> Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah

[salman]

Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyah: The Tortured Scholar

One day, his father and his family asked him to join them on a picnic but he suddenly disappeared, so they had to go out without him. When they came back at the end of the day, they blamed him for not going out with them. He said, pointing to a book in his hand: "You did not benefit anything from your trip, whereas I memorized all this book in your absence.

He was known for his physiognomy, sharp memory and wittedness which amazed the people of Damascus and made them admire him more and more. Though he was young, his fame reached the neighbouring territories. Once, one of the scholars of Halab visited Damascus. The scholars and dignitaries of the city went to welcome him. He told them: "I heard in other territories of a boy who is quick in memorizing everything. I came here to see him."

They led the man to the small school where the boy used to go to memorize the Qur'an. The Halabi scholar sat for a while until the boy passed with a big board in his hand. The scholar called him, so he went to him.

The scholar took the board from him and said to him: "Sit here son, and I'll relate to you some Prophetic narrations to write." He dictated for him some, then he asked him to read them.

The boy started reading from the board. Then the Shaykh said to him: "Let me hear it from you." He then started recounting the narrations from his memory exactly like he was reading them from the board. The scholar told him: "Erase this, son." He cited more of the Prophet's narrations and asked him to repeat them. The boy did the same again; he read it from the board and then from his memory. The scholar stood up saying: "Should this boy live long, he will have a great position [become a great scholar]. We've never seen anyone like him before."

This boy was later to be the tortured scholar, Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyah who acquired his knowledge from the best scholars of his time. He studied the Hanbali school and no one surpassed him in it. He also studied the main books of the Prophet's narrations and tradition such as the authentic narrations reported by Al-Bukhaari, Muslim and others.

Ibn Taymiyyah was a devoted person who very much observed the acts of worship. He never let anything distract him from worshipping Allah. He used to spend his night alone, imploring his Lord, continuously reciting the Qur'an and performing prayers, mentioning and invoking Allah, and observing the optional late night prayer.

Ibn Taymiyyah wrote a large number of books; he wrote more than three hundred books. He had a vast knowledge and wrote many classificatory books and literary works. He used to write up to four notebooks a day. One day, he managed to write the "Ar-Resaalah Al-Hamawiyyah" (The Hamawi Treatise) which is made up of seventy medium sized pages. He wrote it between the time of Thuhr and 'Asr prayers. He wrote all his books during the seven years he spent in prison, except the book of Al-Eemaan, (The Faith) which he wrote in Egypt.

Ibn Taymiyyah was keen to do every kind of good deeds. Every week, he used to visit those who were ill especially those in the hospital. He was known for his asceticism and benevolence. He loved to give whatever he had whether it was little or much. Even when he had very little, he gave it in charity. He used to donate whatever he had. If he had nothing to give, he used to take off some of his clothes and give them to the poor.

Despite his poverty, he never accepted any donation from a king or prince. He didn't save any money for himself; neither had he saved any furniture nor food.

Ibn Taymiyyah was famous for his courage, valour, and brave initiatives. Whenever he went out for Jihaad (fighting in the Cause of Allah) with the Muslims, he used to be in the front line, encouraging the warriors and arousing their determination and enthusiasm. He took part in conquest of 'Akkah and showed much bravery that proved his strong faith and love for participating in Jihaad.

When Qazaan, a Tartar king, took a number of Muslims as captives, Ibn Taymiyyah went to him, rebuked him for this act and requested him to set the Muslim captives free and the king did.

Ibn Taymiyyah had a difficult life full of continuous trials, calamities, and tests. No sooner did one calamity end than a new one emerged. As soon as he is released from one prison, he is again locked up in another.

Towards the end of his life, some people plotted against him because of his opinion about prohibiting people from visiting the graves of the Prophets, may Allah exalt their mention, and righteous people. So they spread a rumor among the people that he belittled the Prophets, may Allah exalt their mention. Accordingly, the judges of the four schools of Egypt ordered that he be imprisoned. So he was locked up in Damascus citadel.

In that citadel, Allah inspired him with the understanding of many meanings of the Qur'an and the basics of knowledge that many scholars would have wished to have.

During his captivity in the citadel, he used to say: "If I gave as much gold as that which would fill this citadel, I wouldn't have been grateful enough for this grace of being imprisoned."

