Explanation of the author's statement: In Surat al-A'raf, His saying: (Indeed, your Lord is Allah, who created the heavens and the earth in six days, then He established Himself upon the Throne).
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He says "The first location is his statement in Surat al-A'raf, in His saying: [Al-A'raf 7:54]" [Al-A'raf 7:54] What is its grammatical status?
The student : The predicate of "inna" (indeed)
The Shaykh : It is the predicate of "Inna," meaning your Lord is Allah He created them [Al-A'raf 7:54] What is the duration of these days? The answer is that they are our days that we know, because Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) mentioned them in the indefinite form, so they are understood to be what is known. The first of these days is Sunday and the last is Friday. Four of them are for the earth and two are for the heavens, as Allah detailed that in Surat al-Fussilat. [Fussilat 41:9-10] Yes, how many did they become?
The student: Four.
The Shaykh : Four[Fussilat 41:11] Here
The student: Seven heavens
The Shaykh :[Fussilat 41:12] So Allah detailed them in Surat al-Fussilat. Good. [Al-A'raf 7:54] For the ordering. Meaning He rose above, and the Throne is that ceiling encompassing the created things. We do not know the substance of this Throne, because no authentic hadith has come from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) explaining from what this Throne was created. But we know that it is the greatest of the created things that we know. The origin of the word "Throne" in the language is the bed that is exclusive to the king. It is known that the bed exclusive to the king will be a great, luxurious bed. The hoopoe said to Solomon: [An-Naml 27:23] In this verse, there are several attributes of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He), but the author cited them to establish one attribute, which is establishing Himself upon the Throne. The people of the Sunnah and the community believe that Allah the Exalted is established upon His Throne in a manner befitting His majesty, and it does not resemble the establishment of the created beings. If you asked what the meaning of "establishing Himself" is for them? Its meaning is rising above and settling. It has been reported from the Salaf in its interpretation four meanings. The first: He rose above. The second: He elevated. The third:
The student: He ascended
The Shaykh : He ascended, and the fourth: He settled. But "He rose above," "He elevated," and "He ascended" have the same meaning, whereas "He settled" differs from them. Their evidence for that is that in all its occurrences in the Arabic language, it did not come except for this meaning. Allah the Exalted said:[Al-Mu'minun 23:28] And He said: [Az-Zukhruf 43:12-13] This is the meaning of establishing oneself upon something. The people of denial (ta'til) interpreted it to mean that the intended meaning is dominion. They said the meaning of is then He dominated it. And they argued for this distortion of theirs with a positive proof and a negative proof. As for the positive proof, they said that we infer from the saying of the poet:
"Bishr has established himself over Iraq *** Without a sword or spilled blood"
The verse again:
"Bishr has established himself over Iraq *** Without a sword or spilled blood"
Bishr ibn Marwan. "Established himself" means he dominated Iraq. "Without a sword or spilled blood" They said, and this is a verse from an Arab man, and it is not possible that the intended meaning of "established himself over Iraq" is "rose above Iraq," especially since at that time there were no airplanes by which one could rise above Iraq. This is what kind of proof? Positive or negative?
The student: Positive
The Shaykh : Positive. As for the negative proof, they said if we establish that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) is established upon His Throne in the meaning you say, which is rising above and settling, then it would follow from that that He is in need of the Throne. He is in need of the Throne. This is one. Is this omitted or not omitted?
The student: Omitted
The Shaykh : Omitted. That we describe Allah the Exalted with need.
Second: It would follow from that that He is a body. It would follow from that that He is a body, because the establishment of one thing upon another means its rising above it, which means it is a body.
Third: It would follow that He is limited. It would follow that He is limited, because the one who establishes himself upon something is limited. If I establish myself upon a camel, you are limited in a specific area, confined by it. Yes, and Is He limited or unlimited? He is also limited. "Therefore, when a woman of the Jahmiyyah came to Kufa or Basra, the people gathered to her and said, 'Indeed, Allah established Himself upon the Throne.' She said, 'No, I disbelieve in that. If I say He established Himself upon the Throne, then He is limited upon a limited thing.'" Allah is limited upon a limited thing. These are the three things they claimed follow from establishing that "establishing Himself" means
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No.
The student: To the heights
The Shaykh : Meaning rising above and elevation. So how do we answer them? We say to them: Glory be to Allah and praise be to Him. Glory be to Allah the Great. We answer you:
First: Your interpretation is contrary to the interpretation of the Salaf upon which they agreed. What is the evidence?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : That no disagreement with it has been transmitted from them, disagreement with its apparent meaning. If they had seen contrary to its apparent meaning, it would have been transmitted to us. None of them ever said that means "dominated." This is one.
Second: It is contrary to the apparent wording, because we found that the root of "establishing oneself," when it is transitive with "upon," means what? Rising above and settling. This is the apparent wording, and these are its occurrences in the Qur'an and in the speech of the Arabs.
Third: It entails false consequences. Your interpretation of as meaning "dominated" entails false consequences. We count them:
First, it entails that Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He), when He created the heavens and the earth, was not dominating His Throne, because Allah says:[Al-A'raf 7:54] And before that, for whom?
The student: For something else.
The Shaykh : For other than Him, according to their claim. Third, second, yes.
Second: The predominant meaning of the word "dominated" is always that it does not occur except after a struggle. It does not occur except after a struggle. So who struggled with Allah? No one struggles with Allah. Yes.
"Where is the escape, and the God who seeks, *** and the one who is defeated is not the Victor"
Good. From the false consequences, it is correct for us to say that Allah established Himself upon the earth. Correct?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes. Why?
The student: Because He is dominating it.
The Shaykh : Because He is dominating it. We say if means "dominated," then say that He established Himself upon the Throne, upon the earth, and He established Himself upon the camel, and He established Himself upon the human being. And this is a false consequence. Is it false or correct?
The student: It is invalid.
The Shaykh : False. This is a false consequence. So it entails false consequences, and the falsity of the consequence indicates the falsity of the thing that entails it. Are these proofs for us offensive or defensive?
The student: Offensive
The student: Defensive
The Shaykh : No, offensive. This is offensive. Now we come to the defensive proofs, because they attacked us. With what did they attack us? With a positive proof and a negative proof. The positive proof: they said we have a verse of Arabic poetry. What is it?
The student: "Bishr has established himself"
The Shaykh : "Bishr has established himself over Iraq." This is a mortar bomb that you cannot counter. You can defend,
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : How? We say first: Prove to us the chain of narration (isnad) of this verse. You just say "the poet said." Bring the chain. Say "It was narrated to us by so-and-so, from so-and-so, from so-and-so," until you reach the man who said it. And they have not done this. Now, if we said "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said," what would we be asked for?
The student: The chain of narration.
The Shaykh : The chain of narration. This is one. We first demand the chain from them. If they bring it, we demand the reliability of the men. Or not? Bring these men. Look into them. They may be men of no worth, is that not so? Good. Third: Who is this speaker? Name him. You are now saying we infer from the saying of the poet. And who is this poet? Here.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : It is possible that this poet was after the fifth or sixth or tenth year. We do not know. The poet is not sufficient. I can now say "Bishr established himself over Iraq." Or can I not? I can inform that he established himself over Iraq. So clarify for us this poet. Why do I say clarify this poet? To know whether he was before the change of the tongue or after the change, because every statement used as evidence for the Arabic language after the change of the Arabic language is not a proof, because the Arabic began to change when the conquests expanded and the non-Arabs entered with the Arabs, so the tongue differed. And there is a possibility that it was after the change of the tongue, even if we knew the speaker. Third:
There is also an answer. We say that your interpretation of "Bishr established himself over Iraq" as "dominated" is an interpretation supported by the wording. It is supported by the wording, because it is difficult for Bishr to ascend above Iraq and establish himself upon it as we establish ourselves upon a bed or upon the back of a beast. Impossible. Therefore, we resort to interpreting it as what? As "dominated." We say this from the perspective of concession. Otherwise, we have another answer: to say that "establishing oneself" means rising above, and rising above is of two types: physical rising, like our establishing ourselves upon a bed, and metaphorical rising, meaning control and dominance. So the meaning of "Bishr established himself over Iraq" is that he rose above with dominance and subjugation. And at that time, their arms crumble, and they cannot carry a weapon, let alone throw it at us. Is that not so? Good. What is their second weapon? Here.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes, it appears the time has run out a little, so we will leave it, if Allah wills, for the next night.
