Aqida: al-Mutashabihat

Aqida: al-Mutashabihat

هُوَ الَّذِي أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُّحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ۖ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاءَ الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاءَ تَأْوِيلِهِ ۗ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلَّا اللَّـهُ ۗ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا  ۗ وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلَّا أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ

It is He who sent down upon thee the Book, wherein are verses clear that are the Essence of the Book, and others ambiguous. As for those in whose hearts is swerving, they follow the ambiguous part, desiring dissension, and desiring its interpretation; and none knows its interpretation, save only God. And those firmly rooted in knowledge say, 'We believe in it; all is from our Lord'; yet none remembers, but men possessed of minds.
(Quran 3:7)
________________

Tajsim
Attributing bodity form to Allah

Hand, Face, Foot etc
were litterally attributed to Allah by some of mutajassima
around 300 H.
Exaltied is He above such heinous attribution

Tashbih
Likening Allah to creation

Saying "He has a body not like the human bodies"
as suggested by Ibn Taymiyya
- this is tashbih because it implies His having limits and direction
Exaltied is He above such heinous attribution

Tahqiq
Literal interpretation

Hand, Face, Foot etc
If held to be haqiqi, it will amount to tashbih

Istiwa
If held to be haqiqi, it will amount to tajsim

Position of the Maturidis & Ash´aris
regarding the Fire and Garden

Tafwid - bila kay
Accepting without knowing how

Position of
most of the Salaf,
and the Maturidis
regarding
Hand, Face, Foot etc

Position of the Maturidis & Ash´aris
regarding
Istiwa

Ta'wil
suggesting linguistic interpretation
when needed and under given conditions

Position of
some of the Salaf,
the Ash'aris,
and later Maturidis
regarding
Hand, Face, Foot etc 

Ta'wil
Superceding textual evidence
by allegorical Interpretation when deemed fit by reason

Way of the mu´ tazila

/Circumstanciality/

"I heard Mâlik [ibn Anas] say:

'Whoever recites (the Hand of Allâh) and indicates his hand, or recites (the Eye of Allâh) and indicates that organ of his: let it be cut off to discipline him concerning the Sacredness and Transcendence beyond what he has compared Him to, and above his own comparison to Him. Both his life and the limb he compared to Allâh are cut off."

Ibn Wahb., quoted in Ibn al-`Arabî al-Mâlikî, Ah.kâm al-Qur'ân (4:1740).

Narration of Abû Hurayra:

"The Prophet  recited the verse (Lo! Allâh commands you that you restore deposits to their owners, and, if you judge between mankind, that you judge justly. Lo! excellent is this which Allâh admonishes you. Lo! Allâh is ever Hearer, Seer) (4:58) whereupon he e placed his thumb on his ear and his index finger on his eye."

Narrated by Abû Dâwûd, Ibn H.ibbân (1:498 #265) with a sound chain.
Comment if Ibn Hiiban:

By placing his fingers on his ear and eye the Prophet  wanted to let people know that Allâh Almighty does not hear by means of the ear that has an auditory meatus and curves, nor does He see with the eye that has eyelids, a pupil, and a white part. Highly exalted is our Lord above any likeness with His creatures in any way whatsoever! Rather, He hears and sees without organ (âla) in any way He wishes.

http://www.abc.se/~m9783/k/ha_e.html

"...For one to say: "I believe in this matter what the Salaf believed" is a lie. How does he believe what he has no idea about, and the meaning of which he does not know?

Nor is speaking about the meaning a reprehensible innovation, but rather an obligatory excellent innovation (bid`a hasana wajiba) whenever something dubious appears. The only reason the Salaf kept from such discourse is that in their time no-one construed the words of Allah and those of His Prophet to mean what it is not permissible to construe them to mean. If any such dubiousness had appeared in their time they would have shown it to be a lie and rejected it strenuously. Thus did the Companions and the Salaf refute the Qadariyya when the latter brought out their innovation, although they did not use to address such matters before the Qadariyya appeared on the scene. Nor did they reply to the individuals who mentioned them. Nor did any of the Companions relate any of it from the Prophet since there was no need for it. And Allah knows best."

al-`Izz ibn `Abd al-Salam, Fatawa, ed. `Abd al-Rahman ibn`Abd al-Fattah - Fatwa om ta'wil

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro8.htm

Abu `Ubayd (d. 222) [Abu `Ubayd al-Qasim ibn Sallam] used to say: "As for us we narrate those hadiths but we do not smear them with meanings."

Abu Sulayman [(d. 386)] says: It is even more relevant for us not to be forward in that from which those who have more knowledge, antiquity, and seniority than us stood back.

