al-ʿarsh istawā’—“the All-Merciful rose over the Throne.” Someone asked him, “How did He rise?” He replied:

“Istiwāʾ (rising over) is known, its ‘how’ is unknown; believing in it is obligatory, and asking about it is an innovation.” The same answer had already been given by his teacher Rabiʿah.

People received this statement with full approval, and no one among Ahl al-Sunnah objected to it. Thus Mālik made it clear that istiwāʾ is known, just as everything else that Allah has reported is known; what is unknowable is the modality (kayfiyyah), and it is impermissible to ask about it—one must not say, “How did He rise?” Mālik did not say that the ‘how’ is nonexistent, but only that it is unknown.

On this point there is some debate between our scholars and other Sunni scholars. Most of them say: “Its modality never even crosses the mind, nor can its reality be expressed in words,” while some say: “It has neither modality nor real essence.”

If it is suggested that Mālik’s words “istiwāʾ is known” merely mean that the occurrence of this term in the Quran is known—as some of our colleagues claim, those who treat knowledge of its meanings as part of the interpretation whose knowledge Allah has kept to Himself—then the reply is: This is a weak view, for it is no more than stating the obvious. The questioner already knew that the word appears in the Quran; he had just recited the verse himself.