The Philadelphian Jahmite Ash'ari Scandals Of 2009: Ibn Taymiyyah On Allaah Being Above the Throne, the Creed of the Jahmites That Allaah is in Every Place, and the Corrupt Insinuation of the Jahmites that Allaah Contains the Creation Within Himself|
Posted by Abu.Iyaad on Thursday, September, 24 2009 and filed under Articles
Key topics: Jahmite Ash'aris Hulool Al-Uluww Jahmite Ash'aris Hulool Al-Uluww
They are the followers of the Jahmite Creed of negating their is a Lord above the heaven and a deity above the Throne - adopting in all of that, the philosophical theological speculation that they inherited from the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah (their source and root) - and the axis of which is the proof called "hudooth ul-ajsaam", a corrupt, flawed proof for demonstrating the universe is created. They fraudulently pose as followers of Abu Hasan al-Ash'ari - when he is free of them and their Jahmee creed - and they attempt to masquerade the ta'weels of Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (d. 333H) as the ta'weels of Ahl us-Sunnah when in fact they are simply what al-Maturidi compiled of the ta'weels of al-Jahm bin Safwan and Bishr al-Mareesee that became widespread in the second and third century after hijrah, and which were adopted by the Mu'tazilah, and which were used to protect their "intellectual proof" (see below). These Jahmites actively promote indulging in Kalaam (theological philosophical speculation) and this is verbally stated by them in their videos, claiming that it is necessary for them to get involved with ilm ul-kalaam to deal with issues in Philadelphia.
What is the Essence of Ilm ul-Kalaam (Theological Speculation)
This ilm ul-kalaam is the very one that the Salaf reprimanded and whose practitioners they declared astray and warned against. The ilm ul-kalaam in particular, is that which is related to the "hudooth ul-ajsaam" or "hulool ul-a'raad fil-ajsaam" - the (corrupt and false) intellectual proof for the createdness of the universe that the Jahmites, Mu'tazilah, Kullaabiyyah, Ash'ariyyah and Maturidiyyah have made to be the foundation of their religion, and as a result of which they were forced to negate the attributes to varying degrees, otherwise their proof would become invalidated. This is because their proof demonstrates that something being subject to qualities (sifaat), incidental attributes (a'raad) and occurrences (hawaadith) is evidence of it being a created body (jism) - and thus they had to deny - to varying degrees - whatever Allaah affirmed for himself to keep this Taaghootee principle of theirs, honored and sanctified.
All these factions agree upon the foundation, which is the intellectual proof for the createdness of the universe (whilst bearing in mind their differences in its subsidiary details) but then they differ regarding what should and should not be negated from Allaah of:
in order to keep that intellectual proof intact. So we can see they all differ in this regard - the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Kullaabiyyah, Ash'ariyyah, Maturidiyyah - and all these factions are collectively known as the "Mu'attilah" (Deniers of the Attributes) and the "Mutakallimoon" (Speculative Theologians).
And then they also differ as what methods ought to be used to deny these attributes, is it purely ta'weel, or is tafweed or a combination of both or what?
And from the plainest of falsehoods is their inability to lay down any sound, solid principle that allows them to determine whether an attribute should be subject to ta'weel or not and because of this, the later ones amongst the Mu'attilah fabricated "tafweed" claiming it was the way of the Salaf, and the reason they invented "tafweed" because in "ta'weel" they did not find a satisfactory solution - because their ta'weels differed, so either one person was lying and the other was truthful or vice versa, and inside their souls they knew in reality that they are speaking about Allaah without knowledge. Thus, they fabricated the doctrine of "tafweed" claiming it was the way of the Salaf.
And then there are differences between themselves, so some of the Ash'aris who claim ta'weel is the way refute others who claim tafweed is the way, and then the Ash'aris refute Maturidis, and vice versa on this subject of "ta'weel" and "Tafweed" and which of these ought to be route through which their intellectual proof of "hudooth ul-ajsaam" and "hulool ul-a'raad" should be kept intact.
So this is the foundation of their falsehood and we advise all Muslims to be wise to it and to understand it well so as not to be ensnared by it.
The Salaf Warned Against the Jahmites Who Negated There is A Lord Above the Heaven
The Salaf of the very first times spoke about such Jahmites when they knew that they were attempting to deny there is a Lord above the heaven.