However, the people of the time in which we live have joined two parties. The first [the Mu`tazila and Jahmiyya] altogether disavow this kind of hadith and declares them forged to begin with, which implies their giving the lie to the scholars who have narrated them, that is, the imams of our religion and the transmitters of the prophetic ways, and the intermediaries between us and Allah's Messenger. The second party [the Mushabbiha] gives its assent to the narrations and appplies their outward meanings literally in a way bordering anthropomorphism.

As for us we steer clear from both views, and accept neither as our school. It is therefore incumbent upon us to seek for these hadiths, when they are cited and established as authentic from the perspectives of transmission and attribution, an interpretation (ta'wil) extracted according to the known meanings of the foundations of the Religion and the schools of the scholars, without rejecting the narrations to begin with, as long as their chains are acceptable and narrators trustworthy.

Quoted by hafiz Abu Sulayman al-Khattabi (d. 386) in his Commentary on Abu Dawud's Sunan.
Al-Khattabi, Ma`alim al-sanan `ala sunan Abi Dawud (Hims ed.)5:95. Cited in al-Buti, al-Salafiyya.

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro8.htm

/Ta'wil of the salaf/

As for the saying reported from the Prophet : "The Black Stone is the right hand of Allâh,"...the h.adîth is taken variously to mean prosperity, blessing, acceptance, and the context of the Muslims pledge of loyalty to their Creator.... Ibn Qutayba said that it was actually a saying of Ibn `Abbâs, and he relates a saying of `Âisha )#  that the Black Stone is the depository of the covenant of human souls with Allâh on the Day of Promise (alastu bi rabbikum).

http://www.abc.se/~m9783/k/ha_e.html
51:47

Concerning the verse { We have built the heaven with (Our) hands } (51:47), al-T.abarî narrated in his Tafsîr that Ibn `Abbâs said: "It means: with strength." He reports an identical position from Mujâhid, Qatâda, Mans.ûr, Ibn Zayd, and Sufyân al-Thawrî. This is also Imâm al-Ash`arîs explanation a reported by Ibn Fûrâk in the latters recension of Ash`arîs school.
Ref: Abû Bakr ibn Fûrâk, Mujarrad Maqâlât al-Ash`arî (Beirut, 1987)
p. 44.
This is also Imam al-Ash`ari's explanation according to Ibn Furak in the latter's recension of Ash`ari's school.

http://www.abc.se/~m9783/k/ha_e.html

"And the sky We built with hands; verily We outspread [it]" (Koran 51:47),

al-Tabari ascribes the figurative explanation (ta’wil) of with hands as meaning "with power (bi quwwa)" through five chains of transmission to Ibn ‘Abbas, who died 68 years after the Hijra, Mujahid who died 104 years after the Hijra, Qatada [ibn Da‘ama] who died 118 years after the Hijra, Mansur [ibn Zadhan al-Thaqafi] who died 131 years after the Hijra, and Sufyan al-Thawri who died 161 years after the Hijra (Jami‘ al-bayan, 27.7–8). I mention these dates to show just how early they were.

http://www.themodernreligion.com/basic/literalism.htm

68: 42

"On a day when shin shall be exposed, they shall be ordered to prostrate, but be unable" (Qur'an 68:42),

al-Tabari says, "A number of the exegetes of the Companions (Sahaba) and their students (tabi‘in) held that it [a day when shin shall be exposed] means that a dire matter (amrun shadid) shall be disclosed" (Jami‘ al-bayan, 29.38)—the shin’s association with direness being that it was customary for Arab warriors fighting in the desert to ready themselves to move fast and hard through the sand in the thick of the fight by lifting the hems of their garments above the shin. This was apparently lost upon later anthropomorphists, who said the verse proved ‘Allah has a shin,’ or, according to others, ‘two shins, since one would be unbecoming.’ Al-Tabari also relates from Muhammad ibn ‘Ubayd al-Muharibi, who relates from Ibn al-Mubarak, from Usama ibn Zayd, from ‘Ikrima, from Ibn ‘Abbas that shin in the above verse means "a day of war and direness (harbin wa shidda)" (ibid., 29.38). All of these narrators are those of the sahih or rigorously authenticated collections except Usama ibn Zayd, whose hadiths are hasan or ‘well authenticated.’

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/littlk.htm

Ibn abbas said, when he was asked about Allah’s saying “On the day the leg shall be uncovered” (68:42), “If you find something from the Quran to be obscure, seek its meaning from poetry; verily poetry is the register (diwan) of the arabs. Have you not heard the poet’s saying:

Your people have opened the way
of sword-blows upon the necks
and war or battle rose on every leg
(Ie. it was impossible to flee)”

Then he said, “This is a day of affliction and violence.” Thus th emeaning of verse 68:42 is, “On the day when affliction befalls them in earnest.” (It was mentioned by ibn hajar in fath al-bari 13:428 and Ibn jarir al-tabari in his tafsir 29:38 from Mujahid, Said ibn jubayr, and Qatada.)

https://sites.google.com/site/allahiseloi/mistaken-attributes-of-allah

The Prophet's saying: "Allah smiled/laughed last night at the good deed of both of you..." which is part of a longer hadith about the Ansari who hosted a guest of the Prophet's while he himself remained hungry with his wife. Bukhari and Muslim extracted it through various chains. Al-Bukhari interpreted Allah's smile or laughter as His mercy, and he did not stop and content himself to say: "Let it pass without asking how."

