Explaining the meaning of rising above the Throne and refuting the opponents, and affirming the attributes of Allah without likening Him to creation or denying the attributes

The Shaykh : Yes?

The questioner : The Throne: did it exist and does it still exist?

The Shaykh : The Throne existed.

The questioner : Was it eternal?

The Shaykh : It is not eternal, but it is among the first of the created things.

The questioner : Before the Throne?

The Shaykh : Nothing was with it, .

The questioner : How was the Throne not having one who had risen above it?

The Shaykh : There was a mistake in that, and you are reminding me now that I had intended to say: these people interpreted "istawa" (rose) to mean "istawla" (took control), and this word that I spoke of is the word of the servant, which he does not intend by nature. She said: if he was not in control, then Allah (Mighty and Majestic) before He created any created thing was in control of it. And so I said, and I placed the subject before the predicate and did not bring the predicate, I said: why did they interpret "istawa" to mean "istawla"? Their thought is that they do not confine Allah to a place. We have now affirmed that Allah, in terms of place, is as He was, and was, and nothing was with Him, so there was no place. And when He created the created things and place came into existence, He did not change (Glorified and Exalted is He), nor did He rise to this place. This is a refutation of the doubt that compelled them to interpret "istawa" to mean "istawla." But what did they gain from this interpretation? Nothing, ever. And here is the explanation: it was said to them that the verses coming in affirming the rising of the Most Merciful above His Throne are numerous, among them: Now a question was posed to them: well, before He rose above the Throne by the text of the Noble Qur'an, was He not already risen above it?

The questioner: Did the Throne exist?

The Shaykh : Yes?

The questioner: Did the Throne exist before creation?

The Shaykh : He created the heavens and the earth; the Throne existed before the heavens and the earth, meaning He created the heavens and the earth after the Throne; the Throne is older. . The important point is that there is nothing eternal except Allah (Mighty and Majestic). Do you understand how it is? And this means it is an Islamic belief, and whoever does not believe in it is a disbeliever. But there is disagreement about whether the first created thing was the Throne or the Pen. If we come to the verse: "He created the heavens and the earth in two days, then He rose above the Throne," it means that the Throne existed before the creation of the heavens and the earth. So if we assume that the creation of the heavens and the earth was created by Allah in the blink of an eye, although He said "two days" for a great wisdom, well, after the two days He rose above the Throne, meaning He took control. Do you think before the two days He was not in control? If they say He was not in control, they have attributed incapacity to Him. And how can it be conceived that Allah, the Creator of all things and the Manager of all things, is attributed with incapacity? No Muslim says this. When this question was posed to them by the Salafi scholars: how do you say "then He took control"? Have you attributed incapacity to Allah and that He was not in control of this great creation, which is the noble Throne? They say: no, we want to say that His taking control (they say) is not like the taking control of humans. So go back to the Salafi interpretation: "istawa" means "istala" (rose high), but the rising of Allah above His Throne is not like the rising of kings above their thrones. The matter is finished. And so it must be said regarding all the divine attributes. And our Lord (Mighty and Majestic) has affirmed this in more than one noble verse. He says, for example, in the surah that is equal to a third of the Qur'an: What is the meaning of "kufu" (equal)? It means similar, counterpart, and equivalent. And the other verse is likewise, or more explicit: , so the verse combines between the exalting of Allah and the affirmation of the attributes . So we say, as the Salaf and others said: Allah is Hearing, but His hearing is not like our hearing, and He is Seeing, but His sight is not like our sight, and so on. The obligation of exalting Allah is in all the verses, the verses of attributes and the hadiths of attributes. This is the methodology of the Salaf and the school of the Salaf: affirming all the attributes that Allah affirmed for Himself in His Book or that His Prophet informed us of in his Sunnah, affirming with exalting, without likening Him to creation or denying the attributes. Likening Him to creation is to say: His sight is like our sight, may He be free from that, and His hearing is like our hearing, and His speech is like our speech, and so on for the attributes. This is disbelief and is not permissible . Denying the attributes is to deny the attributes absolutely out of fear of likening Him to creation. No, when we take the divine scale in our hand , we do not fall into likening Him to creation. Despite this, you find the Mu'tazilah, in particular, and most of the other sects, in general, like the Maturidiyyah and the Asha'irah, deny many of the divine attributes, such as rising above the Throne. They say: "istawa" means "istawla" (took control). Well, "istawla" means He was not in control before . No, the taking control of Allah is not like the taking control of humans. Well, the taking control of Allah means: His rising high. So leave the verse as the Salaf interpreted it, and impose this restriction: the rising of Allah above His Throne is not like the rising of a king above his Footstool and Throne. Therefore, it came in one of the good beliefs of the Hanafis, saying:
"And the Lord of the Throne is above the Throne, but *** without the description of settling and connection."
His saying: "without the description of settling and connection" is an affirmation that Allah's elevation above His Throne is not like the elevation of a created being above his throne, because if this created being's throne were pulled from under him, he would fall on his head and would not be able to stand on his own. This is a great difference. Therefore, this noble scholar said:
"And the Lord of the Throne is above the Throne, but *** without the description of settling and connection."

