Do the Ashairah receive 'Udhr bi Jahl?

Are the Ashairah excused?

All scholars agree that anyone who believes the Qur’an is created, or that Allah does not speak literally—through sound or letters—is a disbeliever. There is no dispute that the Ash‘aris hold beliefs that fall into this category.

Many scholars from Ahl al-Sunnah made takfir on the Ash‘aris in their works.

The key question is whether the evidence (Hujjah) has been fully established against them. We maintain that it has.

Ash‘ari scholars had access to the works of al-Darimi, Imam Ahmad, and others, yet they persisted in their flawed methods of tawil and tafwid. They even read those books extensively to come up with arguments to debate their opponents.

So from this angle, declaring Ash‘ari scholars such as al-Nawawi, Ibn Hajar, al-Ghazali, and others like them as disbelievers is both correct and necessary.

Some argue differently, claiming that these scholars never intended to remain in falsehood but were simply unaware of certain texts.

This view is implausible. Such knowledge could hardly have been hidden from them. They authored books containing thousands of narrations and engaged thoroughly with the arguments of those who affirmed Allah’s attributes. It is therefore inconceivable that they were genuinely ignorant of the texts.

بعض أَتبَاع الْجَهْمِية وَمن على طريقتهم حَتَّى صَار الْأَمر فِي هَذِه الْمسَائِل فِي تِلْكَ الْبِلَاد أظهر مِنْهُ فِي غَيرهَا وَلَا تخفى النُّصُوص والأدلة حَتَّى على الْعَوام فَلَا إِشْكَال وَالْحَالة هَذِه فِي قيام الْحجَّة وبلوغها على من فِي جهتكم من المبتدعة والزنادقة الضلال وَلَا يُجَادِل فِي هَذِه الْمَسْأَلَة وَيُشبه بهَا إِلَّا من غلب جَانب الْهوى وَمَال إِلَى المطامع الدُّنْيَوِيَّة وَاشْترى بآيَات الله ثمنا قَلِيلا وَالله أعلم
[ص161 - كتاب فتييان تتعلقان بتكفير الجهمية]

Sulayman ibn Sahman said: "Some of the followers of the Jahmiyyah and those who are upon their methodology have reached the point that, in those lands, this matter has become more apparent than in others. The textual proofs and evidences are not hidden—even from the common people. Therefore, in such a situation, there is no ambiguity regarding the establishment and conveyance of the proof against those among you from the innovators, misguided, zanadiqah. No one disputes this issue or casts doubt upon it except one who is overcome by desires, inclines toward worldly gains, and sells the verses of Allah for a small price. And Allah knows best." [Kitāb Fatīyān Tata‘allaqān bi-Takfīr al-Jahmiyyah - Sulayman ibn Sahman - Page 161]

And so we also say that Hujjah has been established upon all the scholars of the Ash‘aris, as they conducted their research, debated with others regarding the verses and narrations, yet persisted in following their arrogant and corrupt 'aql (reasoning).

Anyone who thinks that al-Nawawi or Ibn Hajar was unaware of the verses concerning Allah’s attributes, or the narrations on this subject, is either mistaken or deliberately deceiving themselves and those around them.

Al-Nawawi wrote a Sharh of Sahih Muslim and clearly encountered the narrations about the slave girl stating that Allah is above, yet he continued to engage in tawil, even though Allah’s “aboveness” is firmly established in the hearts of the common people. Does anyone seriously believe that the slave girl was more aware of the texts regarding Allah’s attributes than al-Nawawi?

The same applies to Ibn Hajar, who acknowledged being aware of the group that affirms Allah’s transcendence and the proofs they presented. Yet he still rejected the texts and gave precedence to his corrupt 'aql.

The texts regarding Allah’s attributes are straightforward, and many scholars have explained that they should be understood according to their apparent meaning (dhahir), without tawil or tashbih. Yet the Ash‘aris observed these statements and continued to follow Ahl al-Kalam rather than adhering to Ahl al-Haqq.

فمن كان مؤمناً بالله ورسوله باطناً وظاهراً، لكنه اجتهد في طلب الحق فأخطأ، أو غلط، أو جهل، أو تأول، فإن الله تعالى يغفر له خطأه كائناً من كان سواء كان فى المسائل النظرية والعملية، ومنشأ الغلط أن هؤلاء لما سمعوا كلام الشيخ ـ رحمه الله ـ في بعض أجوبته يقول بعدم تكفير الجاهل، والمجتهد المخطىء، والمتأول ظنوا أن لهذا يعم كل خطأ، وجهل، واجتهاد، وتأويل، وأجملوا ولم يفصلوا، وهذا خطأ محض، فإنه ليس كل اجتهاد، وجهل، وخطأ، وتأويل يغفر لصاحبه، وأنه لا يكفر بذلك، فإن ما(۱) علم بالضرورة من دين الإسلام كالإيمان بالله ورسوله وبما جاء به لا يعذر أحد بالجهل بذلك، فقد أخبر الله سبحانه بجهل كثير من الكفار مع تصريحه بكفرهم، ووصف النصارى بالجهل مع أنه لا يشك مسلم في كفرهم، ونقطع أن أكثر اليهود والنصارى اليوم جهال مقلدون، ونعتقد كفرهم، وكفر من شك في كفره
[إجماع أهل السنة النبوية على تكفير المعطِّلة الجهمية — سليمان بن سحمان — الصفحتان ١٤٦‑١٤٧]