Al-Bayhaqi relates that al-Muzani reported from al-Shafi`i the following commentary on the verse: "To Allah belong the East and the West, and wheresoever you turn, there is Allah's face" (2:115): "It means -- and Allah knows best -- there is the face towards which Allah has directed you." Bayhaqi continues: "The hafiz Abu `Abd Allah and the hafiz al-Qadi Abu Bakr ibn al-`Arabi have related to us... from Mujahid that he said regarding this verse: "It means Allah's qibla, therefore wheresoever you may be, East and West, do not turn your faces except towards it.

Numerous other examples of what we have mentioned can be found in books such as in Bayhaqi's al-Asma' wa al-sifat, al-Khattabi's Ma`alim al-sunan, al-Baghawi's Tafsir, and other references.

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro9.htm

Bayhaqi in his al-Asma' wa al-sifat related
Hammad ibn Zayd's interpretation of Allah's descent to the nearest heaven, in the hadiths of descent, as His drawing near to His servants.
http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro9.htm

Ibn Taymiyya related Ja`far al-Sadiq's interpretation of Allah's "face" in His saying: "Everything will perish save His face" (28:88) as meaning Religion; and al-Dahhak's interpretation of the face in the same verse as meaning: Allah's essence, Paradise, the Fire, and the Throne.

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro9.htm

... it is authentically related from Ibn `Abbas that he said: "His kursî is His knowledge (kursiyyuhu `ilmuhu),"[21] and this is the explanation preferred by the Imams of the Salaf such as Sufyan al-Thawri, al-Bukhari, al-Tabari, al-Bayhaqi, and others.

http://www.sunnah.org/history/Innovators/ibn_baz.htm

...in certain cases, as in the narration: “On the Day of Resurrection your Prophet shall be brought and shall be made to sit in front of Allah the Almighty, on His kursî.” Some of the Salaf, among them al-Hasan al-Basri, even explicitly said that the kursî is the `arsh. Furthermore, it is authentically related from Ibn `Abbas that he said: “His kursî is His knowledge (kursiyyuhu `ilmuhu),” and this is the explanation preferred by the Imams of the Salaf such as Sufyan al-Thawri, al-Bukhari, al-Tabari, al-Bayhaqi, and others.

http://soulsearch.wordpress.com/2007/04/15/ayat-al-kursi/

/salaf about istiwa/

Umm Salama, the Prophet’s salalahu alayh i wa salam sife, said the following about Istiwa: “The establishment is not unknown (Ghayr majhul) and its modality isinconceivable in the mind (ghayr maqul); one does not ask “how” about Him; “how” is inapplicable to Him.“ (Ibn hajar, fath al-bari 13:406-407 Beirut 1989 ed.)

https://sites.google.com/site/allahiseloi/mistaken-attributes-of-allah

A man asked Imam malik (d179), “How did Allah make istiwa on the throne?” Imam malik inclined his head and was silent until the sweat of fever covered his brow, then he looked up and said, “Istiwa is not unknown (ghayru majhul), the modality of it is inconceivable in the mind (al-kayfu minhu ghayru maqul); but belief in it is obligatory, and inquiring about it is a heretical innovation. You are an innovator.” And he gave orders for him to be taken out.
(Ibn abi zayd al-qayrawani, al-jami fi al-sunan wa al-adab wa al-maghazi wa al-tarikh, ed. M. Abu al-ajfan and uthman battikh (Beirut: Muassasat al-risala: Tunis: Al-maktaba al-atiqa 1402/1982 p123)

https://sites.google.com/site/allahiseloi/mistaken-attributes-of-allah

Sufyan al-thawri (d. 161) forwarded Imam al-haramayn al-juwayni’s (d.478) (in his al-irshad ila qawati al-adilla fi usul al-itiqad) interpretation of Istiwa in the verse 20:4 as “a command concerning the throne” (amrun fi al-arsh), as qouted by al-yafii in his
book kitab marham al-ilal al-mudila fi daf al-shubah wa al-radd ala al-mutazila (Book of the resolution of difficult problems for the removal of doubts and refutation of the mutazila):

The understanding of Istiwa as Allah’s turning to a particular command concerning the throne is not far-fetched, and this is the tawil of Imam sufyan al-thawri, who took as corroborating evidence for it the verse, “Then turned he (istawa) to the heaven when it was smoke” (41:11) (in al-yafii, marham al-ilal al-mudila, ed E. Denison Ross (Calcutta: Asiatic society of bengal1910 p245)

https://sites.google.com/site/allahiseloi/mistaken-attributes-of-allah

Ibn Hajar in Fath al-bari and al-Baghawi in his Tafsir related that
`Abd Allah ibn `Abbas and the majority of the commentators have interpreted istawa in Allah's saying "The Merciful is established on the Throne" (20:4) as meaning He rose above it (irtafa`a).

