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

How does Allah see and hear?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Zainuu said:

This was my argument from the start. You agree to it, that's the end of the story.

Yes. Allah is independent while having these parts, attributes, and names He has given to himself - we both agree. I am glad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 328
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Imam Jafar al-Sadiq, peace with him, has said, “He, the most Exalted One, is Hearing and Seeing. He hears without a faculty, sees without a tool. Rather, He hears by Himself, sees by Himself Imam

Lol! Like a lot of other spectators, I'm sitting back and watching/reading whilst the drama unfolds. To be fair, it's quite an interesting topic, which if we dare to be honest, must have crossed

Read the underlined and bold paragraph:   Additional (not necessary) reading:    

Posted Images

13 hours ago, Nightclaw said:

I do not speak that language. Say it again in English.

OK, I shall pretend that you do not know such language. I meant to say what is Now Strawman argument, whether you will tell me or I search it and waste my time on this "new title" which I may be aware of otherwise except that of "title" like you mentioned "God of gaps" fallacy.

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

No, he doesn't agree to the bolded part. And neither do any of us.

When I say parts, I do not mean additives, but the way we can understand it. I do not mean it as you understand it, but representatively.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Just now, Strange Samurai said:

OK, I shall pretend that you do not know such language. I meant to say what is Now Strawman argument, whether you will tell me or I search it and waste my time on this "new title" which I may be aware of otherwise except that of "title" like you mentioned "God of gaps" fallacy.

I literally do not speak that language. I am African-American. The only Asian languages that I know is Arabic and Chinese. Other than that, you are out of luck. 

Also, I do not understand what you mean. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

The way Sheikh Al-Amili says it, is just spot on!  And of course the rest of what you quoted.  wonderful  thanks for sharing.

 

I have shared two ahadith of Aimma e Tahireen (عليه السلام) earlier on this thread:

Quote

Imam Jafar al-Sadiq, peace with him, has said, “He, the most Exalted One, is Hearing and Seeing. He hears without a faculty, sees without a tool. Rather, He hears by Himself, sees by Himself.”

Imam Muhammad al-Baqir, peace with him, has said, “He is Hearing, Seeing; He hears through what He sees, sees through what He hears.”

The Sheikh has explained these two as:

"The previous tradition points out to the unity of His Attributes, Praise belongs to Him, with His own Self, and the unity of each with the other in the position of the Self. The fact of hearing in Himself, Praise belongs to Him, is not different from the fact of seeing. Rather, He hears through what He sees, sees through what He hears. His essence is all hearing and seeing."

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

You can whip out a narration and give your own interpretation or explanation - in which our own scholars do not do - and say it means x, y, and z. That is not my problem nor do I care because I will not accept it because your interpretation is based off of what should not be interpreted nor explained.

This discussion in itself requires a new thread, where we see your attempt to redescribe these anthropomorphic traditions

 

7 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

The Qur'an alludes to the fact, with no interpretation because it is not needed, that we will be able to see Allah

What makes you so sure that no interpretation is needed? Remember the Rope of Allah? Who's to say that a literal rope doesn't exist, we just have to find it?

Like I said, this is Athari literalism. It's a much, much minor school of thought than you might think.

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

This discussion in itself requires a new thread, where we see your attempt to redescribe these anthropomorphic traditions

I would rather not. I was open to it up until you said "anthropomorphic". This shows that you will not understand what I mean and have described clearly.

4 minutes ago, Sabrejet said:

What makes you so sure that no interpretation is needed? Remember the Rope of Allah? Who's to say that a literal rope doesn't exist, we just have to find it?

I have already explained this. The surrounding verses and the verse itself alludes to what it is, so it automatically cancels any meaning other than what was given.

5 minutes ago, Sabrejet said:

Like I said, this is Athari literalism. It's a much, much minor school of thought than you might think.

Minority has nothing to do with truth.

Moreover, I am pretty tired of reiterating myself. You can continue to reply or respond, but I see no need because I have explained myself. If any further clarification is needed, you can message me and I will respond systematically.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

And @Cool, do you see the issue Nightclaw is raising?  Where exactly he finds an issue?  

I moved a step ahead to reach to the position where things becomes clear to us as to where is the issue. 

I asked a question by referring him @Cherub786 who believes that God is literally sitting upon the throne and that God comes & goes. I asked him his opinion about such belief. He refused to share his opinion, :) if we would have known that, this thread would not reach to its 8th page.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Related topic about Allah’s hands^^. From my knowledge the Ja’fari school has a metaphorical interpretation of “hands”.

