Continuation of the explanation of the author's (may Allah have mercy on him) statement: "And we believe that He"

The Shaykh : The general rising, the mention of the specific rising, the mention of the specific rising. The general rising is among the essential attributes by which Allah has always been and will continue to be described. The specific rising is the rising above the Throne. This specific rising, the rising above the Throne, its evidence is His statement: "And we believe that He

who created the heavens and earth in six days and then established Himself above the Throne

خلق السماوات والأرض في ستة أيام ثم استوى على العرش يدبر الأمر

[Al-A'raf 7:54]

" The first of which is al-Ahad and the last is Atma.
The student: ...

The Shaykh : Friday, and these are the known days.
If someone were to ask, how can these be the known days, and these known days are arranged according to the sun, and when the heavens and the earth were created there was no sun? We say that it is by estimation, because Allah created the earth in two days prior to the creation of the heavens, and there was no sun in these two days. It is said that this is by estimation, meaning by the measure of a day, and a day, and a day, and a day, and a day, and a day, six days. Meaning, after the creation of the heavens and the earth, He rose above the Throne. Was He above the Throne before that or not? If we say no, we err, and if we say yes, we err, because Allah informed us that He rose above the Throne after the creation of the heavens and the earth, and He was silent about what came before that. So it is obligatory for us to be silent. It is obligatory for us to be silent. If it is asked, did Allah rise above the Throne? Was Allah above the Throne before the creation of the heavens and the earth? The answer is: Allah knows best. But after their creation, He rose above it. As for before their creation, Allah knows best.
And His statement meaning He rose above it. And know that comes in the Arabic language in four forms. The first form is absolute, the second is restricted by "ala" (upon), the third is restricted by "ila" (to), and the fourth is accompanied by the conjunction "wa" (and). This is in four forms: the first is absolute, the second is restricted by "ala", the third is restricted by "ila", and the fourth is accompanied by "wa". If it comes absolute, its meaning is perfection. Among this is His statement: meaning he is perfect in his creation and his intellect. The one restricted by "ala" means rising above. Among this is His statement: meaning I rose above, and His statement: meaning you rose above him. The third is restricted by "ila", by "ila".
The student: ...

The Shaykh : The third.
The student: By "ila".

The Shaykh : By "ila", so it means intention. Among this is His statement: according to one of the opinions.
And the fourth is that it is accompanied by the conjunction "wa", so it means equality, like their saying: "The water and the log became level" "and the log" "The water and the log became level". The grammarians mentioned this in illustrating the meaning of the conjunction "wa" of accompaniment. "The water and the log became level" means the water and the log became equal. The log is at the top of the well. So these are four forms in which "istawa" (became level/rose) occurs. "Istawa" did not occur with "ala" meaning anything other than rising above. However, it was reported from the Salaf that some of them expressed it by saying: He rose, and "rose" means He rose above. Some of them said: He ascended upon it, and "ascended" means ascended upon a thing, meaning He rose above it. So these are three words with one meaning. Some of them said: He rose above such-and-such, He settled. meaning you settled. So these are four terms, all of which were reported from the Salaf in explaining His statement: . Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned this in his poem "al-Nuniyyah" and said that it was reported from the Salaf. But the clear, apparent meaning is that it means "He rose above." Settling is something else, something added to the rising. If we were to limit it to meaning "He rose above," that would be good. And if we say "He rose above and settled," there is no harm, if Allah wills. Good.
says: "And His rising above the Throne is His rising above it with His Essence, a specific rising befitting His Majesty and His Greatness, of which no one knows its modality except He"
A specific rising, a specific rising. Because we have two risings, a general and a specific. The general is Allah's rising above everything, the heavens, the earth, the mountains, the human being, and others. Verses of rising, as mentioned before, indicate this. "A specific rising" is His rising above the Throne, which is His rising above it. This becomes clear to you by example. For instance, a person is on a chair in the row. There is a general rising and a specific rising. His being on the chair is specific to what?
The student: To the chair.

The Shaykh : To the chair. And his being above the entire house is general. This is general. Allah's (Mighty and Majestic) rising above all creatures is general, and His rising above the Throne is specific. Therefore, it is not permissible for us to say that Allah rose above the sky, nor that He rose above the creatures. Rather, we say He rose above what?
The student: Above the Throne.

The Shaykh : Above the Throne specifically. And for this reason, it was restricted by his statement: "A specific rising". Then, do we know its modality?
The student: No.

The Shaykh : Yes
The student: No.

The Shaykh : How? No, we do not know its modality. Why? Because this is among the matters of the unseen. Allah informed us about it but did not inform us about its modality. So it is obligatory for us to stop at what has been reported and not go beyond it. Repeat the reasoning. Yes, that is right.
The student: That Allah (Mighty and Majestic) informed us that He rose above, but did not inform us about...