Similar to it is what Ibn Hajar related, in his long commentary on that verse, from Ibn Battal:
"The commentary on istawa as meaning He towers above it (`ala) is correct and the true position and the saying of Ahl al-Sunna."

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro9.htm
Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said: "Allah mentioned Establishment (al-istiwa') and Establishment is only what Allah mentioned about it, not what humans imagine about it."

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro7.htm

Yet again, we never tire of saying "There is nothing like Him whatsoever" (42:11) and that the best explanation is the recitation of the verse as it was revealed and its leaving it unexplained. This was the way of Malik, al-Shafi`i, al-Awza`i, Ahmad, and the rest of the Salaf with regard to this verse.

However, in the face of the false suggestions of those who, between the time of the Salaf and ours, have represented the Creator of heaven and earth as a limited body sitting in a confined space, it has been and still is an obligation of Ahl al-Sunna to clarify ambiguities some used to spread falsehood. And this has been the position of Ahl al-Sunna since Bukhari, al-Khattabi, Ibn Battal, and Ibn al-Jawzi, through the time of Nawawi, Subki, and Ibn Hajar, as the present book abundantly makes clear.

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro6.htm

To suggest or cite opinions that they added the terms: "sitting" or "in person" (bi al-dhat) or "sitting in person" or "literally" (haqiqatan) is to give the lie to their insistance on rejecting the kayf of Allah's establishment.

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro7.htm

When Imam Malik, al-Shafi`i, and others were asked about the interpretation of the verse al-rahman `ala al-`arsh istawa in particular, and about similar verses in general, they used to say:
"Accept these verses and hadith as they were given without believing that they have meanings which pertain to a manner, such as images, descriptions related to creations, and the like."

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said: "Allah mentioned Establishment (al-istiwa') and Establishment is only what Allah mentioned about it, not what humans imagine about it."

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro7.htm

Imam abu hanifa (d.150) says in his Wasiyya:

Had He been in a place and needing to sit and rest before creating the throne, then the question “Where was Allah?” would have applied to Him, which is impossible…We assert that Allah is established on the throne without His need(haja) nor settlement (Istiqrar) upon it, for He it is who preserves the Trone and other than it without needing any of them.
(Abu hanifa, wasiyyat al-imam al-azam abu hanifa , ed. Fuad Ali rida Beirut Maktabat al-jamahir 1970 p.10)

https://sites.google.com/site/allahiseloi/mistaken-attributes-of-allah

He said in his al-fiqh al-akbar:

Allah has no limits, nor any rivals…He who says, “I do not know if my Lord is in the heavens or on the earth” is a disbeliever, and he who says, “He is on the throne, and I do not know whether the throne is in the heaven or on the earth,” he is also a disbeliever.

Imam abu mansur al-maturidi explained this in the saying, “The reason is that by such words he suggests a place for Allah and this is idolatry.”

(Abu hanifa, kitab al0fiqh al-akbar bi sharh al-qari (Cairo: Dar al0kutub al-arabiyya al-kubra 1327/1909 p16; cf. al-maturidi, sharh al fiqh al akbar in majmuat rasail (hyderabad: matbaat majlis dairat al-maarif al-nizamiyya 1321/1903)

https://sites.google.com/site/allahiseloi/mistaken-attributes-of-allah

Imam Shafii (d.204), in his small treatise entitled al-fiqh al-akbar said,

“Whoever says, ‘al-rahmanu ala al arsh istawa’, it is said to him, ‘This verse is one of the ambiguous verses (mutashabih) concerning which one is perplexed to give an answer, and the same is said regarding similar verses.”" (al-shafii, al-fiqh al-akbar p.17)

Others who list the verse of istiwa among the mutashabihat are imam malik ibn anas, the fuqaha of madina, and al-asmai according to abu mansur abd al-qahir al-baghdadi in usul al-din (al-baghdadi, usul al-din p.112-113)

https://sites.google.com/site/allahiseloi/mistaken-attributes-of-allah

The imam of Sunnis, abu al-hasan al-ashari (d324), says in his al-ibana fi usul al-diyana:

Allah is above the heavens, above the throne, above everything, with a loftiness (fawqiyya) which does not make Him any closer to the throne or the heavens, just as it does not make Him any further from the earth. He is close to everything in existence, He is closer to the servant than his jugular vein, and He is a witness over all things.

