Allah the Exalted said: << قل سيروا في الأرض فانظروا كيف بدأ الخلق ثم الله ينشئ النشأة الأخرة إن الله على كل شيئ قدير >

[Surah al-'Ankabut :20] The first instance came in the verbal form, and here it came in the nominal form to indicate the establishment and certainty of this matter. And His saying: Here, "Allah" is a proper name for the Creator (Exalted and Majestic is He), and its original form is "al-Ilah" (the God), from which the hamzah was dropped for ease of pronunciation due to its frequent use, just as it was dropped from "al-nas" (people). Does "al-Ilah" mean the one worshipped rightfully, or not rightfully, or both? "Al-Ilah" means the one worshipped, whether rightfully or not. Consequently, "Allah" here is the one worshipped rightfully, as evidenced by His saying: meaning there is no rightfully worshipped deity except Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He). Is that clear, everyone? So we say: "Allah" is a proper name for the Creator (Exalted and Majestic is He), and its original form is "al-Ilah," meaning the one worshipped. The original meaning of "al-Ilah" is the one worshipped, whether rightfully or falsely. However, when you say "La ilaha illa Allah" (There is no deity but Allah), the meaning is "There is no true deity," meaning there is no deity that is true except Allah (Mighty and Majestic). He says, "prolonged and shortened with the shīn in a state of sukūn." "Prolonged—how do I pronounce it?
The student: al-Nash'ah.

The Shaykh :

the final creation

النَّشَاءَةَ الآخِرة

and shortened with the shīn in a state of sukūn.

the creation

النَّشْأَةَ

Then Allah will produce the final creation

ثُمَّ اللَّهُ يُنشِئُ النَّشْأَةَ الآخِرَةَ

[Al-'Ankabut 29:20]

And His saying

He creates the creation

يُنشِئُ النَّشْأَةَ

can be interpreted as a verbal noun, just as you say "he strikes the blow," or it can be interpreted as a passive participle, meaning He creates the created thing of the Hereafter. The meaning is the same: that Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) creates the creation a second time. If someone asks: How do we call it "creation" (nash'ah) when it is a re-creation? We say: The answer to that is that this re-creation differs greatly from the previous one. So, in relation to it, it is a creation, because the life of the Hereafter is not like the life of this world. The life of the Hereafter is eternal life, and the life of this world is a life of perishing. Therefore, you find it incomplete; the human being is created from weakness to strength to weakness. As for the re-creation, he is created for eternity. Therefore, it is called a creation, even though it is a re-creation, because of the difference between the two states. Look at the fetus in the womb of its mother. Allah the Exalted said about it, after mentioning its stages:

then We developed him into another creation

ثُمَّ أَنشَأْنَاهُ خَلْقًا آخَرَ

[Surah al-Mu'minun :14] Is it creation or development? It is development, but because the final development, in which the spirit is breathed into it, differs from the first, in the first stage, while in the womb of its mother, it is inanimate, then the spirit is breathed into it, so it becomes a new creation different from the first. So it is called a creation, even though it is a development from one state to another.

Indeed, Allah is over all things competent

إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ

[Surah al-'Ankabut :20] And from it are the beginning and the re-creation. " This sentence is an explanation of what preceded regarding His beginning the creation and then re-creating it, because Allah is Able over all things. Ability is an attribute by which the doer is enabled to perform the action without incapacity. Is it strength or something else? It is other than strength. Strength is opposed by weakness, and this is opposed by incapacity. Is that clear? This is shown by an example: For instance, I carried this book, but with difficulty. How am I described? Able, but not strong. Another person wanted to carry this book and was unable to do so; this one is incapable. And the third took it as if it were a feather in his hand; this one is able and strong. So it is clear from this that ability is not strength. Also, ability is attributed to one who has consciousness and is not attributed to one who does not. Do you say to iron that it is able? No. Strength is attributed to one who has consciousness and to one who does not; you say to iron that it is strong, and you say to a human that he is strong. Yes, and Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) is described with ability and described with strength. [Surah al-Dhariyat :58] Okay. Is it general with a specific exception, or not? This is general in what is specified by something. The author of al-Jalalayn, who is al-Suyuti, said: "And the intellect specified itself, so He is not able over it." "The intellect specified itself" means the essence of Allah, so He is not able over it. He said this in Surah al-Ma'idah: [Surah al-Ma'idah :120] He said that the intellect specifies this generality. And we say: The only intellect that specifies this generality is the corrupt intellect that sees the impossibility of voluntary actions being attributed to Allah (Mighty and Majestic). As for the correct, sound intellect, it sees that Allah does what He wills: He descends, He rises above the Throne, yes, He rises to the sky, He laughs, He is amazed, and other voluntary actions that befit His Majesty (Glorified and Exalted is He). So His saying "The intellect specified itself, so He is not able over it" is a great error. If He is not able over Himself, how can He be able over others? This is one of the greatest impossibilities and one of the greatest errors. But if someone says: Perhaps the author means that He is not able to annihilate Himself, for example, or to create something similar to Him. We say: This is not what ability relates to at all. Ability does not relate at all to the absolutely impossible thing, so it is not included in the generality from the start, and it is not excluded from it here. There is a phrase that some people say: "He is Able over what He wills." What do you think of this expression? This expression is an error, because Allah the Exalted says: Every thing, He is Able over what He wills and what He does not will. Even what He does not will, He is Able over it; if He willed it, He would have done it. Yes, it is not only over what He wills. Then, this phrase "Able over what He wills" contradicts what came in the Qur'an. The Qur'an says: Then, some scholars say that this phrase implies the doctrine of the Mu'tazilah, who say that the human being is independent in his action. They said that if the human being is independent in his action, there is no involvement of the will of Allah in it, which means that Allah is incapable regarding the action of the human being. This is dangerous, as is well known. So what should be said is that He is Able over all things absolutely. If someone asks: Does this not contradict us regarding His saying: [Surah al-Shura :29] We say: The will here refers to what? To the gathering or to the ability? To the gathering, not to the ability. The meaning is that if He wills to gather them, He gathers them without incapacity (Glorified and Exalted is He), so it does not contradict what we said. They say that Shaytan gathered his soldiers, or they gathered to him, and they said to him: You rejoice at the death of the scholar, but you do not rejoice at the death of the worshipper. He said: Yes, when the worshipper dies, it does not matter; he dies for himself. But when the scholar dies, he dies for a people, and if he remains, he corrupts matters for us. The scholars intended here are the true scholars who work and call to Allah. He said: Now, I and you, let us go to a scholar. I and you will go to a scholar we will ask, and to a worshipper. They say that they went to the worshipper and said to him: Can Allah create something like Himself? He said: Yes, He can create something like Himself. Can Allah create something like Himself? What is the evidence? He said: Because Allah is Able over all things. What happened to this man? He became a disbeliever. Any person who holds this belief is a disbeliever, and it is also incorrect, no matter what. Even if it were not from the difference, the difference is very great. But if it were only that this deity—if it were decreed—was created, and the true deity is not created. And they came to the scholar and said to him: Can Allah put even the heavens and the earth in one egg? He said: His command, when He wills a thing, is only that He says to it "Be," and it is. If He willed that, He would have done it... Even though the latter may be considered more blameworthy according to what appears to people than the former. And the result is that we say: If a person reads His saying: it is not permissible for him to conceive an exception to anything from this generality, but he should hold to its generality without detail. Yes.