It is the same tape 4b

The Shaykh : We have the pillars, not... a copy, and it is the best copy, and it is the best. The pillars are strong, yes.
The reader: "Chapter: On the arrival of another caravan
And a group came and described it, *** this and added to it in the scale
He said, Listen, O my people, do not let *** these hopes distract you; they are the worst of hopes
I have exhausted my mount and my life has weakened, *** and I have exerted my effort and I am worn out"
I searched

The Shaykh : I searched
The reader: "I searched above and below, then before us *** "

The Shaykh : Then
The reader: " I searched above and below, then before us *** and behind, then left with right "

The Shaykh : I searched, repeat the verse
The reader: " I searched above and below, then before us *** and behind, then left with right
No one here indicated it to me, no *** and no human guided me to it
Except groups that held fast to the hadith, *** their schools are attributed to the Qur'an
They said, What you seek is above His servants, *** above the sky and above every place
And He is the One who truly rose above the Throne, *** but He took possession of the worlds
And to Him ascends every good word, *** and to Him is raised the effort of the grateful"

The Shaykh : Repeat.
The reader: " And to Him ascends every good word *** and to Him is raised the effort of the grateful
And the spirit and the angels descended from Him, *** and to Him they ascend at every time
And to Him the hands of the supplicants are directed, *** toward the height by the fitrah of the Most Merciful
And to Him the Messenger ascended, so it was decreed *** from nearness to his Lord two bows
And to Him Jesus was raised in truth, *** and he will descend so that he may be seen clearly
And to Him ascends the spirit of every believer, *** at death, so it returns in safety ".

The Shaykh : Allah is the Greatest.
The reader: " And to Him the hopes of the servants are directed *** toward the height without a second counsel
But the fitrah of Allah, which they did not create *** except upon it, the creation and the two worlds " .

The Shaykh : But the fitrah, it is better to use the accusative case, but read it with the nominative case.
The reader: " But the fitrah of Allah, which they did not create *** except upon it, the creation and the two worlds
And similar to this is that they were created upon *** their acknowledgment, no doubt, of the Lord
But those among them who deny the attributes have become *** sick with the disease of ignorance and abandonment " .

The Shaykh : ... the zay, it is in any case a foreign name
The student: ...

The Shaykh : No, without a yaa, so I asked about them
The reader: " So I asked about them my companions "

The Shaykh : My companions
The reader: " So I asked about them my companions and my loved ones, *** the followers of Jahm, the party of Genghis Khan" .

The Shaykh : ... Genghis Khan without a yaa ...
The reader: " So I asked about them my companions and my loved ones, *** the followers of Jahm, the party of Genghis Khan"

The Shaykh : There is no defect in this, because this is transmitted, my brothers, transmitted to the whole world, what is correct ... .
The reader: " So I asked about them my companions " .

The Shaykh : I have to rewind the tape, rewind the tape, rewind the tape, rewind, rewind.
The reader: " So I asked about them my companions and my loved ones, *** the followers of Jahm, the party of Genghis Khan " .

The Shaykh : Do not stop at Genghis Khan, Khan with a kasrah like the others, Khan like the rest of the nun line.
The reader: " So I asked about them my companions and my loved ones, *** the followers of Jahm, the party of Genghis Khan
Who are these and who are they called, for they *** brought a matter that fills the ears
And they have a dominance over us that no *** possessor of falsehood has, but the possessor of proof
Or have you not heard"

The Shaykh : Or have you not heard?
The reader: " Or have you not heard their saying and their speech, *** like the thunderbolts, this is not for a coward"

The Shaykh : This is not for a coward
The reader: " Or have you not heard their saying and their speech, *** like the thunderbolts, this is not for a coward
They came to you from above and you came *** from below them, you are not equal
They came to you with the revelation, but you came ***"

The Shaykh : With sculptors of thoughts, or with a dammed nun?
The student: Dammed

The Shaykh : ... okay
The reader: " They came to you with the revelation, but you came *** with sculptors of thoughts and minds
They said, They are anthropomorphists and corporealists, so do *** not listen to the speech of a corporeal animal
And curse them with a great curse and fight them *** with the armies of denial, not a coward
And rule with the spilling of their blood " and according to them

The Shaykh : Imprison them
The reader: " And rule with the spilling of their blood and their imprisonment, *** or if not, expel them from the homelands
Beware of your companions from them, for they are"

The Shaykh : From them, they are
The reader: Beware of your companions from them, they are