The student: Shaykh, is there a refutation of them from the Qur'an?
The Shaykh : What is it?
The student: They are not refuted by His saying, the Exalted:[Hud 11:44] How... this verse.
The Shaykh : No, no, this is clear. They say that a person rises upon a thing, but Allah does not rise.
Allah rose over the Throne, and we explained that the people of the Sunnah and the community hold that means "He rose," and that was after we completed our discussion on the attributes, what?
The student: The negative ones.
The Shaykh : The negative ones, and we explained that His saying, the Exalted:[Al-A'raf 7:33] to the end, indicates that these five forbidden things are forbidden in every Shari'ah, so they are among the foundations of the forbidden, because they were forbidden in every Shari'ah. And Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned that the gradual implementation of these rulings was from the easiest to the most severe. Yes, and we mentioned that there is some consideration in his statement because it is not clear.
Now, regarding, we said that the people of the Sunnah and the community, may Allah be pleased with them, and we included them among them, said that its meaning is: He rose over the Throne. And they provided evidence for this by stating that this is what the meaning of this word requires in the Arabic language, and they brought proofs from the Qur'an, among which is:
The student: "So that you may be carried upon their backs."
The Shaykh :[Az-Zukhruf 43:13] And among them is [Al-Mu'minun 23:28] And among them is [Hud 11:44] There are many proofs in this. And we said that four meanings were reported from the Salaf regarding this, three of which are synonymous: He rose, He ascended, and He went up. And the fourth is He settled. Yes, and we mentioned that the people of distortion distorted the meaning of istiwaa' to mean "He took control." And we mentioned that they argued with a negative and a positive. What is the positive they argued with, Ya 'Abd Allah Zaydan?
The student: The poet's saying: "Bishr took control of Iraq."
The Shaykh : Yes, yes, he took control.
The student: "Bishr took control of Iraq *** Without a sword or spilled blood"
The Shaykh : Yes, and the negative.
The student: The negative. They said if we intended by istiwaa' that it means rising and ascending, it would necessitate that Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, has a body, and also that He is limited.
The Shaykh : Limited. Good, you have done well.
The student: That He would be in need of it.
The Shaykh : And that He would be in need of it. Good, these are three things. And we mentioned the refutation of them, first the refutation of the positive.
The student: First, we say: the verse they argued with... who said it? Then... are its narrators trustworthy, or is this man...
Second, we say this verse, even if it is... by the Book and the Sunnah.
The Shaykh : Second, identify who said it? Third, prove that it is not the chain, prove that this man said it in a time when the language had not changed, because we say that it was said in a time when the language had changed. Fourth, there is something in the verse that prevents istiwaa' from meaning physical rising, because it is not possible for Bishr to...
The student: ...
The Shaykh : ...rise over Iraq with his body. Fifth, that istiwaa' here means "He rose" in the sense of "He took control," meaning He rose over them in authority and dominance, where He took control of it. Clear? Good.
The student: What is its literal meaning, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Indeed, he
The student: The verb istawaa, istiwaa' over the Throne of his kingdom, he sat and settled upon it.
The Shaykh : No, no, this is not acceptable.
The student: Because the one who took control of it is a real king.
