GOD IN ISLAM

A Study of the Theology of the Qur’an

Being the Foundation of Islam’s Monotheistic Paradigm

Researched & Written by

SYED M. WAQAS

BAB-UL-ILM RESEARCH FOUNDATION

(BIRF INTERNATIONAL)

www.birf.weebly.com
God in Islam

We will begin this subject with the linguistic aspect of the study of Divine Being1 as viewed
and illustrated in the metaphysics of the Glorious Quran.2 It is the best way to approach the
theology of Islâm, and the rationale for this approach is that it helps overcome the major
misunderstandings about the God of Islâm. Towards this end, therefore, we will at first
analyze the most celebrated Quranic name for God, Allâh.
The proper noun Allâh is the most important, but oft misunderstood, term of the Glorious
Quran. Allâh is the recurrent term in the Quran for the Deity and Islâm regards this name as
the ‘Holy of the holies.’ It is ironical that many among the Western critics of Islâm take it for
granted that Allâh is the name of a pagan Arab deity, quite likely the chief of the pantheon,
who was originally either a tribal god or southern Arabian god of moon and the Arabs believed
in Him as such before Islâm.3 Sometimes the critics of Islâm venture to make connections of
Islamic God even with the ancient Near Eastern deity, Baal—who Yahweh was jealous of.
Morphologically, the word Allâh is a compound term consisting of two parts of speech, a
definite article “al” and a (common) noun “ilâh.” In Arabic language, Ilâh means ‘a deity,’
and thus Ilâh is the one who is supernatural in essence—a divine in the meta-divine realm. It
is said that the major functions of Ilâh are to care and provide for the creation, human beings
in particular, and govern them with his absolute power, whereas, in response to these favors,
the ilâh deserves—even demands—to be worshipped.4 The trilateral root of this word (alaha)
implies ‘an object of worship, a deity, a god.’ In English, ilâh can in some cases be equated
with ‘god’ without being in need of placing the indefinite article ‘a’ before it owing to the
available distinction between the uppercase and the lowercase initials. Sanskrit deva, Hebrew
El, and Greek theos can also be taken as the other active equivalents of the Arabic noun ilâh.
The Quran employs the term ilâh on 147 occasions to mean a ‘false god,’5 rejecting the
intricate mythologies and pantheons of all pagan nations being a product of groundless human
fear, false expectation, and wayward imagination.
“We did no wrong to them; rather, they have wronged themselves. So, their gods whom
they used to invoke beside Allah did not come to their help in any way, when came the
command of your Lord, and they (as the source of false expectation) added nothing to them
except destruction.”

1
The word “Divine” will be capitalized throughout this work and will be considered as an
alternative for the possession of the word “God.”
2
The phrase “Glorious Quran” is the translation of frequently used Arabic expression for the
holy book, al-Qurân al-Majĭd. Muslims do not generally name the holy book with its single
title and they usually attach an adjective with the proper noun ‘Quran’ out of respect.
3
Prudence Jones & Nigel Pennick, A History of Pagan Europe, Psychology Press, 1995, p.77
4
Sayyid Abul A'la Mawdudi, (trans. Khurshid Ahmad), Towards Understanding Islam,
Leicestershire: The Islamic Foundation, 1982, p.59
5
‘Abdul Mannân ‘Omar, Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an (Arabic-English), Hockessin: Noor
Foundation International, 2012, p.28

2
God in Islam

(Sūrah Hūd 11:101)

The element of false expectations from the figments of human imagination, especially as seen
in the fertility cults, and the hope of deliverance when the time of need comes, has been
addressed in precise cognition of ancient cultic psychology in the 36th chapter of the Quran,
Sūrah Yâ-Sĭn.
“And they have adopted (for worship) other (false) deities than (the one true God) Allah in
the hope that they would help them when in need.”

(Sūrah Yâ-Sĭn 36:74)

When al and ilâh are conjoined in one word, contraction takes place and the vowel ‘i’
immediately drops out with the emphasis, Tashdĭd, on the second syllable. This contracts it
into the term ‘Al-lâh’.6 It is this term, which, according to Islâm, means ‘the one God.’ The
renowned Lane’s Lexicon defines the word Allâh as ‘the only true God’.7
The word Allâh, however, had been treated as a proper noun, the personal name of the creator
God, for time immemorial before the birth of Islâm. There was no confusion on the word and
its implications when Islâm adopted it to introduce its monotheistic paradigm. Lane’s Lexicon
analyzes this aspect of the word Allâh in the following words:

“(Allâh) is a proper name, applied to the Being who exists necessarily, by Himself,
comprising all the attributes of perfection.”8
Therefore, without any linguistic complication, we can translate the Arabic Allâh as God or
the God in English, ho Theos in Greek, Maha-Deva in Sanskrit (also Parmishwar), and Elohim
in Hebrew according to the rules of linguistics. Alfred Guillaume, a renowned Orientalist and
critic of Islâm, analyzes the word Allâh in a similar fashion.
“The oldest name for God used in the Semitic world consists of but two letters, the
consonant ‘l’ preceded by a smooth breathing, which was pronounced ‘Il’ in ancient
Babylonia, ‘El in ancient Israel. The relation of this name, which in Babylonia and Assyria
became a generic term simply meaning ‘god’, to the Arabian Ilah familiar to us in the
form Allah, which is compounded of al, the definite article, and Ilah by eliding the vowel
‘i’, is not clear.”9
However, there is an inherent problem with such an equation of all these terms with Allâh, for
Allâh is not merely a celebrated personal name, but also an independent conception of refined
metaphysics, peculiar to the Quranic paradigm, which could conceptually be equated with
none but Yahweh of the Hebrew Bible. In the linguistic aspect, on the other hand, the only

6
Cragg, Kenneth, The Call of the Minaret, New York: Oxford University Press, 1964, p.37
7
Edward William Lane, Arabic-English Lexicon, London: Willams & Norgate, 1863, p.83
8
Lane, Arabic-English Lexicon, p.83
9
Alfred Guillaume, Islam, Penguin 1990, p.7

3
God in Islam

practical equation available for this word among the religious languages is the Elohim of
Hebrew. The contraction of Hebrew words ‘eloh’ and ‘im’ is identical to that of Arabic ‘al’
and ‘ilah,’ and therefore no false deity can be treated as Elohim. In addition to this, the
uniqueness of the word Allâh is evident in its special characteristics that it has neither a plural
nor a feminine form.10
The Muslim Orthodoxy adheres to the belief that Allâh is the personal name of God, and when
they assert this, they almost always disregard the transcendental character of the Divine Being.
The Arabs had since long known the name Allâh, which they exclusively used for the Most
High without perceiving of any other deity equal to Him. The Quran employs the same ancient
Arabian term for God. At the same time, however, it neutralizes all such claims that there are
other gods equal, below or opposite to Him, rendering them incapable of being treated as
ilâhūn, “gods.” The Quranic argument also hammers the redundant ‘chaos creation’ theory of
the pagan theologies.
“If there were, in the heavens and the earth, other gods besides Allah, there would have
been chaos in both! But glory to Allah, the Lord of the Throne: (Holy is He) above what
(false partners) they attribute to Him!”

(Sūrah Anbiyâ 21:22)

As a matter of fact, Allâh in the Quran is the ‘Most High’, above the realm of time and space,
and the ‘only God’ of the universe. Everything that exists other than His own Being is His
creation. We should bear in mind that there is no problem in describing Allâh as God, as stated
above, when addressing the audience from Western background. Furthermore, the Quran
asserts that ‘all beautiful names belong to God.’11 However, Muslims can and should prefer
to use the name Allâh for the end-goal of retaining their Islamic disposition. Similarly, the
Arabic word also has some linguistic advantages over the word God, such as we cannot
distinguish from the word itself whether it is God or god when spoken until the context helps
us to do so. Nevertheless, conceptually speaking, Allâh and God represent the same Deity and
there is no confusion between the God of the Judo-Christian Bible and the God of the Quran.12

10
Some linguists suggest that al-lât is the feminine form of the word Allâh. However, this is
not the case and such an assumption is on a fallacious understanding of Arabic lexicography.
Lane’s Lexicon does not list the word al-lât under the same root (Arabic alif, lâm, hay –
Hebrew alif, lamed, he – English a, l, h) where it lists the words Ilâh and Allâh. Lane’s scholarly
work, which is respected among both Muslims and non-Muslims equally, clearly
distinguishes the two terms into two different word categories and thus clears away a
general misconception.
11
Sūrah Ṭâhâ 20:8
12
It has been a problem of Judo-Christian writers that they cannot accept Allâh same as the
God of Bible namely “the true God/Yahweh/Elohim/Father”. However, the students of
Semitic religions evidently understand that there is not even slightest conceptual difference
between both. Islâm evaluates these biblical names as the Ṣifât of God. George Sale
comments in the preface of his translation of Glorious Quran; “It would be loss of time, to