The Shaykh : From them, they are, the mīm in "they are" is dammed.
The reader: " Beware of your companions from them, they are more astray *** than the Jews and the worshippers of the crosses
And beware of arguing with them by saying Allah said or *** the Messenger said, for you will return in humiliation
How, and they are more worthy of it, they have executed *** in it the powers of the minds and the bodies
So if you are afflicted with them, refute them on the ta' *** wil "

The Shaykh : The ta'wil is like the connection, is it with the ta'
The reader: " So if you are afflicted with them, refute them on the ta' *** wil, woe to the news and the Qur'an
And likewise refute them on"

The Shaykh : Refute them
The reader: " And likewise refute them on the denial of the *** singular reports, those are the two foundations of our companions"

The Shaykh : Repeat.
The reader: " And likewise refute them on the denial of the *** singular reports, those are the two foundations of our companions
Our sheikhs recommended them "

The Shaykh : Our sheikhs, our sheikhs in the accusative case, in the accusative, in the accusative.
The reader: " Our sheikhs recommended them, their sheikhs, *** so hold them with your hands and your teeth
And if you gather with them in a council, *** then hasten to bring forth and occupy the time
They will not control you with the athar and the *** news and the interpretation of the Furqan
So you become "

The Shaykh : You become, you become, complete, complete, do you have it in the accusative? Okay, go
The reader: " So you become, if you agree with them, like them, and if *** you oppose, a zindiq, a brother of disbelief
And if you are silent "

The Shaykh : And if you are silent
The reader: " And if you are silent, it is said this is an ignorant one, *** so hasten, even with nonsense and babbling
This is what, by Allah, our sheikhs recommended to us *** in the past times
So I returned from my journey and I said to my companion, *** and my mount had announced its weariness
Loosen your saddle and rest from its walking, *** there is nothing except the worlds
If the worlds had a Lord, a Creator, *** the corporealist would be the possessor of proof
Or if the Lord were separate from the people, *** the corporealist would be the possessor of faith
And he would be among the people the most worthy of *** Islam and faith and excellence
And this party would be above their heads, *** no two of them would differ over it
So leave the obligations that were imposed on you, *** and remove your veil and throw away the pillars
There is no Lord above the Throne and the Most Merciful *** did not speak with the Qur'an " .