The Shaykh : Yes, no, it does not hold. Good. The negative. They said it necessitates that He has a body. How do we refute them, 'Abd Allah?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Ah, good. It necessitates that He is limited. Did we mention anything?
The student: No, no.
The Shaykh : Yes, third, it necessitates.
The student: We mentioned, Shaykh. We mentioned. If we said "He took control," do we say that He rose over the Throne?
The Shaykh : No, no, no.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes, no.
The student: In the false manner.
The Shaykh : This is for the refutation, this is the refutation of them. But now we want to invalidate their evidence first, because we say: invalidate the opponent's evidence... invalidate the opponent's evidence first. Destroy then build. Did we not speak about this?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Yes, good. It does not contradict. Now we will speak about it, if Allah wills. They said it necessitates that He has a body. If it is said that He rose in a true sense, meaning He rose, we say: everything that is necessitated by the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) is truth. It is truth. Everything that is necessitated by the speech of Allah and the speech of His Messenger is truth, and it is obligatory for us to adhere to it. But the whole matter is that this must be a necessary consequence of the speech of Allah and His Messenger, because it may be prevented from being what? A necessary consequence. It may be prevented from being a necessary consequence. So if it is established that it is a necessary consequence, let it be, and there is no harm on us if we say it. There is no harm on us if we say it. So we say to them: What do you mean by "body"? If you mean by "body" that it is impossible for Allah to have an essence that is described with the necessary and befitting attributes, if you intend this meaning, then your statement is false. Because we say that Allah has a true essence described with attributes, and He has a Face, hands, eyes, and feet, and say whatever you wish of the necessary consequences that are true necessary consequences. And if you mean by the body that you said it is impossible for Allah to be a body, the body composed of bones, flesh, blood, and the like, then this is impossible for Allah, and it is not a necessary consequence of Allah's rising over the Throne that He has a body like this. Did you understand? So our answer to this contains a detail. What is the detail? That we say: What do you want by "body"? Do you want to say that Allah the Exalted does not have an essence described with the befitting attributes, the essential and the active, the informational and the conceptual? If you intend that, then this is false. Rather, Allah, Mighty and Majestic, has an essence described with essential conceptual attributes, essential informational attributes, and what next? And active. Did this not pass us? He has an essence that rises over the Throne and descends to the lowest heaven and comes to judge between His servants, and so on. And if you mean by the body that you claimed is a necessary consequence of interpreting istiwaa' as rising, if you mean by it the body composed of bones, flesh, blood, veins, and the like, then this... this is impossible, and we prevent it from being a necessary consequence. It is impossible for Allah, and we prevent it from being a necessary consequence for Allah, Mighty and Majestic, that it be a necessary consequence of Allah's rising over the Throne. Clear?
Good. Their saying that it necessitates that He is limited, the answer to it is that we say: also with a detail. What do you mean by "limited"? If you intend by "limited" that He is distinct from the creation, separated from them, as there is a land for Zayd and a land for 'Umar, so this is limited, separated from this, and this is separated from this. If you intend that He is distinct from the creation, then this... is it true or false?
The student: Truth.
The Shaykh : This is true, and there is nothing of deficiency in it. There is no deficiency at all. And if you intend by His being limited that the Throne encompasses Him, then this...
The student: It is invalid.
The Shaykh : ...then this is false and not a necessary consequence. For Allah the Exalted is risen over the Throne, and even if He, Mighty and Majestic, is greater than the Throne and greater than other than the Throne, it does not necessitate that the Throne encompasses Him. Rather, it is not possible for it to encompass Him, because Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, is greater than everything and greater than everything. The heavens are folded in His right hand, and the earth in its entirety is in His grasp on the Day of Resurrection.