4
God in Islam

Tawḥĭd means the ‘Oneness of God’.13 In the language of the Quran, Tawḥĭd means that
God’s existence is an unimpeachable fact, whereas this existence exhibits sharp oneness in
the Lordship, Worship, and Attributes of God.14 Islâm sees this integrated oneness as Tawḥĭd
al-Rabūbiyyah, Tawḥĭd al-‘Ibâdah, and Tawḥĭd al-Asmâ was-Ṣifât. The last kind bears
somewhat different nature from the two other.
God is exclusive in the dignity and integrity of His names (Asmâ). Moreover, the attributes
(Ṣifât) of God are, for all intents and purposes, an exclusive right of God, the Almighty, and
there is no parallel to Him even in this virtue. Nevertheless, God has placed the light of some
of His attributes in man, which reflect in man in many different ways, of which the topmost
is ‘self-consciousness.15 All good in man is exclusively due to the presence of God’s attributes
in man’s instinct. In this way, God shares some of His attributes with man, but this sharing
does not make man into an equal of God and he only can achieve to become His obedient,
virtuous servant. Of course, God cannot be known in Dhât, for His revelation of the ‘Self’ is
limited to Ṣifât, “Attributes”, alone. This subject of the Asmâ was-Ṣifât will be discussed in
the coming pages in more detail.
The Quran sees Tawḥĭd as a historical phenomenon, which the earliest man, Adam, came
to know with the very first breath of life. Interestingly enough, some scholars of mythology
believe that the early man feared the hugeness of the sky and celebrated it as the “High God”
and/or “Sky God”, being the supreme deity who single handedly created heavens and earth
out of nothing.16 However, most historians view the early man as a polytheist and the earliest
religion of humanity being a plurality of gods with a functional hierarchy of polytheism
developed into pantheons and mythologies.17 Historically, Egyptian Pharaoh Akhenaton
(1353-1335 BCE) was the first reformer to introduce the worship of one supreme God, whom
he named “Aton” and identified with the disc of sun. Such historical monotheism, though

refute those who suppose the God of Moḥammed to be different from the true God, and
only a fictitious deity or idol of his own creation.” (Cited in: Dr. Aḥmad A. Galwash, The
Religion of Islam, vol. 1, Alexandria: Conveying Islamic Message Society, p.113)
13
I feel more inclined to translate Tawḥĭd as “Oneness” rather than “Unity”. “Oneness”
conveys the sense of singularity and integrity within the essence of the Deity, whereas
“Unity” sounds more like a pluralistic union. Secondly, the latter term has been mistakenly
used by the tritheistic factions of Christianity that celebrate Unity as three equally powerful
as well as independent gods unified in the Godhead. They utter the famous formula namely,
“Unity in Trinity.” The New Testament does not teach ‘tritheism’, i.e. three-god-ism. The
Quranic ‘oneness’ also rejects the ‘dualism’ of the Persian religion, Zoroastrianism.
14
For details on the standardization of Tawḥĭd, see Philips, Dr. Abu Ameenah Bilal, The
Fundamentals of Tawḥeed, London, 2004, chapter 1
15
It is similar to what Holy Bible declares the ‘creation of man in God’s image.’ (Genesis 1:27)
16
Armstrong, Karen, A Short History of Myth, New Delhi: Penguin Books, 2005, pp.16-17
17
See Hume, David, The Natural History of Religion, London: A. And. H. Bradlaugh Bonner,
1889, section I

5
God in Islam

intrinsically defective and incapable of meeting the three above stated standards, would either
convert into sheer polytheism eventually or would always find asylum under the mythical
shadow of many gods. Nevertheless, the Quran’s view of the history of monotheism stands in
stark contrast to that of secular history, for what the Quran transmits is the history of true
religion that begins with the creation of Adam, whereas what secular history maintains is an
inductive arrangement of ancient chronological records.
Glorious Quran defines God with the logic of ‘self-analysis.’ The Quran views God’s
existence as the most fundamental principle of being and invites human beings to consider the
signs of the universe as a witness to the existence and omnipotence of God. This Quranic
stance on the unquestionable existence of God transcends the ordinary logic of empirical
sciences, for the study of God lies beyond sense perception. Empirical logic restricts itself to
the sensory issues and falls short of recognizing the metaphysical truths, which are ineffable
and above the sensory experience.18 Not with the five senses is God perceivable but His
creation, for He is the Precept underneath the concept of the universe. 19 God is the principle
of creation, hence the uncreated Creator of every living and non-living thing. He created
universe ex nihilo. The existence of the phenomena itself witnesses the existence of an
absolute Creator in the beginning of each line of creation. This is to say that the existence of
existence—all that exists including mankind—furnishes the most foundational, cosmological
evidence for the Ultimate Being—the only Real and the Reality.
Philosophers, such as Immanuel Kant, do not entertain the idea that there can be any
ontological or cosmological proof of the being of God. Kant says that the argument namely
“if something exists, an absolutely necessary being must likewise exist” is not of a
demonstrable nature, for it assembles countless ‘sophistical propositions’ to the effect of
marring the speculative reason and that is why, he asserts, it is only an ancient argument in a
new, embellished dress.20 In a like fashion, Kant insists that the possibility of a metaphysical
proof of the existence of an absolutely necessary being is also zero, for what we perceive of
as the unconditioned, whereto all conditions direct, is virtually nothing at all. The thesis of
Kant, which actually places exclusive emphasis on speculation with no regard to induction,
external experience and judgment, goes on to conclude that, not to mention the phenomenon
of existence being demonstrable, even the cogitation of the nature of such a necessary being