The Salafi “literalist” interpretation I never understood. They seem to say it is a literal “hand” but we don’t know “what” or “how” it is, (because of laisa kamithlihi shay). But to me, the moment you say it is a literal “hand” you have fallen into limiting God, since having a hand entails having parts but having the ability to see and hear does not entail any parts. Perhaps, you could enlighten further Brother @Nightclaw as I have not read the posts here.

Ameer ul Momineen Ali ibn Abi Talib (عليه السلام) says (in Nahjul Balagha):

Quote

The foremost (duty) in religion is the acknowledgment of God; the perfection of acknowledging Him is to bear witness to Him; the perfection of bearing witness to Him is to believe in His Oneness; the perfection of believing in His Oneness is to regard Him as pure; and the perfection of regarding Him as pure is to deny Him attributes, because every attribute is a proof that it is different from that to which it is attributed, and everything to which something is attributed is different from the attribute.

Thus, whoever attempts a description of God creates His like; and whoever creates His like regards Him as two; and whoever regards Him as two recognizes parts for Him; and whoever recognizes parts for Him mistook Him; and whoever mistook Him faulted Him; and whoever faulted Him admitted limitations for Him; and whoever admitted limitations for Him enumerated Him (i.e., denied His oneness and uniqueness).

Whoever said, “In what is He?” held that He is confined; and whoever said, “On what is He?” held He is not on something else. He is a being, but not through the phenomenon of coming into existence. He exists, but not by coming out of nonexistence. He is near to everything, but not in physical proximity. He is distinct from everything, but not separated (by distance). He acts, but without the need of movement or need of instruments. He is One, such that there is none with whom He may keep company or none whose company He may miss.
(Sermon 1)

Quote

Stillness and motion do not occur in Him, and how can that thing occur in Him which He has Himself made to occur, and how can a thing revert to Him which He first created, and how can a thing appear in Him which He first brought to appearance. If it had not been so, His Self would have become subject to diversity, His Being would have become divisible (into parts), and His reality would have been prevented from being deemed Eternal. 

If there was a front to Him there would have been a rear also for Him. He would need completing only if shortage befell Him. In that case signs of the created would appear in Him, and He would become a sign (leading to other objects) instead of signs leading to Him. Through the might of His abstention (from affectedness) He is far above being affected by things which affect others.

Quote

He cannot be described through (the possession of) parts, or through limbs and organs, or by a an accidental quality or alteration or portions. It cannot be said that He has a limit or extremity, or end or termination; nor do things control Him so as to raise Him or lower Him, nor does anything carry Him so as to bend Him or keep Him erect. He is not inside things or outside them. He conveys news, but not with the tongue or voice. He listens, but not with the holes of the ears or the organs of hearing. He says, but does not utter words. 

He remembers, but does not memorise. He determines, but not by exercising His mind. He loves and approves without any sentimentality (of heart). He hates and feels angry without any painstaking. When He intends to create something He says ‘"..Be" and it is’ (2:117), but not through a voice that strikes (the ears) is that call heard. His speech is an act of His creation. His like never existed before this. If it had been eternal it would have been a second god.

:ws:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators

I was reading this a couple of days ago and thought it may be relevant:

Quote

Our Lord, the Glorified One, the magnificent One, has knowledge of Himself even though there was nothing to know, sight of Himself even though there is nothing to behold, hearing of Himself even though there is nothing to hear and Power of Himself even though there is nothing under His Power. When He created the things and the object of knowledge came into existence, His knowledge became related to the known, hearing related to the heard, sight related to the seen and Power related to its object. (At-Tawhid by Shaikh as-Saduq, p.139).

The writer goes on to say:

Quote

This is the belief about which the Imams from among the Prophet’s family are unanimous, but the majority group [of the Muslims, i.e. the Sunnis] has adopted a different course by creating the idea of differentiation between His Self and Attributes. Shahristani says the following on, p. 42 of his book Kitab al-Milal wal-Nihal: “According to Abul-Hassan al-Ash`ari Allah knows through (the attribute of) knowledge, is Powerful through activity, speaks through speech, hears through hearing and sees through sight.”

Page 307, from this source:

Screenshot 2020-11-26 at 09.14.39.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
7 minutes ago, 313_Waiter said:

Perhaps, you could enlighten further Brother @Nightclaw as I have not read the posts here

Allah does not have hands in the way we know it. It is unlike creation. Just as the same way you say Allah does not hear and see the same way we do, but that does not negate the fact that He does those things. 