Good. If they say it necessitates that He is in need of the Throne, what do we say? We say: It does not necessitate, because the meaning of His being risen over the Throne is that He is above the Throne, but it is a specific rising, and it does not mean that the Throne carries Him at all. So the Throne does not carry Him, and the sky does not carry Him. And this necessary consequence, we say, is impossible because it is a deficiency with respect to Allah, Mighty and Majestic. But it is not a necessary consequence of the true istiwaa', because we do not say that the meaning of "He rose over the Throne" is that the Throne carries Him and bears Him. Is the Throne a carrier or a carried thing?
The student: A carried thing.
The Shaykh : A carried thing.[Al-Haqqah 69:17] And the angels carry it. Now, but it is not a carrier for Allah, Mighty and Majestic, because Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, is not in need of it and does not lack it. And with this, their argument is invalidated. What? The negative.
Indeed, your Lord is Allah, who created the heavens and earth in six days and then established Himself above the Throne
إن ربكم الله الذي خلق السماوات والأرض في ستة أيام ثم استوى على العرشIndeed, your Lord is Allah, who created
إن ربكم الله الذي خلقAllah
اللهThe student : The predicate of "inna" (indeed)
The Shaykh : It is the predicate of "Inna," meaning your Lord is Allah
He created the heavens
خلق السمواتIndeed, your Lord is Allah, who created the heavens and earth in six days and then established Himself above the Throne. He covers the night with the day, [another night] chasing it rapidly; and [He created] the sun, the moon, and the stars, subjected by His command. Unquestionably, His is the creation and the command; blessed is Allah, Lord of the worlds.
في ستة أيام(9) Say, "Do you indeed disbelieve in He who created the earth in two days and attribute to Him equals? That is the Lord of the worlds." (10) And He placed on the earth firmly set mountains over its surface, and He blessed it and determined therein its [creatures'] sustenance in four days without distinction - for [the information] of those who ask.
قل أإنكم لتكفرون بالذي خلق الأرض في يومين وتجعلون له أندادا ذلك رب العالمين وجعل فيها رواسي من فوقها وبارك فيها وقدر فيها أقواتها في أربعة أيام سواءًThe student: Four.
The Shaykh : Four
Then He directed Himself to the heaven while it was smoke and said to it and to the earth, "Come [into being], willingly or by compulsion." They said, "We have come willingly."
ثم استوى إلى السماء وهي دخان فقال لها وللأرض ائتيا طوعا أو كرها قالتا أتينا طائعين فقضاهن سبعThe student: Seven heavens
The Shaykh :
seven heavens within two days
سبع سماوات في يومينin six days and then established Himself above the Throne
في ستة أيام ثم استوى على العرشThen
ثمIstawa (He rose)
استوىand she has a great throne.
ولها عرش عظيمThe student: He ascended
The Shaykh : He ascended, and the fourth: He settled. But "He rose above," "He elevated," and "He ascended" have the same meaning, whereas "He settled" differs from them. Their evidence for that is that in all its occurrences in the Arabic language, it did not come except for this meaning. Allah the Exalted said:
And when you have boarded the ship, you and those with you
فإذا استويت أنت ومن معك على الفلكand has made for you of ships and animals those which you mount. (13) That you may settle yourselves upon their backs and then remember the favor of your Lord when you have settled upon them
وجعل لكم من الفلك والأنعام ما تركبون لتستووا على ظهوره ثم تذكروا نعمة ربكم إذا استويتم عليهThen He rose above the Throne
ثم استوى على العرش"Bishr has established himself over Iraq *** Without a sword or spilled blood"
The verse again:
"Bishr has established himself over Iraq *** Without a sword or spilled blood"
Bishr ibn Marwan. "Established himself" means he dominated Iraq. "Without a sword or spilled blood" They said, and this is a verse from an Arab man, and it is not possible that the intended meaning of "established himself over Iraq" is "rose above Iraq," especially since at that time there were no airplanes by which one could rise above Iraq. This is what kind of proof? Positive or negative?