The Shaykh : This chapter is long, it does not fit us, in any case this other group says that he went seeking Allah and searched right and left, but he did not find anyone who guided him to Him except the people of hadith, they are the ones who guided him and explained that He, Glorified and Exalted is He, is above the highest heavens. The author cited several proofs for the elevation of Allah, we will take them one by one:
" They said, What you seek is above His servants, *** above the sky and above every place
And He is the One who truly rose above the Throne, *** but He took possession of the worlds "
Memorize this verse because it is important: He rose above the Throne and He took possession of the worlds. So "took possession" is not appropriate for the Throne, but He took possession of all the worlds. As for "rose above," it is specific to the Throne. Between the proofs
From which aspect?
No, no, because this means only ownership
Then the author cited his elevation by his saying:
" To Him ascends every good word " in the Qur'an
" And to Him is raised the effort of the grateful "
" And the spirit and the angels descended from Him " and descent does not occur except from above. This is a second type of indication of elevation. The elevation of things to Him indicates His elevation, and their descent from Him also indicates His elevation. He said:
" And to Him they ascend " like the first
" And to Him the hands of the supplicants are directed, *** toward the height " this is a fitrah proof. No one has ever said, O Allah, without raising his hands to the sky. These are three
" And to Him the Messenger ascended " this is like the first, the ascent of things to Him because He is above. But his saying: " from nearness to his Lord two bows " this is his statement here, but his statement in *Al-Tabyan fi Aqsam al-Qur'an* contradicts that, where he mentioned that the meaning of His saying: is that the intended meaning is Jibril, and this is the correct view, that the intended meaning of His saying: is Jibril, not Allah, Mighty and Majestic. Yes, but the author, like other mujtahids, may have two or more statements on the issue, and this is one of the issues of the principles in which the Salaf, may Allah have mercy on them, differed. Yes, he said:
" And to Him Jesus was raised in truth, *** and he will descend so that he may be seen clearly "
This is also of the first type, that the ascent of things is to Him
" And to Him ascends the spirit of every believer " from the first
" And to Him the hopes of the servants are directed " from the third type, which is what? The fitrah. And for this he said, but the fitrah of Allah. Good, he says:
"So I asked my companions and my loved ones, *** the followers of Jahm"
This indicates that the man was a Jahmi. The followers of Jahm were the party of Genghis Khan, or Chinggis Khan. This is Abu Muluq, the king of the Mongols, and he is the first king of the Mongols to rule under this name. Yes. Then he said: "Who are these?" until he mentioned their descriptions, until he said:
"They came to you with the Revelation, but you came *** with the delusions of minds and intellects"
And what did the followers of Jahm say in response to him? He said: "Who are these?" And what did they say?
"They said: 'They are those who liken Allah to creation and ascribe a body to Him, so *** do not listen to the speech of a living animal who ascribes a body to Allah.
And curse them with a great curse, and attack them *** with the armies of ta'til (denial of the divine attributes), not as a coward.
Is this correct? This is an error. They are the ones who deserve this ruling. Then they ordered: "Rule with the shedding of their blood". Killing is this ruling. "And their imprisonment", naturally, life imprisonment. This is another ruling. And the third: "Or not", meaning if you do not rule with that, "then expel them". Who issued this ruling? The followers of Jahm and the followers of Genghis Khan, against the people of the Sunnah and the community. He said: Do not let them remain. Either kill them, or imprison them, or expel them. We ask Allah for safety. Yes.
"Beware of your companions regarding them, for they are more astray *** than the Jews and the worshippers of the crosses"
May Allah protect us. Look, they say this about the people of the Sunnah and the community because they drive people away from them.
"And beware of debating them with 'Allah said' or *** 'the Messenger said,' for you will be defeated in humiliation"
If you debate them with the Book and the Sunnah, you will be defeated. What does "defeated" mean? You will be routed and overcome, because the Book and the Sunnah are with them. "How", meaning how can you overcome them when they have exerted the strength of their minds and bodies in it? "So if you are afflicted with them", meaning if it happens that you are afflicted with them in a gathering, then deceive them by way of figurative interpretation or exegesis. When is figurative interpretation? When refutation is not possible. That is, if they bring a verse and you cannot refute them, what do you do? You interpret it figuratively. If they bring a mass-transmitted hadith that you cannot refute, you interpret it figuratively. If that is not possible, then...
"And likewise, deceive them by refuting the ahad reports". If the report is an ahad report, say: This is a lie. So he meant that he advised him to respond to the people of the Sunnah with what? With figurative interpretation if refutation is not possible, and with refutation if the report is an ahad report. And he said: These are two principles for our people, and some of them advised others with them.
Now, if you and they gather in a council, do not let them speak. You start speaking and fill the council with lies and nonsense until the council is wasted. Do you understand how they advise one another? That is, if one wants to misguide, he says: When the council comes, do not let anyone speak. He speaks and starts bringing nonsense and lies. Why? Because if they start speaking, they will overcome him.
"They will not control you with the athar and *** reports and the exegesis of the Furqan"
Because you will either agree, disagree, or remain silent. Look, brothers, how the enemy advises one another. If they bring the Revelation, what do you do in front of them? You refute if it is an ahad report, and you interpret figuratively if it is not an ahad report. If it is mass-transmitted or from the Qur'an, if you sit with them, you occupy them with speech far from these things, lies and nonsense, and so on. And if they control the council and become stronger than you in speech, yes, then you use one of three things. Your situation is not free from three things: either you agree, or you disagree, or you remain silent. If they control the council, it is theirs, so you are not free from three states: either you agree, or you disagree, or you remain silent.
If you remain silent, they say: This is an ignorant person. If you agree, you become like them. We do not want you to become like them. If you disagree and they have the Qur'an and the Sunnah, you become a heretic in the eyes of the other people in the council. He says: This person contradicts the Book and the Sunnah. Is that clear, everyone? Now, this man advised his companion, or this party advised their companion, to have the first word in speech. If they control it over him, let him beware, because their state is not free from these three states. He says:
"So I returned from my journey" to the end of it. Perhaps we should stop here, it is better.
... The people of denial of the divine attributes. How do they say "He took possession of the universes"? The answer is: It is said that Allah took possession of the universes in reality, so He is their close friend and they are His property, without doubt. And what the people of the Sunnah denied regarding the people of denial of the divine attributes, when they said "istawa" means "He took possession of the Throne," is that the people of the Sunnah said to them: Then was the Throne before His taking possession of it for someone else, or not? Because the mentioned "istawa" came with "thum" (then) , so here Allah's taking possession of it is a taking possession after what? After the creation of the heavens and the earth. So before that, it was for whom? For other than Allah. But if we say that Allah took possession of the universes without "thum," there is no objection. But if someone asks: Why did Ibn al-Qayyim choose the word "took possession" to show to those who said "istawa on the Throne" means "He took possession of it" that they erred? For the taking possession of everything, do you say that Allah "istawa" on the earth? What is the answer? They say: No, we do not say this. It is incumbent upon you to say "He istawa on the earth," because you interpret "istawa" with "took possession," and Allah the Exalted has taken possession of everything, so it is incumbent upon you to say "He istawa on the earth, and on the human, and on everything." And they do not say that, because it is disbelief. I think the objection has now disappeared, meaning there is no objection in the speech of Ibn al-Qayyim at all.
The student: ...

