Fawāids |Qur'ān | Authentic Sunnah

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Allāh said:

هَلْ يَنْظُرُونَ إِلَّا أَن يَأْتِيَهُمُ اللَّهُ فِي ظُلَلٍ مِّنَ الْغَمَامِ وَالْمَلَائِكَةُ

“Do they wait but that Allāh should come to them in the covers of clouds and the angels…” [2:210]

يجمع الله الأولين والآخرين لميقات يوم معلوم قياما، شاخصةً أبصارهم إلى السماء ، ينظُرُون فصل القضاء، وينزل الله في ظلل من الغمام من العرش إلى الكرسي

(Abdullāh) Ibn Masʿūd narrated the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Allāh will gather the first and the last for the appointed time of a known Day, standing, their eyes fixed upon the sky, awaiting the passing of judgement, and Allāh will descend in the covers of clouds from the Throne (al-‘Arsh) to the Footstool (al-Kursī).” (Mawsū Tafsīr al-Mathūr 3/659)

[al-Tabarānī in al-Kabīr #9763 and others.

Isnād authenticated by:

-al-Haythamī in Majma’ al-Zawā’id, and likewise it’s verifier Husayn Salīm Asad 22/54
-Al-Dhahabī in al-‘Ulū #200
-Ibn Mandah in al-Īmān #844
-Al-Albānī in Mukhtasar al-‘Ulu pg. 41]

---

Shaykh al-‘Uthaymīn said regarding the benefits of this āyah:

“The affirmation of Allāh’s — Mighty and Majestic— coming (ityān) on the Day of Resurrection, for the passing of judgement between His servants; and it is a real/true (haqīqī) coming, befitting His majesty, whose modality/manner (kayfiyyah) is not known, and about which one does not ask — like the rest of His attributes.

Imām Mālik — may Allāh have mercy on him — was asked about the saying of The Most-High:

الرَّحْمَٰنُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَىٰ

“The Most Merciful, above the Throne, He rose [istawā]” [Tāhā: 5] — how did He rise? — and he said: “The rising is not unknown; the modality/manner is not conceivable [by the intellect]; belief in it is obligatory; and asking about it is an innovation (bidʿah).”

Now, the people of taʿtīl (denial/stripping away of the divine attributes) have held that what is meant by Allāh’s “coming” is the coming of His command — and this is a distortion (tahrīf) of the words from their [proper] places, and a turning of the speech away from its apparent sense without evidence, except for what they claim to be a rational proof, which is in reality merely illusory (wahmī), and not rational at all.

We say: the One to whom the act of “coming” is ascribed is Allāh, Mighty and Majestic is He, and He knows Himself best; and He wishes to make [matters] clear to His servants, just as He, the Almighty, said:

يُبَيِّنُ اللَّهُ لَكُمْ أَن تَضِلُّوا

“Allāh makes clear to you, lest you go astray” [al-Nisāʾ: 176].

And since He wishes to make [matters] clear, and He knows Himself best, and there is no obscurity in [His] speech nor incapacity to express what He intends, nor any deficiency in the eloquence of His speech — then His speech is at the utmost degree of knowledge, the utmost degree of intending guidance, the utmost degree of eloquence and clarity, and the utmost degree of truthfulness.

Can it then be said, after that, that its apparent sense is not intended?! Certainly not — this is impossible, unless Allāh Himself says of Himself that He did not intend its apparent sense. Therefore, what is meant is the coming of Allāh Himself.

Nor is this contradicted by the fact that Allāh sometimes ascribes “coming” to His command, as in His saying:

أَتَىٰ أَمْرُ اللَّهِ

“The command of Allāh has come” [al-Nahl: 1]

or His saying:

أَوْ يَأْتِيَ أَمْرُ رَبِّكَ

“or the command of your Lord should come” [al-Nahl: 33] — for we say: this belongs to the matters of the unseen, and the [divine] attributes are fixed by revealed text (tawqīfiyyah); one must halt with them at exactly what has been transmitted.

So the “coming” which Allāh has ascribed to Himself, what is meant by it is His own coming, in His own Self; and the “coming” which He has ascribed to His command, what is meant by it is the coming of His command — for it is not for us to say of Allāh what we do not know, but rather we must halt at what has been transmitted, exactly according to how it has been transmitted.” (Tafsīr al-Thamīn 1/374-375)

---

Imām ibn al-Qayyim said, as quoted by Shaykh ‘Ubayd:

“The second kind [of Allāh’s coming]: al-Majī and al-Ityān al-Mutlaq (absolute/unrestricted), as in His saying:

وَجَاءَ رَبُّكَ وَالْمَلَكُ صَفًّا صَفًّا

‘and your Lord has come, and the angels rank upon rank‘ [al-Fajr: 22]

And His saying:

هَلْ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَّا أَن يَأْتِيَهُمُ اللَّهُ فِي ظُلَلٍ مِّنَ الْغَمَامِ وَالْمَلَائِكَةُ

‘Do they wait but that Allāh should come to them in covers of clouds and the angels‘ [al-Baqarah: 210] — and this can only be His own coming.