He also says, as reported by abu mansur al-baghdadi in usul al-din:

Allah’s establishment on the throne is an action He has created named istiwa and related to the throne, just as He has created an action named ityan (coming) related to a certain people; and this implies neither descent nor movement. (al-baghdadi usul al din p.113)

https://sites.google.com/site/allahiseloi/mistaken-attributes-of-allah

/salaf about Allah's "coming"/

Coming. The hadith master (hafiz) Ibn Kathir reports that Imam al-Bayhaqi related from al-Hakim from Abu ‘Amr ibn al-Sammak, from Hanbal, the son of the brother of Ahmad ibn Hanbal’s father, that

Ahmad ibn Hanbal figuratively interpreted the word of Allah Most High,

"And your Lord shall come . . ." (Koran 89:22),

as meaning "His recompense (thawab) shall come."

Al-Bayhaqi said, "This chain of narrators has absolutely nothing wrong in it" (al-Bidaya wa al-nihaya,10.342). In other words, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, like the Companions (Sahaba) and other early Muslims mentioned above, sometimes also gave figurative interpretations (ta’wil) to scriptural expressions that might otherwise have been misinterpreted anthropomorphically. This was also the way of Abul Hasan al-Ash‘ari, founder of the Ash‘ari school of Islamic belief, who had two views about the mutashabihat, the first being tafwid, or ‘consigning the knowledge of what is meant to Allah,’ and the second being ta’wil or ‘figurative interpretation’ when needed to avoid the suggestion of the anthropomorphism that is explicitly rejected by the Koran.

http://www.themodernreligion.com/basic/literalism.htm

Imam Ahmad's authentic interpretation of Allah's coming in the verse "And thy Lord shall come with angels, rank on rank" (89:22) as referring to the coming of His order (amr) according to the verse: "Wait they aught save that thy Lord's command (amr) should come to pass?" (16:32)
...
Imam Ahmad in interpreting the "coming" in the verse "And thy Lord shall come with angels, rank on rank" (89:22) as: "The command of thy Lord cometh," in the light of the verse: "Wait they aught save that thy Lord's command (amr) should come to pass?" (16:32). Indeed, the best commentary on the Qur'an is the Qur'an itself.

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro9.htm

/Imam ahmad/

About body:

In Manaqib Ahmad, al-Bayhaqi relates that Imam Ahmad (Unpublished manuscript) said:

"A person commits an act of disbelief (kufr) if he says Allah is a body, even if he says: Allah is a body but not like other bodies." He continues: "The expressions are taken from language and from Islam, and linguists applied "body" to a thing that has length, width, thickness, form, structure and components. The expression has not been handed down in Shari`a. Therefore, it is invalid and cannot be used."

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro3.htm

As Ibn al-Jawzi reported in his Daf` shubah al-tashbih: `Ali ibn Muhammad ibn `Umar al-Dabbas related to us that Rizq Allah ibn `Abd al-Wahhab al-Tamimi said: "Ahmad ibn Hanbal did not attribute a direction to the Creator."

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro4.htm

According to Imam al-Baihaqi, in his “Manaqib Ahmad,” he relates with a sahih chain that

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said:

“A person commits an act of disbelief (kufr) if he says Allah is a body, even if he says: Allah is a body but not like other bodies.” - He continues: “The expressions are taken from language and from Islam, and linguists applied ‘body’ to a thing that has length, width, thickness, form, structure, and components. The expression has not been handed down in Shari’a. Therefore, it is invalid and cannot be used.”

Ibn al-Jawzi in his “Daf shubah al-tashbih said:

“They said: He is established on the Throne “in person.” But this addition is not related by anyone!”

“Al-Aqida al-Tahawiyya.” Imam Tahawi states in #38 of his Al-Aqida: “He [Allah] is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs....”

“He [Allah] is beyond...being restricted...”

Furthermore, Bin Baaz says in the same footnote:

“Similarly, his [refering to Imam Tahawi] saying “The six directions do not surround Him like all other innovations ” means the six created directions. He does not means the negation of Allah being above His creation and established on His throne because His position is not covered by the six directions, as He is above this universe and surroundings.”
“All the evidence from the Book and the authentic Mutawatir Sunnah prove that He is in the direction above us”

http://www.7cgen.com/index.php?showtopic=23038

Hujjat ul-Islam Imam Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, the renowned Ahl al-Sunna Mujaddid, said in his “Ihya ‘ulum al-din,” under the section explaining the “Transcendence” of Allahu-Ta’ala:

“He [Allah] is not a body with a form, or a limitary, quantitative substance, not resembling bodies in quantifiability or divisibility, or in being a substance or qualified by a substance....He does not resemble anything that exists, nor anything that exists resembles Him. There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him, nor is He like unto anything. He is not delimited by magnitude, contained in places, encompassed by directions, or bounded by heavens or earth....”
A hadeeth related by Imam Bukhari states:

“Allah existed eternally when there was nothing else with Him.”

