Explanation of the author's statement: "And His saying: (May Allah be pleased with them and they with Him)"

The Shaykh : Then the author (may Allah have mercy on him) said: These are the verses of pleasure. Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, is described with pleasure. He is pleased with the deed and He is pleased with the doer. That is to say, the pleasure of Allah, Mighty and Majestic, is connected to the deed and to the doer. As for the deed, it is like His saying, the Exalted: meaning He is pleased with your gratitude. And as in His saying, the Exalted: , and as in the authentic hadith: What is this pleasure connected to? It is connected to the deed. And pleasure is also connected to the doer, like this verse which the author cited:
Now, the pleasure of Allah with them is an attribute established for Allah, Mighty and Majestic. It is in His essence and is not something separate from Him, as the people of ta'til (denial of the divine attributes) claim. It is something in His essence, Blessed and Exalted is He.
If someone were to say to you: "Explain to me the meaning of pleasure," you would not be able to explain it, because pleasure is an innate attribute in humans, and innate attributes cannot be explained by anyone more clearly or more explicitly than by their own term. As we said, "Explain love," you cannot, you are not able to. So we say: Pleasure is an attribute of Allah, Mighty and Majestic. It is an attribute of Allah that is connected to the deed and connected to the doer. It is a real attribute connected to His will, so it is among the attributes of action. He is pleased with the believers, with the righteous, with the obedient, and with the grateful. And He is not pleased with the disbelieving people, nor with the open sinners, nor with the hypocrites. So He, Glorified and Exalted is He, is pleased with some people and not with others, and He is pleased with some deeds and dislikes others.
Now, is there any transmitted evidence for pleasure? Yes, the evidence is and regarding the deed .
Is there any rational evidence? Yes, there is rational evidence. The fact that He, Mighty and Majestic, rewards the obedient and recompenses them for their deeds and obedience indicates pleasure, not dislike? It indicates pleasure. And thus, both the transmitted and rational evidence indicate the establishment of pleasure for Allah, Mighty and Majestic. If you say: "Your argument from reward for the pleasure of Allah, Mighty and Majestic, is disputed, because Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, may give the open sinner more blessings than He gives the grateful. Is that so or not?" Now, this is a strong objection, but the answer to it is to say: His giving to the open sinner who persists in his disobedience is a means of luring him, as He, the Exalted, said: And the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: إن الله ليملي للظالم حتى إذا أخذه، لم يفلته وتلا قوله تعالى وَكَذَلِكَ أَخْذُ رَبِّكَ إِذَا أَخَذَ الْقُرَى وَهِيَ ظَالِمَةٌ إِنَّ أَخْذَهُ أَلِيمٌ شَدِيدٌ Indeed, Allah grants respite to the wrongdoer until when He seizes him, He does not let him go. And he recited the words of Allah the Exalted: And thus is the seizure of your Lord when He seizes the towns while they are wrongdoers; indeed, His seizure is painful and severe, and He, the Exalted, said: .
As for when the reward comes and the person is persisting in the obedience of Allah, then we know that it is issued from the pleasure of Allah with him, due to His saying, the Exalted: So this indicates that if the blessings are opened from the heavens and the earth while the servant is upright in the obedience of Allah, that is evidence of the pleasure of Allah, Mighty and Majestic. Now,
They became pleased with Him for the rulings of obligation He legislated for them. So they did not dislike the laws of Allah, nor did they find them burdensome, nor did they delay in them. Rather, they hastened to them and saw them as a blessing from Allah upon them.
They were pleased with the decrees of Allah. A person is not always in ease; there is a day of ease and a day of hardship. So they are pleased with the decrees of Allah, as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: So they are pleased with the cosmic decrees of Allah, just as they are pleased with His legislative decrees.
Thirdly: They are pleased with Allah for His judicial rulings, because the judicial rulings of Allah, with respect to these people, revolve between mercy and justice. Which is more prevalent? Mercy, with respect to the believer. To the extent that the believer confesses his sins to Allah, and when he confesses them to Him, He says: So they are pleased with Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, for His legislative rulings, and secondly His cosmic rulings, and thirdly His judicial rulings. There is no dislike in their hearts for what has come from Allah, Mighty and Majestic. Rather, they are pleased with it with the most complete pleasure.
