Who Is Allah – Understanding Allah’s Names and Attributes #08

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim

have hamdu Lillahi Rabbil Alameen wa Salatu was Salam, ala Ashraf an MBO mousseline. Avena what what's you know Muhammad Ali he offers to them whereas could this mean Allahumma on him that'd be may in fact one on one fat and that'd be my island Turner was even earn money out of the line I mean,

today is the 31st of October, the first frost of the year

and we it is Saturday night and we are talking about the names and attributes of Allah subhanho wa taala.

Last class we talked about Al Rahman Al Rahim. And we talked about at a height Alka Yom. And today in sha Allah, we will talk about a laws, characteristics and qualities relating to his ability to create.

We'll start out with the author of The Rezac and brother.

He splits it over two chapters. And as you've probably noticed, he groups names he doesn't just give every name has its own individual chapter. He kind of groups names around a theme or a concept or a relationship. So we have one chapter, which is a Holic Haluk.

Right, and then we have the chapter after which is a Hadith of the very animal soul with.

So we'll try to get through at least these two chapters today Insha Allah, so Allah is at Han F, and l holla.

Holla off

the roots in Arabic means to create.

It also

communicates or implies a plan and a purpose kind of a

measuring up

before

the implementation or the actual creation.

So when Allah describes himself as alcoholic, on the lesson or on the

the pattern of fair is the doer. That means that therefore a law is the one who creates.

And when a law describes himself

as El Hala, which he does twice in the Koran

This is called Siva MOBA. This is one of the patterns in the Arabic language that indicates intensity

and repetition

and

excellence or a higher degree of something, right? Similar to a chapter that's going to come soon, a Razzak of Rozelle.

So if you're looking or thinking, what's the difference between these two things?

This is a linguistic these all these types of names fall on linguistic linguistic patterns.

Anything that's on the pattern that I call left Razek

has to do with the simple kind of Doer just like we add er

in English or other suffixes, the one who does something

and then there are other patterns that go beyond that color

that I Lima you read, write instead of Fareed

Kola, Rosa.

What do we mean? When we mean that a law creates

similar to the English

and Arabic, there are two primary meanings

to the word or the concept of creation.

The first meaning

has to do with bringing something into existence,

which had no prior existence or precedent.

It didn't exist before. There was nothing like it

This is the type of meaning that Allah intends when he says, Halloween holiday I've been idle law is there a creator, other than a law

this specific type of creation, which has to do with

bringing about something without a prior likeness or pattern or example.

This type of creation necessitates

the purpose and the wisdom behind it.

He's kind of corollary concepts to allows creation.

And that makes sense if we think about it for a second, because

if someone is intentionally

bringing forth something that hasn't existed before,

nor has there existed any pattern, or like thing, or antecedents to that thing,

then one would assume that it would require planning, measurements, and a specific and careful act of will.

As opposed to the other meaning of create, which we'll talk about in just a moment.

What is the purpose of the creation then? Specifically, for our purposes, what is the purpose of our creation? This is something we talked about extensively in the Sunday class.

Can anybody fill us in? Those of you who have been attending the Sunday class, somebody asks you, your teenage son asks you what's the Why am I here? What's the purpose of creation?

To just be yourself, right?

Khilafah

Yes, to be a Khalifa a bad Yes.

Very good. Yes. Those are the two higher ones right? And the first one was a male, which is just kind of our base subsistence good. And the two higher orders are the two higher levels or purposes any bad and if the person isn't content with a better than they have been FFC alpha is their destiny and the pinnacle of human purpose Very good. Mashallah.

So this is the first meaning of to create call up a holodeck to bring something forth, which has no prior example, no prior pattern, or precedents. The second meaning of the word is how we use it colloquially, in English as well, which is kind of just to make something whether it had a precedence or not, whether it had a prior pattern, whether it was imaginable before or not.

So in Arabic, we have the same kind of two meanings. But the hind caught up, as we have in English when we say the word create. So this meaning if we're going to pin it down with more specific words than simply to make, we could say, so prepare, to assemble, to fabricate to manufacture, right, these sorts of meanings. And this is the meaning behind a loss statement, or I should say this is the meaning behind the word

harlech in a loss statement, that's about a lawful asset for the theme,

asset and folly theme. So here in this ayah Allah is saying

that he is the best of creators

we're gonna get that's a good question shake family. So here's, here's the rub. Okay, here's the here's the contradiction. I want you to solve the problem. We have, let's say your teenage son, again is reading the Koran. And he comes across these two ideas and he says, Wait a second, the Imam he said in the football on Friday, that there's no contradiction in the Koran.

But I found a contradiction, Baba. Allah said, Help me in Holly thin, vital Allah.

Is there a creator other than Allah? And then Allah also said if it's about aka Allahu X and on Holly theme, so bless it be Allah, the best of creators which implies that there are more than one Creator and Allah just said there is no

Creator other than Allah, how do you resolve this contradiction?

A lot asks,

is there a creator? Other than a lot? rhetorical question meaning no. And then a law says Blessed would be a lot best of creators, meaning there are other creators out there.

So the shake family says because a law is the first creator, and he gives us the ability to create things. So we are maybe minor creators. In essence, yeah, in essence, yes, it's about these two meanings, right?

To create, just like an English in Arabic, it has two different meanings. The first is to bring about something with no precedents or to bring about something from nothing. Okay? It did not exist in the universe, boom, couldn't be a cool, now it exists.

And then there's this more general sort of creative ability, which is to manufacture to assemble to arrange, right. And this is something that is not specific.

Strictly speaking, to Allah, we create things in the sense that, you know, there wasn't an iPhone, and we took, you know, minerals from the earth and alloys and plastics, and we made the iPhone, right. It's not like the first meaning of holodeck.

Because we're rearranging the atoms, we're taking the substances that Allah has already created. And we're rearranging them, manipulating them, doing things to them, and making them work together in a slightly different way.

In that sense,

that in that sense of the word, there are multiple creators and even then Allah is the best of them.

But in the grand scheme of things like the CHE family, we could not do that without a laws.

Having willed it, first of all,

and second of all, Allah is the Creator in the first instance, because he brought about everything.

When there was a time when it didn't exist at all, not the final product, even the parts that make up the final product.

So what does a lot mean when he says that?

He is the best of creators? What makes a lot a better creator, than people? What if you had someone that came up to you and said, you know, trees and rivers are nice, but man, this iPhone is just really convenient. Look at you know, people, they're so genius. They're so brilliant. How can a law claim to be the best creator? When we've done all these things with technology? We can

prolong people's lives medicine procedures.

Isn't a man aren't people better creators and Allah?

What if someone were to say that to you?

The look of how we've made improvements, right? You hear that language? We've made improvements upon human life and improvements upon the creation. You hear that?

How would you respond to such a person?

Okay, that's one way it sort of like indebtedness and gratitude argument, right? That Allah gave us the raw materials and he gave us the intellect to do those improvements. So we wouldn't be able to do it. And that's echoed by the shahada family. We wouldn't be able to do it without Allah's Will in the first place.

But I don't know if that responds as centrally indirectly to what's being gotten, like that response to things like in time

But it almost seems like a lot of turned it over to us. And then we did even better.

What if someone is is saying that?

Like, yes, we're grateful or thankful to Allah that He turned it over to us and gave us the ability, it's great. So we could improve and make something even better.

People People believe this.

Taught man what he knew not. Okay, that still comes under the indebtedness arguments.

Another kind of gratitude.

Let's think about it this way.

Are there any unintended consequences?

Or externalities?

To the things that human beings create?

Is there any waste?

Let's go back to that iPhone. Yeah, definitely think about that iPhone, it may be convenient. It may let us keep track of things and do all these great things talk and stuff like that. But what goes into an iPhone, right, you have to mined stuff from over here. And it's dependent upon the global supply chain, you've got internal combustion engines puffing smoke up into the air, harming the environments, you know, making our air more difficult to breathe, plastics that end up in the ocean, choking the fish and all these sorts of things, right? Even if even if somebody is going to stand their ground and say, well, it's worth it.

And say, like in some sort of cost benefit analysis thing, like okay, yeah, these things are unfortunate, but they're what we have to do in order to get this thing, which is really great. Nobody can deny that those are all unintended consequences. Those are all side effects. Right? Those are all harms, right? that come along with this process of human creation, the internal combustion engine,

you know, even roads, right roads that break up patterns of animal migration, even light streetlights, which break up patterns of bird migration. the Adirondacks is one of the largest tracts in the United States of like,

like a light sanctuary to, you know, to protect birds migratory patterns. A lot of people don't realize that, right? So I mean, like, there's so much of what we do and create that benefits us, that actually has all of these negative consequences that we have to deal with. Even in the end of the day, if we decide that they're worth it, we have to own it. Okay, now look at the last creation, look at the things that are law created directly.

Do we see these sorts of this sort of waste? Do we see these unintended consequences? Do we see these drawbacks? Is it kind of like subject to the same cost benefit analysis?

Like the leaf, when the leaf falls in the autumn? Is it trash on the ground, that hurts other beings until whatever it decomposes, or somebody cleans it up or something like that?

No, we find the exact opposite. It's actually like this closed loop system where there is no waste, everything gets converted into a purpose towards something else. The leaf when it's on the tree, is making the sugars for the plant to survive. And then an autumn it drops. And then through the process of it becomes food for the earthworm, and then it becomes soil and the ground. And then it becomes a medium through which more trees can grow. There's no waste. There's no side effects. There's no consequences.

