an opening called the pupil (PYOO-pul). The iris (the colored part of the eye) controls how much light the pupil lets in.
Next, light passes through the lens (a clear inner part of the eye). The lens works together with the cornea to focus light correctly on the retina.
When light hits the retina (a light-sensitive layer of tissue at the back of the eye), special cells called photoreceptors turn the light into electrical signals.
These electrical signals travel from the retina through the optic nerve to the brain. Then the brain turns the signals into the images you see.
Your eyes also need tears to work correctly.

Based on this definition of seeing, NO Allah does not see.

Hearing involves:
Sound is transmitted as sound waves from the environment. The sound waves are gathered by the outer ear and sent down the ear canal to the eardrum.
The sound waves cause the eardrum to vibrate, which sets the three tiny bones in the middle ear into motion.
The motion of the bones causes the fluid in the inner ear or cochlea to move.
The movement of the inner ear fluid causes the hair cells in the cochlea to bend. The hair cells change the movement into electrical pluses.
These electrical impulses are transmitted to the hearing (auditory) nerve and up to the brain, where they are interpreted as sound.

Based on this definition of hearing, NO Allah does not hear.

Speaking involves:
Vocal cords are situated in the larynx, which is placed at the top of the trachea. They are layers of mucous membranes that stretch across the larynx and control how air is expelled from the lungs in order to make certain sounds.
As air is expelled from the lungs, the vocal folds vibrate and collide to produce a range of sounds.
The type of sound emitted is effected by exactly how the folds collide, move and stretch as air passes over them.
An individual ‘fundamental frequency’ (their standard pitch) is determined by the length, size and tension of their vocal cords.
Movement of the vocal folds is controlled by the vagus nerve, and sound is then further fine-tuned to form words and sounds that we can recognize by the larynx, tongue and lips.

Based on this definition of speaking, NO Allah does not speak.

While Cherry only asked the first part of his question about Allah seeing, hearing, speaking, I went ahead and answered the subsequent part as well.

To reiterate - Allah does not have organs, limbs, body, etc.

#AllahIsNotZeus

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
6 hours ago, Cool said:

Omnipresence in simple matter:

and Allah is witness to all things. Qur'an 58:6

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) clears it:

"He is with everything but not in physical nearness. He is different from everything but not in physical separation."

Edited by Abu Nur
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Cool said:

@Cherub786 It is now clear that you assume that your God has a body, that's why you are expecting bodily presence and asking the same.

We believe that God doesn't have a body, He is immaterial.

Actually, I don’t say God is a body or has a body.

Interestingly, the first Mujassima (those who believe God is a body, corporeal) were the Shi’ah.

Some of your most respected theologians, companions and narrators from your sixth Imam, namely, Hisham b. al-Hakam and Hisham b. Salim al-Jawaliqi, were the pioneer theologians of this doctrine that “God is a body”.

This is mentioned in the books of heresiography and in al-Kafi itself:

1428552726_HishamsSaidAllahisaBody(alKafiv_1p.61).png.e6a9e05959255d7cabefd72edb4691d8.png

Likewise, Yunus b. Abd ar-Rahman al-Qummi believed and taught that Allah is carried by Angels, the Hamalat al-Arsh. He was also one of your venerated theologians.

Then there was Zurarah b. A’yun, who taught: “Allah did not live, nor have power, nor hear, nor see, nor know, nor wish, until He created for himself life, and power, and knowledge, and will, and hearing, and seeing. It was after he had created these attributes for Himself that He became living, powerful, wise, wishing, hearing, and seeing.”

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
31 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

Actually, I don’t say God is a body or has a body.

Interestingly, the first Mujassima (those who believe God is a body, corporeal) were the Shi’ah.

Some of your most respected theologians, companions and narrators from your sixth Imam, namely, Hisham b. al-Hakam and Hisham b. Salim al-Jawaliqi, were the pioneer theologians of this doctrine that “God is a body”.

This is mentioned in the books of heresiography and in al-Kafi itself:

1428552726_HishamsSaidAllahisaBody(alKafiv_1p.61).png.e6a9e05959255d7cabefd72edb4691d8.png

Likewise, Yunus b. Abd ar-Rahman al-Qummi believed and taught that Allah is carried by Angels, the Hamalat al-Arsh. He was also one of your venerated theologians.

Then there was Zurarah b. A’yun, who taught: “Allah did not live, nor have power, nor hear, nor see, nor know, nor wish, until He created for himself life, and power, and knowledge, and will, and hearing, and seeing. It was after he had created these attributes for Himself that He became living, powerful, wise, wishing, hearing, and seeing.”

