BENEFIT 366: A Scholar May Write a Foreword for His Student’s Work Without Necessarily Sharing the Same View on the Issue

Question: Do you consider Ibn Qudāmah to be a mufawwiḍh(1) based on your foreward to Sheikh Sa‘eed’s treatise Raf‘ Al-Malāma ‘an Man Naṣaba At-Tafwīḍh li-Ibn Qudāmah? Sheikh Yahya ḥafidhahullāh: Ibn Qudāmah was an Imām of Ahlus-Sunnah, well-versed in ḥadīth. There is a statement in the introduction to Lum‘at Al-I‘tiqād that is ambiguous, which led to a scholarly disagreement between Sheikh Sa‘eed (may Allāh have mercy on him) and Sheikh Kamāl on this issue. Each of them authored a treatise in response to the other on this matter, or addressed it within the introduction to their respective commentaries on the book. In our foreward, we clarified that Ibn Qudāmah was an Imām of Ahlus-Sunnah and that this statement is either subject to multiple interpretations or is ambiguous. ... Some ambiguous statements may have be considered a slip (zallah). __ (1) In the studies of Aqeedah, 'Tafwīḍh' refers to two main things: 1. Tafwīḍ Al-Ma‘nā – The belief that the meanings of Allāh’s attributes (such as His Hand, Face, or Descending) are completely unknown and that humans should neither attempt to interpret them nor assign any specific meaning. This is an innovated belief and is what is intended here. 2. Tafwīḍh Al-Kayf – The belief that the meanings of Allāh’s attributes are understood in a general sense (e.g., the meaning of 'Hand' is known), but the how (kayfiyyah) of these attributes is unknown and beyond our comprehension. This is the belief of the Salaf, who would affirm the attributes without delving into their exact nature.