18
Musavi, Sayyid Mujtaba, trans. Ḥamid Algar, God and His Attributes, Qom: Foundation of
Islamic Cultural Propagation in the World, 2003, p.29
19
Khaliq, Dr. Abdul, Qur'an Studies: A Philosophical Exposition, Lahore: Victory Book Bank,
1990, p. 23
20
See Kant, Immanuel, Of the Impossibility of a Cosmological Proof of the Existence of God,
in Abernethy, George L., & Langford, Thomas A., Philosophy of Religion, New York: Macmillan
Company, 1968, pp.195-197

6
God in Islam

is questionable.21 The instance of Kant interprets the postulate of the philosophers of this
particular school, who bluntly adhere to the so-called pure reason.
Glorious Quran has a very expressive stance on such a tendency of intellectual rebellion,
as it remarks on the denial of the incontrovertible existence and relationship between the
things in their original form and the phenomena being the death of senses i.e. becoming “deaf,
dumb, and blind.”22 The Quran employs inductive logic at this stage of debate and invites
disbelievers to look into the heavens and the earth, on the objects of nature, and to reflect on
the organized order of the universe that all witness the existence of a central governing and
binding force. The Quran’s own conclusion to this argument is that such clear signs and
warnings do not benefit those blinded in falsehood and who have sworn to mutilate the
theological truth.23 These people are like animals, for the animals see the world of being and
its logical order as clearly as man does, but are deaf and blind of what man can hear and see
i.e. deprived of self-consciousness.
“For the worst animals in the sight of Allah are those deaf and dumb people who do not use
common sense.”

(Surah Anfâl 8:22)

According to the logic of the Quran, God is Qâ’im bil-Dhât, “the Self-Existent”—the
Yahweh of the Hebrew Bible; He is Ṣamad, “the uncaused Cause, the Ultimate and the
Everlasting;” Zujâj, “the Origin of light, the shining Lamp;” Khâliq, “the Creator of both
existence and nonexistence;” Bâri, “the life-Giver,” Bâqi, “the Eternal,” Rabb-ul-‘Âlamĭn,
“the Maintainer, the Cherisher, and the Master of the universes;”24 Qâdir, “the Omnipotent
and the Omnipresent;” Ḥakĭm, “the Wisest;” ‘Alĭm, “the Omniscient;” both East and West
belong to Him, and He is the absolute Monarch over the heavens and the earth, life and death,
and order and disorder. The mention of directions in the Quran—the East and the West25—is
meant to illustrate that every quarter of the universe is under God’s direct rule and wherever
one may turn, one will find the kingdom of God.
The Quran firmly rejects the mythical ideas of Primordial Ocean, Meta Divine realm,
cosmic ocean, primeval history, God’s appearance from some other phenomenon such as

21
Kant, Immanuel, Of the Impossibility of an Ontological Proof of the Existence of God, in
Abernethy, George L., & Langford, Thomas A., Philosophy of Religion, pp.174-175
22
Sūrah Baqarah 2:18
23
Sūrah Hūd 10:101
24
Hindu sacred literature, especially the Upanishad literature, also understands the
centrality of a mighty personal force existing in one hypostasis with the power to control the
whole universe. Sacred Sanskrit literature terms it “Adhilokanātha”, the Lord of universe—
exactly what Islâm maintains as Rabb-ul-‘Âlamĭn.
25
The uppercase initials of East and West do not stand here for the geographic specification
of Eastern World and Western World; rather, it is a reference to the immeasurable expansion
of the both halves of the universe.

7
God in Islam

lotus, creation of something new out of something previously existing, and organizing an
already existing but chaotic universe etc. For the existence of God, in fact, no logic is required
in the analyses of the Quran, for He is the ultimate and the uncaused Cause of every creative
action—the Alpha and the Omega. God is indeed the ‘Principle of creation’, hence uncreated.
“Allâh is He, besides Whom there is no god, the Knower of the unseen and the seen. He is
the Compassionate, the Merciful. Allâh is He, besides Whom there is no god, the King, the
Holy, the Giver of peace, the Granter of security, the Guardian, the Almighty, the Irresistible,
the Supreme: Glory be to Allâh! He is far above the Shirk they commit (by associating other
gods with Him). He is Allâh, the Creator, the Evolver, the Modeler. His are the most beautiful
names. All that is in the heavens and the earth declares His glory, and He is the All-Mighty,
the All-Wise.”

