Does Ibn Taymiyyah's preference for the Throne's shape being like a dome instead of spherical mean that the issue is a significant matter of scholarly disagreement, and is it permissible to follow those who say it is spherical, or would that be a departure from the methodology of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama'ah, especially given what that entails regarding the determination of the direction of 'uluw (God's elevatedness) and its effect on the Earth's rotation?

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah stated that the 'Arsh (Throne) is dome-shaped, but he presented two possibilities: either it encompasses the celestial spheres, or it is above them but does not encompass them. What was important to him was to establish the 'uluw (height/transcendence) and fauqiyyah (above-ness) of Allah. He mentioned that the celestial spheres are spherical, whereas the 'Arsh is dome-shaped. He indicated that the 'Arsh is above the heavens, and perhaps above all celestial spheres, and we do not turn to Allah except towards the 'uluw.

A group of scholars held that the 'Arsh is not a spherical orb, but rather a dome from the direction of the cosmos. It has legs that are carried by angels, and it is a couch like a dome over the cosmos and the ceiling of creation. They affirmed that the word "qubbah" (dome) indicates roundness from above, not from all sides.

Finally, silence regarding these unseen matters and avoiding excessive detail in them is preferable. One should adhere to what has been transmitted, for pondering them can lead to the evil of excessive thought.