Empiree:
Makes sense isn't?. Now is that established tafsir of the hadith 'in Adam's image' as understood by scholars?.

You know it's like when trinitarian christians interpret ".....I'm ascending to my God and to your God" in the light of triune gods.

The same verse can be read in the light of unitarian (One God). If the hadith is understood as you said, that his image refers to Adam, that makes sense. Then English translation needs revision. I will like to read scholarly opinion on this. However, it makes sense for a muslim to disagree with the hadith has its literally written. This has nothing to do with aqeeda, sects, path etc. It's rather tafsir issue.

There is a similar verse in sura Hajj (22:78)

"......it's He who named you muslims"

There are muslims who think 'he' mentioned in the verse refers to Ibrahim(as) because some translations do not have parenthesis. I never understood it that way even without usool, tafsir. I have always thought it refers to Allah bcus Adam (as) came before Ibrahim (as) and Adam was a muslim. That's how I derived my meaning.

Empiree:
brother, pls stop this. It makes no sense. You too harsh all the time. Knowledge is not confined with anyone. There are things you don't know that he knows.

AlMuflihah:


Subhannahllah I withdraw my earlier statement of the pronoun returning to Adam, I just went back to read the sayings of the salaf about it and indeed the pronoun returns ro Allah. May Allah repair my deeds and not. Hold me accountable for what I saaid of mistake. Now after saying this, does it now mean the hadith is da'eef? Laa wallah, it's sahih and whoever claims it isn't is only standing upon the heretical belief Of the Jahmiyyoon.

And whoever says human are like Allah is also standing on Heresy.

So what do the salafs stand on?

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: “The word soorah (image) in this hadeeth is like all the other names and attributes narrated (in the texts) where the words used may also be applied to created beings, in a limited manner. When these words are applied to Allaah, they carry a unique meaning, such as al-‘Aleem (All Knowing), al-Qadeer (All-Powerful), al-Raheem (Most Merciful), al-Samee’ (All Hearing), al-Baseer (All-Seeing), and such as His creating with His hands, rising above the Throne, etc.” Naqd al-Ta’sees, 3/396


And he said: “There was no dispute among the salaf of the first three generations that the pronoun in the hadeeth refers to Allaah, and it is narrated through many isnaads from many of the Sahaabah.

May Allah protect us from heresy

Empiree:
^
I was just about to post salaf's understanding of it. I was going to ask where you got your "tafsir" from?.

Now the other brother Newnas and fundamentalist appear to agree with your view. But salaf's understanding is not binding either. Look at explanation given including that of ibn Tayimiyah, this is why I said earlier to my brother that Christians would not understand it even if usool is explained. I have came across same explanation before but it definitely doesn't add up to me.

Remember there were scholars in the time of Sheik ul islam who disagreed with him as well

https://islamqa.info/en/20652

So Newnas doesn't understand salafi meaning of the hadith either but condemned Albaqir....see what I'm talking about?.

Knowledge is broad. And thanks for rectification.

However it means sheik ibn Tayimiyah INTERPRETED the hadith which is of course NOT binding on ALL muslims

Newnas:


Are you acting a drama?

AlMuflihah:


Alhamdulillah!
You know why we need to understand Islam in light of the salaf is just like the prophet warned us about the breaking of the ummah into 73 sects, people could intentionally misinterprete texts to cause confusion and heresy, but the first 3 generations were specifically hand chosen as the best of generation by the prophet, hence anything we take as religion should be based on their understanding to avoid falling into errors.
And about the Christians, we need to be careful when engaging them for in the process, we might fall into worse error than what we are trying to achieve. Remember the prophet's instruction to us through Umar? We should not just condemn everything in their books for there are truths in it and lies, so we hold our tongues back from what are in their scriptures that the Qur'an didn't declare false lest we call the truth lie!

AlMuflihah:


Alhamdulillah!
You know why we need to understand Islam in light of the salaf is just like the prophet warned us about the breaking of the ummah into 73 sects, people could intentionally misinterprete texts to cause confusion and heresy, but the first 3 generations were specifically hand chosen as the best of generation by the prophet, hence anything we take as religion should be based on their understanding to avoid falling into errors.
And about the Christians, we need to be careful when engaging them for in the process, we might fall into worse error than what we are trying to achieve. Remember the prophet's instruction to us through Umar? We should not just condemn everything in their books for there are truths in it and lies, so we hold our tongues back from what are in their scriptures that the Qur'an didn't declare false lest we call the truth lie!

