Ibn Taymiyyah in Majmuʿ Fatawa 6/249–252 that the word taghayyur (change), which is a lafz mujmal (broad, unclear term). Because the term itself is general, it cannot be used as a decisive proof until its meaning is specified.

He distinguishes between two meanings of taghayyur (change).

If by taghayyur (change) one merely means that Allah performs afʿal ikhtiyariyyah (voluntary actions done by will), such as speaking when He wills, loving obedience, rejoicing at repentance, or coming on the Day of Resurrection, then this is not blameworthy change.

This is simply affirming that Allah acts by His will and power. The Salaf affirmed that Allah has always been described with sifat al kamal (attributes of perfection), has always been able, and has always spoken when He wills. In this sense, there is no movement from deficiency to perfection, and no loss of any prior perfection. Therefore, this is not taghayyur (change) in the linguistic sense of alteration from one state to another.

However, if by taghayyur (change) one means transformation from perfection to deficiency, or loss of an attribute of perfection, or becoming capable after previously being incapable, then this is impossible for Allah. His kamal (perfection) is inseparable from His essence. He does not acquire perfection after lacking it, nor does He lose perfection after possessing it.

Ibn Taymiyyah then turns the argument against the negators. He argues that those who deny Allah’s voluntary actions actually fall into real taghayyur (change). They claim that in eternity Allah could not speak or act, and that later action became possible. This implies that He became qadir (able) after not being able. That is true taghayyur (change) in ability. Thus, according to him, the negators are the ones whose position logically necessitates change.

In Arabic taghayyur (change) does not simply refer to motion or action. The sun moving is not described as “changing”. A person speaking or walking is not said to have changed. Rather, change refers to shifting from one quality to another, such as health to illness, or righteousness to sinfulness.

In summary, Ibn Taymiyyah denies taghayyur (change) for Allah in the sense of deficiency or transformation. He affirms afʿal ikhtiyariyyah (voluntary actions) without affirming impermissible change. The dispute, therefore, revolves around defining the term properly.

Their Third Proof

Their third proof is that they said: if newly occurring matters were to stand with Him, this would necessarily mean “His change”, and change is impossible for Allah.

They themselves, al Razi (d. 606AH) and others, invalidated this proof by saying: what do you mean by your statement, “If they stood with Him, He would change”?

Do you mean by change the very fact that they stand with Him, or something else? If you mean the first, then the first claim is the same as the second, and the thing made necessary is the very thing being claimed.

There is no benefit in this, because the meaning would be: if newly occurring matters stood with Him, then newly occurring matters stood with Him. This is speech that gives no benefit. If you mean by change a meaning other than that, then it is not accepted.

We do not accept that if they stood with Him, a “change” would necessarily follow other than the occurrence of newly occurring matters. This is their answer.

Clarification of This

The clarification of this is that the word “change” is a broad, unclear word. Change in the known Arabic language is not meant as merely the fact that newly occurring matters stand with something. People do not say about the sun, the moon, and the stars, when they move, that “they have changed”. They do not say about a person, when he speaks and walks, that he “changed”.

They do not say that he “changed” when he circumambulates, prays, commands, forbids, or rides, if that is his normal way.

Rather, they only say “changed” about someone who shifted from one quality to another.

Like the sun, when its light disappears from sight, it is not said that it “changed”, but if it becomes yellow, it is said that it “changed”.

Likewise, a person, when he becomes ill, or his body changes due to hunger or tiredness, it is said: he has changed. Likewise, if his character and his religion change, such as when he was sinful and then turns and becomes righteous, or when he was righteous and then turns and becomes sinful, it is said: he has changed.

In the hadith: “I saw the face of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ changed when I saw on him the trace of hunger, while I would still see him bowing and prostrating.”

His movement was not called change. Likewise, it is said: “So and so has changed towards so and so”, when he begins to hate him after love. But if he remains firm upon affection, then his cheerfulness towards him and his speaking to him are not called change.

If he continues upon his normal way in his words and actions, it is not said that he has changed.

Qur’an Verse

إن الله لا يغير ما بقوم حتى يغيروا ما بأنفسهم

“Indeed, Allah does not change the condition of a people until they change what is within themselves.” (al Raʿd 11)

It is known that if they remain upon their existing normal way, saying and doing what is good, then they have not changed what is within themselves.