(Sūrah Ḥashr 59:22-24)

Glorious Quran, nevertheless, does not overstep—or even slightly ignore—the logic of
cause and effect when dealing with the act of creation and considers every new creation as an
effect of some original cause. However, each cause is also an effect in itself and it is why there
is no essential being in the chain of causality.26 Of course, a chain of causes and effects cannot
originate from non-being, nor can it be infinite being independent and supreme in its own
essence. Therefore, there must be an ‘original cause’ in the bottom of the chain of causality.
It is also not necessary that the original cause must bear the same nature as does the effect.
For instance, the transformation of Divine Decree into matter is indeed such an act of
‘creating’ the phenomenon of creation itself that shows a supernatural cause in the core and
the birth of matter as its immediate natural effect. This particular phenomenon has been
eloquently addressed in Sūrah 112.
“Say: He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Absolute Cause of everything; He neither
begets nor is begotten, and there is none a match to His uniqueness.”

(Sūrah Ikhlâs 112:1-4)

The original cause in creation second to the Divine Being is called in the language of the
Quran as Qaḍâ, the “Divine Will” or “Decree”, which bears and regulates the effect in the
creation of Kun, “Logos.” Kun is the mediator, the go-between the Creator and the creation.
The Muslims identify the Logos of God as Kun, “Be”, which is manifest in the form of the
Quran, which is the mediator between God and the Mankind—intercessor to the mankind that
submits to Him and warner to the mankind that does not. Believers of Islâm feel much the
same presence of Divine halo around them when reciting or listening the Glorious Quran that
was originally felt by the Prophet Muhammad himself on the receiving of Revelation. The
Quran is, therefore, the presence of Divine Will/Decree with the mankind, especially with the
Muslim Ummah, which the Quran proclaims as the ultimate form of God’s true religion.27
This subject will be treated in detail under a different heading.

26
Musavi, Sayyid Mujtaba, trans. Ḥamid Algar, God and His Attributes, p.73
27
Sūrah Mâ’idah 5:3

8
God in Islam

Glorious Quran projects a very academic argument for those who doubt in the existence
of God, Kufâr, ‘the atheists’. The follow-up argument after contesting Atheism is put to the
Agnostics who doubt the phenomenon of Revelation and God’s control over universe. The
Quran challenges them in brevity, reflecting the wisdom and logic that stand at equal footing
with the most refined philosophies of atheism, in Sūrah 52:35-37. It calls upon them to
consider in their own creation, formation and perceivable existence. The Quran questions
whether the atheists are their own creators or they were created by no one, incidentally.
“Were they created by nothing, or were they the creators (of themselves)? Or did they
create the heavens and the earth? Rather, they are not certain. Or have they the
depositories (containing the provision) of your Lord? Or are they the controllers (of them).”

(Sūrah Ṭūr 52:35-37)

These verses employ what is the interrogative argument. It is a very logical approach
towards the absolute denial of God, which bears fruit when the atheists are posed intriguing
questions about the existence of the material universe. The Quran does not maintain a
straightforward postulate of preaching and convincing them in order to determine this class of
matter-worshippers, for any stance other than interrogative arguments would be of no use.
Nothing else will open up their reason for God. Therefore, when atheists are left with no
answer and no argument to reason, the natural outcome should be their testimony of
acknowledging God. Even if implicit acknowledgement, it brings to their ears the good news
of God.
If we take a careful look into the verses quoted above, a modern brain will be surprised to
observe that the verses contain a critical summation of almost all modern theories what
atheists resort to. In this way, the Quran beforehand comments on the incident, evolution, and
stagnation theories. Atheists actually consider themselves extremely intelligent and smart
people, who do not require God or any superior authority to judge what is good and what is
evil on their behalf. Such an attitude of absolute indifference to God makes them the gods of
their own, hence absolutely subjective. However, what these people always forget to see is
that their very faculty of reason is something external to them—neither their own nor in their
control. It has been endowed to them and they have been raised to a certain level where they
have forgotten the Creator and jumped into sheer rationalism, declaring their brain capable of
translating every mystery of the universe. Such people are termed in the Quran as uncertain
and deluded. Therefore, their failure to recognize the artistic hand of God despite possessing
sharp minds turns them into genuine fools, who, in other words, deny their own existence.
Such are the people who light fire to produce light in the darkness, but lose the light of their
own eyes and burn their hands. The Quran speaks of such people as:
“Their example is that of a man who kindled a fire; when it illuminated all around him Allâh
took away their light (their eyesight) and left them in utter darkness: they could see nothing.
Deaf, dumb, and blind, they will never return to the Right Way.”