Sulayman ibn Sahman said: "{Whoever believes in Allah and His Messenger, inwardly and outwardly, but strives to seek the truth and errs, or makes a mistake, or is ignorant, or interprets (the texts), then Allah, Exalted be He, forgives him for his error—whether it is in theoretical or practical matters.} The source of misunderstanding is that when some people heard the words of the Shaykh (Ibn Taymiyyah) رحمه الله in some of his answers—where he stated that the ignorant, the mistaken mujtahid, and the interpreter are not declared disbelievers—they assumed that this applies to every error, every act of ignorance, every ijtihād, and every interpretation. They generalized without making distinctions. This is a clear mistake (on their part), for not every ijtihād, ignorance, error, or interpretation is forgiven for its possessor, nor does it prevent takfīr where it is warranted. For what is known necessarily from the religion of Islam—such as belief in Allah and His Messenger and in what he brought—no one is excused for being ignorant of it. Allah, Glorified be He, has informed us of the ignorance of many disbelievers while explicitly declaring their disbelief, and He described the Christians as ignorant even though no Muslim doubts their disbelief. We are certain that most Jews and Christians today are ignorant followers, and we affirm their disbelief—and likewise, those who doubt their disbelief are themselves considered disbelievers." [Ijma' Ahl Sunnah al-Nabawiyyah 'ala Takfir al-Mu'atillah al-Jahmiyyah - Sulayman ibn Sahman - Page 146-147]

And this is what we see today: scholars excusing the Ash‘aris for their kufr, saying things like, "They wrote many great works and their mistakes are forgiven. We should not pay attention to what such-and-such scholar said regarding the Sifat of Allah, because they made errors in that regard. Anyway, they are great scholars, and may Allah have mercy upon them."

But this is gravely wrong, because, as Sulayman ibn Sahman said, not every ijtihad is a valid excuse to avoid making takfir.

These Ash‘ari scholars are not excused for their mistakes, because Hujjah has been firmly established from every direction. They were aware of the arguments of Ahl al-Sunnah, yet refused to accept them due to their arrogant and corrupt 'aql.

وقد دل القرآن علئ أن الشك في أصول الدّين كفر والشك هو التردد بين شيئين» كالذي لا يجزم بصدق الرسول ولا كذبه. ولا يجزم بوقوع البعث ولا عدم وقوعه ونحو ذلكء كالذي لا يعتقد وجوب الصلاة ولا عدم وجوبهاء أو لا يعتقد تحريم الزنا ولا عدم تحريمه» وذلك كفر بإجماع العلماء. ولا عذر لمن كان حاله لكذا؛ لكونه لم يفهم حجج الله وبيناته» لأنه لا عذر له بعد بلوغها وإن لم يفهمها
[إجماع أهل السنة النبوية على تكفير المعطِّلة الجهمية — سليمان بن سحمان — الصفحة ١٤٧]

Sulayman ibn Sahman said: "The Qur’an indicates that doubt regarding the fundamentals of religion is itself disbelief. Doubt is hesitation between two alternatives—such as one who does not firmly affirm the truthfulness of the Messenger nor deny it, or does not affirm nor deny the occurrence of resurrection, and similar cases. Likewise, one who does not believe in the obligation of prayer nor its non-obligation, or does not believe in the prohibition of fornication nor its prohibition—this is disbelief according to the consensus of scholars. There is no excuse for someone in this condition based on the claim that they did not understand Allah’s proofs and evidences, because once these have reached him, there is no excuse—even if he does not fully comprehend them." [Ijma' Ahl Sunnah al-Nabawiyyah 'ala Takfir al-Mu'atillah al-Jahmiyyah - Sulayman ibn Sahman - Page 147]

إذا صدر منه ما يوجب كفره من الأمور التي هي معلومة بالضرورة» مثل عبادة غير الله سبحانه» ومثل جحد علو الله عل خلقه» ونفي صفات كماله ونعوت جلاله الذاتية والفعلية» ومسألة علمه بالحوادث». والكائنات قبل كونهاء فإن المنع من التكفير» والتأثيم بالخطأء والجهل في هذا كله رد علئ من كمّر معطلة الذات. ومعطلة الربوبية» ومعطلة الأسماء والصفات» ومعطلة إفراده تعالئ بالإلهية» والقائلين بأن الله لا يعلم الكائنات قبل كونهاء كغلاة القدرية
[إجماع أهل السنة النبوية على تكفير المعطِّلة الجهمية — سليمان بن سحمان — الصفحة ١٤٨]