But if they move away from that, and replace intending good with intending evil, and replace belief in truth with belief in falsehood, it is said: they have changed what is within themselves. This is like someone who loved Allah, His Messenger ﷺ, and the Hereafter, then his heart changed and he no longer loved Allah, His Messenger ﷺ, and the Hereafter. This person has changed what is within himself.

Allah Does Not Change

If this is the meaning of change, then the Lord, the Exalted, has always been and will always remain described with the attributes of perfection, and named with the qualities of majesty, honour, and generosity. His perfection is inseparable from His Self, so it is impossible for anything from His attributes of perfection to leave Him, and impossible for Him to become deficient after perfection.

This foundation is what the salaf and the people of the Sunnah are upon: He has always spoken whenever He wills, He has always been able, He has always been described with the attributes of perfection, and He will always remain so, so He is not changing.

This is the meaning of the statement of the one who says: “O One who changes and does not change.” He changes the qualities of creation, removes from them what they had been described with when He wills, and gives them qualities of perfection that they did not have. His perfection is inseparable from His Self. He has always been and will always remain described with the attributes of perfection.

Qur’an Verses

كل شيء هالك إلا وجهه

“Everything will perish except His Face.” (al Qasas: 88)

كل من عليها فان ۝ ويبقى وجه ربك ذو الجلال والإكرام

“Everyone upon it will perish. And the Face of your Lord, Owner of majesty and honour, will remain.” (al Rahman: 26–27)

The Negators Are the Ones Forced Into Change

But these negators are the ones who are forced into saying that He changed. They say: in eternity, it was not possible for Him to say anything, nor to speak by His will and power. That was impossible for Him, and He was not able to do it, then the act became possible, such that He could act.

They have two views about speech. Whoever affirms the known speech and says that He speaks by His will and power, says that speech became possible for Him after it had been impossible for Him. Whoever does not describe Him with known speech, but says that He speaks without will and power, as the Kullabiyyah say, has affirmed speech that is not understood, and no one from the Muslims preceded them in it.

Rather, the Muslims before them were upon two views: the early generations and the people of the Sunnah say that He speaks by His will and power, and His speech is not created, and the Jahmiyyah say that it is created by His power and will.

These people said instead: rather, He speaks without will and power, and His speech is one single thing inseparable from His Self, and it is letters, or letters and sounds, eternal and inseparable from His Self, as has been explained elsewhere.

The intended point is that all of these people, who prevent saying that the Lord has always been able to do whatever He wills, and say that this would require newly occurring matters without end, and that this is impossible, are saying: the act became possible for Him after it had been impossible for Him. The reality of their saying is that He became able after He had not been able. This is the reality of change, even though no cause occurred that would make Him able.

If they say: “He was, in eternity, able over what will always continue”, it is said: this combines negation and affirmation, so in eternity He was able.

Was speech possible for Him or impossible for Him? If you say: “possible for Him”, then you have accepted the continuance of His being one who acts, and that He is able over newly occurring matters with no end. If you say: “rather, it was impossible”, it is said: ability over the impossible, while the act is impossible, is not possible.

What is within ability is only the possible, not the impossible. If you say: “then it became possible for Him”, then you have said: it became possible for Him to act after it had not been possible for Him to act. This is clear in saying that He became able after He had not been, and it is clear in change.

So these negators, who said that the affirmers are forced into saying that He “changed”, the falsehood of their claim has become clear, and they are the ones who said what necessitates His change.

The Fourth Proof Mentioned Here

Their fourth proof is that they said: the occurrence of newly occurring matters with Him is setting, and al Khalil said:

لا أحب الآفلين

“I do not love those that set.” (al Anʿam 76)

The one that sets is the one that moves, for which newly occurring matters occur.

So al Khalil denied love for one for which newly occurring matters occur, so it cannot be a god. If the opponent says: “What I mean by saying that He changed is that He spoke by His will and power, and that He loves obedience from us, rejoices at the repentance of the repentant, and will come on the Day of Resurrection”, it is said: even if you name this “change”, why did you say that this is impossible? This is the very point under dispute, as al Razi (d. 606AH) said: the first claim is the same as the second.

Majmuʿ Fatawa Ibn Taymiyyah 6/249–252