The Shaykh : Yes, and it is among the matters of the unseen, so it is obligatory for us to stop at what has been reported. For this reason, when Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked: "O Abu 'Abd Allah,

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

الرحمن على العرش استوى

[Taha 20:5]

how did He rise above?" What happened to Malik?
The student: He became angry.

The Shaykh : The narration says that he lowered his head in shame and embarrassment, and he stood sweating profusely from the intensity of what came to his heart regarding "how did He rise above?" So Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) made him speak these words that the scholars transmitted and approved, and they made them the foundation for the rest of the attributes. He said: "O this one, the rising is not conceivable, and the modality is not" "the rising is not known". I seek forgiveness from Allah, repeat... "The rising is not unknown, and the modality is not conceivable, and belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is an innovation" "The rising is not unknown, and the modality is not conceivable, and belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is an innovation. I do not think you are anything but an innovator" meaning I do not suppose you, or "I do not think you" meaning I do not know you, to be anything but an innovator. Then he was ordered to be taken out of the mosque because he asked about the modality of the rising. We return to these words and say: This transmission was reported "with the wording: The rising is known, and the modality is unknown, and belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is an innovation". And this is a transmission of the text by meaning. Otherwise, the transmitted text with the chain is: "The rising is not unknown". And the meaning is that it is known. In the Arabic language, what does "istawa" (became level/rose) above such-and-such mean?
The student: He rose above.

The Shaykh : He rose above it. "The modality is not conceivable" means the intellect does not grasp it. So if the intellect does not grasp it, its reference is to hearing. And if hearing does not report it, the intellect obliges suspension. Clear, meaning, however much we want to imagine how He rose above, we can never do so. And if it were said to you that so-and-so is on his bed in his house right now, can you imagine its modality? Yes, you cannot, you are unable. You say, "By Allah, he is leaning and lying like this," yes, or lying like that. Can you or cannot you? This is a human being on earth. How about the Creator (Mighty and Majestic)? Can anyone describe the modality of His rising above His Throne? By Allah, whoever claims that is a liar, a slanderer against the unseen. "And belief in it is obligatory" "in it" meaning in the rising, in the rising above it, that it is not unknown and that it is the rising. "And asking about it is an innovation" meaning about the rising, and the intended meaning is about its modality. It is an innovation. Why was it an innovation? For two reasons. The first reason is that asking about it is a religious question, a question about creed. And that was not reported from the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them). None of them asked the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) about the modality of the rising, despite their intense eagerness for what concerns their Lord (Mighty and Majestic), and despite the presence of the one who would certainly answer, who is from...
The student: The Messenger.

The Shaykh : The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). So if the cause is present and the preventer is absent, the existence of the thing is necessitated. But they did not ask about it. They did not say, "O Messenger of Allah, how did He rise above?" And that was due to their etiquette with Allah and His Messenger, and their knowledge that this is a matter that cannot be reached. And such objections did not come except from the later generations, the deviating ones. Yes. So based on this, we say that asking about it is an innovation because this action...
The student: Was not reported...

The Shaykh : Was not reported from the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), despite the strength of the incentive and the absence of the preventer. Good. Belief in it is obligatory because it came in the Book and the Sunnah. And what came in the Book and the Sunnah from the news of Allah and His Messenger, belief in it is obligatory.
The second aspect of it being a religious innovation is that asking about it is a characteristic of the people of innovation. They are the ones who ask: How did He rise above the Throne? How does He descend? How does He come? How is His hand? How is His face? And so on. No one asks about the manner (kayfiyyah) unless he is an innovator. Do we say the same about all the attributes?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : Yes, we say the same about all the attributes. We say regarding the descent to the lowest heaven: How does He descend?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : We say the descent is known, and the manner
The student: is unknown.

The Shaykh : is unknown, and belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is a religious innovation. Regarding the face of Allah, we say: This face is known, and the manner is unknown, and belief in it is obligatory, and asking about it is a religious innovation. This is, in reality, a great principle that Allah the Exalted inspired to Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him), and it became a guiding light for people to follow.
Then he said: "And we believe that He the Exalted is with His creation, and He is above His Throne". Now, what do the people of innovation say about rising above the Throne (istiwa')? They say istawa means he dominated and ruled, and this is a conceptual attribute, not a perceptible attribute. So they say: meaning he ruled it and dominated it. And there is no doubt that the refutation of them is that their statement is invalid.
First, the aspect of invalidity, and I will tell you this so that you can build upon it the rest of what concerns the attributes. First, this is contrary to the apparent meaning of the word. What is contrary to the apparent meaning is not permissible to revert to it except with evidence, especially in matters that require negation. Be careful: contrary to the apparent meaning of the word, and what is contrary to the apparent meaning, what is it? It is not permissible to deviate from it.
The student: from it.

The Shaykh : No, what is the apparent meaning of the word, it is not permissible to deviate from it. Yes, except with evidence, except with evidence. So what contradicts the word, what contradicts the apparent meaning of the word, it is not permissible to deviate from it. And what is the apparent meaning of the word, it is not permissible to deviate from it. The difference is only in expression, and the meaning is the same, except with evidence. Especially in purely unseen matters. In rational matters, a person might sometimes divert the word from its apparent meaning due to a rational indication. But in matters of revelation that are not perceived except by hearing, it is absolutely not permissible to contradict their apparent meaning.
The second aspect is that it is contrary to the consensus of the Salaf. No one from the Salaf said: meaning he ruled it or dominated it, absolutely.
Third, it entails false implications. The first false implication is that the Throne would be owned by someone other than Allah, and then He would own it by force. The basis for this implication is that he said: which implies sequence, and that this domination did not occur except after the creation of the heavens and the earth. And it is known that the Throne was owned by Allah before
The student: ...

The Shaykh : before the creation of the heavens and the earth. Yes.
And among the false implications is that if we say istawa means dominated, it would be permissible for us to say that Allah istawa upon the earth. Why?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : Because He dominates it. And no scholar among the scholars of the Ummah says that it is permissible to say that Allah istawa upon the earth, ever. Now, we have these two false implications remaining. We have something else: evidence. But I mentioned it now, which is that this is contrary to the Arabic language. We said it is contrary to the apparent meaning of the word, and also contrary to the Arabic language. Did istawa ever come in the Arabic language to mean dominated? Go back to all the dictionaries and you will find that istawa was not used to mean dominated. We say this, but some have claimed that istawa means dominated in the Arabic language, and they cited as evidence the saying of a poet:
"Bishr has taken possession of Iraq *** without a sword or spilled blood"
"Bishr has taken possession of Iraq *** without a sword or spilled blood"
Mahrak said: Here istawa means
The student: dominated.

The Shaykh : dominated, because it is not possible to dominate Iraq by rising above it. So what is our answer to this? Our answer to this
First, the author of this verse is not known. And if the narrator of a Prophetic hadith is unknown, it is not accepted,
The student: ...

The Shaykh : then this is even more so. The author of this verse is not known. If we accepted every fabricated verse as a witness to the Arabic language and a judge over it, then everyone would be able to compose whatever verses they wish and say this is its meaning, citing the eloquent Arab poet... who brings to us from his side verses that are all nonsense.
Second, even if we assume the author is known, when did he say it? Has the Arabic language not changed since the spread of the conquests?
The student : Yes

The Shaykh : Yes, indeed. It is possible that this is from after the language changed.
Third, even if we assume the author is known and that it was before the language changed, we say that istawa here means rose in a conceptual sense. He rose in a conceptual sense, because the upper hand became his in this Iraq. The upper hand became his in it. So istawa here means
The student: rose.

The Shaykh : What is the rising? A conceptual rising. If this is accepted, it is clear. And if it is not accepted and it is said: No, istawa does not come to mean conceptual rising, we say that istawa here means dominated due to the presence of a barrier to physical rising, so it is interpreted as domination. And by this, it is known that there is no evidence for those who interpreted the istawa of Allah upon His Throne as His domination over it. Be careful, O brothers, be careful. These are matters of refutation and a slippery slope. A person must follow what the Salaf followed in them, which is taking the
The student: ...

The Shaykh : the apparent meaning. The apparent meaning of the word, with the knowledge that this apparent meaning cannot be interpreted as likening Allah to creation, due to His saying: And it cannot be defined in terms of manner, due to His saying: So take the apparent meaning of the texts and beware of likening (tamthil) and what else? And defining the manner (takyif). Take the apparent meaning. This is not sufficient for me, but beware of likening and beware of defining the manner. As for likening, it is due to His saying: and His saying: and His saying: And the verses on this are many.
And as for defining the manner, it is due to His saying: to His saying: and His saying: Build your creed upon this and take the apparent meaning of everything. Take the apparent meaning.
So if someone says: Has not Allah the Exalted said: What do we say? Yes, He said this. But did Allah remain silent? No, He clarified. He said: Allah clarified what He intended. If Allah intends something contrary to the apparent meaning, He must clarify it, or His Messenger. If Allah and His Messenger do not clarify it, it is known that the apparent meaning is intended. May Allah guide you and me to what He loves. Yes.