(Sūrah Baqarah 2:17-18)

9
God in Islam

We need to understand the fact that no theory can be annulled merely on the basis that it
does not accord to our brain. Indeed we have no essential justification to adhere to one
ideology and reject the other, for this particular behavior is only the rendition of our own
weltanschauung. It is, therefore, of no practically value. The worship of matter can equally be
rejected using the same reasons as used by the materialists against the supernatural. The
universe is indubitably a natural phenomenon in the current format, but the origination of
universe can have neither natural nor logical interpretations. It is why we ultimately have to
take recourse to the phenomenon of unnatural—let us not use the term supernatural at the
present stage. Furthermore, the existence of universe itself cannot be understood as a purpose
unless we have some information about certain other phenomenon, realm, or time existing
before the space-time.
At this moment, if the theists take the initiative and question atheists on their general
worldview of annihilation. The answers will begin getting shattered very soon without leaving
a logical space to the answerer. What is the probability of such a huge, highly organized
creation, especially when it originates ex nihilo? How could a certain material phenomenon
emerge from an utter unnatural phenomenon, the nonexistence? Why does the universe
operate and where does it lead to?28 Why does exist so much complexity in our universe on
both micro and macro levels beginning from a nucleon to a nebula or vice versa? Why birth
and why death? Is it only a natural course of things? In case all this boils down to the theory
of naturalism, how can one define the phenomenon of ‘natural’ itself? After all, human beings
need n answer why they should call the natural natural? Atheists must answer these questions
to help common people overcome the frustration brought up by a God-emptied world. Making
long into short, this is not the game of arguments nor a play upon words, but a life-centric
matter of putting one’s trust in a certain worldview. For the Muslims, the Divine worldview
is the dearest one in the language of the Glorious Quran.
Glorious Quran mentions 99 beautiful names of God Almighty. These beautiful names are
the attributes of God, Ṣifât al-Rabūbiyyah, both, in character and essence.29 Of course, all of
the names, Asmâ, respectively signify a particular attribute, Ṣift. Therefore, I will deal with
both Asmâ and Ṣifât as “Attributes” of God in the rest of the book. Although the Ḥadĭth reports
a number of more attributes not described in the Quran, the Quranic attributes are taken to be
the cornerstone of Islamic metaphysics. We must be sure about the attributes that God in His
character of divinity does not require any name as a must phenomenon of His Being. Name is
only a human identity or a form of recognition, which is meant for the sake of interaction with
other human beings.
God has introduced Himself to man in 99 different ways. We can put it in a different way
that God, to the degree of human perception, can be known through these attributes, but He

28
Readers must bear in mind on this stage that ‘how does universe operate?’ and ‘why does
universe operate?’ are two entirely different questions.
29
For a copious modern study on God’s attributes, see Yaḥya, Harun, Names of Allah,
Istanbul: Global Publishing, 2004

10
God in Islam

or His essence cannot be defined through any or all of the attributive names demonstrated in
the Quran as well as in the Judo-Christian Bible. The problem of the attributes being personal
or impersonal is in no way important, for God is the originator of every creature; hence,
everything originally belongs to His person. Nevertheless, some of the attributes are
exclusively personal and unshared, while He has shared a number of His attributes with
mankind out of love. Exclusive attributes describe the Divine character as unique without
parallel, whereas the shared ones describe Divine character being present amidst the mankind
as His reflection. Unique attributes, such as Awwal, Âkhir, Wâḥid, Rabb, Ḥaqq, Khâliq,
Ṣamad, Bâqi, Bâ’eth, Qadĭm, Qadĭr, Qâ’im, Razzâq etc. are specific to God Himself,
demonstrating the absolute unity and solitude of God’s nature. Human mind can neither
approach nor perceive of these attributes per se. it is, therefore, wise to maintain that man does
not have even the least possibility to mirror such attributes that befit the eternal God alone.
On the other hand, God has gifted some of His attributes to His special creation within a
limit, so that the Divine character of good may not completely vanish from human race.
Therefore, the attributes like ‘Âdil, Raḥĭm, Jabbâr, Wadūd, Karĭm, Ṣâdiq, Shâhid, Mâlik,
Qâḍi, Wali, Wakĭl, etc. have a deep linkage with the human nature, for man reflects these
attributes of God to a certain degree. In this perspective, even the Biblical picture of man’s
creation in God’s image does not seem incorrect or irrational and hence it should be accepted
by the Muslims as another way of truth.
In my view, these attributes can be divided into two subtypes, personal attributes and
impersonal attributes. The former list of the attributes includes the personal, uncreated, and
non-shared attributes of the Divine nature, whereas the latter accounts for the impersonal and
creation-centric created attributes. They are usually referred to as the absolute attributes and
the relative attributes. The word impersonal, as used above, should not be understood in the
traditional theological sense, for what it implies here is a different phenomenon. Impersonal
presently means those attributes that were not originally the essentials of God’s nature.
Further, created means such attributes that correlate with creation, especially man, for they
were created by God to interact with the phenomena of transient nature. For instance, God
showed Himself to mankind as Raḥĭm, “the Merciful,” but had there been no creation, mercy
would have been no longer needed. Nevertheless, the personal attributes are the inseparable
constituent of God’s Being, which have been present in God’s essence for all eternity. Time
and space, creation and non-creation are meaningless for the essential characteristics of
Divinity because they need neither a correlation with creatures nor reflection in man. God is,
for example, essentially both Qadĭm and Qâ’im, which shows that God’s eternity and
existence remain unaffected in spite of the existence or nonexistence of any phenomenon
outside God’s essence.
Subḥâniyyah, “Transcendence,” is another conceptual attribute in the Quran that is
vouchsafed for God alone. Subḥân-Allâh, “God is Holy/Transcendent,” is a very frequently
asserted expression of the Quran for distinguishing God from His creatures. Most of the
Muslim theologians are obsessed with this expression, or more precisely speaking, with the
nature of Subḥâniyyah. The most recurring translation of the word under consideration is