Newnas:


AlhamduliLlah, I read the article too, and increased in knowledge and guidance.


But Abu Hurayrah is free of the evil OP ascribes to him.

Empiree:
I plead to you to stop this. It snt make sense. Yiu can just hate on someone base on sect. I know he has problem with Abu Hurayra(ra). But sometimes, is it his fault?. There are epistles he posted sometimes ago that are gleaned from Sunni literature blackmailing Abu Hurayra(ra). The problem is rather with literature not op. And yes, he does post some things that he probably does not understand.

Empiree:
I plead to you to stop this. It snt make sense. Yiu can just hate on someone base on sect. I know he has problem with Abu Hurayra(ra). But sometimes, is it his fault?. There are epistles he posted sometimes ago that are gleaned from Sunni literature blackmailing Abu Hurayra(ra). The problem is rather with literature not op. And yes, he does post some things that he probably does not understand.

Empiree:
I understand that. The reason christians have to be condemned in this sense is because the "image" means exactly what it means, Jesus, since that whom they considered God. Therefore, Acadip was right to condemn it.

What I am trying to say however, is, there is nothing wrong in your earlier "tafsir" when you placed pronoun in the proper context. That is the way newnas understands it NOT the way of salaf even though he claims to be one. Also, Sheik ul Islam is not aslaf, his explanation or interpretation is borne out of his understanding. He's not amongst the first 3 generations pinpointed by rosul(saw). So what I am saying is, his understanding is not binding unless if that is the way aslaf understood and interpreted the hadith but i havent seen that yet. Can you post Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali's(RA) understanding of the hadith?. These are the foremost aslaf

Empiree:
I understand that. The reason christians have to be condemned in this sense is because the "image" means exactly what it means, Jesus, since that whom they considered God. Therefore, Acadip was right to condemn it.

What I am trying to say however, is, there is nothing wrong in your earlier "tafsir" when you placed pronoun in the proper context. That is the way newnas understands it NOT the way of salaf even though he claims to be one. Also, Sheik ul Islam is not aslaf, his explanation or interpretation is borne out of his understanding. He's not amongst the first 3 generations pinpointed by rosul(saw). So what I am saying is, his understanding is not binding unless if that is the way aslaf understood and interpreted the hadith but i havent seen that yet. Can you post Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali's(RA) understanding of the hadith?. These are the foremost aslaf

AlMuflihah:



Do you mean the interpretation of texts on the names and attributes of Allah in General or on this particular hadith and other similar hadiths alone?

AlMuflihah:


I understand how you feel about Newnas's post but let me show you how much of an evil casting aspersions and calling a companion a liar is... firstly it means the entire religion is false because the prophet was by far the most important figure in Islam but we're it not for the narations of the companions and their efforts, Islam would probably not survive and if they were to be accused of lying, then the entire religion will be false which will then contradict many verses in the Qur'an
Secondly calling a companion a kafir or liar is a very grave issue because it will go against verses of the Qur'an like this one
مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ ٱللَّهِ ۚ وَٱلَّذِينَ مَعَهُۥٓ أَشِدَّآءُ عَلَى ٱلْكُفَّارِ رُحَمَآءُ بَيْنَهُمْ ۖ تَرَىٰهُمْ رُكَّعًا سُجَّدًا يَبْتَغُونَ فَضْلًا مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ وَرِضْوَٰنًا ۖ سِيمَاهُمْ فِى وُجُوهِهِم مِّنْ أَثَرِ ٱلسُّجُودِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ مَثَلُهُمْ فِى ٱلتَّوْرَىٰةِ ۚ وَمَثَلُهُمْ فِى ٱلْإِنجِيلِ كَزَرْعٍ أَخْرَجَ شَطْـَٔهُۥ فَـَٔازَرَهُۥ فَٱسْتَغْلَظَ فَٱسْتَوَىٰ عَلَىٰ سُوقِهِۦ يُعْجِبُ ٱلزُّرَّاعَ لِيَغِيظَ بِهِمُ ٱلْكُفَّارَ ۗ وَعَدَ ٱللَّهُ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ وَعَمِلُوا۟ ٱلصَّٰلِحَٰتِ مِنْهُم مَّغْفِرَةً وَأَجْرًا عَظِيمًۢا
Muhammad (SAW) is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and falling down prostrate (in prayer), seeking Bounty from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. The mark of them (i.e. of their Faith) is on their faces (foreheads) from the traces of (their) prostration (during prayers). This is their description in the Taurat (Torah). But their description in the Injeel (Gospel) is like a (sown) seed which sends forth its shoot, then makes it strong, it then becomes thick, and it stands straight on its stem, delighting the sowers that He may enrage the disbelievers with them. Allah has promised those among them who believe (i.e. all those who follow Islamic Monotheism, the religion of Prophet Muhammad SAW till the Day of Resurrection) and do righteous good deeds, forgiveness and a mighty reward (i.e. Paradise).
48:29

