A Summary of the Refutation of the Distortion of the Attribute of Rising Above the Throne
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : As for our refutation of their speech, since we interpreted istiwaa' as rising above, we refute their speech from several angles:
The first angle: Their statement contradicts the apparent meaning of the text.
Second: It contradicts the consensus of the Companions, and indeed the consensus of the Salaf in their entirety.
Third: It is not found in the Arabic language that it means to take possession of (istawala), and this is what we mentioned in the previous lesson, but we mention it now: it is not found in the language, and the verse they cited as evidence has been shown to be invalid; it is not evidence, and their argument based on it is invalid.
Fourth: It entails false consequences, among which is that the Throne existed before the creation of the heavens and the earth as the property of someone other than Allah. Second: The word "istawala" generally implies a struggle between Allah and another, so He took possession of it and overcame it. Third: What?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : It is valid, according to your claim, to say that Allah took possession of the earth, the trees, the mountains, the human, the camel, and the like. No one says this, because He took possession of these things. If we equate istiwaa' with istawala, then if it is valid to use the word "istawala" for something, it is valid to use the word "istiwaa'" for that thing, because they are synonyms according to their claim. By these false consequences, it becomes clear that their interpretation is invalid; it becomes clear that their interpretation is invalid. And since Abu al-Ma'ali al-Juwayni (may Allah pardon him) used to establish the doctrine of the Asha'irah, because he was an Ash'ari, and he denied the rising of Allah above the Throne, indeed he denied the elevation of Allah by His essence, he said: "Allah the Exalted was, and there was nothing other than Him". And what do you say?
The student: Yes, correct.
The Shaykh : And He is now as He was.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : He intends a meaning; he intends to deny the rising of Allah above the Throne, meaning that He was and there was no Throne, and He is now as He was. So He did not rise above the Throne. Then Abu al-'Ala' al-Hamadhani said to him: "O teacher, leave us alone from mentioning the Throne and the rising above the Throne, because its evidence is auditory (sam'i). The evidence for the rising above the Throne is auditory; had Allah not informed us of it, we would not have known. He informed us of this necessity that we find in our hearts; no one has ever said 'I know' but found in his heart a necessity to seek the elevation. What?"
The student: Oh Allah
The Shaykh : Yes, no one has ever said "Oh Allah" but found in his heart a necessity to seek the elevation, correct?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, correct. So Abu al-Ma'ali was confounded. He began to strike his head. Al-Hamadhani confused me; al-Hamadhani confused me, because he could not answer, because this is an innate (fitri) proof that no one denies. By this, we know, by this we know, that the rising above the Throne, its evidence is auditory, its evidence is auditory, and that it does not contradict the perfection of Allah (Mighty and Majestic).
The first angle: Their statement contradicts the apparent meaning of the text.
Second: It contradicts the consensus of the Companions, and indeed the consensus of the Salaf in their entirety.
Third: It is not found in the Arabic language that it means to take possession of (istawala), and this is what we mentioned in the previous lesson, but we mention it now: it is not found in the language, and the verse they cited as evidence has been shown to be invalid; it is not evidence, and their argument based on it is invalid.
Fourth: It entails false consequences, among which is that the Throne existed before the creation of the heavens and the earth as the property of someone other than Allah. Second: The word "istawala" generally implies a struggle between Allah and another, so He took possession of it and overcame it. Third: What?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : It is valid, according to your claim, to say that Allah took possession of the earth, the trees, the mountains, the human, the camel, and the like. No one says this, because He took possession of these things. If we equate istiwaa' with istawala, then if it is valid to use the word "istawala" for something, it is valid to use the word "istiwaa'" for that thing, because they are synonyms according to their claim. By these false consequences, it becomes clear that their interpretation is invalid; it becomes clear that their interpretation is invalid. And since Abu al-Ma'ali al-Juwayni (may Allah pardon him) used to establish the doctrine of the Asha'irah, because he was an Ash'ari, and he denied the rising of Allah above the Throne, indeed he denied the elevation of Allah by His essence, he said: "Allah the Exalted was, and there was nothing other than Him". And what do you say?
The student: Yes, correct.
The Shaykh : And He is now as He was.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : He intends a meaning; he intends to deny the rising of Allah above the Throne, meaning that He was and there was no Throne, and He is now as He was. So He did not rise above the Throne. Then Abu al-'Ala' al-Hamadhani said to him: "O teacher, leave us alone from mentioning the Throne and the rising above the Throne, because its evidence is auditory (sam'i). The evidence for the rising above the Throne is auditory; had Allah not informed us of it, we would not have known. He informed us of this necessity that we find in our hearts; no one has ever said 'I know' but found in his heart a necessity to seek the elevation. What?"
The student: Oh Allah
The Shaykh : Yes, no one has ever said "Oh Allah" but found in his heart a necessity to seek the elevation, correct?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, correct. So Abu al-Ma'ali was confounded. He began to strike his head. Al-Hamadhani confused me; al-Hamadhani confused me, because he could not answer, because this is an innate (fitri) proof that no one denies. By this, we know, by this we know, that the rising above the Throne, its evidence is auditory, its evidence is auditory, and that it does not contradict the perfection of Allah (Mighty and Majestic).