Hammaad bin Zayd (d.179H) also said, as is reported by Abdullah bin Ahmad in "as-Sunnah" (no. 41) and by al-Khallaal in "as-Sunnah", and also by adh-Dhahabee in "Mukhtasar al-Uluww" (p. 146)
Sulayman bin Harb said: I heard Hammad bin Zayd (d. 179H) saying: "They are circulating around [the issue of] of wanting to say that there is no deity above the heaven". He means the Jahmiyyah.
So note here what Hammaad bin Zayd said that the Jahmiyyah, in their speech, they were circulating around the issue of wanting to express that Allaah is not above the Throne, without going as far as saying that explicitly.
And Abdullah bin Imaam Ahmad, in "as-Sunnah" (1/120-121) and al-Bukhari in "Khalq Af'aal il-Ibaad" (p. 129) and adh-Dhahabi in "Mukhtasar al-Uluww" (p. 169), and Ibn al-Qayyim in "Ijtimaa Juyoosh al-Islaamiyyah" bring the following (with adh-Dhahabi and Ibn al-Qayyim declaring it Saheeh):
From Abdur-Rahman bin Mahdee who said: The companions of Jahm are desiring to say: "Allaah did not speak to Moses" and they are desiring to say, "There is nothing above the heaven", and that "Allaah is not above His Throne". I consider that their repentance be sought, so either they repent or they are to be killed (their necks are to be struck).
And what has also been said by Abdur-Rahmaan bin Mahdee (d. 198H) as narrated by al-Khallaal in "as-Sunnah", and Abdullah bin Ahmad in "as-Sunnah" (no. 147), and Ibn Taymiyyah also referenced it to "ar-Radd 'alal-Jahmiyyah" of Ibn Abee Haatim:
There is not amongst the people of desires [those] more evil than the companions of Jahm [bin Safwan]. They are revolving around [the issue] of wanting to say that there is nothing above the heaven. I consider, by Allaah, that they are not to be married into, and nor should inheritance (be given to them or taken from them).
And the saying of Yazeed bin Haroon (d. 208H) as quoted by al-Qadi Abu Ya'laa in his "Ibtaal ut-Ta'weelaat" and also ad-Dhahabi in "Mukhtasar al-Uluww" (p. 167):
Whoever claimed that "ar-Rahmaan ascended above the Throne" is [understood up a meaning] different to what is established in the hearts of the general folk is a Jahmee.
And Abul-Qasim Sulayman bin Ahmad at-Tabarani brings in "Kitaab us-Sunnah", as does adh-Dhahabi in "Mukhtasar al-Uluww" (p.132-133) from al-Abbaas bin Fudayl al-Asfaatee from Sulayman bin Harb who said:
I heard Hammaad bin Zayd (b. 98H, d. 179H) (saying): I heard Ayyub as-Sakhtiyaani (d. 131H), the Mu'tazilah were mentioned, so he said: "The central axis of the Mu'tazilah is that they want to say there is nothing above the heaven".
And adh-Dhahabi, in his "Mukhtasar al-Uluww" commented on this saying:
This isnaad is like the sun in its clarity and like a pillar in its affirmation from the head and scholar of the people of Basrah (i.e. Hammaad bin Zayd).
And the Mu'tazilah were upon the deen of the Jahmiyyah in negating there is a Lord above the heaven, and we have documented elsewhere that the Mu'tazilah were also heavily involved in debating with the Indian Materialist Philosophers during the time of Haroon ar-Rasheed - see here. But this saying of the Ayyub as-Sakhtiyani was said before or around 131H which is when Ayyub as-Sakhtiyani died, and this is because the Mu'tazilah adopted the deen of the Jahmiyyah of ta'teel of Allaah's uluww and Allaah's sifaat.
And then what has been said by 'Abbaad bin al-Awwaam al-Waasitiyy (d. 185H), as has been reported by al-Khallaal in "as-Sunnah", adh-Dhahabee in al-uluww (p.154), Ibn al-Qayyim in "Ijtimaa' Juyoosh al-Islaamiyyah) (2/216) and Abdullah bin Ahmad in "as-Sunnah" (no. 65):
I spoke to Bishr al-Mareesee and his associates, and I saw that the final (part) of their speech ends up with them saying there is nothing above the heaven, and I hold that they are not to be married into, and nor should inheritance (be given to them or taken from them).