When he was reminded of the people who had hurt and caused his imprisonment, he said: "I can never reward them for the good they brought to me."

Ibn Taymiyyah remained in jail in that citadel for about two years till he died in 728 A.H. At the time of his funeral prayer in the mosque, the soldiers surrounded the funeral to protect it from the overwhelming crowds. The number of people kept increasing till they filled up all the alleys, streets and markets. May Allah have mercy on this great scholar.

Source: Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyah: the tortured scholar

[salman]

The 'aqeedah of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah and the praise of the imams for him

Question: Please answer my question about the aqeedah of Shaykh ibn Taymiyah in which I have read that he deviated from the correct aqeedah and was a anthropomorphist. Also, I have read that scholars such as ibn Hajar al-asqalani do not look up to him. Can you please make this issue more clear?.

Answer: Praise be to Allah.

Firstly:

Shaykh al-Islam Ahmad ibn 'Abd al-Haleem ibn Taymiyah is regarded as one of the prominent mujaddids (renewers and revivers) of Islam. He was born in 661 AH and died in 728 AH (may Allah have mercy on him). If the efforts of a mujaddid bear fruit in his own time and generation, the efforts of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah began to bear fruit in his own time and have continued to do so until the present, affecting scholars and seekers of knowledge and Islamic groups that belong to Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jamaa'ah. Scholars still refer to his books to refute the enemies of Islam among the Jews and Christians and sects that claim to belong to Islam such as the Raafidis, Huloolis and Jahamis, and innovated sects such as the Ash'aris and Murji'is.

His achievements in the fields of fiqh, hadeeth, tafseer and sulook (ways of drawing close to Allah) are too well known for us to need to give any examples here. His books and writings bear witness to that and he does not need anyone like us to praise him, rather his knowledge and fiqh are extant and bear witness that no one can deny except one who is ignorant or stubborn.

Secondly:

The testimony of the imams of his own and subsequent eras makes clear to any fair-minded person the falseness of the claims that have been fabricated by the enemies of Islam and the enemies of the Sunnah against this prominent imam, and highlight his knowledge, understanding and strength of argument. Hence we may know the reason why the people of kufr and innovation fought against him, which was because he demolished their principles and "and then the roof fell down upon them, from above them" (cf. al-Nahl 16:26). We will quote some of the testimony to the soundness of the belief of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, and his support for the Sunnah, and his refutation of those who followed innovation and myths.

These words of praise and testimony in favour of this imam did not come only from his students and supporters, but even his opponents testified that he surpassed others in knowledge and understanding, and they even bore witness to his courage, generosity and jihad for the sake of Allah in support of Islam. There follow some of these words of praise and testimony:

1 â€" Imam al-Dhahabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said, listing his Shaykhs:

He is our Shaykh, the Shaykh of Islam, unrivalled in our time in terms of knowledge, courage, intelligence, spiritual enlightenment, generosity, sincerity towards the ummah, enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil, and learning hadeeth â€" he put a great deal of effort into seeking it and writing it down, and he examined the different categories of narrators and acquired knowledge that no one else acquired.

He excelled in Qur'anic commentary (tafseer) and delved deeply into its subtle meanings. He derived meanings from it that no one else managed to do before him. He also excelled in hadeeth and in the memorization thereof; very few have memorized as much hadeeth as he memorized. He attributed ahaadeeth to their proper sources and narrators, and he was able to quote readily whatever he needed to establish proof. He surpassed all people in knowledge of fiqh and the views of different madhhabs, and the fatwas of the Sahaabah and Taabi'een, so much so that when he issued a fatwa he did not adhere to the view of a madhhab, rather he based his fatwa on whichever view was supported by the stronger evidence. He excelled in knowledge of Arabic language, and studied issues on the basis of rationality and reason. He studied the views of the philosophers and refuted their arguments and pointed out their mistakes and warned against them. He supported the Sunnah with the strongest evidence and proofs. He was harmed for the sake of Allah by his opponents and persecuted for his support of the pure Sunnah, until Allah caused him to prevail and caused the pious to unite in loving him and praying for him, and suppressed his enemies and guided men of other groups and sects through him. Allah made kings and commanders inclined to follow him and obey him, and he revived Syria â€" and indeed Islam â€" through his efforts, when it was almost defeated, by urging the rulers to resist the Tatars, when people were harbouring doubts about Allah and the believers were tried and shaken with a mighty shaking (cf. al-Ahzaab 33:10-11), and hypocrisy grew strong.