AlMuflihah:


I understand how you feel about Newnas's post but let me show you how much of an evil casting aspersions and calling a companion a liar is... firstly it means the entire religion is false because the prophet was by far the most important figure in Islam but we're it not for the narations of the companions and their efforts, Islam would probably not survive and if they were to be accused of lying, then the entire religion will be false which will then contradict many verses in the Qur'an
Secondly calling a companion a kafir or liar is a very grave issue because it will go against verses of the Qur'an like this one
مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ ٱللَّهِ ۚ وَٱلَّذِينَ مَعَهُۥٓ أَشِدَّآءُ عَلَى ٱلْكُفَّارِ رُحَمَآءُ بَيْنَهُمْ ۖ تَرَىٰهُمْ رُكَّعًا سُجَّدًا يَبْتَغُونَ فَضْلًا مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ وَرِضْوَٰنًا ۖ سِيمَاهُمْ فِى وُجُوهِهِم مِّنْ أَثَرِ ٱلسُّجُودِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ مَثَلُهُمْ فِى ٱلتَّوْرَىٰةِ ۚ وَمَثَلُهُمْ فِى ٱلْإِنجِيلِ كَزَرْعٍ أَخْرَجَ شَطْـَٔهُۥ فَـَٔازَرَهُۥ فَٱسْتَغْلَظَ فَٱسْتَوَىٰ عَلَىٰ سُوقِهِۦ يُعْجِبُ ٱلزُّرَّاعَ لِيَغِيظَ بِهِمُ ٱلْكُفَّارَ ۗ وَعَدَ ٱللَّهُ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ وَعَمِلُوا۟ ٱلصَّٰلِحَٰتِ مِنْهُم مَّغْفِرَةً وَأَجْرًا عَظِيمًۢا
Muhammad (SAW) is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and falling down prostrate (in prayer), seeking Bounty from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. The mark of them (i.e. of their Faith) is on their faces (foreheads) from the traces of (their) prostration (during prayers). This is their description in the Taurat (Torah). But their description in the Injeel (Gospel) is like a (sown) seed which sends forth its shoot, then makes it strong, it then becomes thick, and it stands straight on its stem, delighting the sowers that He may enrage the disbelievers with them. Allah has promised those among them who believe (i.e. all those who follow Islamic Monotheism, the religion of Prophet Muhammad SAW till the Day of Resurrection) and do righteous good deeds, forgiveness and a mighty reward (i.e. Paradise).
48:29

Empiree:
First, allow me to say I have no problem with interpretation given by Sheik-ul-Isam(ra). However I am refering to the particular hadith.

Empiree:
I go against those Shia who do that. I understand gravity of insulting sahabas. You should know that not all Shia do that. So it's unfair to castigate all. Another reason is, it's no longer Shia issue. Some salafi brothers today talking trash about Umar(ra),calling him names. So it is no longer Shia thing. Besides, some of the Shia Ulama have been warning against cursing Sahaba. I dont think it is proper thing to curse even though they disagree with the first three Imams. They should at least see them as muslims and treat them as such. I am not aware of any shia here calling any of the sahaba kafir.