And the saying of Wahb bin Jareer (d. 206), from the leading Scholars of Basrah, as reported by adh-Dhahabi in "Mukhtasar al-Uluww" (p. 170):
Muhammad bin Hammaad said: I heard Wahb bin Jareer saying: "Beware of the opinion of Jahm, for they are trying (to say) that there is nothing above the Heaven, and this is nothing but the inspiration of Iblees, it is nothing but kufr".
So the issue is manifestly clear through these statements from these Imaams of the Salaf and they are all from the mid-second century after hijrah - before al-Ash'ari and al-Maturidi were even born. And the reason why Jahm bin Safwan denied there is a Lord above the heaven, was because it would falsify his intellectual proof that he adduced against the Indian materialist Philosophers called the Sumaniyyah. See here for more details on his debates with them. And this intellectual proof is the root of the creed of the Mutakallimoon (theological speculators, being the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Kullabiyyah, Ash'ariyyah, Maturidiyyah), and it is the foundation and basis of the bulk of their positions regarding Allah's Names and Attributes, and other areas of creed.
Jahmite Ash'aris of Philly Attempting to Pass Off Their Jahmi Creed as the Creed of Ahl us-Sunnah
So these Philadelphians have attempted to argue in favor of the deen of the Jahmites of old by denying there is a Lord above the heaven and denying there is a Deity above the Throne - and as they found no way to attack the manifest verses of the Qur'aan and the manifest ahaadeeth of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and the statements of the illustrious Companions and the agreement of the Salaf (al-Qurtubi: see here and here) - then they decided to isolate some of the notable figures amongst Ahl us-Sunnah in order to impute them with every repugnant meaning (which they fabricated in their own minds) - all in order to hide their own manifest falsehood, for fear of the common people recognizing its corruption and opposition to the deen of the Prophet and the Companions.
Thus, if they can keep the common folk occupied and busy with the likes of Ibn Taymiyyah, it keeps them away from realizing the true roots and foundations of the Ash'ari creed, as well as away from much of what the shrewd Ash'aris keep hidden from the common folk - from what is found in their books. And at the same time, the shrewd ones amongst them say to the common people, "Don't go too deep into the aqidah, just know the basics and that's enough for you", and this is due to their sure knowledge and insight, that if the people became wise to what they are upon, they would abandon it in an instant - and you can read and see for yourself from the likes of Abu Hamid al-Ghazali admitting this with speech that needs little comment!
The Jahmee Under Scrutiny
As for the Jahmee who is the subject of our discussion, then he is from the generality of those who lack intellectual honesty and integrity in quoting and representing the views of the opponent, and whose feebleness and decrepitude in intellect shines with a sense of false glory in much of what he mutters against the likes of Ibn Taymiyyah. And you can see the sandal of Abdullah bin Abi Ja'far taking care of him at this location.
And with the psychological comfort of the ta'weels of the Jahmites being by his side in the bag - and thereby feeling a sense of security about "hudooth ul-ajsaam", the intellectual proof of Jahm bin Safwan that is the base and foundation of his deen - he gleefully propounds the deen of the Jahmites that there is no Lord above the heaven and no Deity above the Throne - a corrupt saying that in the view of the Salaf tends towards Atheism, and which the Salaf scorned, reviled and abused centuries before the "Ash'ariyyah" were even known as a faction. Then along came al-Juwaynee (d. 478H), ar-Raazee (d.606H) and their likes and they jahmified and mareesified the Kullaabi doctrines that the Early Ash'aris were upon, adopting much of the ta'teel and ta'weel of the Jahmiyyah and Mu'tazilah, and making it all integral to the madhhab. And that is what all Ash'arites are upon today.
So it has become necessary to expose his treachery and scandal in misrepresenting the speech of Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah in which he (Shaykh ul-Islaam) is refutating the Jahmites and their claim that Allaah is within all of creation (including the interiors of dogs and swines) lofty and exalted is Allaah from that with a lofty exaltation. So in the course of refuting the kufr of these Jahmites, Ibn Taymiyyah is explaining the futility of their saying and its necessities, and so this Philadelphian Jahmite took what Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned of the necessities following on from their Jahmee belief, and claimed it to be an actual creed of Ibn Taymiyyah himself - and this is a common trait of these people and this is what is found in the generality of what they quote from Ibn Taymiyyah in their attempts to slander him and impute him with every vile thing.
