Continuation of the answer to the previous question. "A questioner says: Peace be upon you, and Allah's mercy and blessings. Allah the Exalted says:

The Shaykh : A wicked man said to the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), when he called the people, "Is this what you have gathered us for? Woe to you!" So Allah the Exalted said: . Who is Abu Lahab?
His connection to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was strong; he was the Prophet's uncle. Yet his kinship did not benefit him from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). In fact, the Messenger called his close relatives and kept calling them by their names until he reached Fatimah and said: So kinship does not benefit a person. What benefits a person is the correct cause, which is religion. So when a person is a believer in Allah and His Messenger, he is the most deserving of Allah and His Messenger. And whoever is a disbeliever is the most hostile to them. So, the Qur'an differs in terms of what? Its topics and contents. But in terms of the Speaker, it cannot differ, because the Speaker is One, namely Allah, Exalted and Majestic. So the similarity is in perfection, quality, truth, and justice, and in everything else. But in terms of differentiation, you have understood the detail in this.
So, is the description of similarity (tashabuh) specific to some of the Qur'an or comprehensive? Answer, oh...
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : Comprehensive or specific to some of it?
The student: Comprehensive.

The Shaykh : Comprehensive. The entire Qur'an is similar (mutashabih); its parts resemble one another in perfection, quality, truth, justice, and so on.
And Allah, Glorified and Exalted, described the Qur'an as Wise and Clear (muhkam), saying: And He said: Is this comprehensive or specific?
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : Think before you answer. Comprehensive or specific?
The student: Comprehensive.

The Shaykh : Think, my son.
The student: Specific.

The Shaykh : Some students, when I am certain about them and I say "think" and they give the correct answer, then switch to a wrong answer. So I heard from some of you just now that he says: "Specific," because I told him to think. In any case, it is comprehensive. The entire Qur'an is clear (muhkam) and precise, with no flaw whatsoever. .
We come to the third verse that he cited.The questioner : .
Here, Allah the Exalted divided the Qur'an into two categories: similar (mutashabih) and clear (muhkam). So what is the clear (muhkam)? And what is the similar (mutashabih)?
Read the verses and it will become clear to you what the meaning of clear (muhkam) is. So the clear (muhkam) is that whose meaning is clear to everyone, and every person knows its meaning, and there is absolutely no possibility of confusion in it. And the similar (mutashabih) is that whose meaning is hidden from people, except for those who are firmly grounded in knowledge.
Pay attention. There is no doubt that among the verses of the Qur'an are clear (muhkam) verses that a person does not know; not everyone knows them. Only those firmly grounded in knowledge know them, and others do not. From this, deviation occurred for those whose hearts Allah has turned away, may Allah protect us from that. They began to pursue the similar (mutashabih) verses and did not benefit from the Qur'an.
As for those firmly grounded in knowledge, Allah opened up for them and they knew from the Qur'an what was hidden from others, and they became firmly grounded in knowledge. Are there examples of this? Yes, there are many examples in rulings and in news.
For example, Allah, Glorified and Exalted, said: So the people of denial (ta'til), who deny the attributes of Allah, Mighty and Majestic, and distort the verses of Allah and the hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) to meanings not intended, took from the statement "There is nothing like Him" that for every attribute by which a created being is described, it is negated from Allah. Because if it were affirmed for Allah, it would necessitate that the created being be similar to the Creator.
So they said: Allah has no Face, no Hand, and no Eye. And they said: Allah has no Mercy, no Wisdom, no descent to the lowest heaven, and no coming to judge between the servants. Because if we affirmed this, it would necessitate that He be what? Similar to the created being. And Allah says: -Pay attention, my brother- The truth became confused for these people, so they thought that affirming what Allah has affirmed for Himself, or what His Messenger or His messengers in general have affirmed for Him, was likening (tamthil), and they denied it. Some of them said: Allah is not described with any attribute. And some of them said: Allah is described with only seven attributes, and the rest are denied. They deny it by way of figurative interpretation (ta'wil), not by way of disbelief (takdhib). Because if it were denial by way of disbelief, it would be disbelief in the Qur'an, which is kufr. But denial by way of interpretation -pay attention, my brother- the seven attributes are known and collected in a verse in the creed of al-Safarini, which says:
"He has Life, Speech, and Sight, Hearing, Will, Knowledge, and Power"
Meaning Power. How many are these? Seven attributes. He says: I affirm these for Allah, and nothing else is affirmed. They said: Okay.
Do you affirm Anger for Allah? I seek refuge in Allah. Do we affirm Anger for Allah?! Allah does not get angry. This is forbidden. The one who says that Allah gets angry is one who has likened (tamthil) Allah to creation, making a likeness for Allah. In reality, His Anger is His retribution, and it is not an attribute in addition to retribution. Pay attention. These people became confused about the matter, so they thought that affirming the attributes that Allah has affirmed for Himself, or that His Messenger or His messengers have affirmed for Him, was likening (tamthil), and they denied it. But if they had reflected on the very verse they used as evidence, they would have found that it is evidence against them, not for them. Who among you is the smart one who can make the verse evidence against them, not for them?
No, he points with his hand. The one who has intelligence. They said: "There is nothing like Him" indicates that He is not described with any attribute by which a created being is described. Because Allah says: I say: If they had reflected on the verse with true reflection, they would have found that it is evidence against them, regardless of His saying: .
-Pay attention- Yes, let's see the brother. Come on.
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : We need a better answer than this.
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : By Allah, I don't know. Okay, let's have him stand up... Okay.
The student: "There is nothing like Him" means that in reality, the attributes of the Creator do not resemble the attributes of the created being.