11
God in Islam

‘transcendence;’ however, precisely speaking, this translation falls short of conveying a

satisfactory sense because it philosophically sounds more Greek-like. Plato’s God was also
transcendent i.e. remote and detached from creatures, and so was the “Unmoved Mover” of
the hierarchy of Aristotle. Thus, the deity of the two was unable to make any impact
whatsoever on the lives of ordinary mortals. 30 The God of the Old Testament Bible is also
transcendent viz. “otherworldly” or “above the mortals”, for the Hebrew attribute that occurs
in this relation is “Kaddosh” implying ‘other, above’ or ‘different’—though generally
translated as ‘Holy’.31 This biblical attribute is more compatible to the idea of Subḥân as
compared to the Greek concept of a transcendent God.
The second translation of the Arabic word in question is ‘praise,’ which is more a hymnal
word than descriptive. Indeed God is transcendental in nature but not remote or
unapproachable in a sense that He turns into a Deistic Deity, which may give birth to an
agnostic feeling in the believing folk. If God is far away on one side, He is even closer to
one’s jugular vein on the other.32 A better translation of the word in question will be ‘God is
transcendent of the whole evil thing’, while He is absolute in all good and perfect in nature.
Subḥâniyyah has a close intellectual connection with Qudrah, “the absolute ability/power of
doing anything,” derived from the root QDR. The Quran repeatedly asserts that ‘God has
power over everything’—thing includes all organic, inorganic, spiritual, and supernatural
elements. However, the attribute of Subḥâniyyah governs the attribute of Qudrah and explains
that despite having the power, God cannot do an evil act, such as lying, deceiving, sinning or
evil actions we know.
In the human perspective, Subḥâniyyah again appears to be our guide and lists a number
of human or animalistic traits that God is transcendent of. For instance, the nature of living
beings requires rest, sleep, eating, discharging, sexual coupling, bearing children, getting sick,
dying physical death and so on. But God, the Most High, is far-above these mortal traits in
His nature. He has the power to create all of such things/phenomena, and so did He when He
created life. But He is Subḥân in His Being—essentially incapable of failing in any sense and
falling into the shortcomings of mortal nature. Human beings, due to their limited vision and
understanding, cannot fully grasp the transcendental nature of God, for man knows Him only
in a limited ways.
“No vision can grasp him, while it is He Who has grasp over all visions, the Subtle, the
Aware.”

(Sūrah An‘âm 6:103)

Indeed God has the power to grasp and control all visions, for He is the one who bestows.
God being invisible to human eye is a positive need for trust and faith in the Creator. This is

30
Armstrong, Karen, A History of God, New York: Ballantine Books, 1993, pp.38-39
31
Armstrong, A History of God, p.41
32
Surah Qâf 50:16

