Likewise, he did not comment on Ibn al-Jawzi’s figurative reinterpretation of the verse concerning istiwāʾ (rising over the Throne), but rather endorsed it. For he explicitly stated (p. 123)—after a lengthy discussion containing much distortion and falsehood, which there is no room to explain at present:

“According to us, istiwāʾ means taking possession and subjugation, or consigning its meaning to Allah.”

That is what he said! This shows that he still has not recognized the truth, for he vacillates between figurative reinterpretation and consigning the meaning to Allah.

Yet I believe that his mention of consigning the meaning here was merely a political expedient—a manoeuvre to mislead readers who might object to his figurative reinterpretation. For he later says (p. 127):

“As for Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Ash‘ari’s rejection of interpreting istiwāʾ as rising above, we do not agree with him in that at all. We say that he said this as a reaction against the Mu‘tazilah. Although we do not agree with them on many of their issues, here we agree with them and believe that they are correct in this matter!”

That is, in their denial that Allah is above His creation. Yet the Mu‘tazilah and those like them, such as the Ibadis, say that Allah is in every place. This is something that ignorant pseudo-scholar vehemently condemns; he explicitly declares anyone who says it to be an unbeliever, and believes that Allah, exalted is He, exists without a place. By this he means that He is not above the Throne, as the Exalted has stated in many of His verses and as His Prophet ﷺ has stated in his hadiths. So refer to his words on this matter in The Weak Hadiths, under hadith 6332.

Part of that Saqqaf’s misguidance is that he explicitly denies that the Prophet ﷺ ever said, “Where is Allah?” even while affirming that it is found in Sahih Muslim. He then further confirms this, saying—may his mouth be smashed!—(p. 108):