Invalidity of belief in the Trinity and the Hypostases (by Syaikh Ibn Taimiyah)
The Disbelievers claim that among that which was revealed to Muhammad (peace be upon him) (i.e Qur'an), there is evidence in their favor supporting their belief in the hypostases. They refer to the verse, which says, "And, verily, Our Word has gone forth of old for Our slaves, the righteous."
The Muslims say that the Book (the Qur'an) is the Word of Allah. There can be no words except from a living and speaking being. These are essential attributes, which serve as names. Each of these attributes, which serve as names. Each of these attributes is different from the other, for He is One God, One Creator, and One Lord Who can’t be separated or divided.
The Disbeliever said, "As regards the personification of the creating Word of God and its immanentism in a created man and their merging; that is the Word and the human entity, the Creator did not speak to any of the prophets unless by Inspiration of from behind a veil. It is mentioned in the following verse,
"It is not given to any human being that Allah should speak to him unless (it be) by Inspiration, or from behind a veil, or (that) He sends a Messenger to reveal what He wills by His Leave. Verily, He is Most High, Most Wise." [Asy Syuura: 51]
Since abstract matters do not appear except in concrete forms like the Holy Spirit and other such things, then, does the Word of God, which has created the concrete as well as the abstract, appear without a cover? The answer is no.
That is why He appeared in Jesus (peace be upon him) bin Maryam, for man is the most exalted among the creations of God. That is why he spoke with people and they saw of him what they saw."
They said, "When we say that God is one god in there hypostases, this is because He ordained it for Himself. He clarified it in the Torah and in the books of the prophets, like that mentioned in the first book of Torah, which says that when God willed to create Adam, He said, "Let us make meaning our image, after our likeness." (Gen: 1: 26) Who is similar to Him and identical to Him other than His Word and His Spirit?
When Adam violated and disobeyed his Lord God, the Exalted, said, "This is Adam! He has become like one of Us." It is clear that God said this to His Son and His Holy Spirit."
They said, "David (peace be upon him) said in the Psalms, "The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." (Psalms, 110:1)
They said, "He said in the second Psalms, "I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee." (Psalms, 2:7)
They said, "In the second book of Torah, when God spoke to Moses (peace be upon him) from the bush saying, "I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob," (Exod,3:6) and He did not say, 'I am the god of Ishaq.' He repeated the word 'god' three times saying, "I am the god and the god and the god' to establish the issue of the three hypostases regarding His Divine entity."
The Disbelievers claim, "Because of this clear statement, which God made in the Torah and in the books of prophets we make three hypostases into one essence, one god, one lord, and one Creator. He is the One we call: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit."
They also said, "We knew that when saying so, we do not have to worship three gods but only one god. When the Muslims also say, "Man, sperm, and soul", we do not mean three persons but one person. When the Muslims say, 'The flame of the fire, the light of the fire, and the heat of the fire, .' It does not mean three fires, neither when the Muslims say, 'The disk of the sun, the light of the sun, and the sun rays, 'for they are not three suns. If this is Muslim’s belief regarding God, glorified be His Names and exalted be His Graces, then the Muslims are not to blame. The Muslims did not neglect that which they have received, reject that which they have been charged with, or follow otherwise than they have been ordered."
Additionally, the Disbeliever said, "There is the incarnation of the creating Word of God with which He created everything and its personification in a created human being. He is the One taken from the chosen virgin Maryam who was unified with him in a way free from mixing, changing, and transforming. He spoke to people just like God spoke to Moses (pbuh) from the bush. He presented the miracle with His Divine entity and showed the deficiency of His Human entity and showed the deficiency of His Human entity while the two actions were performed by one Jesus (pbuh).”
Islam refutes!
The Christians invented the claims of the hypostases and the trinity before the coming of Muhammad (pbuh). This is well-known among them from the moment they invented their Canon, which was established by three hundred and eighteen men in the presence of King Constantine.
They do not have any reasonably deduced evidence for a textual one from the words of the prophets before Muhammad (pbuh), so how can they have evidence to support their claims in that with which Muhammad (pbuh) came, after they invented the Canon? How can this be, especially with the clear knowledge from Muhammad (pbuh) in the Book revealed to him, which clearly states their disbelief and deviation from the right path? The Exalted says,
"Surely, in disbelief are they who say that Allah is the Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary)." [Al Ma'idah: 17]
He the Almighty also says,
"Surely, disbelievers are those who said, Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)." [Al Ma'idah: 73]
There are many other similar verses.
They said, "It is said in that book, "And, verily, Our Word has gone forth of old for Our slaves, the Righteous," It is said to them, "You have distorted the wording and meaning of the verse. Its correct wording is,
"And, verily, Our Word has gone forth of old for Our slaves, the Messengers, That they verily would be made triumphant, And that Our hosts, they verily would be the victors." [Ash Shaaffat: 173]
Thus, the word that has gone forth to His slaves, the Messengers, is His saying (which means),"That they verily would be triumphant."
Allah says there is a word that has gone forth from Him to His slaves, His Messengers, and that word is that He will grant them victory. Similarly, the Exalted says,
"Thus was the Decree of thy Lord proved true against the Unbelievers; that truly they are Companions of the Fire!" [Al Mu'min: 6]
The 'word' in the Arabic language means the meaningful sentence whether it begins with a verb or a noun. It is a complete statement, and so is the word 'kalam' (speech), which is a full sentence.
This clarifies that the verse which means, "And, verily, Our Word has gone forth of old for Our slaves, the Messengers," is similar to that in which Allah says, which means, "And had it not been for a Word that went forth before from your Lord, and a term determined, (their punishment) must necessarily have come (in this world)." [Taha: 129]
Thus, His Word has previously gone forth, concerning the victory of the messengers that will surely come.
Only those who have strayed from the right path distort the wording of these verse and say, "... for Our slaves, the Righteous," and regarded "the Word" as Christ himself. But there is nothing in the wording of the verse that indicates this in any way, or that Christ had preceded the Messengers of Allah who are also His slaves.
The Qur'an is the Speech of Allah
All Muslims say that the 'Book' is the Speech of Allah, which cannot belong to any being except one that lives and speaks. The Book, i.e., the Qur'an, is truly the Speech of Allah. And speech can never come except from a speaking being. Muslim say, "Allah is a living speaking Being, and He spoke about what is in the Torah, the Gospel, and the Qur'an.
Allah is not referred to in the Torah or the Gospel by 'the Speaking' it is also not mentioned in religious laws. The Muslims never said that the Speech of Allah is a god or a lord.
Essential Attributes and Whether or Not they Serve as Names
Christians allege that essential attributes serve as names, as they regard each essential attribute as an essence. But this is not correct, because the attribute, which depends upon something else, cannot be an independent essence that exists by itself. Who could believe that the heat of the fire, which is dependent upon the fire, is an essence like the fire? Such an idea is ridiculous.
If it is correct to say that an attribute can be an essence, then power would also be an essence. If they, i.e., the Christians, mean by 'essential' that they are inherent attributes and that the other attributes are related to action; like the Creator and the Provisioner, it is known that His inherent attributes, which include Power and the like are not limited to that only.
By having three hypostases and claiming that Divine religious laws. A group of them say that God, 'Exists Alive All-Knower,' while others say, 'An Existing Knowing All-Powerful,' and so make the All Powerful replace the Living, and render the Holy Spirit as the Power.
Although this saying is more suitable to the meaning attributing power to the Holy Spirit is clearly false. They also have to prove the hypostasis of the Word, which they sometime call the Wisdom. At other times they call it the Word and yet at other times they call it Articulation, just as they mention it in this letter, for what was united with Christ was the Hypostasis of the Word. They sometime couple it with life and at other times with power. Sometimes they say the father is the Existing, and at other times say he is the existing one by himself, or say he is the self. His existence by himself is called in Syriac language, 'entity and sometimes, 'Generosity.'
