Continuation of the explanation of the author's statement: "Chapter Eleven: On Presence. Allah has affirmed for Himself in His Book"

The Shaykh : Preserving the wording is preferable. That is why he did not say "Allah affirmed for Himself a presence with His creation," but rather said "Allah affirmed for Himself that He is with His creation," as it came in the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Among the proofs from the Book is His saying: "Wherever" is an adverb of place, meaning in whatever place you are. It is paired with "wherever" to convey generality, meaning in any place. It is possible to express it by saying "wherever you are," but he said "wherever you are," as in His saying: He the Exalted says: To whom does this pronoun refer? It refers to Allah. "With you" is the predicate. So Allah informed about Himself that He is with His creation. And when that is the case, how do we understand this verse? Do we understand this presence as the presence of a man with his brother, meaning you are now with me and I am with you, and we are in one place? No, we do not understand it that way. Why? For two reasons: First, there is in the Book and the Sunnah what prevents that, namely what Allah affirmed for Himself, that He is above His Throne. Whoever is above His Throne cannot be on the earth.
Second, the presence of the Creator with the created is not like the presence of the created with the created. Yes, just as the other attributes of Allah the Exalted are in the manner befitting Him, this attribute is of the same category. This attribute is like all the other attributes, they are all of one category. What Allah has attributed to Himself is in accordance with what befits Him, (Glorified and Exalted is He).
Third, we say that even with regard to the created with the created, presence does not necessarily imply sharing the same place. Does it imply sharing the same place? No. This principle directs the soldiers: he says "Go to such and such a place, and I am with you," while he is sitting in the command room. Is that not so? And it is said, for example, that the believer is with his believing brothers, even if they are far apart in different lands. Even the child, as Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah exemplified, says: "The child cries, and his father says to him, 'Go, go to such and such a place, I am with you'", and he is with him, or is he in the house? He is in the house. So when this is clarified, the presence here is a real presence and does not necessarily imply sharing the same place; it is impossible. Know that when a person says "it does not necessarily imply" in this and other cases, it is not like saying "it does not entail" or "it does not necessitate"? The difference between them is that "necessarily implies" (istilzam) means that this is obligatory, and "does not entail" (la taqtadi) means that it is possible for that to be the case. So there is a difference between "does not necessarily imply" and "does not entail." Because if you say "it does not entail," that is prohibited. If I said to you, for example, "presence does not entail sharing the same place," is that correct? No, it is incorrect. If you say "presence is not the presence of Allah," meaning we intended which presence? "Presence does not entail sharing the same place," what do you say? It is incorrect, because it may entail it, because it may entail it. But if you say "presence does not necessarily imply sharing the same place"? That is correct; it does not necessarily imply it, but it may entail it. So this is a difference we must know between the terms, between entailment and necessary implication. Yes.
And he said: "And Allah is with the believers, and Allah is with the believers". The difference between this and the one before it is that the one before it is more general, and this one is more specific. He said: "With the believers". This presence is not like the first one. The first one refers to the presence of encompassing, knowledge, power, and dominion. But this presence adds to the implication of the previous presence. This entails, in addition to encompassing, victory and support.
As for the third example or the third proof: This is more specific than the one before it. The author began with it in order. "Indeed, I am with you." To whom is the address? To Musa and Harun. This is more specific than being with the believers, because it is restricted to whom? To a person, a person who deserves that Allah be with him. And this presence is like the presence of the believers; it entails, in addition to encompassing, what? Victory and support. For this reason, when Musa (peace be upon him) said about Pharaoh: , Allah the Exalted said: . And when Abu Bakr said to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): , this presence is more specific than the first presence because it is particular, as it is restricted to specific persons. Yes.