AlMuflihah:

Sincerely I can't find any on this particular hadith for I'm in a place I can't really search well. However what I believe could be responsible for the scarcity was because during the time of the salaf, they would explain in general terms what to do About verses and ahadith regarding the attributes of Allah generally for there wasn't really any fitnah of much heresies then, but later when the Jahmiyyoon surfaced that was when much explanations on the topic arose, that's why you would find many sayings on the topic after the surfacing of the sect than before it.

And Allah knows best.

Newnas:


It suffices as evil for a person to speak of a companion with foul language such as dotard and even calling the wives of the prophet deviants and calling Abu Bakr and Umar innovators.

If he adds curses to it then he only increases in misfortune over misfortune.

There is no salafi brother that will do what you have said, except a shia in salafi clothing.

AlMuflihah:



Now back to this hadith, I am not asserting that sahih bukhari or Muslim is perfect, but it isn't left to us to decide which hadith is or not.

A's for the hadith in the OP, the problem is from the English translation, the hadith if read in Arabic makes absolute sense without any ambiguity, for the pronoun in his image goes back to Adam and not Allah, so we could as well interprete it as Allah created Adam in Adam's image of...
And Allah knows best, and may the perfect peace be on his khalil. Muhammad

AlBaqir:


[size=2pt]The hadith is clear as you have said. Your conclusion was just influenced by your firm belief that Nothing could be liken unto Allah. Your conclusion was not from the text. And I understand the urge to defend. "KhalaqaLLAHU Adama ala suratih...Allah created Adam in His image". You said, "Allah created Adam in Adam's image" Does that make any sense akhi? Adam was the first human being created by Allah. How then he was created in his own image? What was his (Adam) image before he was created?!

# Again, Some have tried to interpret the tradition by ascribing the pronoun (his image) to Adam himself not to Allah. Then the meaning would be that Allah had created Adam in Paradise in an image same to that when he descended to the earth. That Allah had completed him in one time and made him sixty cubits long and seven cubits wide, the same image, which his offspring on the earth saw, and he did not advance from a state to another. Adam was not a seed then became a clot then a lump of flesh then bones clothed with flesh then a fetus then a suckling infant then a weaned child then a teenager then a man with the normal length and width.

But it was narrated by Abu Hurayra in these words: “Adam had been created corresponding to the image of the Beneficent (Allah (S.w.T.)).” *Abu Hurayra had another tradition saying: “Prophet Moses (a.s.) beat the rock with his stick for the Israelites and water gushed out. He said to them: “Drink water, donkeys.” Then Allah revealed to him: “You intended to compare the human beings, whom I had created according to My image, to donkeys.”•

Ref: *^ Al-Qastalani mentioned this tradition in his book Irshad as-Sari, vol.10, pg.491and said that the pronoun (his) in Abu Hurayra’s tradition (Allah (S.w.T.) had created Adam according to His image..), referred to Allah (S.w.T.) and not to Adam.

•^Ibn Qutayba mentioned this tradition in his book (Interpretation of different traditions) pg.280, and made it as evidence that the pronoun (his) in Abu Hurayra’s saying: (Allah (S.w.T.) had created Adam according to His image) referred to Allah (S.w.T.) and not to Adam.

# Some also interpreted Abu Hurayra’s sayings: (Allah (S.w.T.) had created Adam according to His image) and (Adam had been created according to the image of the Beneficent) and in his tradition about Moses (I had created them according to my image) that Allah (S.w.T.) had created Adam and his progenies according to the attributes of Allah (S.w.T.).

Allah (S.w.T.) is alive, hearer, seer, talker, aware, willing and disliker. So He had given these attributes to Adam and his progeny. They fell into what they fled from, because the attribute of Allah (S.w.T.) is far above comparison. This is agreed upon unanimously among those who believe in transcendence of Allah (S.w.T.). Especially when we say that His attribute is He Himself and that He is the Truth as it is fixed in our principles of jurisprudence. Abu Hurayra advanced in this tradition. Sometime he narrated it as above and sometime he said: “If someone of you quarrels with another, let him avoid the face because Allah (S.w.T.) had created Adam according to His image.”
Ref: Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2 section on hitting face being forbidden, pg.397

