A Review of the Theological Opinions of the Jahmiyah in the Commentary of Kashf Al-Asrār Wa ʿUddat Al-Abrār (“The Unveiling of the Mysteries and the Provision of the Pious”) by Abu Al-Faḍl Rashīd Al-Dīn Maybudī

Criticism of the theological opinions of the Islamic sects is one of important discussions in some of the Qur’ānic commentaries. To survey these critques causes to be clarified more own commentator’s ideas. The mystical Commentary of Kashf Al-Asrār Wa ʿUddat Al-Abrār (“The Unveiling of the Mysteries and the Provision of the Pious”) by Abu al-Faḍl Rashīd Al-Dīn Maybudī is one of the commentaries that have discussed the theological opinions of the Khawārij‚ the Jahmiyah‚ the Mu’tazilah etc. This article, which is written in descriptive and analytic way, because of Maybudī’s special attention to the Jahmiyah‚ deals with critiquing and surveying the thological opinions of this sect, and mentioning Maybudī’s view of each of criticized subjects‚ according to this commentary. Maybudī considers the Jahmiyah as innovators. Maybudī considers the false symbolic interpetation as more important innovations of the Jahmiyah. In Meybudi’s view, the false symbolic interpretation means to turn away from external meanings of the verses and the traditions and to turn to the symbolic meanings of them. Maybudī thinks the interpretation of “ ‚”استوی علی العرش“is firmly established on the throne”‚ to “domination and conquest” as one of the false symbolic interpretations of the Jahmiyah. Of course‚ Maybudī himself speaks about the true hermeneutics. It is to interpret the verse and the tradition to meaning that is possible and is agreement with the Qur’ān and the tradition. The true hermeneutics can be achieved by man’s effort and divine grace. Maybudī quotes some of the commentators that they interpret the verses ”إن الله لا یستحیی…“ (البقره: 26)‚ “Surely Allah is not ashamed…” (The Cow/26) to ”لا یخشی“‚ “does not fear” and”و تخشی الناس و الله احق ان تخشاه“ (الاحزاب/37) ‚ “and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him” (The Confederates/37) to ”تستحیی“‚ “was ashamed”. For “”استحیا‚ “to be ashamed” means ”خشیت“‚ “to fear”‚ and on the contrary. Also Maybudī describes the belief in being God ‛in essence’ in any place and with any one‚ but not being He on the Throne‚ in other words‚ the rejection direction and place for God‚ as another of the Jahmiyah’s innovations. In Maybudī’s view‚ God is ‛in His essence’ in one place‚ namely the heaven and the Throne‚ and in ‛His knowledge’ in any place and with any one‚ in other words‚ in all places. Also Maybudī considers the denial of God’s eternal attributes and their false symbolic interpretation as another of the Jahmiyah’s innovations. They interpret symbolically God’s eternal attributes to hinder from His similarity to the creatures and to keep from His transcendence. In Maybudī’s view‚ both anthropomorphism and transcendence make way for blasphemy. According to Maybudī‚ God has the eternal attributes (the denial of transcendence), but according to the rule “to have one name does not invole to be one”‚ we should not apply the same meaning used in human to God (the denial of anthropomorphism). Morevere‚ they should not be interpretered symbolically. In Maybudī’s view‚ their external meaning should be heared and accepted‚ and their internal meaning should be surrenderd to the Truth. Among this Jahmiyah’s innovation‚ Maybudī mentions the rejection of describing God as “thing”‚ and the denial of the attributies of self and hand for God and their false symbolic interpretion. Also Maybudī considers the belief in accompanying God’s Makr (plan) and Keid (plan) with corruption and betrayal and deception as another of the Jahmiyah’s innovations. According to Maybudī‚ God’s Makr and Keid apply only to the best interest without corruption and betrayal and deception. God and man’s Makr and Keid are the same in name‚ but they are differences in meaning. Also‚ Maybudī considers the Jahmiyah’s belief in being created the Qur’ān‚ and or according to some others of them the absence a thing of the Words of God on the earth‚ and or according to some others of them the belief in being created our letter and reading in reciting the Qur’ān as another of the Jahmiyah’s innovations. In Maybudī’s view‚ these untrue ideas of the Jahmiyah result from the fact that‚ according to them‚ the Words of God are not an expression that depends on a letter and a sound‚ but they are His knowledge which subsists in the essence of Him. In Maybudī’s view‚ the Qur’ān is not an expression of the Words of the Truth‚ but it is the very Words of the Truth. It is not seperate from God‚ but it is connected upon Him and subsists in Him. The Qur’ān depends on a letter and a sound and any letter of it is not created. Our letter and reading in reciting the Qur’ān are nor created neither among our works. It truly exists on the earth and we read it by tongue‚ hear it by ear and know it in heart. Also‚ Maybudī considers the describtion of Imān as affirmation by the heart without confessing by the tongue and acting by the members of body‚ as another of the Jahmiyah’s innovations. According to Maybudī‚ Imān consists in confessing by the tongue; affirming by the heart; acting by the members of body and property; and following the Sunnah. Also‚ Maybudī considers the independence of man from God in hindering him from sins and the annihilation of the bounties of paradise as another of the Jahmiyah’s innovations.