He replied: "This is something the Arabs do not know, nor is it permissible in their language."
Bayan bin Ahmad said: We were with al-Qa‘nabi when he heard a man from the Jahmiyyah saying: "{The Most Merciful rose over (istawa) the Throne} [Taha: 5], [meaning] 'seized' (istawla)."
Al-Qa‘nabi said: "Whoever is not certain that the Most Merciful rose over the Throne as is established in the hearts of the common folk is a Jahmi." [Ijtima‘ al-Juyush (p. 135)].
Al-Darimi (may Allah have mercy on him) said in Al-Naqd (p. 199), while refuting al-Marisi regarding his interpretation of al-Istiwa’ as al-Istiyla’: "It is said to this lost and disgraced common opponent, who raves without understanding: These are possible interpretations for meanings that are the foulest of misguidance and the most obscene of impossibilities. No one among people interprets them thus except the ignorant and those firmly rooted in misguidance.
Woe to you! Is there anything that Allah has not 'seized' (conquered) according to your claim, or that He did not know, such that He specified the Throne with it from among all that is in the heavens and the earth? Do we know of even the weight of an atom in the heavens or the earth that Allah does not own and is not within His dominion, such that He would specify the Throne for 'seizing' it from among all things based on a struggle and contention? Furthermore, you have explicitly stated what we have said, as you compared Him regarding His Throne to a conqueror of a city who took control (istawa) over it through victory. In your claim, Allah is not safe from being overcome; for the victor who seizes (al-mustawli) may sometimes conquer and sometimes be conquered. Has anyone heard of an ignoramus more ignorant of Allah than one who claims that Allah seized His Throne through contention?"
Abu Ahmad al-Qassab al-Karaji (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his exegesis, Nukat al-Qur’an (1/426): "Their statement that al-Istiwa’ is al-Istiyla’ (seizing) is wrong for multiple reasons.