Sometime he said: “If someone of you hits another, let avoid the face and not say: May Allah (S.w.T.) uglify your face and the face of whoever looks like you, because Allah (S.w.T.) had created Adam according to His image."
Ref: Mentioned by al-Bukhari in al-Adab al-Mufrad and by Ahmed in his Musnad, vol.2, pg.434[/size]

AlMuflihah:


Alhamdulillah!
You know why we need to understand Islam in light of the salaf is just like the prophet warned us about the breaking of the ummah into 73 sects, people could intentionally misinterprete texts to cause confusion and heresy, but the first 3 generations were specifically hand chosen as the best of generation by the prophet,

AlMuflihah:

hence anything we take as religion should be based on their understanding to avoid falling into errors.
!

Empiree:
What Do You Think Of Ibn Tayimiyah's tawil Of The Hadith?. Well, sister took back her previous post. She now adheres to Ibn Taymiyah's opinion. So she's no fault now.

However, I love her initial explanation of "his image". That's sweet in my opinion. Perhaps, could (his image) refers to human being/human form?.

AlBaqir:


It seemed I missed something faah. What was Ibn Taymiyyah (the Mujassim)'s Tawil of the hadith? I will love to read it please.

AlMuflihah:


Subhannahllah I withdraw my earlier statement of the pronoun returning to Adam, I just went back to read the sayings of the salaf about it and indeed the pronoun returns ro Allah. May Allah repair my deeds and not. Hold me accountable for what I saaid of mistake. Now after saying this, does it now mean the hadith is da'eef? Laa wallah, it's sahih and whoever claims it isn't is only standing upon the heretical belief Of the Jahmiyyoon.

And whoever says human are like Allah is also standing on Heresy.

So what do the salafs stand on?

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: “The word soorah (image) in this hadeeth is like all the other names and attributes narrated (in the texts) where the words used may also be applied to created beings, in a limited manner. When these words are applied to Allaah, they carry a unique meaning, such as al-‘Aleem (All Knowing), al-Qadeer (All-Powerful), al-Raheem (Most Merciful), al-Samee’ (All Hearing), al-Baseer (All-Seeing), and such as His creating with His hands, rising above the Throne, etc.” Naqd al-Ta’sees, 3/396 

And he said: “There was no dispute among the salaf of the first three generations that the pronoun in the hadeeth refers to Allaah, and it is narrated through many isnaads from many of the Sahaabah.

May Allah protect us from heresy

Empiree:
.
However, I love her initial explanation of "his image". That's sweet in my opinion. Perhaps, could (his image) refers to human being/human form?.

Empiree:
.Your initial interpretation is not hearsay either. It is still in line with Sharia.

AlBaqir:



A very faulty and desperate interpretation. The text is extra clear. The pronoun goes back to the Creator. Kindly read my reply on that to her. And you can imagine the "programming". She surrender her submission because Ibn Taymiyyah himself believe the pronoun goes back to Allah and not Adam. In Salafiyyah, you are not allow to think or submit on your own. You must submit based on what salaf says. Allah says: We have revealed this Quran in plain Arabic so that you may understand(surah Yusuf:2), "And indeed, We have made the Qur’an easy for direction and guidance, but is there anyone who will take advice? {surah Qamar: 17 etc.

In Shi'i theology, anything reported or documented by anybody, attributed to the holy Prophet or his Household that contradict Quran in anyway is definitely not from him (peace be upon him and his household). That is the first criteria in Shi'i ilm hadith, before you can ever think of any other thing. There are lots of ahadith in Shi'i documents from the Prophet and the Aimmah on that. You don't say one hadith is sahih because its Sanad (chain) is okay and start twisting it while its matn (content) is absurd and against Quran and Aql.

Demmzy15:
Salam everyone, sorry to break into this argument. I wanna ask AlBaqir a question :

What do you mean by Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah(rah) was a Mujassim (anthropomorphist) and give evidence for this!

Jazaka Allaah kayran in advance.

AlBaqir:


I'm sorry brother. I don't have much time posting on a full blown heretic, a mujassim, a nasibi and takfiri. However you can read what Sunni Shuyukh of Ibn Taymiyyah's contemporary say about him:
http://www.sunnah.org/fiqh/refuting.htm