Here you go:

https://www.iqraonline.net/hisham-b-al-hakam-god-is-a-body-part-3/

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

Thank you for that article. It actually confirmed what I already know, that when Hisham said God is a body, he meant body according to the Aristotelian meaning

Quote

 

Hisham submissively followed the Imam in thinking of God as a ‘thing’ but this meant that he had to then abide by the implications of such a decision seeing as though his former master Jahm also taught that each thing exists when it exists as an existent body (jism mawjud). The incorporeal is non-existent (ma`dum, ma laysa bi-mawjudin). For something to exist it had to be a ‘body’.

And they claimed that to establish the existence of a thing is to consider it a body, but he is unlike any other body

when they refer to him as a body they wish to assert that he is Existent

Thus, Hisham’s aim was Tathbit to affirm the Existence of God and to escape the charge of Ta’til (denying the attributes of God) and Tabtil (invalidating the existence of God). He accepted that God was a thing. This in his system meant that He was a body. But what kind of Body?

 

The article also confirmed that your theologian Hisham b. Salim al-Jawaliqi was an anthropotheist:

Quote

He عليه السلام said: This one (Hisham b. al-Hakam) desired Ithbat (to establish the existence of God) while the other one (Hisham b. Salim) likened His Lord the Elevated with creation.

Elevated is Allah who has no like, analogue, equal or match. He is not in the attribute of the created ones. Do not subscribe to what was said by Hisham b. Salim rather subscribe to what was said by the Client of the family of Yaqtin and his fellow (Hisham b. al-Hakam).

So the article also confirmed that your theologian Hisham b. Salim al-Jawaliqi was an anthropotheist:

Notice your Imam is saying to subscribe to the theology of Hisham b. al-Hakam, and this article has confirmed that Hisham b. al-Hakam believed Allah is a body, but a body unlike bodies. This means that this is actually your (Twelver) official creed too. So I find it quite ironic that I'm accused here of believing God is a body or has a body, when I have flatly denied such an accusation, but the official creed of your sect is the belief of Hisham b. al-Hakam who did affirm God is a body, but a body unlike other bodies.

Hisham b. Salim al-Jawaliqi is confirmed to have believed that the Lord is likened to His creation (God forbid). But you should know that this Hisham is nevertheless respected in your madhhab, being a companion of your sixth and seventh Imams, and a trustworthy narrator.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
Quote

Notice your Imam is saying to subscribe to the theology of Hisham b. al-Hakam, and this article has confirmed that Hisham b. al-Hakam believed Allah is a body, but a body unlike bodies. This means that this is actually your (Twelver) official creed too. So I find it quite ironic that I'm accused here of believing God is a body or has a body, when I have flatly denied such an accusation, but the official creed of your sect is the belief of Hisham b. al-Hakam who did affirm God is a body, but a body unlike other bodies.

As for Hisham b. al-Hakam, he used it to establish an argument for the existence of God:

when they refer to him as a body they wish to assert that he is Existent. They do not ascribe to the Creator parts which are combined or limbs adjoining one another.

So in the other way, by body they mean a thing. We have another hadith that relate to this:

محمد بن يعقوب، عن علي بن إبراهيم، عن محمد بن عيسى، عن عبد الرحمن ابن أبي نجران قال: سألت أبا جعفر عليه السلام عن التوحيد فقلت: أتوهم شيئا؟ فقال: نعم، غير معقول ولا محدود، فما وقع وهمك عليه من شئ فهو خلافه، لا يشبهه شئ ولا تدركه الاوهام، كيف تدركه الاوهام وهو خلاف ما يعقل، وخلاف ما يتصور في الاوهام؟! إنما يتوهم شئ غير معقول ولا محدود.

Muhammad b. Ya`qub from `Ali b. Ibrahim from Muhammad b. `Isa from `Abd ar-Rahman b. Abi Najran.

He said: I asked Abu Ja`far عليه السلام about monotheism (tawhid), so I said: Can I think of Him as a thing? So he said: Yes, [but a thing that is] not understood and not defined within limits. Whatever subject dwells out of your imagination regarding Him is different from Him. No thing resembles Him, and imaginations cannot attain Him. How could imaginations attain Him when He is different from what can be understood, and different from what is perceived in one’s thoughts?! He can be thought of a thing that is not understood and not defined. (al-Kafi, Volume 1, hadith 217)

Here is the another hadith that Imam (عليه السلام) clearly clarify that Shia's do not believe in Body or form, or figure:

أحمد بن إدريس، عن محمد بن عبد الجبار، عن صفوان بن يحيى، عن علي بن أبي حمزة، قال: قلت لابي عبد الله عليه السلام: سمعت هشام بن الحكم يروي عنكم أن الله جسم، صمدي نوري، معرفته ضرورة، يمن بها على من يشاء من خلقه، فقال عليه السلام: سبحان من لا يعلم أحد كيف هو إلا هو، ليس كمثله شئ وهو السميع البصير، لا يحد ولا يحس ولا يجس ولا تدركه [ الابصار ولا ] الحواس ولا يحيط به شئ ولا جسم ولا صورة ولا تخطيط ولا تحديد.