12
God in Islam

a test of man’s ability to recognize God and put his trust in Him. Such people will eventually
be endowed with the ability to see God with their transformed visions in the Heaven.
Two of the most beautiful names of God recounted in the Quran are Raḥmân and Raḥĭm.
Rahĭm is the one who is compassionate but also strictly just in his judgment. Thus, the scholars
maintain that Raḥĭm is an attribute peculiarly employed for the Muslims—for the submitters
themselves. Raḥmân, on the other hand, is an attribute that implies ‘one who is highly
compassionate and forgiving despite mistakes.’ Commentators of the Quran, therefore, regard
this attribute pertinent to all living creatures on the earth including both classes of human
beings, the believers and the non-believers. However, these attributes contradict the Divine
character as described in two other attributes namely Jabbâr, “the Mighty, the Absolute,” and
Qahâr, “the Dominant, the Crushing.” This apparent contradiction can easily be straightened
out by comprehending the logic of judgment and a just salvation. The Quran guarantees
Salvation to those only who believe and strengthen their faith in God with good deeds. This
lack of absolute assurance of salvation to those who do not value good deeds has been
maintained due to the fact that such an act can make believers proud. Like the emphasis of
Jesus Christ on the Mosaic Law in Matthew 5:17, the Quran also emphasizes on the outer
legal requirements, such as the uprightness of individual character and discipline on the path
to God. It is well observed that the goodness of the individual character can only be maintained
when one has the fear of being judged, though the hope of mercy should not be given up for
perchance errors. Thus, God being Mighty and Dominant is at the same time the God of mercy
and love—of love being Wadūd, “the Loving.”
Furthermore, two other attributes of God are Ḥayy and Qayyūm. Ḥayy is the ever-alive,
eternal, and imperishable; the one for whom death, time, and space do not exist in any sense.
Qayyūm means the all-pervasive, ever-sustaining, and self-existing; one for Whom both
matter and non-matter, existence and non-existence are but a mere classification of His act of
creation. In fact, the brevity and beauty of the Quran’s portrayal of Deity can perfectly be
grasped from these two attributes of God. This precisely means if Quran had described no
other attribute of God, these two would have been sufficient to maintain the logic of God’s
existence and omnipotence.
Shirk is “association”—the association of gods or other supernatural beings with the Most
High. Shirk is an exact semantic opposite of Tawḥĭd, ‘the absolute unity of God.’ Shirk is a
general term of Arabic that could be used even for the association of anything with any other.
However, after the use of this term in the Quran, the term is exclusively recognized as
polytheism—the association of false gods with God, the Creator. In the Quran, Shirk is worse
than Kufr because Kâfir, the unbeliever, denies God due to his ignorance or handicapped
knowledge, whereas the Mushrik associates partners with God after believing in the existence
of the Almighty. Therefore, God will not forgive shirk at any cost, though all of the other sins
are pardonable before the grace of God.
“Surely Allâh will never forgive the one who commits the sin of shirk and may forgive anyone
else if He so pleases.”

(Sūrah Nisâ 4:116)

13
God in Islam

There is no doubt that Shirk is the only real sin in the doctrine of Glorious Quran. All other
sins are pardonable in nature; hence they will be forgiven in the result of Divine mercy.
Nevertheless, the association of partners with God will confirm one’s seat in Hell—Hell being
the eternal abode of the polytheists. Indeed the Quran’s extraordinary emphasis on the oneness
of God and prohibition of polytheism justify Islâm’s central theme that the greatest problem
of mankind has been superstition, developing always into polytheism and myths of hope and
fear. Such myths of hope and fear have always ended up creating redeemers, intercessors,
saviors, helpers, and above all gods. Ancient history witnesses the creation of numerous
stories of legends’ voluntary death for overcoming human fear of death and their subsequent
resurrection being a victory over death. In a sequel, the best example of creating hope out of
the fear of condemnation and death is the legend of the redemptive effect of Jesus’
crucifixion.33 Thus, the superstition of the early days afterwards turns into a full-fledged
religious system, though legendary in all aspects. Such an initiation and transition disturb the
whole mechanism of society and mankind suffers under different compulsions which
originally have no justification at all. Therefore, unity of God in nature and existence is viewed
by Quran as the most celebrated fact of the universe.
The Prophet of Islâm explained two kinds of Shirk—like the two kinds of Jihâd—that are
Shirk al-Akbar and Shirk al-Asghar, ‘the major and minor association.’ Indeed the major kind
of Shirk is the association of partners with God, but the minor Shirk has been pointed as “al-
Riyâ”, ‘showing off oneself’.34 Al-Riyâ is dangerous to oneself, for it is a grave sin of
disposition. Excessive exaggeration of the outer self, which one does not actually look like, is
like making oneself into a god, creating a barrier between the self and God. The Prophet
warned Ummah concerning the problem of showiness, for this divides the community instead
of bringing love in their relations.
Shirk, in all of its forms and modes, is extremely dangerous for mankind even in the
sociological sense of the study of religions. Association of partners with God is not only a
religious problem, but the duplication of society with false notions of the incarnation of the
supernaturals into the social realms of mankind, hence the birth of an absolute hierarchy. Shirk
must not exist on earth or even in the hearts of the people in any of the possibly acceptable
ways, for everything belongs to the original, single principle of creation namely, God
Almighty.

33
Asadi, Muḥammad M., Islam & Christianity: Conflict or Conciliation?, pp.58-59
34
Aḥmad and at-Tabarâni in Philips, Dr. Abu Ameenah Bilal, The Fundamentals of Tawḥeed,
London, 2004, p.43

14