The Shaykh : Okay, other than that. This is the third and last one. Come on, please.
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : But they used the verse as evidence: No attribute of the created being can be affirmed for the Creator. We say: This verse indicates against you. What is it for you? Be patient, my brother. Be brave. What do you say?
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : Rest, okay. O brothers, is it possible to negate similarity for something that does not exist in its origin?
The student: No.

The Shaykh : Answer. Negating similarity indicates the existence of the origin of the thing, because negating similarity for what is not established in itself is a waste of words with no benefit. Because if it is not established, no one says "nothing is similar to it" for something that is not established in its origin. It is not possible to negate similarity from it because it is what? Non-existent in the first place. So negating similarity indicates what? The establishment of the origin of the thing.
So we say: This verse indicates that He has attributes, but nothing is similar to Him. And Glorified is Allah. Any refuter, this is a rule I give you: "Any refuter who uses a correct piece of evidence, we find that this correct evidence is evidence against him, not for him". And the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) pointed to this rule in his great book, about which Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "There is nothing in existence that has a second like it". The book is called what? "The Intellect and the Transmission" or "Refuting the Conflict Between Intellect and Transmission". He said: "Any refuter who brings a correct piece of evidence from the Book and the Sunnah, it will be evidence against him, not for him". Glorified is Allah! But only the geniuses understand this. Yes, only the geniuses understand it. As he (may Allah have mercy on him) also has this useful word, he says: "I used to always say, or I always thought, that Greek logic -meaning the science of logic- is of no benefit to the dull-witted, and the intelligent do not need it. The status of this science is that it is of no use". If the dull-witted do not benefit from it because their heads spin before they know a chapter of its chapters, and the intelligent do not need it because all the premises and conclusions are already present in the mind of the sane person, what need is there for it? Yes.
So I say: The statement of Allah the Exalted: is among the ambiguous verses; some people know its meaning and some do not. The people of truth said that the meaning of is that He has great attributes, none of which is like any other attribute, just as He has a great Essence, none of which is like any other Essence. Did you understand, my brothers? Good.
In the final part of the question, it asks: Are the verses of attributes among the ambiguous verses or not?
The answer to this is: They are not among the ambiguous verses, nor are they among the clear ones. They are not ambiguous with regard to their meaning, but they are ambiguous with regard to their reality. How so? Do you know the meaning? Do you distinguish?
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : The reasons for not knowing. Are you hearing what I am saying? What did I say?
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : You are not listening. Where did your mind wander?
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : What is the benefit of the body being present if the heart is not present?
The student: Nothing.

The Shaykh : Nothing. May Allah reward you with good. Since you have admitted this, rest easy. Now, my brothers, I hope that you will be present with your hearts, because these are great meanings that benefit a person, perhaps for his entire life. We ask Allah to benefit us and you with what He has taught us.
I say: The verses of attributes are ambiguous with regard to their reality, meaning no one knows them, and not ambiguous with regard to their meaning. With regard to their meaning, their meaning is known and there is no ambiguity; their reality is not known. We give as an example the statement of Allah the Exalted: What is the Throne? The Throne is a created thing among the created things; it is impossible for us to encompass it in measure or description. It is a great Throne. It came in some hadiths that Allah is the Greatest, there is no god but Allah. Good. The ring of a shield is very small, and the desert is very vast. If you throw a shield ring into a desert, what is the ratio of this ring to the desert? Yes.
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : Nothing. He said: Allah is the Greatest. So the Throne cannot be measured except by the One who created it, Mighty and Majestic. It is a great Throne. The Lord, Mighty and Majestic, rose above it. He created the heavens and the earth, then He rose above the Throne. Pay attention. What does "rose above" (istawa) mean?
The Qur'an was revealed in a clear Arabic language. And if we examine the Arabic language from beginning to end, we find that "istawa" (rose above), when followed by the preposition "ala" (on), means elevation. Whenever you find "istawa" followed by "ala," the meaning is elevation. means I rose above it, on the ship. What does it mean? What does "you rise above their backs" mean? People, what does it mean?
The student: Above their backs.

The Shaykh : Yes, "you rise above their backs" means you are elevated on their backs. Good. "The Merciful rose above the Throne." What does it mean? It means He is elevated. This is its meaning in the language: whenever you find "istawa" followed by "ala," it is for elevation. So we know the meaning of "istawa on the Throne," which means He is elevated above it. But is it possible for you to grasp the reality of this rising and say He rose above in such a manner, with such an attribute, and in such a way, or is it not possible?
The student: It is not possible.

The Shaykh : It is not possible. If I were to say to you now: If I say that the teacher rose above the chair in the school, do you know how he rose above it?
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : No, we do not know. We know that he is elevated on the chair, but he might be sitting like this, or not? This teacher is not Allah. He might be sitting like this, right? He might be sitting like this, right? He might be sitting like this. There are multiple postures, and we do not know the manner. If we do not know how this absent human being rose above his bed, then the Creator, Exalted and Majestic is greater. It is greater that we do not know how He rose above the Throne. Is that clear, everyone, or not clear? For this reason, Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him), the Imam of the City of Migration, was asked about this issue. A man said: "O Abu 'Abdullah,

The Most Merciful [who is] above the Throne established.

الرحمان على العرش استوى

[Taha 20:5]

how did He rise above?" Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) was not like you and me, or the second or third person. He lowered his head like this, yes, and he dropped a little, saying like this. He lowered his head and stood sweating profusely, drenched in sweat, because of the greatness of what came to his heart. Because it is a great question regarding the Lord, Mighty and Majestic, and the Lord must be respected and magnified, and one should not ask about what He has made ambiguous in His Book. We are human beings, and we have only what we have been taught. Then he raised his head, and Allah opened for him with these strange words that deserve to be written with the ink of light and the ink of gold. He said to him: "The rising is known, the manner is unknown, belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is an innovation." This is how most of those who transmit from him report it. And what came in the chain of narration is that he said: "The rising is not unknown, the manner is not conceivable, belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is an innovation." The scholars transmit the first two sentences in terms of meaning, and the matter is broad in this. The important thing is his statement: "The rising is known." Known, what? The meaning is known, meaning it is known in the Arabic language: "istawa on such a thing" means He is elevated above it. "And the manner is not conceivable." This means we do not comprehend it, and it has not come through hearing, so we must refrain from it. We do not know how He rose above His Throne. "And belief in it is obligatory." Belief in it is obligatory, why? Because it came in the Book of Allah, Mighty and Majestic, so it is obligatory for us to believe in it. "And asking about it is an innovation." Asking about it is an innovation. How is asking about it an innovation? One asks how Allah rose above the Throne? Do we say this person is an innovator? We say: Asking is an innovation. The questioner might not be an innovator. The questioner might be a man with a sound heart who asks, thinking that this is a good question. But we say: "Asking about it is an innovation." Then he said: "I do not see you as anything but an innovator." The words of the scholars, glory to Allah the Greatest, are precise. He affirmed that the question is an innovation. He did not say "I do not see asking about it as anything but an innovation," but he said: "Asking about it is an innovation." But what did the man who asked say? "I do not see you" means "I do not think you are anything but an innovator," because he might be a true innovator, or he might be ignorant and think that this question is permissible.
In any case, a statement may be described as an innovation without the speaker being described as an innovator, just as a statement may be described as disbelief without the speaker being described as a disbeliever. This is an issue that we should discuss in a general session, meaning broader than this, because some people have come to be ignorant of this issue. So when the texts come that this is disbelief, they declare every one who is characterized by it a disbeliever, even if the conditions of disbelief do not apply to him.
And this is a great trial. The fitnah did not occur in this Ummah except through this confusion: that what the Lawgiver declared to be disbelief, some people, when anyone is characterized by it, say this person is a disbeliever. And this is not correct. What do you say about a man who said about Allah that He is His slave and the created being is his Lord? Is it disbelief or Islam?
The student: Disbelief.

The Shaykh : Meaning he says to Allah: You are my slave and I am your Lord. Is the statement disbelief or Islam?
The student: Disbelief.

The Shaykh : Disbelief. There is no doubt that it is disbelief. But even so, it was not disbelief when the joyful man said it, who erred out of extreme joy. This joyful man lost his camel in a desert. What does "lost it" mean? He lost it, and his food and drink were on it. He searched for it and did not find it, and he despaired of it. He lay down under a tree waiting for death. That was it, there was no food or drink. Then he found the camel's bridle hanging from the tree. What was his joy? Light or intense?
Very intense. So he took the bridle of the camel and said: "O Allah, You are my slave and I am your Lord." The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: .
So Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "Asking about it is an innovation." This came without being asked for, and praise be to Allah.
He came saying: "I do not see you as anything but an innovator." And in his statement: "Asking about it is an innovation," he affirmed that it is an innovation. Then he said to him: "Go out." He ordered him to go out, and he left the mosque. So what Allah described Himself with is ambiguous from one aspect and not ambiguous from another aspect. Do you understand, everyone? From which of the two aspects is it not ambiguous?
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : From the aspect of meaning, it is not ambiguous; it is known. And it is not possible that Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) or His Messenger would address the Ummah with something whose meaning they do not know at all, because Allah the Exalted says: and He says: .
He (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "Asking about it is an innovation." Why was asking about it an innovation?
For two reasons:
The first reason: The Companions, who were more eager than we are to know the attributes of Allah, did not ask about it. Not one of the Companions said: "O Messenger of Allah, what is the meaning of the rising of Allah? How did He rise above the Throne?" Never.
And whoever introduces into the religion of Allah what is not part of it is an innovator.
The second point: The second aspect is that asking about the manner of *istiwa'* (rising above the Throne) is the habit of the people of innovation, because the people of innovation ask those who affirm the attributes about the manner in order to put them in a difficult position. However, praise be to Allah, they will not succeed in putting them in a difficult position. Furthermore, asking about the manner of *istiwa'* is an excessive strictness in the religion of Allah. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: What is the matter with you, asking about the manner of Allah's rising above the Throne? Do not ask, as long as the Companions did not ask. Let what sufficed them suffice you.
If someone were to say: What do you say if we took a path of safety, which is the path of *tafwid* (delegation)? The path of *tafwid* means that if we were asked what is the meaning of , we would say: By Allah, I do not know. I delegate the matter, and I do not speak about the meaning or the manner. If someone were to say: I want to take this path, is this correct?
O my brothers, the question says: A man says: I read the saying of Allah the Exalted: and I do not say *istiwa'* means He rose, nor do I say *istiwa'* means He took possession, nor do I say anything at all. I remain silent and say: Allah knows best, and leave me to submit. Is this correct? Yes. Or is it not correct?
The student: It is not correct.

The Shaykh : It seems to me that you are being decisive.
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : It is not correct. Yes, it is not correct. In reality, the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah says in his book *Al-Aql wa al-Naql* (Reason and Revelation): "The statement of the people of *tafwid* is among the worst of the statements of the people of innovation and deviation" . Glory be to Allah, among the worst of the statements of the people of innovation and deviation. Because he says: He is He. This opens the door for the philosophers and the deviants, because the philosophers and deviants said: We know that the Qur'an intends such and such, and intends such and such, and intends such and such, and they interpreted it according to their desires. The thing that has a meaning is better than the thing that has no meaning. And you, O people of *tafwid*, are ignorant, and you cannot refute us because you do not know what you are saying.
And the strange thing, O my brothers, is that the people of *tafwid* say: The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) speaks words while he does not know what they mean. What does that mean? I seek refuge in Allah. They say: The Messenger said about his Lord: . And he says: The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) does not know the meaning of "descends" and does not know the meaning of "says." Glory be to Allah! The Messenger speaks words he does not know the meaning of? Who dares to say this? But the people of *tafwid* say this.
And I would like to draw your attention to an important meaning found in some books. Some say: The people of the Sunnah are two groups: those who interpret figuratively (*mujawwid*) and those who delegate (*mufawwid*). This is an error. Rather, the people of the Sunnah are one group: those who affirm the attributes. They are not those who delegate, nor those who interpret figuratively. But they are those who affirm for Allah what He affirmed for Himself, or what His Messenger affirmed for Him, without distortion, without denial of the divine attributes, without asking how an attribute is, and without likening Allah to creation.
And I advise those present to read *Al-'Aqidah al-Wasitiyyah* (The Middle Creed) by the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah and its commentaries, and to also read the books of the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah and his student Ibn al-Qayyim, because in them is an explanation of the truth in this great chapter, which is part of the creed and its foundation, that I have not found in other books.
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : And *Al-Tamimiyyah* and its abridgment, and what is similar to that.