All these claims are due to their confusion and deviation. They cannot find three definite meanings of the attributes that deserve to be considered essential.
The Christian Claim that the Attributes Serve as Names
If the mean that these names are proper or non derivative nouns and that the other attributes are adjectives, the name, 'living' and 'All-Knower' are derivatives, which indicate the meanings of knowledge and life. Similarly, 'All-Powerful' denotes ultimate power. Moreover, if they mean that He is called by His attributes, we know that Allah, the Exalted, has many attributes. he has Divine attributes and the All-Powerful is one of them.
Power denotes His dominion over His Creatures more than Knowledge does. The fact that He created all things proves His Power more than it proves His Knowledge. His Omnipotence is more evident than His exclusive Knowledge.
Each Attribute is Different From the Other
If the mean that the attributes of the Lord, the Exalted and Glorious, are separate from Him, and that is truly what they are saying, and that these attributes are also attached to Him, this would mean associating between two antitheses. Mentioning the example of the sun is not correct rather it is considered and argument against them, not for them.
The rays that are dependent upon the air, earth, mountains, trees and walls are not those that are dependent upon the sun, while those that are dependent upon the sun are not dependent upon the air and the earth.
If they claim that God gives of his Divine Knowledge to the hearts of all the prophets just like sunrays, it should be said to them: this was not something done exclusively for Christ. Allah gives from His knowledge to all the prophets. Neither does this mean that the Divine Entity or His Dependent Attributes becomes immanent in any of His creatures, nor does it mean that the servant becomes a god to be worshipped simply because of the knowledge and faith he has been granted.
They say, "God is one, Who is the only Creator and the only Lord."
This is true, but they contradict it by saying in their Creed of Faith, "And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only -begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds [God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance [essence] with the Father."
Thus, they continue their argument by saying they are two gods, and then they argued that the Holy Spirit is a third god that should also be worshipped. Therefore, they argued that there are three gods but said, "We prove that there is only one god." This is a manifest discrepancy, which is associating between two contradictory statements: one affirms and one refutes.
That was why some wise people say, "Most people's belief could be conceivable except for that of the Christians, because those who established this belief could not understand what they were saying. So they spoke out of ignorance and associated contradictory meanings. That was why some said, "If ten Christians gather, they will end up with having eleven different opinions." Others said, "If one asks one of the Christians along with his wife and his son about their monotheism the man will say one opinion, his wife will say another and his son will say a third one."
Their claim that God is neither separated nor divided and this contradicts with what they mention in their Canon and the examples they provide to support their claim. They expressed this by using the analogy of the sunray, which is, in fact, separated and divided. If the sunray is reflected upon a given surface, it will be a division or a part of the original sunray. In addition, some of it will disappear while some will remain. This means that if an object is placed over the surface in which the ray is reflected, it will be divided into two halves. Thus, the part of the ray which existed between the two halves, and which is now above the separating object, then acts as a separator between the two halves.
The reason for this is that sunrays are dependent upon the earth and the air, each of which is separated and divided, and whatever is dependent upon the dividable is also dividable. For this reason, the sunray reflected upon a dividable surface or place is also dividable. This necessitates the ability of the dependent object to be divided.
They also claim that God was united with Christ, and then Christ ascended to heaven and sat on the right side of the Father. In addition, one of their beliefs is that from the moment the divine entity united with the human, they were not separated. The one who ascended to heaven and sat on the right side of the Father was Christ who is a divine-human entity, a full god and a full human being. They do not say that one sitting on the right side of the father is only the human entity, but they claim it is the unified divine human entity that sat on the right side of the divine entity. What can be a clearer division and separation than this? None of the prophets ever said such a thing. It was even said, "These words have a meaning that we do not understand." However, the meaning belongs to their priest who wrote it down and rendered it the creed of their belief. If they spoke of that which they themselves could not comprehend, they would be counted among the ignorant people who should not be followed. No one can comprehend how the divine entity that was united with the human entity could sit at the right side of the Divine Entity, which is free from being united! This free entity is separate and different from the united divine entity and is not connected to it. it is only adjacent to it, so that which is adjacent to the free divine entity is the united entity composed of the natures of the human and the divine. This is a true division and separation of the divided parts from the other.
