3 – The deviance of the deniers, who fall into three categories
a – A group who denied the Names and the meanings to which they refer; they described Allah is terms of absolute negation (what He is not). These are the Jahamiyah. The fact of the matter is that their deviation is disbelief in Allah, just like the deviation of the mushrikeen.
b – A group who affirmed the names of Allah as words, without accepting the attributes of perfection that they imply. They said, Rahmaan (Most Beneficient), Raheem (Most Merciful), without Rahmah (Mercy) Hakeem (All-Wise) without wisdom, Qadeer (All-Powerful) without power, Samee’ (All-Hearing) without hearing, etc. These are the Mu’tazilah.
c – A third group who affirmed seven of the Sifaat al-Ma’aani (characteristics), namely: like, knowledge, power, will, hearing, seeing and speech, but they denied all the other attributes. These are the Ash’aris.
(Abu’l-Hasan al-Ash’ari (may Allah have mercy on him) did not subscribe to this view)
In the case of those who disbelieved in the names and Attributes of Allah, those who likened His Attributes to the attributes of His creatures and those who denied His Names and Attributes, their misguidance is quite clear, because they are opposing Allah and His Messenger, disbelieving in the Qur’aan and Sunnah. Their position is quite clear and does not require further explanation.
The ones whose faulty belief needs to be exposed are the Ahl al-Kalaam (Islamic philosophers/scholastics) who claim that they are declaring Allah to be above any resemblance to His creatures, so they deny attributes of Allah which have been narrated in the Qur’aan and Sunnah, on the basis that this may lead to tashbeeh (anthropomorphism or thinking of Allah as being like His creation). So they resort to interpreting these attributes in a manner that takes them far away from their true meaning.
(Some contemporary figures such as Hasan al-Banna and Hasan Ayyoob tried to be lenient towards those who made this mistake, who are known as the khalaf (successors), and they tried to reconcile between the views of the salaf (pious predecessors) and the khalaf. But the fact of the matter which must be understood is that the view of the khalaf who claim that the apparent meaning of the attributes of Allah is not what is meant, is far removed from the correct view. There is no meeting point between this and the view of the salaf. The fact that some of the khalaf had good intention is no excuse, because good intentions do not make falsehood true.)