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.

Imaam al-Tabari and the Sifaat Fi'liyyah Such as Istiwaa', Nuzool, Ityaan, Majee'

Also from what this shyster and fraudster has ascribed to al-Tabari is the following translated statement:

-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,"

Notice again, no reference. Remember al-Tabari's tafsir spans over 25 volumes, so when this shyster says, "He says in his tafsir...", he is really saying this, "I am going to misquote al-Tabari and make sure you don't find out about it, or at least make it very hard for you to find out about it because you won't know where it is." Now of course the intent of this lowly despicable, calculated deceiver, is to use this one claimed statement of al-Tabari and use it to deny that Allaah made istiwaa over His Throne, or that Allaah descends (nuzul) or that Allaah will come and arrive (majee', ityaan) on the Day of Judgement. And the argument is (the argument of the Jahmites) that this necessitates movement from one place to another and is only said of bodies.

Now, we've looked high and low, we looked at the verses pertaining to majee' (89:22) and Ityaan (2:210) and (6:158) and could not find this quote. The closest we could find to this quote is what occurs in Aayah al-Kursee, regarding the saying of Allaah, "No sleep no slumber overtakes Him" (2:255). It is in the third volume of Ahmad Shakir's checking of Tafsir al-Tabari, Dar Ihyaa al-Turath, Beirut, 1st edition: (3/12):

And within this quote is the saying of al-Tabari:

And indeed He, exalted by His remembance, means by His saying, "Neither sleep nor slumber overtakes Him" that aafaat (meaning, harms, deterioration and the likes) do not occur to Him and 'aahaat (maladies) do not affect Him. This is because sleep and slumber are two meanings which overcome the understanding (fahm) of the one with understanding, and in the one whom they afflict they put and end to the state, condition which he was upon before they afflicted him.

So the explanation of the speech, when the affair is like what we have described is: [That] Allaah, there is none worthy of worship except He, the ever-Living (al-Hayy) who never dies, the self-Sustainer (al-Qayyum) who sustains everything besides Him with sustence, and preservation, and regulation and management from one state, condition to another state, condition. Neither sleep nor slumber over takes Him, and that which changes others does not change Him, and the changing, transforming (tanaqqul) of states, and the passing of nights and days do not cease from Him what He has never ceased to be upon. Rather, He is the continuous upon state, condition, and the self-Sustaining who sustains all of the creation, if He slept He would be overcome, subdued, because sleep overcomes the sleeper and subdues him....

The part in bold is the relevant part and note that this is different to what this Jahmee kadhdhaab is ascribing to al-Tabari. Now we have looked high and low, and if this Jahmee kadhhaab was honest, truthful and intending objective truth, he would be sincere enough to either post the reference for this alleged statement on his blog, or send it to us through our contact page, because other than this statement there is no other statement that mentions tanaqqul and taghayyur in al-Tabari's tafseer [as far as we know]. Update: The quote has been found and it is addressed fully in a separate article in Part 4.

Further, let us quote directly from al-Tabseer Fee Ma'aalim al-Deen itself to put and end to this vile Jahmee's attempted distortion and his attempt to throw his own Jahmee filth upon an Imaam from the Imaams of the Salaf, (Dar al-Aasimah, Riyaadh, 1996 first edition print with tahqiq by Ali al-Shibal, pages 146-147):

The translation of which is:

And He descends every night to the lowest heaven. So whoever rejected anything from what we have mentioned, we say to him: Indeed, Allaah, exalted be His remembrance, says, in His Book, "And Your Lord and the Angels will come, rank upon rank" (89:22), and He said, "And are they wating for anything but that Allaah should come to them in the shadows of clouds" (2:210), and He said, "Are they waiting for anything but that the Angels should come to them (at death) or that Alllaah should come (on the Day of Judgement) or that some of the signs of your Lord should come (the sun rising from the West)?"(6:158) So do you believe and attest to these reports or do you reject them?

If he claims that he rejects them, then the debate between us is ended from this angle.

And if he claims he believes in them, it is said to him: So what has caused you to reject the report that is reported from the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) that, "He descends to the lowest heaven, descending to it?"

So if he says: I reject that because descent (hubut) is transportation (nuqlah), and that movement (intiqaal) from one place to another is not permitted for him because that is from the attributes of created bodies!

It is said to him: Allaah has indeed said, "And Your Lord and the Angels will come, rank upon rank" (89:22), so is majee' (coming) permitted for Him? If he says, "It is not permissible for him, rather the meaning of this saying is that the command of your Lord will come?"

It is said to him: Allaah has informed us - the Blessed and Exalted - that He will come, He and the Angels, and you have claimed that His command will come, not Him. Then likewise you [should] say that the Angels do not come, but it will be the command of the Angels, not the Angels themselves, just like the meaning of the coming of the Lord, the Blessed and Exlated, [to you] is the coming of His command.

So if he says: I do not say that regarding the Angels, but I say it regarding the Lord.

It is said to him: The report about the coming of the Lord - the blessed and exalted - and the Angels is one report. So you claimed that the report about the Lord - exalted be His remembrance - is that His command will come, not Him, then you claimed about the Angels, that they will come themselves, not their commmand. So what is the difference between you and between the one who opposes you in this and says: Rather, the Lord is the one who comes and as for the Angels, then it is their command that will come, not the Angels themselves?!