This is when it is absolute/unrestricted — so how much more so when it is restricted in a way that makes it explicit that it is His own coming, as in His saying:

أَن تَأْتِيَهُمُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ أَوْ يَأْتِيَ رَبُّكَ أَوْ يَأْتِيَ بَعْضُ آيَاتِ رَبِّكَ

‘but that the angels should come to them, or your Lord should come, or some of the signs of your Lord should come‘ [al-Anʿām: 158] — for He conjoined His own coming to the coming of His angels, then conjoined the coming of His signs to His [own] coming…” (Al-Sa‘yu al-Hathīth pg. 172)

---

Did Imām Ahmad interpret Allāh’s coming as the coming of His command?

Ibn al-Jawzī mentions in his Tafsīr:

“The saying of The Most-High:

أَن يَأْتِيَهُمُ اللَّهُ

“but that Allāh should come to them.”

A group among the Salaf used to refrain from speaking on matters such as this.

Al-Qādī Abū Yaʿlā has related from Ahmad that he said: “What is meant by it is His power (qudrah) and His command (amr).” He said: “And He has clarified this in His saying,

أَوْ يَأْتِيَ أَمْرُ رَبِّكَ

‘or the command of your Lord should come‘ [al-Nahl: 33].”

The verifier commented: There is something to be examined in this (fīhi nadhar) — for Abū Yaʿlā only related, from Abū Bakr of the Hanbalīs, the use of the verse “or the command of your Lord should come” as evidence for affirming “coming” as an attribute of Allāh befitting His majesty. He [Abū Bakr] said: For since the coming of the signs was intended, He explicitly mentioned them [separately].” (Ibtāl al-Taʾwīlāt, 1/269)

—-

Shaykh ul-Islām said:

“…then Imām Ahmad, during al-Mihna, countered them with the saying of The Most-High:

هَلْ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَّا أَن يَأْتِيَهُمُ اللَّهُ فِي ظُلَلٍ مِّنَ الْغَمَامِ وَالْمَلَائِكَةُ

“Do they wait but that Allāh should come to them in the covers of clouds and the angels…” [2:210]

— he said: it has been said, “Rather, His command comes.”
This is how Hanbal related it; none of the others who related his debates during the Mihnah — such as ʿAbdullāh ibn Ahmad, Sālih ibn Ahmad, al-Marwazī, and others — related this.

So the companions of Ahmad differed concerning this;
Some of them said: Hanbal erred; Ahmad did not say this — and they said: “Hanbal has known errors, and this is one of them.” This is the approach of Abū Ishāq ibn Shāqlā.

And some of them said: rather, Ahmad said that by way of a binding argument (ilzām) against them. He means: if He informed of Himself with “al-ityān” and “al-majī” and this was not [taken by you] as evidence that He is created — rather, you interpreted that as meaning “His command came” — then likewise say: “the reward of the Qurʾān comes,” not that the Qurʾān itself is that which comes.

For the [necessity of] figurative interpretation (Ta’wīl) here is even more binding — since what is meant here is informing of the reward of the reciter of the Qurʾān, his reward being an action belonging to him; it was not intended thereby to inform about the Qurʾān itself.

So if al-Rabb (The Lord) has informed of the coming of Himself, and you [nonetheless] interpreted that as His command — then, if He has informed of the coming of the recitation of the Qurʾān, it is all the more fitting [by the stronger and more evident reason] that you should interpret that as the coming of its reward.

And if he said this to them by way of a binding argument, it does not follow that he was in agreement with them on it, nor does he need to commit [and adopt] to this — for this hadīth has many parallels concerning the “coming” of the deeds of [Allāh’s] servants; what is meant is the coming of the reciter’s recitation, which is his deed — and the deeds of [Allāh’s] servants are created, and their reward is created.
It is for this reason that Ahmad, and others among the Salaf, said: “It is the reward of the Qurʾān that comes” — for reward falls upon the deeds of [Allāh’s] servants, not upon the attributes and actions of al-Rabb (The Lord).

A third group among the companions of Ahmad held the view that Ahmad did say this, at that time, and they made this into [an established] narration from him.

Then, those among them who incline toward taʾwīl — such as Ibn ʿAqīl, Ibn al-Jawzī, and others — make this their mainstay (ʿumdah); so much so that Abū al-Faraj ibn al-Jawzī mentions it in his Tafsīr, while not mentioning, from the words of Ahmad and the Salaf, that which contradicts it.

And there is no doubt that what has been related from Ahmad by mutawātir transmission contradicts this narration, and makes clear that he does not say: “The Lord’s command comes, arrives, and descends” — rather, he denounces whoever says that.”
(Majmū al-Fatāwā 5/239-240)

In al-Istiqāmah, quoted by the verifiers of Bayān Talbīs al-Jahmiyyah 6/179-180, Shaykh ul-Islām added:

“…the companions have differed concerning Hanbal’s solitary transmissions, in which he opposed the majority — is his narration to be accepted as established? [There are] two approaches: al-Khallāl and his companion tend to reject them, while others — such as Ibn Hāmid — accept them as established…

…in any case, what is well known among the companions of Imām Ahmad is that they do not interpret figuratively (Ta’wīl) the attributes belonging to the category of movement — such as coming (al-ityān), arrival (al-majī), descending (al-nuzūl), going-down (al-hubūt), drawing-near (al-dunū), and lowering (al-tadallī) — just as they do not interpret figuratively (Ta’wīl) any others, following the Salaf al-Sālih; and the speech of the Salaf on this matter indicates the affirmation of the very meaning under dispute.”