Sulayman ibn Sahman said: "A person becomes liable for disbelief when he engages in acts that necessitate kufr in matters that are known with certainty—such as worshipping other than Allah, Glorified be He; denying Allah’s aboveness over His creation; negating His attributes of perfection and the qualities of His majesty, both essential and active; or denying His knowledge of events and created things before they come into existence. To prevent declaring such a person a disbeliever, or to excuse him through error or ignorance, would be defending those who deny Allah’s essence, His lordship, His names and attributes, His exclusive divinity, as well as those who claim that Allah does not know events before they occur—such as the extreme Qadariyyah." [Ijma' Ahl Sunnah al-Nabawiyyah 'ala Takfir al-Mu'atillah al-Jahmiyyah - Sulayman ibn Sahman - Page 148]

Sulayman ibn Sahman states that the Ash‘aris of his time had received the Hujjah and therefore had absolutely no excuse for their kufr. Their ijtihad was invalid and blameworthy because they claimed ijtihad regarding matters that were already clear and part of Ilm bi Darurah (necessary knowledge).

Just as there would be no excuse for someone to claim ijtihad regarding the fact that Prophet Muhammad is the final messenger of Allah, there is no excuse for anyone who rejects that Allah is above. Allah has mentioned His “aboveness” in multiple places, and it is common knowledge among ordinary people.

Ibn Taymiyyah acknowledged that there could be cases where a person believes the Qur’an is created without this necessarily making them a kafir.

The Salaf Saliheen also mentioned this. They did not make takfir of every individual who held such a view, because some were genuinely ignorant about the Qur’an being uncreated—some did not even understand what the belief entailed—and were therefore treated as ignorant people rather than outright kuffar.

It is important to note that Ibn Taymiyyah considered the beliefs of the Ash‘aris to constitute major kufr, but he excused certain people due to what he conceived as genuine ignorance.

One cannot claim that Ibn Taymiyyah viewed the Ash‘aris as Muslims, because that is not true. He clearly distinguished between the general ruling and the specific ruling, as is also evident from the scholars of the Salaf Saliheen.

ولهذا كان السلف مطبقين على تكفير من أنكر ذلك، لأنه عندهم معلوم بالاضطرار من الدين، والأمور المعلومة بالضرورة عند السلف والأئمة وعلماء الدين قد لا تكون معلومة لبعض الناس: إما لإعراضه عن سماع ما في ذلك من المنقول، فيكون حين انصرافه عن الاستماع والتدبر غير محصل لشرط العلم، بل يكون ذلك الامتناع مانعاً له من حصول العلم بذلك، كما يعرض عن رؤية الهلال فلا يراه، مع أن رؤيته ممكنة لكل من نظر إليه، وكما يحصل لمن لا يصغي إلى استماع كلام غيره وتدبره، لا سيما إذا قام عنده اعتقاد إن الرسول لا يقول مثل ذلك، فيبقى قلبه غير متدبر ولا متأمل لما به يحصل له هذا العلم الضروري.
[دار تعارض العقل والنقل - ابن تيمية - المجلد ٧ - الصفحة ٢٧]

Ibn Taymiyyah said: "And for this reason, the early scholars (al-salaf) were strict in declaring those who denied this (Uluww) as disbelievers, because, for them, it was Ma'lum bi al-Darurah in religion. Matters that are necessarily known among the early scholars, imams, and religious authorities may not be known to some people: either because they avoid listening to what has been transmitted regarding it—so that when they refrain from listening and reflection, the condition of knowledge is not fulfilled for them. Rather, this avoidance prevents them from attaining knowledge of it, just as someone avoids sighting the crescent and thus does not see it, even though it is possible for anyone who looks at it to see it. Similarly, this occurs for someone who does not pay attention to listening to and reflecting on the words of others, especially if they hold a prior belief that the Prophet would not say such a thing. Their heart remains unreflective and inattentive, and as a result, they do not acquire this what else would be Ilmu bi Darurah." [Dar-u Ta'arud al-'Aql wal-Naql - Ibn Taymiyyah - Volume 7 - Page 27]

Ibn Taymiyyah explains that some people may be genuinely unaware of certain aspects of Ilm bi Darurah due to their turning away, as they do not believe the Prophet would have said anything else.

This, however, clearly does not apply to the Ash‘ari scholars, who authored numerous works of Tafsir and Sharh of Hadith.

Ibn Taymiyyah excused some individuals while not excusing others, because he distinguished between those for whom knowledge was genuinely hidden and those who were fully aware yet rejected it through the use of kalam.