The rending of the sky, the setting in motion of the mountains, the boiling of the seas, the enfolding of the sun and the moon, and every other transformation by which the elements of this universe pass from one state to another—none of these events means that the whole cosmos will lapse into sheer non-existence so that nothing remains save Allah alone, as is alleged by some scholastic theologians who inherited this notion from the Jahmiyyah.

Jahm’s fundamental claim is that Allah cannot effect that which is infinite; he therefore posited a beginning and an end for His action, portraying Him as inactive in pre-eternity and post-eternity. On that basis he declared that Paradise and Hell will come to an end and that everything will perish. The Salaf and the leading Imams rejected this innovation. Jahm, together with others among the Muʿtazilah and their like, further asserted that the entire creation will vanish altogether and then be recreated after its total annihilation—an assertion that contradicts the Book, the Sunnah, and the unanimous position of the early generations, as has been explained elsewhere.

Concerning the creation of the heavens and the earth, Allah has informed us that before them His Throne was upon the water. We have discussed this subject in detail, showing—on the strength of revelation, fully consonant with sound reason—that Allah is the Creator of all things, and that everything besides Him is contingent, preceded by non-existence. Yet this in no way entails that, exalted be He, He was devoid of speech and action subject to His will, for such a view is not that of the Salaf and the Imams of the Sunnah; the authentic reports from them affirm the opposite, as has been set out in its proper place.

For this reason the Jahmiyyah, the Qadariyyah, and those who have followed them have spoken of the Lord’s power in terms that are gravely deficient. Whoever examines the debates of Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī and the like with these groups on the matter of the Divine Attribute of Power will witness strange things: one finds that each disputant seems to conceal inwardly the very opposite of what he proclaims outwardly—he publicly defends a position while his own words point to its negation. If, despite the manifest superiority of one view over another, a man fails to perceive that superiority, such obliviousness is indeed colossal ignorance.