It should also be said to them, "Is the thing united with Christ the Divine Entity of the Lord of the Worlds or one of His Attributes?"
If he is the Entity of the Father, he will be father himself. Thus, Christ becomes the father, a falsehood about which all Christians agree, for they say, "He is God and he is the Son of God," just as Allah related about them. They do not say he is the father and the son at the same time. According to them, the father is God, and this is another example of their inconsistency.
If they say that the thing united with the Christ is an attribute of the Lord, we say that the divine attributes are inseparable from the Lord. They can neither unite with nor be immanent in anything other than the Divine Entity. Moreover, the attribute in itself is not the Creating God, the Lord of the Worlds. It is only an attribute, and no sane person would ever say that the Speech of Allah, His Knowledge, or His Life is the Lord of the Worlds Who created the heavens and the earth. if it is claimed that Christ is an attribute of God, he would not be God, and he would not be the Lord of the worlds or the Creator of the heavens and the earth.
But the Christians say that Christ is the Lord or the worlds, the Creator of all things. He is the One Who created Adam and Maryam, even though he is the son of Adam and the son of Maryam. he is the Creator of all that due to his divine entity, and he is also the son of Adam and Maryam by means of his human entity. If it is sais that Christ is the divine attribute, an attribute can't create. How can this be while Christ is not the divine attribute itself, but rather a created being made by a Word from Allah, and thus is called the Word of Allah, as Allah created him by the word, 'Be'?
The Exalted says,
"Such is Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary). (it is) a statement of truth, about which they doubt (or dispute). It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! when He determines a matter, He only says to it, "Be", and it is." [Maryam: 34-35]
Allah called Jesus (pbuh) His Spirit, as He created Him though the breath of the Holy Spirit into His mother, unlike all other human beings who are created from a human father. Allah, the Exalted, says,
"Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah. "He shall speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. And he shall be (of the company) of the righteous.She said: "O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man has touched me." He said: "So (it will be) for Allah creates what He wills. When He has decreed something, He says to it only: "Be!" and it is." [Ali Imran : 47]
If they say, "He is united with some of the Divine Entity and some of its Attributes, the will be believing in the division and the separation of the Divine Entity which is clearly false. Moreover, concerning their saying, "Very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance [essence] with the Father; by whom all things were made," it should be said to them, "This begotten child who is his father's equal in essence and who is a very god from a very god is either a dependent attribute or an independent entity. If it is the first, the muslim say that an attribute cannot be a god or a creator, about which it cannot be said that it is a begotten being from God or that it is His equal in essence. None of the prophets or their followers called any of Allah's Attributes a child or His son. It cannot be said that an Attribute of Allah is begotten from Him. No sane person would say that an attribute is begotten from the original entity.
The Christians say, "Christ created the heavens and the earth because of the union between His Divine Nature and that anciently begotten Son who is equated to the Father in essence."
This means that he is not only an attribute but also an independent entity, not a dependent attribute. If this separation and division in the Divine Entity is their premise, the claim concerning natural begetting will entail that a part of him has been removed. The Exalted says,
"Yet they assign to some of His slaves a share with Him (by pretending that He has children, and considering them as equals or co-partners in worship with Him). Verily, man is indeed a manifest ingrate! Or has He taken daughters out of what He has created, and He has selected for you sons? When news is brought to one of them of (the birth of) what he sets up as a likeness to ((Allah)) Most Gracious, his face darkens, and he is filled with inward grief! (Do they then like for Allah) a creature who is brought up in adornments (wearing silk and gold ornaments, i.e. women), and in dispute cannot make herself clear? And they make the angels who themselves are slaves to the Most Beneficent (Allah) females. Did they witness their creation? Their evidence will be recorded, and they will be questioned!" [Az Zukhruf: 15-19]
Some Christian scholars seek to prove that begetting and filiation is an eternal attribute that is dependent on the substantive, namely the son. They sometimes call this 'uttering the word,' and sometimes call it 'knowledge' and at other times they call it 'wisdom'.