This means that absolutely nothing existed, including the throne. Everything that came into existence after once having been in a state of non-existence is a creation which does not possess eternal attributes. The Ahl al-Sunna ulema say that the claim that Allah is sitting on His Throne indeed stipulates a direction because the throne is a creation of Allah, and all of creation is located in “created directions.” Saying that Allah is in the “direction” of the throne is indeed imposing a sensory limitation to Allahu Ta’ala. After all, is the throne not located in a particular direction? The fact is that the throne is located in a certain direction and a certain place. For Allah to be localized on the Throne would mean that Allah is in a place. This opposes the creed of Ahl al-Sunna wa’al Jama’ah.

Imam Bukhari, who passed away in 256 AH, believed that Allah exists without a place, as it is authentically stated by Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his “Fath al-Bari.”

http://www.7cgen.com/index.php?showtopic=23038

Muhammad Khalil Harras, another wahhabi, writes in his translation of Ibn Taymiya’s “Sharh Aqeedah al-Wasitiyyah,” page 73:

“The Mutazila deny the vision. This denial is based on refusing to accept Allah in any direction for it is necessary for a thing being seen to be in the direction of the seer...”

Al-Harras thus claims Allah must be in a direction to be seen in the Hereafter.

Abu Ja’far at-Tahawi in his “al-Aqida” once again refutes this mujassim by saying:

#35 says: “The Seeing of Allah by the People of the Garden is true, without their vision being all-encompassing and without the manner of their vision being known....We do not delve into that, trying to interpret it according to our own opinions or letting our imaginations have free rein.”
Also, remember that “Allah is not contained by the six directions.”

http://www.7cgen.com/index.php?showtopic=23038

/Early Mujassima/

1: `Uthman Ibn Sa`id al-Darimi al-Sajzi (d. 280; not `Abd Allah ibn `Abd al-Rahman al-Darimi, author of the Sunan, who died in 255)
/quotes from his book Naqd 'ala al-Jahmiyya:/
- "The Living, the Self-Subsistent, does what He wills, moves if He so wills, descends and ascends if He wills, collects and spreads and rises and sits if He wills, for the distinguishing mark between the living and the dead is movement: every living thing moves without fail, and every dead thing is immobile without fail. "

In this phrase the author has compared Allah to every living thing, although nothing is like Him whatsoever.

- "Those who object claim that Allah has no limit, no boundary, and no end, and this is the principle upon which Jahm has built all of his heresy... Allah certainly has a limit... and so has His place, for He is on His Throne above the heavens, and these are two limits. Any person who declares that Allah has a limit and that His place has a limit, is more knowledgeable than the Jahmis."
`Uthman ibn Sa`id al-Darimi, Kitab al-naqd `ala al-jahmiyya (Cairo, 1361/1942).
- "If He so willed, He could have settled on the back of a gnat and it would have carried Him thanks to His power and the favor of His lordship, not to mention the magnificient Throne." 
- Ibn Taymiyya reproduced the above statement verbatim in his Ta'sis. Also: "He is distinguished from His creation and above His Throne with a patent distance in between the two, with the seven heavens between Him and His creatures on earth."

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro2.htm

2. "Is istiwa other than by sitting (julus)?"" + passage taken verbatim from the Bible, Book of Revelation
Kawthari later renamed `Abd Allah ibn Ahmad's book: Kitab al-zaygh (Book of aberration).
http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro3.htm

3. Ibn Khuzayma (d. 311): He wrote a large volume which he named Kitab al-tawhid Fakhr al-Din Razi was so repelled by Ibn Khuzayma's book that he renamed it: Kitab al-shirk.

Kawthari points out that Ibn Khuzayma's understanding is identical to that of the anthropomorphists of Tabaristan and Isfahan... who say: "If He does not have eyes, nor ears, nor hand, nor foot, then what we are worshipping is a watermelon!" ... Ibn al-Jawzi says the following about him:I saw that Abu Bakr Ibn Khuzayma compiled a book on Allah's attributes and divided it into chapters such as: "Chapter of the Asserting of His hand"; "Chapter of His Holding the Heavens on His fingers"; "Chapter of the Asserting of His foot, in spite of the Mu`tazila." Then he said: Allah said: "Have they feet wherewith they walk or have they hands wherewith they hold, or have they eyes wherewith they see, or have they ears wherewith they hear?" (7:195); then he informs us that he who has no hand and no foot is like cattle.

the scholar Ibn Hibban, who died in 354 AH, was expelled from Sijistan for refusing to assert limits to Allah.

http://www.7cgen.com/index.php?showtopic=23038

The persecutors of al-Tabari (d. 310) for denying "sitting" of Allah

Al-Khallal, [Ibn al-Jawzi's offenders, Ibn Hibban's and Tabari's would-be killers, ] Ibn Qayyim, and Ibn Taymiyya all form the party that maintain that Allah sits on the Throne then places his feet on the kursi as one would on a footstool, and that the Prophet sits on the throne by His side. As a contemporary scholar remarked, all this seems to replicate another passage of the Bible, namely what is found in the Gospel according to Mark (19:16): "Then the Lord [Jesus], after he spoke to them, was raised to the heaven, and sat at the right of Allah.
http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro3.htm

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro3.htm

Later Mujassima

Ibn Rajab relates in Dhayl tabaqat al-hanabila that Ibn al-Fa'us al-Hanbali gave the hadith a literal meaning: "He used to say: The Black Stone is Allah's Right Hand literally (haqiqatan).