The Shaykh : Yes. Now, if we say that Allah took possession of everything, meaning He has the close friendship over everything, is this truth or not truth? This is truth. Someone might say: How do we say it is truth, while we denied those who interpreted "istawa" with "taking possession"?
The answer is that we denied them because "istawa" does not mean "took possession." This is one point.
Second: Because "istawa" was coupled with "thum," which indicates that this is a new occurrence, meaning "istawa" after the creation of the heavens and the earth. Do you say that Allah did not "istawa" on the Throne except after the creation of the heavens and the earth? The answer is: We say no. But they say: Then He took possession after the creation of the heavens and the earth. And this is the aspect of denial against them. So the result is that the word "took possession of the kingdom" has no problem, or "took possession of the creation" has no problem. The problem is interpreting "istawa" with "took possession" from two aspects:
The first aspect: That "istawa" does not come to mean "took possession."
And the second: That it necessitates that the Throne was before Allah's "istawa" on it for other than Allah. So this is the aspect of denial against them. Yes.

The questioner : It can also be said that your saying "He took possession of..." implies that another one had taken possession of it before.

The Shaykh : No, no, absolutely not. This, if it came with what necessitates succession... But as an initial matter, it is correct that Allah took possession of everything. Yes.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : I told you that Ibn al-Qayyim chose "took possession" in order to respond to them, because if he said that "istawa" means "took possession," we would say: He has taken possession of everything, so say: He "istawa" on everything, otherwise it is a contradiction. Yes, this is the aspect of Ibn al-Qayyim's choice of the word "took possession" over others. Yes.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : We say: "Thum" (then) "istawa." The word "thum" indicates succession and that before that it was for other than Allah. And yes, it is possible to specify some individuals of a general ruling by specification for it and attention to it, and this is common in the Arabic language. But the word "thum istawa" prevents the intended meaning from being "taking possession."

The questioner : Shaykh, what is the evidence for the word "taking possession"?

The Shaykh : It does not need evidence.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : No, no, absolutely not. Everything that indicates a meaning befitting Allah, you may inform about Allah with it. Everything that indicates a meaning that is not impossible for Allah, you may inform about Allah with it. The reports are broader than the names. Yes.

The questioner : It does not have "thum"...

The Shaykh : This is correct, but we do not say "took possession," because "istawa" is like "istawa" in its sister verses among the remaining verses. Allah mentioned "istawa" in seven places.

The questioner : The Throne...

The Shaykh : There is no doubt He took possession of everything. We do not prevent that He took possession of the Throne. We say: He took possession of the Throne, but we prevent interpreting "istawa" with "took possession." Yes. Read, read. I have clarified what I have here, but this has not been clarified now.
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : "Took possession of a thing" means He had the close friendship over it in terms of ownership and management. And this does not contradict the perfection of Allah Mighty and Majestic, rather it is part of His perfection that He takes possession of everything. Yes. But the objection is that we interpret "istawa" with what? With "took possession." This is the objection. This is one, because if you interpret "istawa" with "took possession," the Throne, when the heavens and the earth were created, was not the property of Allah, or not? Because he said: This is two.
Third: Why did Ibn al-Qayyim choose the example of "he took possession of a kingdom"? Why? To demonstrate the invalidity of their interpretation of *istiwa'* (rising above the Throne) as *istawla* (took possession). The point is this: We and you both say that Allah took possession of everything. Do you consider it correct to say that Allah rose above everything? If they say no, they are contradicting themselves. If they say yes, they are openly contradicting the Ummah (the Muslim community). In fact, we can say that they are committing disbelief (kufr) right now. We ask: Do you interpret *istiwa'*? Do you make it valid to say that He rose above everything in place of "He took possession of everything"? If they say yes, they contradict the Ummah or commit disbelief. If they say no, they are contradicting themselves. So, what is valid then?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : How? My interpretation is...