His good qualities are many, and he is too great for a man like me to talk about his life. If I were to swear an oath between the Corner and the Maqaam I would swear that I have never seen anyone like him, and that he has never seen anyone like himself.

See: Dhayl Tabaqaat al-Hanaabilah by Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (4/390).

2 â€" al-Haafiz 'Imaad al-Deen al-Waasiti (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

By Allah, there was never seen under the canopy of heaven anyone like your Shaykh Ibn Taymiyah in knowledge, righteous deeds, attitude, manner, adherence to the Sunnah, generosity, forbearance and carrying out duties to Allah when His sacred limits were transgressed; he was the most sincere of people, the most sound in knowledge, the most effective, the most serious in supporting the truth, the most generous, the most perfect in following the Sunnah of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). We have never seen anyone in our own time who demonstrates the example of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and his Sunnahs in word and deed like this man; a sound heart will bear witness that this is following the Sunnah in the true sense of the word.

Al-'Uqood al-Durriyyah (p. 311).

3 â€" al-Haafiz Jalaal al-Deen al-Suyooti (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

Ibn Taymiyah, the Shaykh, the imam, the 'allaamah (great scholar), the hafiz, the critic, the faqeeh, the mujtahid, the brilliant mufassir, the Shaykh of Islam, the leader of ascetics, the unrivalled in our time, Taqiy al-Deen Abu'l-Abbaas Ahmad al-Mufti Shihaab al-Deen 'Abd al-Haleem, the son of the imam and mujtahid Shaykh al-Islam Majd al-Deen 'Abd al-Salaam ibn 'Abd-Allah ibn Abi'l-Qaasim al-Haraani.

One of the prominent figures, he was born in Rabee' al-Awwal 661 AH, and he learned from Ibn Abi'l-Yasar, Ibn 'Abd al-Daa'im, and some others.

He took an interest in hadeeth, and narrated and selected (sound ahaadeeth); he excelled in the study of narrators' biographies, defects in ahaadeeth, fiqh, the sciences of Islam, 'ilm al-kalaam and other fields.

He was a man of vast learning, one of the few brilliant scholars, ascetics and unique individuals. He wrote three hundred books, and he was tested and persecuted many times.

He died in the latter part of Dhu'l-Qa'dah 628 AH.

Tabaqaat al-Huffaaz (p. 516, 517.

Ibn Hajar al-Haytami [one of the greatest Shaafa'i fuqaha', who died in 974 AH and who is someone other than Ibn Hajar al-'Asqallaani, the author of Fath al-Baari, who died in 852 AH] criticized the two Shaykhs of Islam, Ibn Taymiyah and his student Ibn al-Qayyim, a great deal and accused them of describing Allah in physical terms, likening Him to His creation, and other abhorrent beliefs. But he was refuted by many, who explained the falseness of what he said and demonstrated that the two imams were innocent of any belief that goes against the Qur'an and Sunnah. One of these scholars was:

4 â€" al-Mulla 'Ali Qaari (may Allah have mercy on him), who said, after quoting Ibn Hajar's accusations against them and his criticism of their 'aqeedah:

I say: Allah protected them â€" i.e., Ibn al-Qayyim and his Shaykh Ibn Taymiyah â€" from this abhorrent accusation. The one who studies Sharh Manaazil al-Saa'ireen by Nadeem al-Baari al-Shaykh 'Abd-Allah al-Ansaari, who is the Shaykh of Islam according to the Sufis, will clearly see that they were among Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jamaa'ah and are indeed among the awliya' (close friends of Allah) of this ummah. Among what he said in the book mentioned was the following: "These words of Shaykh al-Islam highlight his position as a prominent scholar of Ahl al-Sunnah, and his status among scholars, and it demonstrates that he is innocent of what his Jahami enemies accused him of, that he likened Allah to His creation, as they usually accused the scholars of hadeeth and Sunnah, just as the Raafidis accuse them of being Naasibis, and the Naasibis accuse them of being Raafidis,, and the Mu'tazilah accuse them of being anthropomorphists. That is a legacy of the enemies of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) who accused him and his companions of having invented a new religion. And this is a legacy of the scholars of hadeeth and Sunnah from their Prophet, that the people of falsehood give them offensive labels.