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro7.htm

...the Hanbalis Ibn Ya`la and al-Zaghuni condemned by Ibn al-Jawzi, and the Hanbalis `Abdullah ibn Ahmad, Ibn Sa`id al-Darimi, and Ibn Khuzayma denounced by al-Razi and Kawthari: ...their assertion that the only alternative to the Jahmi belief that "Allah is in every place" is to say that "He is in one place only, above His throne" is just as false as saying He is in every place for Allah exists without place.

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro7.htm

It will be clear from the forthcoming opinions of the Salaf and Khalaf that the correct position of Ahl al-Sunna never adds "in person" or "literally" -- which is to specify a modality -- to the mention of Allah's establishment on the Throne, and that to suggest space in the slightest manner is to leave Islam.

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro7.htm

Khalaf scholars usually give an explicit meaning to such verses. This way is acceptable insofar as there is a fear that people will otherwise interpret them anthropomorphically, likening Allah to his creations (tashbih) and begin to speak of His "Hand" as a literal (haqiqi) attribute, in the manner of Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn Qayyim, and the early Hanbali anthropomorphists decried by Ibn al-Jawzi.

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro7.htm

/Ibn Taymiyya/

Kawthari says: "Ibn Taymiyya replicates part and parcel what is found in
1-- `Uthman ibn Sa`id al-Darimi's al-Radd `ala al-jahmiyya, and
2-- the Kitab al-sunna attributed to `Abd Allah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and
3-- Ibn Khuzayma's al-Tawhid wa sifat al-rabb."

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro1.htm

One of the greatest indications of Ibn Taymiyya's anthropomorphist views is that in advocating the interpretation of istiwa' as istiqrar or settling -- absolutely condemned by the Salaf,

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro2.htm

Ahl al-Sunna scholars in Ibn Taymiya’s time accused him of being a mujassim. Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani’s biography of Ibn Taymiyya in “al-durar al-kaamina fi a‘yaan al-mi’at al-thaamina” [The Hidden Pearls Concerning the Famous People of the Eighth Century] is sahih dalail (proof) to justify such a claim. Ibn Hajar states authentic statements in his book such as:

“People were divided into parties because of him. Some considered him an anthropomorphist [mujassim] because of what he mentioned in ‘al- ‘aqeeda al-Hamawiyya’ and ‘al-‘aqeeda al-Waasitiyya’ and other books of his, such as Allah’s hand, foot, shin, and face being litteral attributes of Allah (Sifaatun Haqeeqiyyatun lillaah) and that He is established upon the Throne with His Essence (wa annahu mustawin ‘ala al-‘arshi bi dhaatihi). It was said to him that were this the case He would necessarily be subject to spatial confinement (al-tahayyuz) and divisibility (al-inqisaam). He replied: “I do not concede that spatial confinement and divisibility are (necessarily) properties of bodies (anaa laa usallimu anna al-tahayyuz wa al-inqisaam min khawass al- ajsaam),” whereupon it was adduced against him (ulzima) that he held Allah’s Essence to be subject to spatial confinement.”

Ibn Taymiyya's Literal Representation of Allah's "Descent"

Tuhfat al-nuzzar or "Travels" of Ibn Battuta, who relates:
"When I came to Damascus there was a man called Ibn Taymiyya speaking about religious science, but there was something strange in his mind One day he was giving the Jum`a sermon and he said, ''Our Lord descends to the nearest heaven thus," then he went down two steps on the minbar and he said "like my descending" (kanuzuli hadha)."
This well-known incident is confirmed both internally through Ibn Taymiyya's own writings, and externally as related in Ibn Hajar's Durar:...
http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro4.htm

Ibn Taymiyya Compares Allah to the Moon

In  `Aqida wasitiyya. in his interpretation of the verse 57:4: "He is with you wherever you are"

"The phrase "and He is with you" does not mean that He blends into creation... Nay the moon... one of the smallest of Allah's creations, is both placed in the heaven (mawdu`un fi al-samaa') and present with the traveler and the non-traveler wherever they may be. And the Exalted is above (fawq) the Throne, as a watchful guardian of His creatures and their protector Who is cognizant of them.1
"
http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro5.htm

Ibn Hajar al-Haytami (d. 974) in his Fatawa hadithiyya:

"Ibn Taymiyya is a slave which Allah has forsaken and misguided and blinded and deafened and debased. That is the declaration of the imams who have exposed the corruption of his positions and the mendacity of his sayings. Whoever wishes to pursue this must read the words of the mujtahid imam Abu al-Hasan (Taqi al-Din) al-Subki, of his son Taj al-Din Subki, of the Imam al-`Izz ibn Jama`a and others of the Shafi`i, Maliki, and Hanafi shaykhs..."
"Among the things Ibn Taymiyya said which violate the scholarly consensus are:...
...4 that the Qur'an is created in Allah's Essence (muhdath fi dhatillah),3 elevated is He above that!
...6 his sayings about Allah's "corporeality," "direction," "displacement," (al-jismiyya wa al-jiha wa al-intiqal), and that He fits the size of the Throne, being neither bigger nor smaller, exalted is He from such a hideous invention and wide-open disbelief (kufr), and may He forsake all his followers, and may all his beliefs be scattered and lost!
...8 that the prophets are not free from sin (al-anbiya'a ghayru ma`sumin), and that the Prophet has no particular status before Allah (la jaha lahu) and must not be used as a means (la yutawassalu bihi), and that the undertaking of travel (al-safar) to him in order to perform his visit (al-ziyara) is a disobedience (ma`siya) in which it is unlawful to shorten the prayers, and that it is forbidden to ask for his intercession in view of the Day of Need"

Ibn Hajar al-Haythami al-Makki's Fatawa hadithiyya (Cairo: Halabi, 1390/1970) p. 114-117.

Ibn Hajar says in Fath al-Bari (1993 ed. 3:66) about Ibn Taymiyya's prohibition to travel in order to visit the Prophet: "This is one of the ugliest matters ever reported from Ibn Taymiyya." Yet even today the Saudi scholar Bin Baz supports this statement of Ibn Taymiyya to say!

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro5.htm

From Shiekh Bouti's Salafiyya:

Perhaps what you have seen of Ibn Taymiyya's doing in searching for an acceptable interpretation for Allah's "Face" in His saying: "All that is on it will perish, but the face of thy Lord full of Majesty, Bounty and Honour will abide" (44:26-27) should put an end to all misconceptions and cut off the source of all arguments and differences in this subject, since he is the one who heaps criticism on the Khalaf for their interpretation of such verses. We reject the double standard of those who are looking to excuse away Ibn Taymiyya's clear case of interpretation or give it a preference or a special right over others, claiming, "the face in that verse does not neccessarily refer to an attribute, and therefore such interpretation is different from other interpretations, therefore there is nothing wrong with plunging into this form of ta'wil."

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro9.htm

/Tajsim and other heresies of modern preachers and its refutation/

Bilal Philips says:
“He has neither corporeal body nor is He a formless spirit. He has a form befitting His majesty, the like of which no man has ever seen or conceived, and which will only be seen (to the degree of man’s finite limitations) by the people of paradise.”

Abdl Aziz bin Abdullah bin Baaz. Bin Baaz, in his commentary of Imam Abu Ja’afar at-Tahawi’s “Al-Aqida,” says under footnote #3:
“By hudood (limits) the author [refering to Imam Tahawi] means such as known by humans since no one except Allah Almighty knows His limits.”

Muhammad Saleh al-Uthaymeen in his “Aqidat al-muslim”:
“Allah’s establishment on the throne means that He is sitting ‘in person’ on His Throne.”

https://sites.google.com/site/allahiseloi/mistaken-attributes-of-allah

Ibn al-`Uthaymin's Sharh al`aqida al-wasitiyya, which we will address in a few pages, and where the author, dissatisfied with Ibn Taymiyya's moon, turns to comparing Allah to the sun instead.

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro5.htm

Bin Baz says that it is forbidden to travel with the intention of visiting the Prophet and comments that this was not an ugly but a correct thing for Ibn Taymiyya to say. - Ibn Hajar says in Fath al-Bari (1993 ed. 3:66) about Ibn Taymiyya's prohibition to travel in order to visit the Prophet: "This is one of the ugliest matters ever reported from Ibn Taymiyya."

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro5.htm

Wahhabis and "Salafis" are most confused about this in their belief that the only alternative to the constructed claim that "Allah is in every place" is their real claim that "He is in one place only, above His throne."
Each claim is as worthless as the other since both ascribe spatial location to Allah, Exalted is He above what they claim. Both are equally false in devising for Him, respectively, dispersion in an infinity of places, and limitation in a single place. Both are disbelief according to Imam `Abd al-Ghani al-Nabulusi's limpid statement:

"Whoever believes that Allah permeates the Heavens and the Earth, or that He is a body sitting on His Throne, is a disbeliever, even if he thinks he is a Muslim."

http://www.sunnah.org/anthro/anthro1.htm