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : I mean, if I said that Allah rose above a donkey, would that be fitting? It is not fitting, even though the donkey and everything else is His property. Yes, my brother.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Praise be to Allah. Yes.
The reader: In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and all his Companions.
He said (may Allah have mercy on him):
"There is no Lord above the Throne, nor *** Does the Most Merciful speak with the Qur'an
If there were a Lord above the Throne, a beholder *** Then localization and dependence on a place would be necessary
If this Qur'an were the very essence of His speech *** In letters and voice, it would be a body
So if this and that are negated, what remains *** Of faith in this negation?
So leave the lawful and the forbidden to their owners *** For they are the fence for them around the garden
So breach it and enter, and you will see within it *** All the other colors prepared for you
And you will see by it what a veiled one does not see *** Of everything you desire, a pair of spouses
And cut the ties that have bound *** These people from past ages
So that you become free, not under commands *** No, nor prohibition, nor distinction"

The Shaykh : Yes, this passage says: In what came before, if the worlds had a Lord, a Creator, and He was described with His various attributes, it would be said: If this were a fixed reality, who would be in the right? The people of *tajsim* (ascribing a body to Allah), the *mujassimah* (those who ascribe a body to Allah), and the people of *tajsim* are the people of the Sunnah and the community. And you say that *tajsim* is invalid. So, if *tajsim* is invalid, then the existence of the Lord is invalid, the existence of His speech is invalid, that He is above the Throne is invalid, and that He is described with attributes is invalid. At that point, the best thing is to abandon these matters and these assumptions, and to deny the Creator, deny the Resurrection, and deny everything, and to be free and unbound from everything. And to abandon the lawful and the forbidden. What does it mean to abandon them? It means to abandon adherence to them. Do not say, "This is lawful, so I do it," and "This is forbidden, so I leave it." Be free and break through this fence, which is the lawful and the forbidden. Because the lawful and the forbidden are a fence, like a wall around a garden, that supports it and protects it. So, the lawful and the forbidden, my brothers, are a wall that surrounds faith and prevents it from being harmed from the outside. Therefore, you find that when a person leaves the forbidden for the sake of Allah the Exalted, his faith strengthens. And when he performs the obligatory to draw near to Allah, his faith strengthens. So these limits, as Allah named them, are limits that preserve the heart. And the stronger this fence is, the better preserved the faith is. He says, "Break through it." The author says:
"Break through it, then enter, and you will see *** that all the colors have been prepared for you"
I mean, if you break through this thing, you will find that all the colors have been prepared for you. From where? From what one desires of the adornments of this world and its pleasures, which have no limits. And at that point, what will happen? If one adopts this description, he will be a heretic and an atheist who does not acknowledge a Lord, nor the lawful, nor the forbidden. Reflect on how *ta'til* (denial of the divine attributes) led the intelligent people to disbelief in Allah. Because these intelligent people... as is understood from the author's words, looked into the doctrine of the people of *ta'til* and found it to be nothing. They looked into the doctrine of the people of the Sunnah and the community and found it, according to the people of *ta'til*, also incorrect. And... they found it not correct either. So what did they say? They said, "Then we will not be with these people nor with those people. So throw... and leave everything. Do not make anything lawful and do not forbid anything, and be free." And this, may Allah protect us, is the height of heresy and denial. Yes.
The reader: “But you made your own veil when you see *** Above the sky for people a religion
If you said that what is above the sky is averted *** And the Throne is empty of the Most Merciful
And Allah does not speak to His servants *** No, nor does He speak in a Quran
He never spoke, nor does He speak, and no speech *** Has ever appeared from Him to a human being
You would have solved its riddle and gained its treasure *** And you would have known that people are in delusion”

The Shaykh : Look, I seek refuge in Allah, meaning if you said this statement and denied this denial, you would have hit the mark and solved the enigma, meaning this complex enigma where one does not know what the truth is in it. We do not know if the truth is with the people of the Sunnah, whom the people of ta'til (denial of the divine attributes) call ascribers of a body to Allah, or with the people of ta'til. So we are in confusion, as the common people say... we do not know anything. Yes, we were created to enjoy, and it is nothing but our worldly life; we die and we live. We ask Allah for well-being. Yes.
The reader: "But you claimed that your Lord is separate *** from His creation, for you said there are two existents
And you claimed that Allah is above the Throne and the Footstool *** truly, above them are the two feet
And you claimed that Allah hears His creation *** and sees them from above seven eights"
The student: ...