The Claim of the Jahmite
The Jahmee made some remarks on the following saying of Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (Majmoo Fataawaa 16/100):
The translation of which is:
For the Jahmiyyah [who] say that He (Allaah) is in every place with His Essence, or that He is neither within the universe, nor outside of it, [then] they do not describe Him with "highness" exclusive of "lowness". For if He was in a location [according to the view of the Jahmites], then amongst the locations are those which are elevated and those which are low, thus, He would be [upon the belief of the Jahmites] high in the high (location) and low in the low (location). Rather, when they said, "He is in every place", then they have made all the locations to be places that He occupies, and as containers and receptacles, and they made them, in reality, to be higher than Him (i.e. above Him). For a place contains that which is inside (it), and the vessel and container (both) contain that which is surrounded (by them), and the container is above what is contained (by it).
And this statement of Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah occurs in his tafseer of Surah al-A'laa, and in which he discusses that "al-A'laa" is a name of praise which means that He is the highest, above everything, and is an affirmation of al-uluww and that the Jahmiyyah, amongst them are the Hulooli Jahmites, those who say Allaah is in every place, and the Mu'attil Jahmites, those who say Allaah is neither within the universe nor outside of it - so the first speak with Ittihaad, such as Ibn Arabi and the people of wahdat ul-wujood, and the second group speak with what necessitates Allaah's non-existence.
So Ibn Taymiyyah is talking about those who claim He is in every place and stating the implications of their statement and belief. And inshaa'Allaah, we will give a more detailed synopsis of the whole passage a little later.
So from the remarks that this Jahmite made upon this quoted passage were the following:
Satisfying the Gluttony For Punishment Of the Jahmite With the Sandal of Abdullah bin Abi Ja'far
After being looked after with the sandal of Abdullah bin Abi Ja'far on a previous occasion, it looks like this individual has developed the Stockholm Syndrome, has grown fond of the sandal and has come begging for more.
And inshaa'Allaah, his appetite can be satisfied with the following:
Point 1: Treachery in Quotation And Twisting the Context Is From The Distinguishing Hallmarks of the Jahmiyyah - If They Did It With the Qur'an, Then What Prevents Them From Doing It With the Statements of the Scholars
It is known that that the Jahmites of old, when they wanted to argue for their Atheism, that Allaah is in every place (the Hulooli Jahmites), they would bring only parts of whole verses, such as "Allaah is with you wherever you may be..." or that "There is no secret counsel of three except that He is the fourth", and then they would leave what is before or after these parts which explains that it is in reference to His knowledge (ilm) that He is in every place, and not in reference to His Essence (dhaat).
So if these Jahmites were bold enough to do this with the Qur'aan in order to deceive the people, then what prevents them from doing this with the speech of the Scholars. Let's take a look at some paragraphs before and after and see what is going on more fully ...
Which translates as:
And the intent here is that His uluww (aboveness, elevation) is from the attributes of praise that are binding for Him. It is not permissible for Him to be described with the opposite of uluww, ever. And for this reason, the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said in the authentic hadeeth:
In this particular instance, the context of the quote is that Ibn Taymiyyah is refuting the Jahmiyyah who claim Allaah is both above and below or who do not describe Him with being either above or below, and the context is one of refuting the Hulool (indwelling) that the Jahmiyyah innovated, and thus, in their claim of Allaah being everywhere, it is necessitated that Allaah is contained by things, and given the Jahmite claim that Allaah is in all things, then "the container is above what it contains", and thus they made things above Him,even though they refuse to describe Him to be above - so the passage is establishing this, and a little later Ibn Taymiyyah mentions how these Jahmites considered the saying of Fir'awn, "I am your Lord Most High", to be the truth, so they do not have a problem in describing things from the creation as being "above" and "high" as a means of praise, yet they do not do this for Allaah, the Most High, exclusively, and as they claim He is in all things, contained by them, then they made things to be higher than Him in reality.