May Allah sanctify the soul of al-Shaafa'i, who said when he was accused of being a Raafidi: If being a Raafidi means loving the family of Muhammad, then let the two races (of mankind and jinn) bear witness that I am a Raafidi.

May Allah be pleased with our Shaykh Abu'l-'Abbaas ibn Taymiyah when he said: If being a Naasibi means loving the family of Muhammad, then let the two races (of mankind and jinn) bear witness that I am a Naasibi.

May Allah forgive the third â€" Ibn al-Qayyim â€" when he said: If being an anthropomorphist means affirming the divine attributes and regarding them as being above the interpretation of a liar, then praise be to Allah, I am an anthropomorphist; bring your witnesses."

Mirqaah al-Mafaateeh by al-Mulla 'Ali Qaari (8/146, 147).

The words between the quotation marks "" were quoted by al-Mulla 'Ali Qaari from Imam Ibn al-Qayyim, from his book Madaarij al-Saalikeen bayna Manaazil Iyyaaka Na'budu wa Iyyaaka Nasta'een (2/87, 88).

The scholars of the Standing Committee were asked:

People say that Ibn Taymiyah was not one of Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jamaa'ah, and that he was misled and misled others, and that this is the view of Ibn Hajar and others. Is what they say true or not?

They replied:

Shaykh Ahmad ibn 'Abd al-Haleem Ibn Taymiyah is one of the imams of Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jamaa'ah, who called people to the truth and to the straight path. Allah supported the Sunnah by means of him and suppressed the followers of innovation and deviation. The one who regards him as something other than that is the one who is an innovator and is misled and is misleading others. They heard wrong things about him, and they thought that truth was falsehood and falsehood was truth. That is known by the one whom Allah guides and who reads his books and the books of his opponents, and compares his biography with theirs. This is the best and most decisive testimony between the two parties.

Shaykh 'Abd al-'Azeez ibn Baaz, Shaykh 'Abd al-Razzaaq 'Afeefi, Shaykh 'Abd-Allah ibn Ghadyaan, Shaykh 'Abd-Allah ibn Qa'ood.

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa'imah (2/451, 254).

Thirdly:

Comments of Imam al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar al-'Asqallaani (may Allah have mercy on him) concerning Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah:

Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar al-'Asqallaani is a well known imam who died in 852 AH; he is the author of beneficial books such as Fath al-Baari Sharh Saheeh al-Bukhaari, al-Talkhees al-Habeer, Tahdheeb al-Tahdheeb and others. Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar said a few things in different places about Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, in which he testified that he was a man of knowledge and virtue who defended the Sunnah. The points on which al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) criticized Shaykh al-Islam can be refuted, and there are those who criticize Ibn Hajar himself on some points of 'aqeedah, but that does not concern us and there is no need to discuss it here. Rather we will quote what he said in praise of Shaykh al-Islam, in order to highlight the error of those who say that al-Haafiz (may Allah have mercy on him) did not respect Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah.

There follows a glimpse of what al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said about Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him).

1.

Shaykh Ibn Naasir al-Deen al-Dimashqi wrote a book called al-Radd al-Waafir 'ala man za'ama anna man sammaa Ibn Taymiyah Shaykh al-Islam kaafir, in which he refuted one of the fanatical Hanafis who claimed that it was not permissible to call Ibn Taymiyah "Shaykh al-Islam", and that the one who did that was a kaafir. In it he mentioned eighty five imams, all of whom described Ibn Taymiyah as Shaykh al-Islam, and he quoted their words from their books to that effect. When al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) read this book â€" al-Radd al-Waafir â€" he wrote an introduction to it, in which he said:

Praise be to Allah, and peace be upon His slaves whom He has chosen.

