On the Māturīdī position and their validation of a possibility for the beatific vision (Ru'yah) with the eye
🧵
🧵
The Shaykh claims that we believe that Allāh will be seen on the day of judgement, without direction and without facing.
He is correct, this is indeed what we believe, however he continues his statement and states 'this is not real Ru'yah' or in his words 'Ru'yah Haqīqīyyah'.
He is correct, this is indeed what we believe, however he continues his statement and states 'this is not real Ru'yah' or in his words 'Ru'yah Haqīqīyyah'.
Of course, coming from a person who likes to switch off rationality and go by what he knows from the customary norm from the worldly realm, he will assume that the seen (Mar'īyy), in this case Allāh, will have to be in a direction, and we will indeed have to *face* him.
There are a few responses that I am going to give, of which each will tackle a different point within this statement.
1. What is Ru'yah (Vision)?
2. Is direction necessary for something to become seeable?
3. What are the opinions our respected Hanafī Shuyūkh gave on the details of this issue?
2. Is direction necessary for something to become seeable?
3. What are the opinions our respected Hanafī Shuyūkh gave on the details of this issue?
What is Ru'yah?
When it comes to the definition of this, we will have to make sure that we do not fall into a definition which is common just amongst humans,
When it comes to the definition of this, we will have to make sure that we do not fall into a definition which is common just amongst humans,
for if we were to take a particular definition which is only used for humans, then we would fall into absurdity and will have to deny Ru'yah even for Allāh, not just from our angle, but also from the angle of the Shaykh.
What is the definition that is commonly known for this?
الرؤية إثبات الشيء كما هو، بحاسة البصر.
Vision is the affirmation of a thing as it is, by the perception of the eye.
الرؤية إثبات الشيء كما هو، بحاسة البصر.
Vision is the affirmation of a thing as it is, by the perception of the eye.
Imām al-Ghazālī elaborates further and states that the reality of vision when it comes to human beings, is a type of apprehension that is more perfect and revealing than imagination and knowledge.
It is like a perfection, for example the immateriality of things in imagination is not more virtuous than that which is apprehended through the actual sense of sight when it comes to material things.
Is direction and facing necessary for the reality of sight?
In the words of the Shaykh, apparently it is not a real sight if the thing which is being seen is in a direction or facing.
In the words of the Shaykh, apparently it is not a real sight if the thing which is being seen is in a direction or facing.
However, this is false out of two reasons.
He is making this claim because he understands vision in the sense of his personal experience. This is also know as 'Ādah. 'Ādah is the habitual pattern that tends to occur constantly. For example, it is known to us that fire burns,
He is making this claim because he understands vision in the sense of his personal experience. This is also know as 'Ādah. 'Ādah is the habitual pattern that tends to occur constantly. For example, it is known to us that fire burns,
however, this is only known due to the customary norm which we have experienced with the fire. It would not be possible to conclude fire burns except with some level of experience and inference.
Nevertheless, it is also known, especially in today's time, one can create a fire that does not burn. And we constantly see this around is when the settings of the environment are changed.
A closer and more accurate example of this is the story of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام when he was thrown into the fire, yet he was not burned by it.
Allāh said:
يا نار كوني بردا وسلاما على إبراهيم
"Oh fire, be cool and safe on Ibrāhīm"
Allāh said:
يا نار كوني بردا وسلاما على إبراهيم
"Oh fire, be cool and safe on Ibrāhīm"
From this, it should be clear that habitual patterns or customary norms constantly change. Therefore, we cannot rely on experience to negate/affirm a certain thing in the scenario of vision.
We state, everything that exists, rationally has the possibility of being seen. And we see things in direction and bodies because the [relations of] direction and bodies are in fact existent. Likewise, we are able to see movement and stillness because the two states exist.
If one denies the above, then he would be asked, 'how would you know the difference between stillness and movement then?'
Furthermore, all these qualities which are stated by people, such as, direction, body, colour, light, stillness & movement, share a common quality.
Furthermore, all these qualities which are stated by people, such as, direction, body, colour, light, stillness & movement, share a common quality.