Clocks have hands. We have hands. Are our hands the same as clocks? No. We have feet. Beds have feet. Are our feet the same as beds? Of course not. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

 

3 minutes ago, Haji 2003 said:

Our Lord, the Glorified One, the magnificent One, has knowledge of Himself even though there was nothing to know, sight of Himself even though there is nothing to behold, hearing of Himself even though there is nothing to hear and Power of Himself even though there is nothing under His Power. When He created the things and the object of knowledge came into existence, His knowledge became related to the known, hearing related to the heard, sight related to the seen and Power related to its object. (At-Tawhid by Shaikh as-Saduq, p.139).

I agree, for the most part.

"His knowledge became related to the known, hearing related to the heard, sight related to the seen, and power related to its object."

So then is there a connection, because this is what relation warrants.

7 minutes ago, Haji 2003 said:
Quote

This is the belief about which the Imams from among the Prophet’s family are unanimous, but the majority group [of the Muslims, i.e. the Sunnis] has adopted a different course by creating the idea of differentiation between His Self and Attributes. Shahristani says the following on, p. 42 of his book Kitab al-Milal wal-Nihal: “According to Abul-Hassan al-Ash`ari Allah knows through (the attribute of) knowledge, is Powerful through activity, speaks through speech, hears through hearing and sees through sight.”

 

We reject what the Ash'aris say concerning this matter. I do not know why his book was quoted, considering we reject it. It is unfair to attach this to all Sunnis and say we believe this when we do not. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

So according to Qur'an:

God is above the throne (استوى على العرش) and He is with us (و هو معكم). Anywhere we turn our face, we will find His وجه. 

Which of these verses mentions His presence metaphorically & which mentions His presence really? This is the question for Ahlul Salaf.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Yet another question, Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) said in Quran:

قَالَ يَا إِبْلِيسُ مَا مَنَعَكَ أَن تَسْجُدَ لِمَا خَلَقْتُ بِيَدَيَّ أَسْتَكْبَرْتَ أَمْ كُنتَ مِنَ الْعَالِينَ

38:75

God has created Adam (عليه السلام) with His two hands.

If this refers literally to the two hands of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) then can this by itself, describes Him as having the ability to touch?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators
2 hours ago, Nightclaw said:

We reject what the Ash'aris say concerning this matter. I do not know why his book was quoted, considering we reject it. It is unfair to attach this to all Sunnis and say we believe this when we do not. 

Based on my understanding of what is written, he is attributing the belief to the Sunnis and saying that we do not believe the quotation that follows:

2 hours ago, Nightclaw said:

“According to Abul-Hassan al-Ash`ari Allah knows through (the attribute of) knowledge, is Powerful through activity, speaks through speech, hears through hearing and sees through sight.”

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
2 hours ago, Nightclaw said:
2 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

 

Allah does not have hands in the way we know it. It is unlike creation. Just as the same way you say Allah does not hear and see the same way we do, but that does not negate the fact that He does those things. 

Clocks have hands. We have hands. Are our hands the same as clocks? No. We have feet. Beds have feet. Are our feet the same as beds? Of course not. 

I’ve heard shamsi use these analogies. So you agree with the Shi’a view that it is metaphorical and not literal?

Quote

metaphor a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.

  • a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else.

But if you say it is a part you fall into dangerous territory.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
41 minutes ago, Cool said:

Yet another question, Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) said in Quran:

قَالَ يَا إِبْلِيسُ مَا مَنَعَكَ أَن تَسْجُدَ لِمَا خَلَقْتُ بِيَدَيَّ أَسْتَكْبَرْتَ أَمْ كُنتَ مِنَ الْعَالِينَ

38:75

God has created Adam (عليه السلام) with His two hands.

If this refers literally to the two hands of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) then can this by itself, describes Him as having the ability to touch?

That is a very good and important question. I reflect Imam Ali (عليه السلام) words and those quranic verses that talks about His (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) hand, Imam Ali (عليه السلام) said:

He initiated creation most initially and commenced it originally, without undergoing reflection, without making use of any experiment, without innovating any movement, and without experiencing any aspiration of mind.

How is two hands can be related to this hadith. Is not hand always related to physical attributes? How it is related on creation when God did not made any movement, experiencing, tools etc to Create.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Curious
5 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

yes!  So now the question is,

So why is everyone arguing?

Simply because we’re not Ahl Rahmah. No?

[Shakir 11:118] And if your Lord had pleased He would certainly have made people a single nation, and they shall continue to differ.