I came across this beneficial book and I realized what deep knowledge the imam who wrote it has, and how prominent he is in many branches of knowledge, to such an extent that he became greatly respected and honoured by the scholars. The fame and position of Shaykh Taqiy al-Deen as an imam is brighter than the sun, and his title as the Shaykh al-Islam of his own era has lasted until today and will continue tomorrow. Nobody rejects that except one who is ignorant of his position, or is unfair. How wrong is the one who thinks that way and how mistaken he is. Allah is the One Whom we ask to protect us from the evil of our own souls and of our tongues by His blessing and grace. If there were not other evidence of the greatness of this man apart from that which was pointed out by al-Haafiz al-Shaheer 'Ilm al-Deen al-Barzaali in his Tareekh, (where he says): There was no one in the history of Islam for whose funeral people gathered as they did for the funeral of Shaykh Taqiy al-Deen. He pointed out that the funeral of Imam Ahmad was attended by hundreds of thousands, but if the population of Damascus was like that of Baghdad, or many times greater, no one would have stayed away from his funeral. Moreover, all of those who were in Baghdad, except a very few, believed in the leadership of Imam Ahmad. The ruler and caliph of Baghdad at that time had a great deal of love and respect for him. This is unlike the case of Ibn Taymiyah, for the ruler of the city when he died was absent, and most of the fuqaha' in the city had ganged up against him, and he died imprisoned in the citadel. But despite that none of them stayed away from his funeral or failed to pray for mercy for him and mourn for him, except three individuals, who stayed away for fear of the anger of the masses.

Although these huge numbers attended his funeral, there was no motive for that except their belief that he was a great imam and their desire to seek blessing from attending his funeral. They did not gather on the orders of the authorities or for any other reason. It is narrated in a saheeh report that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "You are the witnesses of Allah on earth" â€" narrated by al-Bukhaari and Muslim.

A number of scholars opposed Shaykh Taqiy al-Deen many times, because of reasons for which they criticized him that had to do with fundamental and minor issues. Many hearings were held against him in Cairo and Damascus, but there is no report that any of them said he was a heretic and there was no ruling that he should be executed, even though there were many people in government at that time who were strongly opposed to him, and he was imprisoned in Cairo, then in Alexandria. Despite that, they all recognized his vast knowledge and his deep piety and asceticism, and they described him as generous and courageous, as well as supporting Islam and calling people to Allah in secret and openly. Why shouldn't we denounce the one who says that he was a kaafir or that the one who calls him Shaykh al-Islam is a kaafir, when there is nothing to imply kufr in calling him that? He was undoubtedly a Shaykh of Islam, and the issues for which he was opposed were not things that he said on the basis of whims and desires, and he did not persist in saying them after proof was established against him out of stubbornness. His books are filled with refutations of those who promoted anthropomorphism and his disavowal thereof. But nevertheless he was a human being who made mistakes and got things right. That in which he was correct â€" which was most of it â€" may be benefited from, and we may pray for mercy for him because of that, and that which he got wrong should not be followed, but he may be excused for it, because the imams of his era bore witness that he was fully qualified to engage in ijtihaad; even the one who was most strongly opposed to him and strove to harm him, namely Shaykh Kamaal al-Deen al-Zamalkaani, bore witness to that, as did Shaykh Sadr al-Deen ibn al-Wakeel, who was the only one who was able to hold a debate with Ibn Taymiyah.

It is most amazing that this man was the staunchest opponent of the innovators such as the Raafidis, Huloolis and Ittihaadis, whose writings on that are many and well known, whose fatwas concerning them are too numerous to count. How happy they would be to realize that there are people who accuse him of kufr and say that the one who does not regard him as a kaafir is a kaafir. The one who claims to have knowledge, if he has any reason or sense, should ponder the man's words in his famous books, or hear them from honest and trustworthy narrators, so that he will put aside what he finds objectionable and warn others by way of sincerity, and praise him for the matters he got right, as the attitude of other scholars should be. If there was no good quality in him except the fact that his student was Shaykh Shams al-Deen ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, the author of so many beneficial books, from which everyone has benefited, both those who agree with him and those who oppose him, that would be sufficient indication of his great status, so how about when his prominence in various fields of knowledge and his distinction in the study of the texts was affirmed by the prominent Shaafa'is of his time and others, in addition to the Hanbalis? No attention should be paid to the one who calls him a kaafir despite all these achievements, or who describes the one who calls him "Shaykh al-Islam" as a kaafir, and he should be ignored with regard to this matter; indeed he should be rebuked for saying that, until he comes back to the truth. Allah speaks the truth and He guides to the right way; Allah is sufficient for us and He is the best disposer of affairs.

