(Explanation of the Doctrine of the Jabriyyah, Their Doubt, and the Refutation of Them) Jahm ibn Safwan and his followers, who denied the attributes of the Creator, the Judge, and rather, they negated from Him the highest heavens, and they emptied the Throne of the Most Merciful.

The Shaykh : ... explains something of the doctrine of the Jahmiyyah. The doctrine of the Jahmiyyah is compulsion (jabr) with regard to the actions of the servant, and that the servant is compelled in his work and is not the actor. Rather, his action is as he says: "like the trembling of a shivering person"
"and the blowing of the wind, or the movement of a sleeper *** and the movement of the trees"
I mean, for example, when I say this and that, it is forced upon him. The action is the action of Allah, and I have no will at all and no power, just as if a tree is shaken by the winds to the right and left, does it have a will? It has no will. For example, a person shivering from the cold, does he have a will? He has no will. This shivering has no will. So they say that the human being has no voluntary action and that he is compelled in his work, and Allah the Exalted burns him in the Fire of Hell and punishes him for an action that is not attributed to him. Rather, it is attributed to whom? To Allah. But He punishes him for His actions... He, and may Allah protect us, Allah punishes this poor, compelled human being who has no action at all, and the action is for Allah, He punishes him for His actions. Allah punishes him for His actions. Well, is this injustice or justice? It is a great injustice. They were told, this is injustice. How can Allah the Exalted compel him to the action, and the action is the action of Allah, and then burn him in the Fire of Hell and punish him for His actions? Is this injustice or not? They said, no, injustice, in our view, is what is impossible by its essence. Injustice that is impossible by its essence is this injustice. But what Allah the Exalted does in His dominion is not injustice. If He did it in the dominion of another, He would be unjust, but this is impossible by its essence. How is it impossible by its essence? Because the dominion is the dominion of whom? The dominion of Allah. Everyone in the heavens is for Allah. So His tormenting this man for what he did is a disposition in what? In His dominion. So He is not unjust, and injustice for Allah is impossible, because injustice is for the actor to dispose in the dominion of another, and there is no owner except Allah. So in that case, injustice with regard to Allah is impossible. What? By its essence. Well, the author refuted them.
"How is He, the One of authority, purified from it *** and that purification is praise"
I mean, if you say that injustice is impossible by its essence, how is Allah purified from it? If it is impossible by its essence, does it need Allah to be purified from it? If it is impossible, does it need to be said that Allah does not wrong? It does not need it. Yes, how do we purify Allah from injustice? And we say this is praise for Allah the Exalted for the perfection of His justice, He does not wrong. Then we say that injustice is impossible, because a person does not praise for what is impossible, whether in existence or non-existence. The impossible is impossible; one does not praise for it, neither in bringing it into existence nor in its non-existence. Although Allah the Exalted says: This indicates its possibility, not its impossibility? Its possibility. But Allah forbade it for the perfection of His justice; He forbade it upon Himself. The important point, the summary of this passage, is that the doctrine of the Jabriyyah regarding the actions of the servants is compulsion (jabr); that he is compelled and has no will, and that voluntary movements are in the position of the movement of trees by the wind. If they are told that their claim is injustice? They say, no, injustice is the impossible thing, and this is not impossible, because injustice is for a person to dispose in the right of another or the dominion of another, and this is from the dominion of Allah... So there is no injustice because He disposes in His dominion. How do we refute them? We say, this interpretation you mentioned for injustice is not praiseworthy. Why? Because a person does not praise for the non-doing of what is impossible, because if he wanted to do it, he could not, so he is not praised for not doing it. And Allah the Exalted purified Himself from injustice, praising Himself by His essence, or not? If it were impossible by its essence, denying injustice for Allah would be purifying Him from what does not befit Him, and it would be futile with no benefit. And this matter is clear. As for the refutation of them in their saying that the human being is compelled, this is not its place. The speech now is to understand their doctrine. As for the refutation of them, it is clear. Does every person know that his action is by his choice or not? By his choice. There are things that are not by his choice, like death and illness; these are not by his choice, no doubt. But the voluntary actions that a person does, good work... speech, action, is this by his choice or not? For this reason, if we took one of these people and beat him severely and said, what is this? You have overdone it. And what do we say to him? This is forced upon us, a decreed matter. And the decreed matter, does he accept this or not?
The student: He does not accept it.

The Shaykh : He does not accept it. The Commander of the Faithful, when a thief was brought to him and he ordered his hand to be cut off, as mentioned about him, he said: "Wait, O Commander of the Faithful. By Allah, I did not steal this except by the decree of Allah." So he said to him: "And we do not cut you off except by the decree of Allah." So the important point is that this saying cannot be established by anyone at all. And if we said it, the heavens and the earth would be corrupted, and every person would commit zina, steal, kill, and drink intoxicants. Yes, he would not be blamed for it and nothing would harm him, because it is without his choice and without his will. Yes.