So Ibn Taymiyyah is explaining the fasaad (corruption) and evil in their viewpoint. And when someone is refuting the Jahmiyyah and explaining the false necessities of their view, then it is not permissible for you to impute the one refuting them with the false necessities that he is mentioning - because his speech is in the context of refutation (ar-radd) and not one of making iqraar (affirmation) of one's own creed, and there is a difference between speech when it is made in the course of refuting (ar-radd) an opposer and between when it is made in the course of affirming (iqraar) one's belief and stating it.
The Jahmee has claimed therefore, that since Ibn Taymiyyah has said "the container is above the contained" in relation to the view of the Jahmites, that therefore, the view held by Ibn Taymiyyah that Allaah being above the Heaven, above the Throne - which is in all the revealed Books, and it is what all the Prophets and Messengers spoke with, and which the Qur'an was sent with, and which the Prophet invited to, and which the Companions explicitly expressed and which the entirety of the Salaf were agreed upon and which the Early Ash'aris were upon, as well as many other factions - that this view necessitates the creation is contained by Allaah, on account of these three words that Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned in the course of refuting the Hulooli Jahmites.
So the reality of what is going on in this Jahmee's mind is this:
Hey, I can see Ibn Taymiyyah is refuting the Hulooli Jahmites and he is showing that given their belief that Allaah is in everything, then in that case, we know that the container is above what it contains, and therefore, the Jahmiyyah have made all things above Him in reality, whilst at the same time they do not affirm aboveness for Allaah exclusively, despite them considering "aboveness" (of the essence) to be praiseworthy for things within the creation. So what I am going to do is I am going to take three of his words, "al-haawee fawq al-mahwee" (the container is above the contained) which Ibn Taymiyyah stated to explain that the necessity of their saying is that all things are above Him in reality, and I am going to claim that since Ibn Taymiyyah is having a go at these Jahmees and refuting them for not holding that Allaah is above the Throne, and since he has used this statement "the container is above the contained" to show how their view necessitates that all things contain Allaah and are above Him, which is a revilment, then I am going to make it look as if Ibn Taymiyyah, because he is criticizing them for this, must hold the opposite of this which is Allaah is above all things and contains them. Why? Simply because he mentioned this statement, "the container is above what it contains", and since he holds, at the same time, that Allaah is above the heaven, above His creation, then it can be surmised that Ibn Taymiyyah must hold that Allaah contains the creation within Himself. And as for the clear explicit clarifications regarding this matter, where Ibn Taymiyyah declares such a presumption about Allaah to be a "corrupt belief", and from the false presumptions of the oppressors (dhaalimoon) then I'm not interested in that at all, because then it will become clear to all people that it is me and my likes who are guilty of initiating this false presumption, by being the first to give rise to it in our minds, and they will realize that we are simply trying to throw our dirt onto Ibn Taymiyyah...
And the intent of the Jahmee isn't to attack Ibn Taymiyyah as much as it is to attack the creed of the Book and the Sunnah, that Allaah is above the Throne, with His Essence. If you attack Ibn Taymiyyah, you can get away with it, but if you attack the actual Book and the Sunnah, then all people know you to be a deviant Jahmee. And in reality, if these people were truthful, they would come and express their true reality by saying the following:
Considering that all people in all parts of the earth, always seek Allaah in the direction of above, then what is mentioned in the Qur'aan and the Sunnah that Allaah is above the creation, this necessitates that Allaah is containing the creation within His Essence, and that He surrounds them from all sides and is thus, containing the creation in the manner of a sphere containing another. It is only in this this manner that Allaah can be rationally understood to be above them all, and for it to be rationally understood that there is no contradiction between a person being in Canada calling upon Allaah above Him and a person in South Africa calling upon Allaah above Him
But the Jahmee is a coward and is not bold enough to come out and say that it is the texts of the Book and the Sunnah that necessitate this "rationality". But this is what they really want to say, they want to impose their own limited rationalities upon the revealed texts, so if they were truthful and honest, they would express what their real problem is, its with the revealed texts.