Yes,

exactly. So everything that a law creates is like a closed system. Right? Constantly being repurposed and constantly being reused.

Even if it's the nature of that use is changing.

So when a law says that he is the best of creators, that's not it's not a contest. Like you can look and see. How efficient is the creation? Yeah, exactly. Until humans interview

100% Yeah. So we see how a lot is the best of creators he's able to create these bodies. Right

Everything that we see

no waste, no negative side effects,

no unintended consequences.

He is the greatest creator. Whereas we we Bumble along, we make some shiny, cool stuff. But it has dramatic costs on the environment and even on like even, even the things that

even if we ignore the environmental side effects, even the effects on our lives, like, you know, everybody now is talking about smartphone usage and smartphone addiction and screen addiction and screen time and stuff like that, like this is this is a, it's not even a side effect. It's a direct effect of what we've created. Right. So a lot is accidental Holly theme.

When we're talking about a loss ability to create, this is one of the

it's one of the most commonly referred to qualities or attributes of a law that he refers to in order to prove his own Ohia. Right, so his divinity, or his exclusive right to be worshipped. Because whereas there might be some qualities that seem to exist

among the creation, to create in this first meeting, this unique way, bringing something into existence that didn't exist before, is something so unique, and so powerful, that it is a very strong proof for divinity and for ownership. And thus, the conclusion that Allah wants us to make, that nothing else deserves to be worshipped, except Allah.

So many times in the Quran, Allah draws our attention to the created world, not not what we've made, not our kind of bumbling creations, but the things that he created directly, the sun and the moon, the stars, the rain, the Earth, the vegetation, the animals, the mountains, all these sorts of things, and tells us to look at them and ponder them

and then conclude from that, that there is Will, a singular intelligent will

and an enormous power

behind this creation, which therefore deserves to be worshipped alone, those are usually kind of the the flowchart of ideas that Allah puts out in the Quran for us to follow.

So that covers alcoholic alcohol luck.

The next chapter the author has is a pairing or a trio we should say, of names that happen at the end of sort of hasha you know, a loss kind of listing all of these names

of holodeck. We just did, Albury, also with

a holly berry, and also with

the these three, when they're paired, We're looking now at a laws, quality of creation through a different lens before we were looking at how he is conduct he creates, and how there are these two meanings of create.

And he is able to do

one is completely unique to him. And the second while not completely unique, he's the best that Okay, now we're looking at it through the lens of kind of

the stages of creation, when a law creates

when a lot creates something, or will have something to be created, what are the steps that happen?

spanning from the instant it is decided and willed to the instant that it actually becomes created.

We can look at these three names and kind of cover that entire process of holonic Albury and MUSAWAH

so in this context of holodeck, as we did mention before, it refers to creation, but not just any aspect of creation, creating with purpose and wisdom. So it's a gesture towards the aspects of planning that is involved and the the wisdom that's involved behind it.

Whereas a Vanetti refers to bringing something new and unprecedented into existence. So this is one of the meanings that we were talking about in the last chapter. Now we're talking about specifically now, as it does have its own name, to achieve this specific aspect of Allah's creation, as Barry, he is the one who

brings about into existence something that did not exist before.

So it has to do with kind of the implementation of things. And the third element so well,

has to do with a laws shaping, shaping and sculpting of things. Okay, so we could imagine this as almost like the third stage. So we have a hard lesson, the one who creates or the one who plans and proportions, and Abadi, the one who then brings that thing about in a context and within a history where it never existed before. And then finally, finally, the tail sweep, the forming or the shaping or the molding of this thing. And this thing is formed and shaped and molded, not haphazardly, but specifically, specifically in accordance to what it is created for.

We talked about this when it came to human beings. In the Sunday class, we talked about, for example, that human beings are primarily a potentiality. Right? They we don't have the advantages of a of the animal kingdom in some sort of sense where we don't have, for example, claws or fangs, and we don't have

immense speed such that we can run away or, you know, outrun something like a deer, or we don't have the ability to fly, right, like birds, these sorts of things. What do we have, we have these kinds of tools, we have the tool of language, we have the tool of intellect, their immense potentialities, but they're not quite yet realized they required developments. But once we develop them,

then we have kind of reached this power or this capacity that other creations don't have, and how this is kind of there's this appropriateness or this suitability.

The fact that we are these potentialities, and were created, as we said earlier, for NASA, our higher purpose, our greater purpose is Khilafah.

It all kind of goes together, we need to begin on the path of self development.