Now, what do the people of ta'til (denial of the divine attributes) say about this attribute?
They say: "We do not establish that Allah is pleased. Yes, He is pleased with them, but He does not feel pleasure. Why?" They said: "Because pleasure is an accidental, created attribute, and it cannot subsist in Allah, because created things do not subsist except in a created being. And Allah, Mighty and Majestic, is the First, with nothing before Him. How can created things subsist in the First? How can He be not pleased and then become pleased? This does not happen. This is only for the created being. Also, pleasure is an accident, meaning an accidental, transient attribute, and an accident does not subsist except in a body. And bodies are similar, and it is not possible for Allah to be described with pleasure." Now, if that is the case, what is the meaning of the pleasure of Allah? Allah has established pleasure for Himself. Do you deny it? They said: "No, but we interpret it. So we say: meaning He rewarded them. Look, they interpret the attribute by its necessary consequence or its effect. They rewarded them, and what prevents that? They said: "We taught you." And what prevents that? Reason. It is not possible. So how do we answer them? We answer them with what has preceded: the prohibition. And what after that? And submission. We say: "Suppose that reason does not indicate that, but it does not prohibit it. And we will show you that it does not prohibit it. If reason has not indicated it, then the transmitted evidence has indicated it, so."
Then we say: Reason has indicated it, because the reward of Allah for the obedient indicates that He is pleased with them. For this reason, if someone gives his son some money or clothing, people consider it a sign of what? Of pleasure. And if one of the people is silent and you strike him with a stick, yes, he twists on his back, the stick, the sound of you striking him, a great strike. Why? May Allah guide you. How do you strike him? He said: "Because I am pleased with you." Is this correct or not? This is not correct at all. But if you give him things, gifts and others, for an action he performed, it would be said that this man is what? Pleased with them. So the reward of the obedient indicates, without doubt, the pleasure of Allah with them. So this indicates that this reward is evidence for the establishment of pleasure. As for interpreting pleasure as reward, meaning as its effect, that is an error.
Then we say to them: "Your statement that pleasure is a created thing after it was not, what prevents Allah, Mighty and Majestic, in the perfection of His disposition in His kingdom, to be pleased with some people and to be angry with some people, and to be pleased with a person in one state and to be angry with him in another state? What prevents it? And is this not from the perfection of His lordship, that He is the Doer of what He wills? So this is, without doubt, from the perfection of His lordship and His perfection, Mighty and Majestic."
Then your statement: "Created things do not subsist except in a created being" is not correct. Because we see that created things do not necessitate the simultaneity of the creator. Pay attention. Created things do not necessitate the simultaneity of the creator. What does this mean? It means, for example, I am now a created being, without doubt. My actions are created. Does it necessitate from this created thing that it be simultaneous with me? If it does not necessitate, then it does not necessitate from the subsistence of created things in Allah that He be a creator or a created thing. It does not necessitate, because created things do not require the simultaneity of what? The creator. Rather, the creator precedes his created things. That is to say, what I created, I precede it. My actions did not coincide with me. My actions did not coincide with me. Similarly, the actions of Allah, such as pleasure, anger, wrath, and others, do not necessitate that they be simultaneous with Allah. And thus, it is possible for them to be created after they were not. And your statement also that they are accidents, and an accident does not subsist except in a body, this is not correct. Accidents subsist in things other than bodies. It is said: "A long night," "a cold winter," "a chronic or severe illness." These things are described with these attributes, although they are not bodies. And by this, it becomes clear that all their arguments are flawed, rather dead, having no face.
And I always, and praise be to Allah, whenever I think about these people, I say: How can this be reason? How do they claim that this is reason with such weak causes? And if you wish, go back to their books and look at them. These are the causes by which they argue in their books. And yet they claim that they are the owners of reason, and that the Salaf (the earliest generations) are in the position of old women, old men, and children who have no reason. Then the people of tafwid (delegation) say that the Salaf have neither reason nor transmission, because the texts are not known to them. So they stripped the Salaf of knowledge of the names and attributes of Allah and of reason. We ask Allah for safety.
Now, he said: "And His saying: ."
The student:

The Shaykh : How? Yes.