So coming to our point - if you are a third party to a dispute between two people, Zayd Jahmee and Ahmad Sunnee. And Zayd Jahmee is saying that Allaah is within everything, in dogs, swines, in the toilets and bellies of men and women, and Ahmad Sunnee is refuting this kufr, and exposing it and showing its repugnance - and you are a third party to all of this, watching and observing - and your only response is to take three words from Ahmad Sunnee and then you launch an attack on him and impute to him from these three words, something that he is free of, and which he explicitly refutes elsewhere and says is a "corrupt belief" - then this is from the greatest of signs of your allegiance to Zayd Jahmee and from the greatest of signs of your treachery towards the one who is expressing the truth in the actual issue that is the subject of the discussion.
And this is the generality of what you find with all of the Jahmites, everything they take from Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah is in the course of his refutation of the deviants from the Jahmiyyah and others from the Mu'attilah, and then they make interpolations from isolated statements that are made in the course of such refutations and then devise and build a creed for Ibn Taymiyyah around these words, and then ascribe it to him, and then go on to rebuke him for it - when he is free and innocent of such a concocted thing and it is often the case that he explicitly rejects and refutes what they have fabricated upon him (yes, even centuries after his death) in other places!
Point 2: Does Ibn Taymiyyah Hold That Allaah Contains the Creation Within Himself?
This issue has been dealt with specifically in another article and you can read that here. Ibn Taymiyyah is answering a question related to the Throne, and this is in the treatise "ar-Risaalah al-Arshiyyah", which is in Majmoo al-Fataawaa (6/545-592) - and in the course of this, Ibn Taymiyyah touches upon the issue which is related to this claim that the Philadelphian Jahmites have made against him many centuries later - and we don't know of anyone prior this or last century who made this claim - Allaah knows best.
We can summarize the essence of the discussion of Ibn Taymiyyah releated to this issue in this "Risaalah":
Ibn Taymiyyah is answering a question posed to him regarding the Throne and supplicating to Allaah in directions other than what one finds instinctively which is to face above and from the answer to this question we can summarize that Ibn Taymiyyah holds on the basis of the verse in the Qur'an:
They have made not a just estimate of Allah such as is due to Him. And on the Day of Resurrection the whole of the earth will be grasped by His Hand and the heavens will be rolled up in His Right Hand. Glorified is He, and High is He above all that they associate as partners with Him! (Az-Zumar 39:67)
And what is reported in the authentic ahaadeeth regarding this verse which are found in two Saheehs and also what is reported from the Salaf and from Ibn Abbas in particular, regarding this verse:
The seven heavens and the seven earths and whatever is within them and between them are not in the Hand of ar-Rahman except like a mustard seed in the hand of one of you
That Allaah is greater and mightier and greater than everything, and that the universe compared to Allaah is extremely small, and as such the meaning of Ihaatah (encompassment) is understood in light of this, and not upon the false, corrupt belief, as Ibn Taymiyyah calls it, that the universe is contained by Allaah in the manner of a sphere contained and surrounded by another. And thus, [in addition to the meanings of encompassment in knowledge (ilm), and in power (qudrah)], then the texts indicate encompassment from this angle also and because the texts have alluded to it, then it is spoken with in a manner that befits His Majesty and which is based upon these texts, and not upon any false and corrupt beliefs like what is presumed by the dhaalimoon (oppressors), exalted is Allaah from what they say, that Allaah contains the universe in His Self.
And that all of the texts support each other, thus, Allaah is above the heaven, above His Throne, and Allaah is mightier than everything, and the heavens and earth are extremely small to Allaah - all of these are found in the revealed texts, and thus, when we consider that all people in all parts of the earth, seek Allaah in the direction of above, no matter where they are, then we only speak on the basis of what we know from the texts, and thus Allaah's encompassment is in the manner alluded to in the saying of Ibn Abbaas. And upon this, all the doubts in this regard are removed, for that then explains that all people in all parts of the earth are indeed seeking Allaah when they seek Him above, and who is in truth above them all.
This is essentially what Ibn Taymiyyah is saying, and here is a passage from towards the end of the treatise:
It has become clear, in all assumptions (of what the case might be), that turning to Allaah is not permissible except (in the direction of) above, alongside His being above His Throne, separate and distinct from His creation, and regardless of whether it is assumed that He encompasses the creation - in the manner that He encompasses them when they are in His grasp - or if it is assumed that He is above them and encompasses them without Him grasping them, then in either of these two assumptions, He is above them, separate and distinct from them.