The Christian say, "He is begotten from God, so he is God's son." None of the prophets of their followers ever said this. This is simply an invention of the Christians.
No one understands the meaning of the words 'begetting' and 'filiation' this way.
The prophets only attributed the word 'son' to creatures. They (i.e., the Christians) said, "he is an actual father to Christ and a guarding supporting father to others." From this statement it is clearly understood that the Christians are referring to the natural form of begetting in which a part of the father is separated. However, their scholars deny this, so they neither followed the prophets not spoke reasonably. Thus, they deviated from what they reported from the prophets and then caused their followers to also go astray. They did not say that the betting of God is similar to that of animals, in which something is separated from an existing being. Instead, they said that it is a divine form of begetting in which a part was separated from the divine entity and was immanent in the human one. In the end, however nothing can be understood from the word 'begetting' except its usual meaning.
In addition, the Christian say, "And [I believe] in the Holy Ghost, the Lord, and Giver of Life; who proceedeth from the Father [and the Son]; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the Prophets." They say that the Holy Spirit emanated from the Father, and is worshipped and glorified, but this claim is false because it can't be said about the Lord's life, which is dependent upon Him. His life has not emanated from Him like the rest of His Attributes. If the independent attribute is emanating, His Knowledge and Power and the rest of His Attributes will also emanate from Him. Moreover, emanation in speech is more evident than in life, for speech comes out from the speaker while life doesn't come out from the living. If any of the attributes emanated, it would be the attribute, which they call 'the son,' as well as 'knowledge,' 'speech' and 'speaking.' According to reason, it is better to say this about speech than about life. They also say, "It is with the father, is worshipped and glorified." Dependent Divine Attributes can never be with the Lord or worshipped with Him. They say, "he is speaking in the prophets," but a Dependent Divine Attribute does not speak in Prophets. Al these are rather the characteristic of the Holy Spirit, which Allah places in the hearts of the prophets, or a characteristic of one of the angels; such a Jibril (Gabriel, peace be upon him). If the Holy Spirit emanated from the Father, and emanation means coming out, that would be clear separation and division.
The similitude the Christians put forward for this emanation is that of the sunray, which is invalid due to some reasons, the most important of which are the following:
-[FONT="] [/FONT]The sunray is dependent on the air and the earth; it is not an independent essence. But to them, the Lord's life is a living worshipped being and essence.
-[FONT="] [/FONT]This sunray, that is dependent on the air and the earth, is not an attribute of the sun or dependent upon it, while the Lord's life is one of His dependent attributes.
-[FONT="] [/FONT]They specify emanation only for the Holy Spirit and do not say that the Word has emanated. Emanation of speech is perhaps more reasonable than that of life. The more one ponders more reasonable than that of life. The more one ponders on their words in the Canon and so on, the more one finds contradictions between those books on the one hand, and the Torah, Gospel and the rest of the Books of Allah on the other.
Note : This article is part of the book by one of greatest Muslim scholar Syaikh Ibn Taimiyah who lived in 1263 C.E- 1328 C.E. A message (in the form of book) was sent to him from Cyprus (the Bishop of Sayda), which appeared to support the religion of the Christians. Syaikh Ibn Taimiyah was motivated to write a reply to it and then he wrote a reply (in the form of book) entitled 'Answering Those Who Altered The Religion of Jesus Christ.' (emphasis added)