The student: Positive
The Shaykh : Positive. As for the negative proof, they said if we establish that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) is established upon His Throne in the meaning you say, which is rising above and settling, then it would follow from that that He is in need of the Throne. He is in need of the Throne. This is one. Is this omitted or not omitted?
The student: Omitted
The Shaykh : Omitted. That we describe Allah the Exalted with need.
Second: It would follow from that that He is a body. It would follow from that that He is a body, because the establishment of one thing upon another means its rising above it, which means it is a body.
Third: It would follow that He is limited. It would follow that He is limited, because the one who establishes himself upon something is limited. If I establish myself upon a camel, you are limited in a specific area, confined by it. Yes, and
Toward...
علىToward...
علىThe student: ...
The Shaykh : No.
The student: To the heights
The Shaykh : Meaning rising above and elevation. So how do we answer them? We say to them: Glory be to Allah and praise be to Him. Glory be to Allah the Great. We answer you:
First: Your interpretation is contrary to the interpretation of the Salaf upon which they agreed. What is the evidence?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : That no disagreement with it has been transmitted from them, disagreement with its apparent meaning. If they had seen contrary to its apparent meaning, it would have been transmitted to us. None of them ever said that
Istawa (He rose)
استوىSecond: It is contrary to the apparent wording, because we found that the root of "establishing oneself," when it is transitive with "upon," means what? Rising above and settling. This is the apparent wording, and these are its occurrences in the Qur'an and in the speech of the Arabs.
Third: It entails false consequences. Your interpretation of
Istawa (He rose)
استوىFirst, it entails that Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He), when He created the heavens and the earth, was not dominating His Throne, because Allah says:
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 العرشThe student: For something else.
The Shaykh : For other than Him, according to their claim. Third, second, yes.
Second: The predominant meaning of the word "dominated" is always that it does not occur except after a struggle. It does not occur except after a struggle. So who struggled with Allah? No one struggles with Allah. Yes.
"Where is the escape, and the God who seeks, *** and the one who is defeated is not the Victor"
Good. From the false consequences, it is correct for us to say that Allah established Himself upon the earth. Correct?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes. Why?
The student: Because He is dominating it.
The Shaykh : Because He is dominating it. We say if
Istawa (He rose)
استوىThe student: It is invalid.
The Shaykh : False. This is a false consequence. So it entails false consequences, and the falsity of the consequence indicates the falsity of the thing that entails it. Are these proofs for us offensive or defensive?
The student: Offensive
The student: Defensive
The Shaykh : No, offensive. This is offensive. Now we come to the defensive proofs, because they attacked us. With what did they attack us? With a positive proof and a negative proof. The positive proof: they said we have a verse of Arabic poetry. What is it?
The student: "Bishr has established himself"
The Shaykh : "Bishr has established himself over Iraq." This is a mortar bomb that you cannot counter. You can defend,
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : How? We say first: Prove to us the chain of narration (isnad) of this verse. You just say "the poet said." Bring the chain. Say "It was narrated to us by so-and-so, from so-and-so, from so-and-so," until you reach the man who said it. And they have not done this. Now, if we said "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said," what would we be asked for?
The student: The chain of narration.
