# Do Salafis believe God has a body?

*A God with parts? Mufti Abu Layth on Hanbali and Salafi anthropomorphism*

- URL: https://muftiabulayth.org/r/xznxiyp0b5s/s/16/
- Date: 2020-07-03 · Kind: discussion · Transcript tier: machine · Recording: Prof. Dr Khalil Andani | The Oral Text & the Ontology of The Quran | Mindtrap with Mufti #28 (1:20:44–1:24:04)
- Status: general teaching
- Watch from the start of the segment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xznXIYp0B5s&t=4844s
- Recording page: https://muftiabulayth.org/r/xznxiyp0b5s/

**Topics:** God and the divine attributes; Salafism and Wahhabism

**Summary (not a quotation; machine-made, unchecked):** Mufti Abu Layth says Hanbalis and modern Salafis in effect believe God has body parts and so project a human image onto God; the guest notes philosophers and Isma'ilis objected that attributes give God parts.

## Longer summary

The guest says that the Hanbali, Ash'ari and even Maturidi views leave a God with parts, which the Avicennan philosophers and the Isma'ilis attacked, since a God composed of essence plus attributes would be an effect of those parts. Mufti Abu Layth says that, whether or not parts imply createdness, the Hanbalis and modern-day Salafis, though they do not use the word, clearly believe God has body parts, such as hands, eyes and a leg, adding the caveat that they are not like ours. He argues this projects man onto God, even a deformed human being that people would mock, and that the caveat comes too late because people cannot be told about a hand or foot and not picture it. He says he is not surprised people struggle with the Hanbali description of God in the twenty-first century.

## Sources and names cited

- Dr Khalil Andani (guest)
- Hanbali
- Salafi
- Isma'ili
- Ibn Sina (Avicenna)
- tajsim
- aqidah

## Transcript (machine tier, 1:20:44–1:24:04)

[1:20:16] Yes. Yeah, well, what I would ask is like if if knowledge is already part of your attributes. Exactly. Exactly. Sight and knowledge are just input input faculties for knowledge, so why do you it cuz even the Ash'aris themselves that they when they try to justify Kalam and they try to justify Sama and they try to justify Basar, they either just choose not to rationalize them or they end up doing a horrible job.

[1:20:43] [laughter] I mean, another issue that's lying at the core of this is that uh if you take a Hanbali view and Ash'ari view, even a Maturidi view, what you end up with is a God who has parts to be God. And the problem with that issue, which which uh both um the philosophers, the Avicennan philosophers pointed this out and the Isma'ilis attacked them for this, is that if you have a God who has parts, then that then God is actually a created being.

[1:21:17] Yeah. Because God is the product of parts and the coming together of those parts. So God just becomes an effect and the real cause is all is the parts themselves. So that issue was also there. How do you get away from the idea that God has parts? Cuz if you have separate attributes, just like distinct Sifat, you have essence plus attributes equals God. And and that that was an issue.

[1:21:43] And uh I mean, I whether whether you say that parts necessitates being created, uh I mean, I mean, that's a discussion, but I would say definitely the fact that just stating God has like because the Hanabila and the modern day Salafis, although they don't use this word, but they clearly believe God had body parts.

[1:22:09] Um they still today believe God has uh body parts like he has hands and he has eyes and he has uh you know, one leg and and these kind of things, but and they then they'll just put the caveat, but it's not like our leg, uh but it's not like our two right hands and it's not like our fingers. But this it is in essence a it is just a reflection of the human being projecting, you know, it's like we're just projecting man onto God.

[1:22:39] And that too, I dare I say, you know, uh it is projecting a deformed human being onto God because if that being was human, we would mock it because we would like if you saw I don't mean we as a civilized society, but unfortunately, human beings would see that as a like if you saw a human if you saw a being with like obviously one leg and just two right hands on as opposed to one right and one left and just and each hand not having only like to having just two fingers, you would see that as like, what the hell is that?

[1:23:15] Like, you know, you wouldn't be seen as something and but yet that's how they describe God in almost their Aqidah books. Uh the Obviously, they'll put the caveat, oh, but it's not like us humans. Uh but it's a bit late then because, you know, like in the psychological experiment that you can't say something and expect people not to visualize it. Like you can't say arm, uh there's an arm, guys, you know, there's a hand or there's a foot and then say don't picture a foot.

[1:23:41] Obviously, that's how the mind uh operates. But yeah, so I I find uh the Hanbali almost a paradox within within Kalam, the whole and their description of God in this day and age, the 21st century, um I'm not surprised people don't struggle with it.

[1:24:03] Yeah, I think I think it this idea of struggling with very human anthropomorphic ideas of God, I don't even think it's it's it's a exclusively Hanbali or Muslim problem. I think uh Christians all over especially in the West, um I I I recall some survey that was done among Americans asking people to describe God and and God turned out to be a a white person, you know.

## Cite

Mufti Abu Layth Archive, segment xznXIYp0B5s/s/16. https://muftiabulayth.org/r/xznxiyp0b5s/s/16/

Not a fatwa: these answers were given to specific people at specific times. Ask a qualified scholar about your own situation.