The questioner : Is this a poem?

The Shaykh : Yes, this is a poem named "Badr al-Imani" (The Full Moon of Wishes): "The servant says in Badr al-Imani": a poem containing good descriptions of Allah (Mighty and Majestic).

The questioner : The Hanafis...

The Shaykh : The later Hanafis, like the Asha'irah, interpret the texts, but the earlier ones among them, and especially their Imam, are Salafi in belief. He says: "Whoever does not say that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) is in the sky has committed disbelief." Why? Because our Lord says: So what do these people who exaggerate in the Qur'an say? Meaning the angels, Allah is the Greatest. Our Lord is speaking about His Self . They gave all these attributes to the angels. So Abu Hanifa says: "Whoever does not believe that Allah is in the sky has committed disbelief," because its meaning is denying this verse, and indeed many verses and Prophetic hadiths, like the famous hadith, but people are heedless of the belief that lies under this famous hadith: , , . The intended meaning of the hadith "who is in the earth" is not the insects under the soil in layers that our eyes do not reach and our discoveries do not find, but rather: whoever is in the earth of human and animal, and do not burden them with what they cannot bear, and do not torment them, and so on, as that came detailed in many authentic hadiths. So then we understand the full hadith: meaning: He who is in the sky will have mercy on you. Then the interpreters and deniers come and interpret these texts from the verses and Prophetic hadiths contrary to their apparent meanings. Why? They say: so that we do not liken Him to creation. But you have likened Him and diminished Him, and also because you said:
"A human rose over Iraq *** without a sword or spilled blood."
This is a verse of poetry that they cited as evidence in interpreting the verse, even though, from the standpoint of Arabic literary tradition, it is not valid to interpret the texts of the Book and the Sunnah with modern poetry. Rather, Arabic poetry from the pre-Islamic age of ignorance is considered, given their authenticity in the Arabic language and the foreign influences that had seeped into it, that scholars cite even to establish linguistic terms from old pre-Islamic poetry. So, even though this poetry is not old, it is used as evidence that *istawa* means *istawla* (to take control). Nevertheless, they likened Allah (Mighty and Majestic) to humans. "A human took control of Iraq: meaning he ruled. Without a sword or spilled blood." So when they were asked how they liken Allah's *istawa* over the Throne to the *istawa* of a human over Iraq? Do you liken Allah's taking control to a human's taking control of Iraq? They would back down and say: No, we are not saying that Allah's taking control of His Throne is like a human's taking control of Iraq. So, leave the verse as it is and say, as the Salaf said, that *istawa* means *istala* (to be high above), but His being high is not like the being high of humans, and the matter ends there. This discussion is actually long, and this amount is sufficient for now to interpret this phrase: