Al-Sayf al-Saqil fi al-Radd 'alaIbn Zafil (Arabic:السيف الصقيل في الرد على ابن زفيل,lit. 'The Burnished Sword in Refuting Ibn Zafil [derogatory name forIbn al-Qayyim]'), is atheological book, written by theShafi'i-Ash'ari scholarTaqi al-Din al-Subki (d. 756/1355), as a refutation againstIbn al-Qayyim's poem entitledal-Kafiya al-Shafiya fi al-Intisar lil-Firqa al-Najiya (Arabic:الكافية الشافية في الانتصار للفرقة الناجية,lit. 'The Sufficient and Healing [Poem] on the Victory of the Saved Sect'), known popularly asal-Qasida al-Nuniyya (Arabic:القصيدة النونية,lit. 'Ode Rhyming in theLetter Nun [N]').[1][Note 1]
Al-Subki considered the poem to beblasphemous due to its ideological practice oftakfir (excommunication of other Muslims), and due to its theological deviations about the Divine Attributes, i.e.,anthropomorphism andanthropopathism.[3][1]
Al-Subki purposely cited sections of the poem and also referred toIbn Taymiyya. He strove to disqualify the derogatory designations used by Ibn al-Qayyim when he referred to theAsh'aris asJahmiyya andMu'attila, etc. Moreover, al-Subki explored several theological aspects concerning God's entity and His Attributes in terms of figurative interpretation (ta'wil) and also deals witheschatological issues.[2]
The book was re-edited and commented on byHanafi-Maturidi scholarMuhammad Zahid al-Kawthari (d. 1371/1951), under the title ofTabdid al-Zalam al-Mukhim min Nuniyyat Ibn al-Qayyim (Arabic:تبديد الظلام المخيم من نونية ابن القيم).[4][5]
The Hanafi hadith scholarMurtada al-Zabidi (d. 1205/ 1791) — in the introduction to his bookIthaf al-Sada al-Muttaqin (commentary onIhya' 'Ulum al-Din byal-Ghazali) — quoted at some length from the refutation written by al-Subki.[6]
An unfortunate peculiarity that the poem shares with some of Ibn al-Qayyim's other works on Islamic Faith - is that it presents the reader with a false dilemma, namely - that one must either believe that Allah (God) has eyes, hands, a descending motion, and so forth, in a literal sense, or else one has nullified ('attala) or negated these Attributes. And this is erroneous, for the literal is that which corresponds to an expression’s primary lexical sense as ordinarily used in a language by the people who speak it, while the above words are clearly intended otherwise, in accordance with the [Qur'anic] verse (There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him) [42:11], for if the above were intended literally, there would be innumerable things like unto Him in such respect as having eyes, hands, motion, and so forth, in the literal meaning of these terms. The would-be dilemma is also far from the practice of the early Muslims, who used only to accept such [Qur'anic] verses and hadiths as they have come, consigning the knowledge of what is meant by them – while affirming the absolute Transcendence of Allah Most High above any resemblance to created things – to Allah Most High alone, without trying to determinately specify how they are meant (Bila Kayf), let alone suggesting people understand them literally as Ibn al-Qayyim tried to do.[3]
Tabdid al-Zalam, al-Kawthari's commentary on al-Subki's refutation of Ibn Qayyim entitled al-Sayf al-Saqil fi al-Radd 'ala Ibn Zafil.