And if he claims that the diffence between himself and this other one is that the angel is a creation of Allaah, and that cessation and movement is permitted upon it, but it is not permitted upon Allaah, it is said to him: And what is your evidence that the meaning of majee' and huboot, and Nuzool is transportation and cessation, especially upon the meaning of whoever claims amongst you that Allaah - sanctified be His name - that no place is devoid of Him? And how is it not permitted in your view that the meaning of majee', huboot, and Nuzool be different to what you have understood of transportation and cessation as it relates to the Eternal, the Maker, yet it is permitted to you that the meaning of "knower (aalim)", "powerful (qaadir)" with respect to Him is different to what you have understood with respect to those besides Him, in that He is knower without knowledge, and powerful with no power?

Note that this argument is directed towards the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah and what al-Tabari is arguing is identical in mode of argument to what the early Ash'ari scholar al-Baqillaani (d. 403H) was arguing against the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah who accused him of being a Mujassim for affirming the sifaat Khabariyyah, it is worthwhile for us to quote this passage from al-Baqillani (in the book "at-Tamheed", p.298):

And if someone said: What has led you to deny that His Face and Hand is a limb when you do not understand hand as an attribute, and face as an attribute except [in the form of a] limb? It is said to him: That is not necessitated, just like it is not necessitated when we do not understand a living, knowing, able (being) except to be a body (jism) that we, us and you, should judge Allah with the same.

And just like it is not necessitated when He is established by His own Essence (qaa'iman bi dhaatihi) that He is substance and body just because we, and you, do not find anything established by itself (qaa'imun bi-nafsihi) in what we (outwardly) observe except that it is like that (i.e. Substance and body).

And the answer to them is likewise if they say: It becomes necessary that His knowledge, life and speech and all of His attributes belonging to His Essence (dhaat) are non-essential incidental attributes (a'raad), genuses, or occurrences (hawaadith), or changes, or coalesce (merge) in Him, or are in requirement of a heart, and they used the existence (wujood) [that they observe] as argument [in this regard].

So essentially al-Tabari is saying:

How come you Jahmites, when it comes to the descent of Allaah, claim that you do not understand descent to be anything but transportation (from one place to another) like in created bodies and yet you are able to affirm Allaah is qaadir and aalim in a manner different to how they are found in the creation (albeit, even upon an innovated sense). So if you found a way to affirm these matters in a way different to how they are in creation, then likewise, you should affirm that Allaah descends, without treating its reality to be like what is in the creation.

And this is what al-Baqillani is arguing against the Mu'tazilah regarding the attributes of face and hands and the likes:

Since you are able to affirm a living (hayy) and able, powerful (qaadir) one without Him being a jism [and we do not see in observable reality anything with life and power except that it is a body] then likewise you should have no problem in affirming the attributes of face and hands without this necessitating Allaah is a jism (body).

Al-Tabari continues:

And if you did not understand a knower (aalim) except one who has knowledge and an able, powerful (qaadir) except one who has power, then what is your rejection that one who comes has no coming and one who descends has no descent, and that the meaning of that is [His mere] existence there alongside your claim that no place is devoid of Him!

If then one amongst them says to us: Then what do you say about the meaning of that [i.e. what is the truth regarding this]?

It is said to him: The meaning of that is what is indicated by the apparentness (dhaahir) of the report, and there is nothing towards the report except submission and faith in it. So we say: Our Lord will come - lofty is His majesty - on the Day of Judgement, and the Angels rank upon rank. And He descends to the lowest heaven, descending to it every night, and we do not say that the meaning of that is that His command descends. Rather we say that His command is descending to it (the lowest heaven) at every moment and hour and likewise to other than it from all of His creation which are present so long as they are present. Not an hour is devoid of His command, hence there is no angle for specifying it to be His command that decends to it at one time exclusive to another, so long as it is present and remains.

Likewise we say about these meanings: That which is correct of statement about everything which has been related in the reports about the attributes of Allaah the Mighty and Majestic and His Names, exalted be His Remembrance, is along the lines of what we have mentioned.

From this we see that the attempted fraud of this academic shyster and pretender to knowledge has now been thoroughly exposed for what it was. This criminals intent all along by using these clipped and dubious alleged quotes from al-Tabari was to deny these particular attributes of istiwaa, nuzul, majee', Ityaan, by using the very argument of the very Jahmites that al-Tabari is refuting in this very same book!!

Conclusion

A wannabe Hellenized Kalaam guru making his debut trying to foist his Jahmee filth upon the Imaams of the Sunnah turns himself into another number alongside Abu Adam Naruiji (see here), the Philadelphian Jahmites (see here), the Ma'rifah blind-followers (see here), the pretender Abu Layth (see here), the deceiver Abdullah Ali al-Amin (see here), GF Haddaad and his babies, Faqir et. al. (see here, and also here), Nuh Keller (see here and also here) and others.

To Allaah is the complaint! When will we come across one of these people who is not a calculated deceiving imposter lacking honesty and trustworthiness and with whom an honest objective investigative dialogue is possible?!!

So far, they all end up stinking the place out with their dishonesty...