Introduction

When a Jahmite is bold enough to lie against Allaah that He is not above His Throne, and does not have the attributes of face, hands and eyes (all as attributes of His essence) despite Allah having affirmed that for Himself and the entirety of the Salaf (and the very early Kullaabis and Ash'aris) having taken all of that with acceptance (with negation of tamtheel and without any ta'weel and tafweed), and similarly when a Jahmite belies the Messenger (alayhis salaam) in these matters, then it is of no surprise that this Jahmite will think anything of lying upon the Salafi scholars and attributing to them what they are free of or twisting their words upon other than what they meant or decontextualizing their statements in order deceive the unsuspecting audience. This is not surprising to say the least. So we have one of these such Jahmites who tried it on with the following:

First of all note how there are not any references given, as in page numbers and editions, which is common practice with these people when it comes to these particular types of citations. But it makes sense, if you want to commit a crime, you've got to make sure you make it as difficult as possible to unravel, so you can't really fault the Jahmee for this. They need to make it as difficult as possible for people to go and verify for themselves and to see what is actually being said. They drop a few quotations, the audience who does not know any better, laps it up like milk, and the shyster will even receive a few pats on the back through the comments section, "Hey, well done, I am learning so much!" So this is the type of operational scam that is going on here.

Further, many of these people themselves are complete ignoramuses, they don't even have a clue about their own theology, but they think they know it. And with this flawed, deficient understanding of their own theology, they then approach the sayings of the Salafi scholars, only to completely misunderstand and misapply them. So this is the type of clown we are dealing with here. For an in-depth illustration of what has just been mentioned in this paragraph, please study the antics of this clown which we covered in detail. That will give you a standard benchmark with which to judge the circus performances that these Jahmites are doing these days.

Now this shyster has brought five or so matters in the above post and we will try to address them one by one inshaa'Allaah.

Ibn Jarir al-Tabari Discussing Allaah's Place (Makaan) and Tanaqqul, Taghayyur

In Part 3 we addressed a quote ascribed to al-Tabari by this very dishonest individual which is as follows:

-He says in his tafsir, "Indeed Allah ta'ala negated regarding Himself through it (the following): change (Taghayur), movement (tanaqqul) from one place to another, occurrence of change which occurs in humans and other creation,"

We have now been informed of the quote and checking it in a print version, it is in volume 3, page 194 of the Dar Ihyaa al-Turath, Beirut, 2001 print of Jaami al-Bayaan, at the beginning of the tafseer of the Surah Aali Imraan. As we said, never, ever, ever trust a Jahmite in citation. Let's look at the full quote and compare it to what is above:

The discussion is about the meaning of "al-Qayyum" and al-Tabari has cited the views of Mujaahid and Rabee' who say that it means (القائم علـى كل شيء) and (قـيـم علـى كل شيء يكلؤه ويحفظه ويرزقه) which basically mean, the one who maintains everything, the one who preserves, safeguards and provides for everything.

After bringing these sayings, he then says:

Here is the translation with comments (and you will soon realize what this Jahmee Kadhaab tried to hide):

And others said: ...

So this is not the saying of al-Tabari but he is citing the views of others! So here the great lie is exposed, and al-Tabari is free of the fabrication against him.

And others said: The meaning of that is al-qiyaam alaa makaanihi (established in His place), and His angles in [having] permanent establishment alongside which there is no cessation (zawaal) and no transformation (intiqaal). And that Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, negated from Himself through it [i.e. al-Qayyum], taghayyur (change) and tanaqqul (movement) from a place to another, and the occurrence of transformation which occurs in humans, and in all of His creation besides them (humans).

A number of things here.

First: In this view, there is affirmation of makaan (place) for Allaah. This is considered kufr to all Hellenized Kalaam theologists, since in this view Allah does not move from His place (makaan), which means He has a "place" according to this view al-Tabari is citing.

Second: As we explained in the article on the term "hulul al-hawaadith" (see here), that there are certain things denied for Allaah, such as the change which occurs in created things (meaning deterioration and what is similar to this) and likewise that Allaah does not acquire attributes He never had before and likewise Allaah does not create anything in His own essence. No doubt all of this is denied for Allaah. However, Allaah having speech and action tied to His will and power does not come under that type of deficient change, rather it is pure perfection. This is what the Ahl al-Kalaam aim to deny by labelling it as "hawaadith" and "taghayyur" and the likes, and this is to remain consistent with their proof of huduth al-ajsaam, and they claim that it means Allaah must be "creating" in His own essence, and this is pure baatil (falsehood) and we will address this more fully in a separate article.

However, as we will see, al-Tabari does not consider this explanation to be correct. In any case, he mentions the one who held this view:

A mention of who said that: Ibn Humayd narrated to me, he said: Salamah, from Umar bin Ishaq, from Muhammad bin Ja'far bin al-Zubayr, [who said: Al-Qayyum, the one who is established in His place (makaan) with His authority over His creation, never ceasing. And Eesaa had ceased (to be) in their saying, meaning the saying of the Ahbaar (learned sages) who debated with the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) from the people of Najraan regarding Eesaa, that he ceased from the place he was and went to other than it.

So the argument here (in what al-Tabari is presenting) is that since Eesaa was not permanently established in a place (makaan) but rather ceased and went away from it, then he cannot be divine, as in cannot be al-Qayyum. Again, nothing in this for the Hellenized Kalaam theologists, in fact, this view too is plain manifest kufr to them.

Then al-Tabari explains:

But the more worthy of the two explanations of being correct is what is said by Mujaahid and Rabee' and that it is a description from Allaah, exalted be His remembrance, of His self that He is the one who maintains the affair of every single thing in its sustenance, and repelling (harm) from it, and preserving it, regulating it, managing it with His power, [as is] the saying of the Arabs, "So and so is qaa'im over the affair of this city" meaning by that: The one holding authority over the regulation of its affair.

So al-Tabari holds on to this view and maintains that the meaning of al-Qayyum is "the one who maintains the affair of every single thing in its sustenance, and repelling (harm) from it, and preserving it, regulating it, managing it with His power." Allaahu Akbar! What more needs to be said.

Closing Notes

First thing is, always remember, never, ever, ever trust a Hellenized Kalaam theologist in his citation of Salafi scholars. He has an operative motive to justify his baatil and to gain legitimacy through it. Second, as you can see this is an exemplification of great treachery on behalf of this individual called Zubair, and there are multiple crimes involved here. We hope that this individual hastily repents to Allaah, and puts up a repentance and exonerates al-Tabari from the fabrications he tried to impute to him. For al-Tabari is a Salafi, Sunni, Athari imaam who afffirms Allaah's istiwaa (ascent), nuzul (descent), majee' (coming) and Ityaan (arrival) - without how - and he is innocent of the Jahmee filth this individual tried to malign him with! Instead, this individual should write an article containing al-Tabari's tafseer of the verses mentioning istiwaa, majee' and nuzul as part of his repentance, and also post the parts from al-Tabseer Fee Ma'aalim al-Deen which contain a refutation of the Jahmiyyah who deny the sifaat Khabariyyah (these were listed in Part 1), and in particular, al-Tabaris' lengthy refutation of those who denied al-nuzul using the standard Jahmee argument.