That is, existence.
The fact that all these things share a common quality, suggests that we don't see them because they are in direction, rather we see them because they exist.
The fact that all these things share a common quality, suggests that we don't see them because they are in direction, rather we see them because they exist.
A person may claim here, 'How is this true, when many things that exist cannot be seen?'
We respond as Imām As-Sābūnī and our fellow Māturīdīs respond:
We respond as Imām As-Sābūnī and our fellow Māturīdīs respond:
“By our reasoning, we adhere to the possibility of seeing every existent thing, not it's occurrence. Nothing exists except that it can be seen, however, Allāh has established the customary norm to a state in which some existent things cannot be seen, and that is out of His wisdom
not because they themselves cannot be seen.”
See Al-Bidāyah.
It is similar to the story of Jibrīl عليه السلام appearing to the Prophet ﷺ while he had two companions with him. They were unable to see him although the Prophet ﷺ was able to see him.
See Al-Bidāyah.
It is similar to the story of Jibrīl عليه السلام appearing to the Prophet ﷺ while he had two companions with him. They were unable to see him although the Prophet ﷺ was able to see him.
Likewise, the angel of death constantly passes by us, but we are unable to see him, and that is all out of divine wisdom, not because they cannot be seen.
Coming back to the discussion of direction, we will re-use our definition of vision.
Vision is to affirm something as it is, by the means of eyes.
Therefore, if something exists in a direction, then it will indeed he seen in a direction. However, if something exists above
Vision is to affirm something as it is, by the means of eyes.
Therefore, if something exists in a direction, then it will indeed he seen in a direction. However, if something exists above
direction, then it will be seen without direction. It is as simple as this. If something exists in a large state [while there is no barrier which affects the vision], then it will be seen in a large state.
In addition, we know that Allāh exists free of direction while we exist in direction. And we know that Allāh sees us while he is in no direction to us. Likewise, we will see him without Him being in a direction to us.
This is something which was negated by Imām Abū Hanīfah himself, as he stated:
“You will not see him like you see one another” meaning, you will not see him like we see another by facing each other and similar qualities.
See Al-I'tiqād of Al-Ustuwā'ī.
“You will not see him like you see one another” meaning, you will not see him like we see another by facing each other and similar qualities.
See Al-I'tiqād of Al-Ustuwā'ī.
Lastly, the argument of the eternal being observed with the emergent quality of sight or the emergent ontological attribute 'eye' is absurd out of the reason that, God can be known by emergent intellect although He is eternal.
What do Māturīdī scholars say specifically about the details? Is it with the eye, or is it other than that.
The general rule is that, we do not delve into this and rather leave the qualities of this event to Allāh, as stated by Imām At-Tahāwī and Imām Abū Yūsuf.
The general rule is that, we do not delve into this and rather leave the qualities of this event to Allāh, as stated by Imām At-Tahāwī and Imām Abū Yūsuf.
However, if one still wants to unveil certain details as such, then the Māturīdīs conclude:
In the Qur'ān and Hadīth the word 'إلى' (to) has been conjoined with the word النظر (observing). They state, due to this, the language suggests that it is with the eyes.
In the Qur'ān and Hadīth the word 'إلى' (to) has been conjoined with the word النظر (observing). They state, due to this, the language suggests that it is with the eyes.
See As-Sawād Al-A'dham by Al-Hakim As-Samarqandi, At-Tamhīd by Abū al-Mu'īn an-Nasafī, At-Tasdīd by as-Sighnāqī, Al-Bidāyah by As-Sābūnī, all under the chapter of Ru'yah.
As for the belief of vision with the heart, then it is not definitively stated by the Māturīdī scholars, rather it is suggested as a possibility of types of vision.
You can read more on it here:
kaafiyahchannel.wordpress.com
You can read more on it here:
kaafiyahchannel.wordpress.com
Just a small addition in regards to the Hadīth, the Tashbīh is in the clarity of the vision, not in the thing that is being observed.
Also see this for some quotes
Loading suggestions...