Distortion of Imam Malik's statement on Istiwa refuted.Tafwid kayf not ma'na Shk Hatim's Istiwa book

*Distortion of Imam Malik's Statement on Istiwa Refuted* The video addresses the famous statement attributed to *Imam Mālik (d. 179 AH)* regarding Allah’s Istiwa (establishing/rising over the Throne, Qur'an 20:5): الإِسْتِوَاءُ غَيْرُ مَجْهُولٍ ، وَالْكَيْفُ غَيْرُ مَعْقُولٍ *(or الإِسْتِوَاءُ مَعْلُومٌ ، وَالْكَيْفُ مَجْهُولٌ "Al-Istiwa is known (not unknown), and the modality (kayf) is unknown / incomprehensible..." The primary thesis is to refute proponents of *Tafweed al-Ma’na* (who claim that the meaning of Istiwa is unknown). The speaker argues for *Tafweed al-Kayf**—that the linguistic meaning of *Istiwa is understood (*al-Uluww* / highness / ascending), while only the physical modality (*kayf*) is consigned to Allah. --- *1. Classical Scholar Quotes Cited* To prove that Imam Mālik meant "known in language," the speaker references several authorities: *Al-Qurtubi (*Tafsir al-Qurtubi*):* Explicitly cited under Surah Al-A'raf. Al-Qurtubi states that when Imam Mālik said "Istiwa is known," he meant *known in the Arabic language* (*fi al-lughah*). *Abu Bakr Ibn al-Arabi (*A'ridat al-Ahwadhi*):* Referenced alongside early Maliki authorities as confirming that the stance of Imam Mālik and the Salaf was that divine attributes are *known in meaning* (*ma'lum al-ma'na*) according to Arabic linguistics, whereas the modality (*kayfiyyah*) is unknown. *Imam Al-Dhahabi (*Kitab al-Uluww*):* Cited to establish the authenticity of this report from Imam Mālik (and his teacher Rabiah). Al-Dhahabi confirmed that this is the consensus position of *Ahl al-Sunnah*: we do not conceptualize the modality (*kayf*), but the meaning conveyed in the text of the Qur'an is known. *Abu al-Qasim Khalaf al-Maliki & Ibn Abd al-Barr (*Al-Tamheed*, Vol. 7):* Cited to show that Allah would not address Arabs in language they could not comprehend. Istiwa in Arabic signifies *loftiness, ascending, and establishing* (*al-irtifa' wa al-tamakkun*). --- *2. Refutation of the "Tafweed al-Ma'na" Interpretation* The speaker presents *4 primary refutations* against theologians who claim Imam Mālik meant *"Its presence in the Qur'an is known, but its meaning is unknown"*: 1. *It Would Be Redundant (*Tahsil al-Hasil*):* The questioner recited the verse: "The Most Merciful rose over the Throne" before asking. He already knew the verse was in the Qur'an. Answering that "its presence in the Qur'an is known" adds no value to the questioner. 2. *Grammatical Focus on the Single Noun (*Al-Kalimah al-Mufradah*):* Imam Mālik specifically stated "Al-Istiwa is known" (referring to the individual noun itself), not *"The revelation of Istiwa is known"*. This proves he was referring to the dictionary/linguistic definition of the word. 3. *Limiting Ignorance to Modality Alone (*Takhsis al-Kayf*):* Imam Mālik explicitly assigned ignorance *only to the *Kayf (how)**. Had both the meaning and modality been unknown, he would have said "Both the meaning and the how are unknown." Relegating ignorance to kayf proves that what remains (the ma'na*) **is* known. 4. *Mismatch Between Question and Answer:* The man asked *"How did He perform Istiwa?"*—not *"Is Istiwa mentioned in the Qur'an?"*. Saying that its presence in Scripture is known would fail to answer the question asked. Mālik was explaining that we comprehend the linguistic meaning, but the modality is beyond human reach. --- *3. Conclusion* The speaker criticizes later theologians (*al-mutakallimun*) for stacking secondary quotes to re-interpret foundational scholars. He concludes that even under a strictly silent interpretation, Imam Mālik’s text at most supports silence (*sokoot*), not the late Ash'ari stance of actively negating the apparent linguistic meaning. *Source Video:* [Watch on YouTube](https://www.google.com/search?q=http:...)