A Stone He Can't Lift, Point 13 and the End of Hell

Referring to Allah being One, without any partner, how is this question to be answered: can Allah create a stone He Himself can't lift? That defies the purpose. That defies the essence of Allah; that defies the nature of Allah, because He is able to do anything He wants. This is a silly thing to say anyway, and Allah doesn't do stupid things. These kinds of questions are absurdities; they should not be entertained by our minds, because they are absurdities, because they defy the actual nature of Allah (swt) being the All-Powerful. Why would He want to do something like that? Even hypothetically speaking, it is just a wrong kind of question to bring up; and Allah forgive us.

Allah is above the throne, and one of Allah's names means all-encompassing: what does this mean? All-encompassing in knowledge, all-encompassing in sight, all-encompassing in ability and power. There are many things that all-encompassing could mean.

A somewhat strange question arises from point 13, which refers to His creation. What does the author mean by this? Is this a mistake? Allah is not created? It is easy to see how that mistake may come about, but it is actually a misunderstanding. “Just as He was possessed of His attributes prior to His creation” does not refer to Himself being created. Lā ḥawla wa lā quwwata illā billāh. That is not what it means. Prior to His creation means prior to us: prior to Him creating the creation. In case anybody else has thought that, it is an important clarification, actually. So: just as He was possessed of His attributes prior to His creating whatever, His creation. “His creating His creation” might have helped.

Can Allah be referred to as somebody, in terms of one or more, or being a body? If that is what is being asked: Allah cannot be called somebody. We should avoid that word.

Some have studied that Ibn Taymiyyah and ʿUmar (may Allah be pleased with him) both believe Hell will eventually cease to exist, and ask whether it is not okay to follow any of these opinions, because any scholar will be rewarded: one reward if he's wrong, and if he's right, then two rewards. It is a good question. But the thing is that that is related to fiqh and jurisprudence. ʿAqīdah is not to be messed with; ʿaqīdah is not to be messed with. Ijtihād is not done in ʿaqīdah, especially when going against the majority, as though the majority misunderstood something. That is a serious problem.

As for ʿUmar (may Allah be pleased with him) saying the same thing, that is not something that has been heard of. Not that everything has been heard; but this has never been heard. If it can be brought from a substantial source, then perhaps a response can be given. But no response is going to be given to something which… It is hard to think that ʿUmar would go that far and say something like that. Even al-Albānī completely condemns that idea. He just completely puts that opinion down.