What proves this is is that there is nothing in the world that can be seen without it being either a body or subsisting in a body, and that bodies are either split or joint, and that split bodies have the potential to adjoin to become new bodies,
and that joint bodies have the potential to be split, and that when one body no longer exists the one adjoined to it also no longer exists, and that when two separate parts of bodily nature meet then it is a new attribute they are associated with after having not been associated
as such, and that when a body separates then it is a new attribute it is associated with after having not been associated as such.
So if this is the system of whatever is in the world, and the law of the unseen and the seen is that it is either a body or subsisting in a body, and whatever has temporariness in it must have been orginated by an originator via an adjoiner adjoing it if it is a joined body
or via a separater separating it if it is a separate body, and it is known through this that the adjoiner of joined bodies and separater of separate bodies is one who does not resemble such bodies, and adjoinment and separateness does not apply to Him, and He is the one,
the powerful, the adjoiner between different things, the unresembling, powerful over all – then it is clear by what we have said that the creator of things was before every thing, and that the night, day, time and moments are originated,
and that the originator of these is the one who regulates them and deals in them as He sees fit before they are created, because it is only possible that an originated thing comes after the presence of its originator, and that there is the highest standard of proof
and the most evident evidence for the open-minded understanding person proving the beginningless-ness of its creator and the beginning-ness of anything that is of created nature and that they have a creator in the Quranic verse:
“Do they not look at the camels how they are made, and at the sky how it is raised high, and at the mountains how they are fixed firm, and at the earth how it is spread out?”
[Tarikh al-Tabari, al-Tabari, 1/28]
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Ibn ‘Uthaymin (d. 1421 AH) said [as mentioned in the book Majmu’ Fatawa wa Rasa`il Ibn ‘Uthaymin]:
The expression of denying attributing likeness [between the Creator and the creation] is better than expressing the denying of attributing similarity and this is from three sides:
The first: Attributing likeness (Tamthil) is that which the Qur`an came to deny absolutely unlike attributing similarity (Tashbih), which the Qur`an did not deny.
Imam Al-Zarkashi (d. 794/1392) who was a Shafi’i scholar of fiqh and Tafsir who studied with Imad al-Din Ibn Kathir and lived two generations after Imam Al-Busiri said in praise of the Burdah in the introduction to his commentary Sharḥ al-Burdah:
"Reciting [the Burdah] can prevent disasters, if people only knew about value of the poem, then they would write it on their pupils of their eyes with gold ink."
Shaykh ‘Alā’ud-Dīn ibn Al-‘Attār (d. 724 a.h), the student of Imām An-Nawawī and one of his many biographers who witnessed karamāt as well as sat in his many circles of knowledge, stated about him:
“My Shaykh narrated to me that he held twelve classes a day explaining and reading the texts. Two classes go over the Wasit, one class going over the Muhadhdhab, a class going over both of the two Sahih works [i.e. Bukhari and Muslim], a class specifically covering Sahih Muslim