The Shaykh : ...
The reader: "And you claimed that His speech originated from Him *** and to Him the end of times returns
And you described Him with hearing and sight *** which should not be attributed to one who has no body
And you described Him with will and power *** and aversion and love and tenderness
And you claimed that Allah knows everything *** in the universe, whether secret or open
And knowledge is an attribute added to His essence *** an attribute that subsists in one who has no body"

The Shaykh : All these things are from the doctrine of the people of the Sunnah and the community. So we believe, but he says "claimed" because he does not believe in this... that Allah is separate from His creation, and that there are two existing entities: a Creator and a created being. And we believe that Allah is above the Throne and has risen above it, and that the Footstool is the place of His feet. And we believe that Allah the Exalted hears His creation, even if they are in the depths of the seas. And we believe that Allah the Glorious and Exalted sees them from above seven heavens, and He is on His Throne, Glorified and Exalted is He, and nothing of their actions is hidden from Him. And we believe that the Qur'an is His speech, from Him it began and to Him it returns. From Him it began because He initiated it and spoke it first, and to Him it returns at the end of time, as has come in some reports that it will be lifted from the mushafs (written copies) and the breasts, until the people will have no Qur'an before them and no Qur'an in their breasts. And that will be when the people turn away from it completely, with no recitation, no action, and no belief. For Allah the Exalted honors His speech by not leaving it among people in this state. And this is similar to the allowance of the Abyssinian to destroy the Ka'bah, stone by stone, so that it is not harmed, even though Allah the Exalted protected it from Abraha, the king of Abyssinia, when he came to destroy the Ka'bah. But at the end of time, if the people violate the sanctity of this House and it is nothing in their eyes, then this Abyssinian man will be unleashed upon it and he will demolish it, stone by stone, until his soldiers carry its stones from Makkah to the sea. Yes.

The questioner : Before the Mahdi?

The Shaykh : No, no, after him. He said: "And to Him returns the last of the times" "And to Him returns the last of the times" And we also believe that Allah the Exalted is described with hearing and sight. But he says: Hearing and sight do not exist except for one who has a body, meaning except for a physical body. And we also believe that among His attributes are will and power. The Asha'irah also believe in will and power, and they believe in hearing and sight. But we also believe that He hates. Among His attributes are hatred and love. He hates and He loves. Is there anything in the Qur'an that indicates hatred? For example: And love, as in His saying: The Asha'irah and others from the people of *ta'til* deny hatred and love. How do they interpret them? They interpret them either as the created thing or as will. They interpret them as will because they affirm will, or as the created thing because the created thing is affirmed by everyone. So they say that Allah hates, meaning He punishes the disbelievers, for example, He punishes the disbelievers. Did you understand? And they say: Or they say He wills their hatred, or He wills their punishment. He wills their punishment. And they do not affirm hatred. But we say to them: What do you say about His saying: Is it possible to interpret "hates" as "punished"? "Punished their emergence"? That does not make sense. Or "He willed the punishment of their emergence"? That does not make sense. Okay, they said that reason does not indicate it. It does not indicate that Allah is described with hatred. And what do we say to him? Okay, we say to him: The answer is from two angles:
First: If we assume that reason does not indicate it, then the hearing, meaning the Book and the Sunnah, indicates it, or not? And the evidence is not limited to one piece of evidence. There may be several pieces of evidence for a thing. And for this reason, one of the known principles among them is that the absence of a specific evidence does not necessitate the absence of the indicated thing. Because if this evidence is absent, it is not prevented that the thing is established by another evidence. Yes. For example, how many roads are there to Makkah? Many roads. If we assume that this road is closed, does it mean that reaching Makkah is prevented? No, there are other roads. So if we assume that reason, as they claim, does not indicate hatred, does not indicate... hatred, we have the transmission, the hearing.
Another answer is to say: Rather, reason indicates the establishment of hatred for Allah. For the fact that Allah the Exalted takes revenge on the sinners indicates hatred of the sin. If He loved it, would He punish them? Absolutely not. And we say the same about love. And for this reason, the Asha'irah and others who judge by reason regarding the attributes of Allah are, without a doubt, contrary to reason. They are contrary to reason. Because the fact that reason is an evidence was not established except by the way of hearing. So if they deny the indication of hearing, it necessitates the denial of the indication of reason. And the fact that reason is an evidence for hearing: Look, always Allah the Exalted says: and the like. So this indicates.