Ahmad b. Idris from Muhammad b. `Abd al-Jabbar from Safwan b. Yahya from `Ali b. Abi Hamza.

He said: I said to Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام: I heard Hisham b. al-Hakam narrate from you that Allah has a body, supported by light, His recognition is necessary and He bestows this [knowledge] upon whom He wills from the creation. So he عليه السلام said: Glorified be He, whom no one knows how He is except Himself. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing. He cannot be limited, nor can He be felt, nor can He be moved, nor can He be comprehended [by sight, nor by] the senses, nor can He be contained in anything, nor does He have a body, nor does He have a form, nor a figure, nor a confine. (al-Kafi, Volume 1, hadith 278)

Edited by Abu Nur
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
Quote

Hisham b. Salim al-Jawaliqi is confirmed to have believed that the Lord is likened to His creation (God forbid). But you should know that this Hisham is nevertheless respected in your madhhab, being a companion of your sixth and seventh Imams, and a trustworthy narrator.

 

Yes some they do consider to him trustworthy narrator:

Ayatollah al-Khoei considers the hadiths that rebuke Hisham as unreliable and thus regards Hisham a trustworthy hadith transmitter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

We don't accept with Hisham b. Salim, that is linking God to creations or attaching God body with other parts, limbs etc.

Nevertheless, he is one of your theologians, considered a member of your sect, a companion of your Imams, and a trustworthy narrator that has been praised. My original point was that the accusation of corporalism and anthropotheism that is levelled against us Sunnis actually originates and was pioneered by Shi’ite theologians, like Hisham b. Salim al-Jawaliqi and also Dawud al-Jawaribi. Regarding Hisham al-Jawaliqi, I found this:

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Hisham_b._Salim_al-Jawaliqi

Quote

It is reported that a man from Syria asked Imam al-Sadiq (a) to have a debate with him. The Imam (a) told him to have debates with a number of his companions, including Hisham b. Salim.

Quote

But as for Hisham b. al-Hakam, he used it to establish an argument for the existence of God:

when they refer to him as a body they wish to assert that he is Existent. They do not ascribe to the Creator parts which are combined or limbs adjoining one another.

So in the other way, by body they mean a thing. 

Yes, I acknowledge this was probably his meaning in affirming body for God. Another sect, the Karramiyyah (followers of Muhammad b. Karram), who were Hanafis in law, and self-professed Sunnis (though we don’t recognize them as such), likewise said Allah is a Jism with the meaning that He is self-subsisting (qa’imu bi Nafsihi).

However, the difference is, in our Madhhab, we do not use the term Jism at all in respect to Allah, because it is not from our terminology. Our Madhhab is to only use terms for Allah which are proven from the Divine Revelation and are befitting His Majesty. Jism is not one of those terms.

Your sect and theologians like Hisham b. al-Hakam used this term Jism for Allah because they were drowning in Aristotelian metaphysics and their minds were unable to understand the theology of Islam and Quran outside the Aristotelian framework.

Edited by Cherub786
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
Quote

Your sect and theologians like Hisham b. al-Hakam used this term Jism for Allah because they were drowning in Aristotelian metaphysics and their minds were unable to understand the theology of Islam and Quran outside the Aristotelian framework.

As far I consider of your statement, It was a nice joke. How about you make an topic and write every possible proof how our sect were drowning in Aristotelian Metaphysics and were lack of understanding theology of Islam and Qur'an.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
Quote

However, the difference is, in our Madhhab, we do not use the term Jism at all in respect to Allah, because it is not from our terminology. Our Madhhab is to only use terms for Allah which are proven from the Divine Revelation and are befitting His Majesty. Jism is not one of those terms.

Do you think that we do? No we don't and we have so many narrations where our Imams (عليه السلام) clearly state He does not have Jism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ShiaMan14 said:

Simple-minded sunnis think that because:

  • Allah sees, He must have eyes;
  • Allah hears therefore He has ears;
  • Allah speaks therefore He has a tongue.

A gross misrepresentation of our theology. On the contrary, it is quite evident that this is your belief, that if it is affirmed Allah hears He must have ears, and if it is affirmed He speaks, He must have a tongue. So you are projecting your own psychology and anthropotheistic tendency on us, quite unjustly if I may say so.

Quote

Seeing involves:
First, light passes through the cornea

Hearing involves:
Sound is transmitted as sound waves

Speaking involves:
Vocal cords are situated in the larynx, which is placed at the top of the trachea.

Now it is quite evident who the real anthropotheist and literalist is. You are unable to conceive of the faculties of sight, hearing, and speech without corporeality, limbs, physicality, etc. But we can conceive of these faculties as not involving or necessitating such things. This goes to show that your mind is limited.