[Shakir 11:119] Except those on whom your Lord has mercy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Cool said:

I moved a step ahead to reach to the position where things becomes clear to us as to where is the issue. 

I asked a question by referring him @Cherub786 who believes that God is literally sitting upon the throne and that God comes & goes. I asked him his opinion about such belief. He refused to share his opinion, :) if we would have known that, this thread would not reach to its 8th page.

I think the discussion will again go back into a circle until @Nightclaw declares his stance on this.

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

parts, attributes, and names He has given to himself

Except for this part all is good. :)

Everything belongs to Allah and Allah is independent of everything. 

Everything depends on Allah and Allah has no dependency.

To Allah belong the Most Excellent Names, so call Him by them!”

Above verse is a proof that Allah ascribes himself names and attributes so that we can call him through them. While he is independent of all these attributes and names.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
59 minutes ago, Guest Curious said:

Simply because we’re not Ahl Rahmah. No?

[Shakir 11:118] And if your Lord had pleased He would certainly have made people a single nation, and they shall continue to differ.

[Shakir 11:119] Except those on whom your Lord has mercy.

Very interesting point.  I agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

I’ve heard shamsi use these analogies. So you agree with the Shi’a view that it is metaphorical and not literal?

Quote

No. A metaphor means it is not literally applicable, meaning it does exist and it means something else. I have explained that already. Literal means it exists [in this context] in the form of world as we know it.

3 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

But if you say it is a part you fall into dangerous territory.

You have to read the whole thread again. I am very tired of explaining my side over and over and over again. It is of Allah. The Hands and Face of Allah is of Allah. It exists and has existed with Allah. If you see me saying "part", I explained that already. Every single person that comes onto this thread should read, because I dislike repeating myself.

Edited by Nightclaw
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Haji 2003 said:

Based on my understanding of what is written, he is attributing the belief to the Sunnis and saying that we do not believe the quotation that follows:

3 hours ago, Haji 2003 said:

According to Abul-Hassan al-Ash`ari Allah knows through (the attribute of) knowledge, is Powerful through activity, speaks through speech, hears through hearing and sees through sight.”

 

Allah is does not need to display His power in order for Him to be powerful.

Allah does not need to speak through speech, but has spoke in a way we do not know about [i.e., to Prophet Musa (peace be upon him)

I do not know how Allah sees and hears, but I know He does.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Abu Nur said:

'The Jews say the hand of Allah is tied. It is their hands which are tied and they are cursed for what they have said. Rather, His hands are outspread, spending as He wills. ' (5:64)

The whole statement sound figurative.

This here is absolutely correct. If someone says this about you in Arabic, it means you are stingy or miserly. Even the context of the verse alludes to this. 

However, if I ask any single one of you, without using any of your books [because they are not hujjah on me or any other Muslim that is not Shia] to read the Arabic and understand from context what exactly it is, you will not come to this conclusion on other verses. If you are looking at the Arabic solely and you understand it as a Muslim, then you will reach the conclusion that it is in the real sense and not metaphorical.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
18 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

This here is absolutely correct. If someone says this about you in Arabic, it means you are stingy or miserly. Even the context of the verse alludes to this. 

However, if I ask any single one of you, without using any of your books [because they are not hujjah on me or any other Muslim that is not Shia] to read the Arabic and understand from context what exactly it is, you will not come to this conclusion on other verses. If you are looking at the Arabic solely and you understand it as a Muslim, then you will reach the conclusion that it is in the real sense and not metaphorical.

Which one and how do you come to conclusion that they are taking literally. Are His hand one of His attributes?

Edited by Abu Nur
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

Which one and how do you come to conclusion that they are taking literally. Are His hand one of His attributes?

Because of the context. The verse you provided where the Jews stated Allah's hands are tied - this is an idiomatic expression in the Arabic language, which is why knowing the language is crucial. You also have to know why the verses were revealed; context. It is not difficult to know what is not literal or literal in the Qur'an when you know it's language. If we did the same thing with an English book, we would have no problems as opposed to a non-English speaker trying to decipher. Why? Because we know the language and can easily distinguish between literally everything.

Are his Hands one of His attributes?

1. a quality or feature regarded as a characteristic or inherent part of someone or something.

Yes. 

And Allah knows best.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
Quote

Are his Hands one of His attributes?

1. a quality or feature regarded as a characteristic or inherent part of someone or something.

Yes. 

And Allah knows best.

I'm fine with this if its one of the Attribute of God, only Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) knows what it is.

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...