And this is based upon what has been said by Ibn Abbaas, as he mentioned earlier, that "The seven heavens and the seven earths and whatever is within them and between them are not in the Hand of ar-Rahman except like a mustard seed in the hand of one of you" - and this is reported by Ibn Jareer at-Tabari in his tafseer and also by as-Suyooti in ad-Durr al-Manthoor (5/336).
From this it is clear that the insinuation that if Allaah is above all of His servants, in all parts of the earth, and if all His servants seek Him above, that this means that Allaah contains the creation within Himself like a sphere containing another, that this is a corrupt belief, and that it is from foolishness to hold such a belief.
Then he continues:
When a chick-pea or a peppercorn, rather a dirham or a dinar, or a ball that a child plays with and what is similar to that, is in the hand of a person, or is beneath him, or whatever is similar to that, does any intelligent person, when he perceives the elevation of the person over it and his encompassment of it, that the person is like a celestial (spherical) body? And Allaah - and to Allaah is the loftiest example - is greater than that should be thought about Him, but only those think that who:
So these words are very clear and earlier, Ibn Taymiyyah said, in some important words:
And the intent is that whatever has come from the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) on this subject and other than it, then all of it is the truth, and part of it establishes the truth of the other part, and it is (all) in agreement with the innate instinct of the creation, and with what they have been granted of clear intellects (al-aql as-sareeh) and sound objectives (al-qasd as-saheeh) - it does not oppose the clear intellect and nor the sound objective and nor the upright fitrah and nor the sound transmission that is established from the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).
And what is meant here is that when we look at whatever has come in the revealed texts, then they are all considered in light of each other, and they are all placed together and with each other, and when we do that, we see that some of these texts support and clarify the truth of others - and it is on this basis that we can hold that no matter where a servant is, Allaah is always above Him when he seeks Allaah above - without falling into anything that is not befitting - because we are limiting ourselves to the texts and reconciling between them, and thus we are free from "corrupt beliefs" such as Allaah being like a celestial sphere that contains the creation, rather we hold that in which there is consistency and congruency on the basis of all the texts put together.
Whereas on the other hand, those people who use rationalities, and who are averse to the revealed texts, then they will start bringing absurdities and start imagining the "corrupt beliefs" such as "if all people are seeking Allaah above them, no matter where on the earth they are, then it means Allaah must be completely surrounding the creation from every side and is thus like a sphere containing another sphere" - so these are the people who try to engage rationalities and who invent false necessities because they have not fully submitted to the truth contained in the revealed texts and these false corrupt beliefs actually originated in their minds in the first place! And these are none other than the Jahmites, they are the ones who presume these false things in their mind, then they impute these false things to the people of the Sunnah, when the people of the Sunnah are free of these slanders and insinuations as you can see.
Another fraud of the Philadelphian Jahmites has been uncovered and its just another example of establishing their creed through attacking personalities - why? Because their creed, if they were to openly call the people to it through its own language and terminology, not one in thousand would accept it and the majority would tend to atheism, as readily admitted by the Imaams of the Ash'aris themselves, such as al-Ghazali (d. 505H) and ar-Razi (d. 606H) and you can see with your own eyes, from their own books readily admitting this.
Thus, their strategy is: Attack Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah and throw as many allegations as possible, hoping they will stick, in order to make the people think that he speaks with Tajseem and tashbeeh and so on, and then once that is done, people will naturally incline to our creed "not a jism, not a jawhar, not an 'arad, not in jihah, not in makaan, not inside the universe, not outside the universe, not above, not below" more readily (go and read what al-Ghazali said in the link above)!
You see they can't come to the average Muslim and say,
"We are going to teach you your deen. Now, first things first: Allaah is not a jism, not a jawhar, not an 'arad, not in jihah, not in makaan, not inside the universe, not outside the universe, not above, not below, not within, not without...
They can't do that, because all people of sound fitrah will recognize this as Atheism and gross ta'teel. So instead they've got to do this: "Ibn Taymiyyah says this ... and Ibn Taymiyyah says that ... and Ibn Taymiyyah claims this ... and Ibn Taymiyyah claims that ..." because this way its easier to deceive people and to foster an environment where their creed (which tends towards atheism) doesn't look that bad after all, and seems perfectly natural. These are the realities of these people, so be not deceived!