The real corporalists (mujassimah) and anthropotheists (mushabbihah) and you actually come from the same school of thought and limited way of thinking. The only difference, they wanted to say God does hear, see and speak and so must have these bodily limbs and organs, whereas you were unwilling to affirms limbs and organs for God, therefore, ended up denying that God hears, sees and speaks altogether. Both of you are drowning in misguidance and have created your own imaginary gods that has nothing to do with the Real God described in the Quran.

But we follow the moderate, true path, affirming that God does hear, see and speak, which is clearly evident in the Quran, while not affirming limbs and organs for God.

Quote

While Cherry only asked the first part of his question about Allah seeing, hearing, speaking,

BTW, I hope you haven’t overlooked or not read my earlier questions to you:

 

I am eagerly waiting for your response to these critical questions.

Edited by Cherub786
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Cool said:

Again why are you applying places & directions on God? 

A belief in omnipresence necessitates place, or more accurately “every place”, for God, and you have affirmed that God is omnipresent, so it follows you apply places to Him, and are in fact guilty of that which you accuse me of.

Quote

But lets say from our (human) perspective, everywhere including sewer. What do you recite while going to defecate? And why do you recite? Who listens to the creatures living in the sewer? who grants them rizq? Who do "infaq" to them? Who has created them? Who has made for them their dwelling place i.e., sewer? 

Because we offer a prayer before entering bait al-khala (the restroom) does not at all imply that we believe God is present in such a place. On the contrary, we deny that God is present in such places that are not befitting of His Personal presence.

That you apparently believe God is “present” in the sewer and washroom (God forbid) but from your human perspective, is very disturbing.

We believe God is Holy (Quddus, Subbuh) and Pure (Tayyib). The property of Holiness and Purity of God means it is impossible for Him to be Personally present in places that are impure and unholy.

Likewise, we believe it is not befitting His Majesty for Him to manifest the presence of His Glory Jalal in places that are impure and unholy.

The Quran teaches that when Allah manifests the presence of His Glory in this world, that part of the world cannot persist and is annihilated (Surah 7:143).

Yet you believe that God is Personally present in the sewer معاذ الله in stark contrast to what the Quran teaches.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

Do you believe God is above us

Yes

Quote

such that if I look towards the sky, God will be there if I keep going up?

No

Quote

Also, in a previous discussion you said God's power and knowledge are distinct. Where did you get this from? Th Qur'an or Sunnah? The salaf? Ibn Taymiyyah? 

Firstly, I get it from language: power and knowledge are distinct things. These terms have definitions that are separate from each other.

So when Allah جل جلاله says “I know what is in your heart” He obviously does not intend to say “I am powerful what is in your heart”, and when He says “I am the Possessor of Quwwah (Power, Strength)” He does not intend with these Words “I am the Possessor of Knowledge”.

The real question is, where did you get the idea that these terms are identical, and identical with God’s essence? Well, I guess you’ve already answered that: the Christian Thomas Aquinas and other disbelieving philosophers that preceded him.

Edited by Cherub786
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

I would interpret hearing in this verse as God having knowledge of the caller, and uses the term 'heard' because that is how we have knowledge of audible things.  

Your explanation is strange, because if God simply said “I know what she said” the meaning is not changed according to you and it can still be understood from our human perspective. By saying “I have heard what she said” it appears that God is deliberately creating confusion and controversy as people will naturally understand from this that God has an actual faculty of hearing and not simply that God has knowledge of all that is audible. Needless to say, your theology is often confronted with the dilemma of having to force a far fetched explanation on the Text which doesn’t flow from it naturally.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

This is Ayatullah Ja'far Subhani's explanation:

 As we have seen in the verse cited above [42:51], the Qur'an establishes the fact that God speaks to His slaves according to three modes of self-disclosure. It is impossible for the speech of God to reach man except by the following three modes: (a) ‘unless [it be] by revelation’—in other words, by divine inspiration; (b)‘or from behind a veil’—in other words, that man can hear God’s speech, but cannot see Him (God’s speech to Moses took this form); (c) ‘or [that] He sendeth a Messenger’—in other words, an angel is sent by God to man to convey the inspiration. In this verse, the speech of God has been explained as having been brought into being by God, either directly without intermediary, or indirectly through the intermediary of an angel. According to the first mode—divine inspiration—God sometimes casts His words directly into the heart of the Prophet, and sometimes He causes His words to enter the heart after having first been heard by the ear. In all three modes of speech, however, the words of God are brought into being. The speech of God is therefore to be considered as one of the attributes of Divine Activity.

Does “brought into being” mean created in this context?

So are you saying your belief is that when God spoke directly to Moses at the burning bush, He created a voice, audible speech, which Moses heard with his physical auditory senses (ears)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...