In order to kind of continue down the path of self development to become a laws, representatives on Earth, it all kind of goes together. Whereas you know, the things that are supposed to eat meat, right, they are given fangs, and they are given claws, they are given strength, the things that don't have those abilities or those capacities, they are given something suitable to them, they are given

great speed, or they're given in, for example, you see eyes that are on the side of their head so that they can kind of look around and notice who's going to stop them and sneak up on them so that they can run away. Right? So everything animal, so we're refers to, or it references a laws, shaping and forming everything in accordance with its purpose. What it was made for, and this is one of the strongest proofs of a laws, intelligent design and his intelligent will. But we don't see this kind of

contradiction. We don't see something that has eyes on the side of its head, and has claws. And it's kind of all over the place. Right? Everything is kind of focused into a singular purpose. If you're a predator, you're a predator. If you're a prey you're prey. And there's a few omnivores. And that's not necessarily a contradiction to this general rule. But everything has kind of given the tools that it needs to have to survive.

So again, these sorts of things, they come back to allows Rubel via his dominion and his unique control and ownership over the creation. And he uses them in the Koran to justify and bring along our intellects to the point where we conclude that because of this unique dominion, therefore this is

is unique divinity, and it deserves to be worshipped alone.

Allah's ability to create is also used as a proof of the resurrection. This is something extremely important. We had a clip a couple of weeks ago about the resurrection and what will be happening to us after we die.

And

for people who only view what they've experienced,

it can seem like something that's hard to believe, if they're only used to affirming the things that their observation

can grasp.

What's the main argument that Allah uses against this mentality? He says, look, use your observation. Use your observation to see how I brought you about from nothing in the first place.

And then posits the rhetorical question, if I brought you about, from nothing in the first place, that how much easier is it to bring you back a second time after you've died and decayed? It's much easier, it's much harder to bring you about from absolutely nothing than it is to return you to an existence that you already had before.

So when it comes to, sometimes we run into these names, we come into that we run into the issue of when is it appropriate to use these terms for people, right, so we have a Holic, we have a baddie, we have a normal soul with

let's say that for example, a Holic means the Creator.

Is it appropriate to say that a human being creates?

Is it appropriate to say that such and such a person is the creator of this program? Or the creator of this work of arts? Or the creator of I don't know, the iPhone 20, whatever we're on now?

Is that something that's

permissible on the show yacht

to use this kind of terminology?

Say family says if used with the understanding that we are lesser creative, good, that's essentially what the author of our book says. And how do you communicate that understanding? He says by not using it?

Absolutely. But using it conditionally? What does he mean by that? He means by not saying that anyone is just the Creator, period. But saying the creator of this the creator of that, right, and our authors are author's opinion is that if you use such a phrase, then it's understood that you're not bringing about from absolutely nothing, you're doing this process of manufacturing or rearranging. Yes. Also a good point. Exactly like master of the house, and that's what we're going to get into. Soon enough. Okay, good. So that's a Holic? What about Albury?

Is it permissible? For anybody, if we say the initiator in this sort of item that's not really a very good transit translation, but we studied what a bad it means to bring something out from nothing where it didn't exist before. Would it be appropriate to name a child for example, Abadi, or to say that, Oh, so and so is the body of this sort of thing?

Of course, yeah. There's no doubt there's no doubt if any of these names if we put off the before it, it becomes permissible. I'm the daddy of the muscle. Well, I'll do this. Of course, that's not what we're asking. We're asking is it appropriate to use the actual word

without using OGD?

We just said that for colic it is appropriate if we pair it with something specific. Okay.

And our author is of the opinion that this is not appropriate with battery. Because he says the meaning of battery is this specific meaning of creation, where you're bringing something that there was nothing like it before, not the meaning of rearranging, not the meaning of manufacturing. So our authors have the opinion that, yes, you can use Harlock you can use the creator of this and that and the other if you specify something that is created, but you're not allowed to do it for Batty, because it implies only this kind of creation in the first instance. What about animal soul with the shaper? The former?

Can we call someone

the most aware of something for Can we just say Elmo solver just like that?

Yes, you've anticipated what? Check out those access, shake family? That's exactly what he says.

Yes. Good. She had a family on the same page. Yeah, so the author Chicago, Zach, his opinion is that, yes, the same with Kotick. You can't use it by itself. You can't say he is an animal soul whip. But you can say he's the most subtler of something. He's the shaper of this. He's the former of that he's the motor of this or that or the other. Because then it's understood that what that person is doing is he's rearranging or he's forming this sort of material or this end product from what it was before. Right. So very good. There's only a minute left. Does anybody have any final questions on a holiday a holiday? A holiday can vary and Massawa before we conclude.

mean what yeah, thank you very much for your participation, as always, always a pleasure to share the space, the same space even if it's virtual.

And we will see you again next time in sha Allah Alhamdulillah wa salatu salam ala Rasulillah Salam Alaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh