and likewise, he did not comment on Ibn al-Jawzī's interpretation of the verse on (al-istiwaʾ) but approved it, because he stated (p. 123) — after a long discourse filled with much distortion and falsehood that there is no room to explain now — he said: "Al-istiwaʾ according to us is dominance and subjugation, or delegating its meaning to Allāh." Such he said! This indicates that he has not yet recognized the truth, due to his hesitation between interpretation and delegation! However, I believe that his mention of delegation here is merely a tactic, a maneuver and deception for readers who might reject his interpretation, for he later said (p. 127): "As for the rejection by Imām Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī of interpreting al-istiwaʾ as elevation; we do not agree with him on this at all, and we say: He said that due to a reaction he had from the Muʿtazilah, and although we do not agree with them on many of their issues; here we agree with them and believe they are correct in this matter"! Meaning: in their denial of Allāh's elevation above His creation, but the Muʿtazilah and those like them, such as the Ibāḍīyah, say that Allāh is everywhere, and this is something that ignorant pseudo-scholars deny vehemently, declaring disbelief upon those who say it, and believe that Allāh exists without a place! And it means: that He is not above the Throne as He, the Exalted, informed in many of His verses, and His Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) informed in his ḥadīths, so refer to his words on this in "al-Aḥādīth al-Ḍaʿīfah" under ḥadīth (6332). And among the misguidance of that al-Saqqāf is that he explicitly denies the authenticity of his saying (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam): "Where is Allāh?" despite his saying that it is in "Ṣaḥīḥ al-Imām Muslim"! Then he confirms this by saying — may his mouth be silenced — (p. 108):