The Shaykh : The chain of narration. This is one. We first demand the chain from them. If they bring it, we demand the reliability of the men. Or not? Bring these men. Look into them. They may be men of no worth, is that not so? Good. Third: Who is this speaker? Name him. You are now saying we infer from the saying of the poet. And who is this poet? Here.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : It is possible that this poet was after the fifth or sixth or tenth year. We do not know. The poet is not sufficient. I can now say "Bishr established himself over Iraq." Or can I not? I can inform that he established himself over Iraq. So clarify for us this poet. Why do I say clarify this poet? To know whether he was before the change of the tongue or after the change, because every statement used as evidence for the Arabic language after the change of the Arabic language is not a proof, because the Arabic began to change when the conquests expanded and the non-Arabs entered with the Arabs, so the tongue differed. And there is a possibility that it was after the change of the tongue, even if we knew the speaker. Third:
There is also an answer. We say that your interpretation of "Bishr established himself over Iraq" as "dominated" is an interpretation supported by the wording. It is supported by the wording, because it is difficult for Bishr to ascend above Iraq and establish himself upon it as we establish ourselves upon a bed or upon the back of a beast. Impossible. Therefore, we resort to interpreting it as what? As "dominated." We say this from the perspective of concession. Otherwise, we have another answer: to say that "establishing oneself" means rising above, and rising above is of two types: physical rising, like our establishing ourselves upon a bed, and metaphorical rising, meaning control and dominance. So the meaning of "Bishr established himself over Iraq" is that he rose above with dominance and subjugation. And at that time, their arms crumble, and they cannot carry a weapon, let alone throw it at us. Is that not so? Good. What is their second weapon? Here.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes, it appears the time has run out a little, so we will leave it, if Allah wills, for the next night.
The student: Shaykh, is there a refutation of them from the Qur'an?
The Shaykh : What is it?
The student: They are not refuted by His saying, the Exalted:
and the ship came to rest on the [mountain of] Judiyy
واستوت على الجوديThe Shaykh : No, no, this is clear. They say that a person rises upon a thing, but Allah does not rise.
Allah rose over the Throne, and we explained that the people of the Sunnah and the community hold that
Istawa (He rose)
استوىThe student: The negative ones.
The Shaykh : The negative ones, and we explained that His saying, the Exalted:
Say, "My Lord has only forbidden immoralities
قل إنما حرم ربي الفواحشNow, regarding
He settled upon the Throne
استوى على العرشThe student: "So that you may be carried upon their backs."
The Shaykh :
That you may settle yourselves upon their backs and then remember the favor of your Lord when you have settled upon them
لتستووا على ظهوره ثم تذكروا نعمة ربكم إذا استويتم عليهAnd when you have boarded the ship, you and those with you
فإذا استويت أنت ومن معك على الفلكand the ship came to rest on the [mountain of] Judiyy
واستوت على الجوديThe student: The poet's saying: "Bishr took control of Iraq."
The Shaykh : Yes, yes, he took control.
The student: "Bishr took control of Iraq *** Without a sword or spilled blood"
The Shaykh : Yes, and the negative.
The student: The negative. They said if we intended by istiwaa' that it means rising and ascending, it would necessitate that Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, has a body, and also that He is limited.
The Shaykh : Limited. Good, you have done well.
The student: That He would be in need of it.
The Shaykh : And that He would be in need of it. Good, these are three things. And we mentioned the refutation of them, first the refutation of the positive.
The student: First, we say: the verse they argued with... who said it? Then... are its narrators trustworthy, or is this man...
Second, we say this verse, even if it is... by the Book and the Sunnah.
The Shaykh : Second, identify who said it? Third, prove that it is not the chain, prove that this man said it in a time when the language had not changed, because we say that it was said in a time when the language had changed. Fourth, there is something in the verse that prevents istiwaa' from meaning physical rising, because it is not possible for Bishr to...
The student: ...
The Shaykh : ...rise over Iraq with his body. Fifth, that istiwaa' here means "He rose" in the sense of "He took control," meaning He rose over them in authority and dominance, where He took control of it. Clear? Good.
The student: What is its literal meaning, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Indeed, he
The student: The verb istawaa, istiwaa' over the Throne of his kingdom, he sat and settled upon it.
The Shaykh : No, no, this is not acceptable.
The student: Because the one who took control of it is a real king.
The Shaykh : Yes, no, it does not hold. Good. The negative. They said it necessitates that He has a body. How do we refute them, 'Abd Allah?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Ah, good. It necessitates that He is limited. Did we mention anything?
The student: No, no.
The Shaykh : Yes, third, it necessitates.
The student: We mentioned, Shaykh. We mentioned. If we said "He took control," do we say that He rose over the Throne?
The Shaykh : No, no, no.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes, no.
