How do we respond to those who deny the attribute of seeing Allah the Exalted?

The questioner : Yes. May Allah bless you. The one who denies the attribute of seeing Allah the Exalted argued with the saying of Allah to Musa: "You will not see Me," and said that this is a negation. He also argued with the saying of Allah the Exalted: "Sight cannot comprehend Him." How do we respond to him?

The Shaykh : Well, as for his argument with "You will not see Me," he has no proof, because its meaning is that you will not be able to see Me now. For this reason, He said, "Look at the mountain." He gave him a sign. And Musa's request to see Him indicates that it is possible, because if it were impossible, it would not be befitting for Allah. Are these people more knowledgeable about what is befitting for Allah or not befitting than Musa? It is not possible. As for his saying "Sight cannot comprehend Him," it contains proof for the establishment of seeing, not its negation. That is because comprehension is more specific than seeing in general, and negating the more specific indicates the establishment of the more general. If the more general were not established, it would be necessary to negate the more general. If the more general were negated, the more specific would be included in it. If we said "He is not seen," it would include that He is not left unseen. If "Sight cannot comprehend Him" were the intended meaning, He would have said "He is not seen" or "Sight does not see Him." He did not say "Sight does not see Him" but rather "Sight does not comprehend Him." It is known that sight sees Him, but it does not comprehend Him. So in these two verses is a refutation of them, the people of falsehood. This supports a statement by the Shaykh al-Islam that I saw, which was good, in the beginning of *Dar' Ta'arud al-'Aql wa al-Naql*. He said: "No person who holds a bid'ah (religious innovation) or falsehood argues with a correct verse or hadith except that this evidence is evidence against him, not for him." Yes, because if he argues with it for his falsehood, it carries a trace of this issue. And it is known that it cannot indicate falsehood.