The student: In the false manner.
The Shaykh : This is for the refutation, this is the refutation of them. But now we want to invalidate their evidence first, because we say: invalidate the opponent's evidence... invalidate the opponent's evidence first. Destroy then build. Did we not speak about this?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Yes, good. It does not contradict. Now we will speak about it, if Allah wills. They said it necessitates that He has a body. If it is said that He rose in a true sense, meaning He rose, we say: everything that is necessitated by the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) is truth. It is truth. Everything that is necessitated by the speech of Allah and the speech of His Messenger is truth, and it is obligatory for us to adhere to it. But the whole matter is that this must be a necessary consequence of the speech of Allah and His Messenger, because it may be prevented from being what? A necessary consequence. It may be prevented from being a necessary consequence. So if it is established that it is a necessary consequence, let it be, and there is no harm on us if we say it. There is no harm on us if we say it. So we say to them: What do you mean by "body"? If you mean by "body" that it is impossible for Allah to have an essence that is described with the necessary and befitting attributes, if you intend this meaning, then your statement is false. Because we say that Allah has a true essence described with attributes, and He has a Face, hands, eyes, and feet, and say whatever you wish of the necessary consequences that are true necessary consequences. And if you mean by the body that you said it is impossible for Allah to be a body, the body composed of bones, flesh, blood, and the like, then this is impossible for Allah, and it is not a necessary consequence of Allah's rising over the Throne that He has a body like this. Did you understand? So our answer to this contains a detail. What is the detail? That we say: What do you want by "body"? Do you want to say that Allah the Exalted does not have an essence described with the befitting attributes, the essential and the active, the informational and the conceptual? If you intend that, then this is false. Rather, Allah, Mighty and Majestic, has an essence described with essential conceptual attributes, essential informational attributes, and what next? And active. Did this not pass us? He has an essence that rises over the Throne and descends to the lowest heaven and comes to judge between His servants, and so on. And if you mean by the body that you claimed is a necessary consequence of interpreting istiwaa' as rising, if you mean by it the body composed of bones, flesh, blood, veins, and the like, then this... this is impossible, and we prevent it from being a necessary consequence. It is impossible for Allah, and we prevent it from being a necessary consequence for Allah, Mighty and Majestic, that it be a necessary consequence of Allah's rising over the Throne. Clear?
Good. Their saying that it necessitates that He is limited, the answer to it is that we say: also with a detail. What do you mean by "limited"? If you intend by "limited" that He is distinct from the creation, separated from them, as there is a land for Zayd and a land for 'Umar, so this is limited, separated from this, and this is separated from this. If you intend that He is distinct from the creation, then this... is it true or false?
The student: Truth.
The Shaykh : This is true, and there is nothing of deficiency in it. There is no deficiency at all. And if you intend by His being limited that the Throne encompasses Him, then this...
The student: It is invalid.
The Shaykh : ...then this is false and not a necessary consequence. For Allah the Exalted is risen over the Throne, and even if He, Mighty and Majestic, is greater than the Throne and greater than other than the Throne, it does not necessitate that the Throne encompasses Him. Rather, it is not possible for it to encompass Him, because Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, is greater than everything and greater than everything. The heavens are folded in His right hand, and the earth in its entirety is in His grasp on the Day of Resurrection.
Good. If they say it necessitates that He is in need of the Throne, what do we say? We say: It does not necessitate, because the meaning of His being risen over the Throne is that He is above the Throne, but it is a specific rising, and it does not mean that the Throne carries Him at all. So the Throne does not carry Him, and the sky does not carry Him. And this necessary consequence, we say, is impossible because it is a deficiency with respect to Allah, Mighty and Majestic. But it is not a necessary consequence of the true istiwaa', because we do not say that the meaning of "He rose over the Throne" is that the Throne carries Him and bears Him. Is the Throne a carrier or a carried thing?
The student: A carried thing.
The Shaykh : A carried thing.