Said and written by Ahmad ibn 'Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Hajar al-Shaafa'i, may Allah forgive him, on Friday 9 Rabee' al-Awwal, 835 AH. Praise be to Allah, and may Allah send blessings and peace upon His Messenger Muhammad and his family.

Al-Radd al-Waafir by Imam Ibn Naasir al-Deen al-Dimashqi (p. 145, 146), al-Haafiz al-Sakhaawi â€" the student of Ibn Hajar â€" quoted the words of his Shaykh in his book al-Jawaahir wa'l-Durar (2/734-736).

2.

al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar wrote a lengthy biography of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on them both) in his book al-Durar al-Kaaminah, at the beginning of which he said:

His father took him with him from Harraan in 667 AH, and he learned from Ibn 'Abd al-Daa'im, al-Qaasim al-Arbili, Muslim ibn 'Allaan, Ibn Abi 'Umar and al-Fakhr, among others. He read by himself and copied Sunan Abi Dawood, and he studied al-rijaal (narrators of hadeeth) and al-'ilal (faults in hadeeth). He acquired deep knowledge, and he distinguished himself and went ahead of others. He wrote books, taught and issued fatwas, and he surpassed his peers. He had an amazing ability to recollect quickly; he was courageous; he had a deep knowledge of textual and rational matters; and he was able to discuss matters in detail on the basis of the views of earlier and later scholars. End quote.

Al-Durar al-Kaaminah fi A'yaan al-Mi'ah al-Thaaminah (1/168).

In his biography he quoted many texts of the imams which praised Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) and affirmed his scholarship in rational and textual fields of knowledge. For example, he said:

3.

I read in the handwriting of al-Haafiz Salaah al-Deen al-'Alaa'i, when he wrote the biography of the Shaykh of our shaykhs, al-Haafiz Baha' al-Deen 'Abd-Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Khaleel, the following: This Baha' al-Deen learned from the two Shaykhs, our Shaykh, master and leader in the way of Allah, the prominent Shaykh, the one who leads his followers to the best way, the one who has numerous virtues and the strongest evidence, which all the nations affirm that they are unable to list all this evidence; may Allah enable us to learn from his great knowledge and benefit us by means of his knowledge in this world and in the Hereafter. He is the Shaykh, imam, scholar, teacher and bright star, the imam of imams, the blessing of the ummah, the leader of scholars, the example for people to follow, the light for the learners, the suppressor of innovators, the sea of knowledge, the treasure of those who seek benefit, the interpreter of the Qur'an, the wonder of our age, the unrivalled one of our era, Taqiy al-Deen, the imam of the Muslims, the proof of Allah against the world, the one who will join the righteous, the follower of the predecessors, the supporter of the truth, the sign of guidance, the prominent hafiz, the most eloquent of speech, the pillar of sharee'ah, the possessor of brilliant knowledge, Abu'l-'Abbaas Ibn Taymiyah.

Al-Durar al-Kaaminah (186-187).

Fourthly:

Although the texts that we have quoted or referred to, which contain the words of al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) or which were quoted by al-Haafiz from others, speak of respect for Shaykh al-Islam and highlight his status in the field of religious knowledge, that does not mean that al-Haafiz did not differ with Shaykh al-Islam at all in some fields of knowledge, or that he never criticized him, because it usually happens that scholars refute one another, without that necessarily meaning that the one who refutes another does not respect or appreciate the status of the latter, let alone accuse him of innovation or misguidance. Long ago, Imam Maalik (may Allah have mercy on him) spoke his famous words: "Anyone's opinion may be accepted or rejected, except the occupant of this grave" or words to that effect â€" meaning the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

Regardless of who was right in any given issue, whether it was Shaykh al-Islam or the one who differed with him or tried to refute him, al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar or someone else, how about if the one who was right in most of the cases where they objected to him, was Shaykh al-Islam? May Allah have mercy on them all.

You may refer to many of the issues for which Shaykh al-Islam was criticized, especially by Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, to whom we referred above, in what was written by Shaykh Nu'maan Khayr al-Deen ibn al-Aloosi (may Allah have mercy on him) in his beneficial book Jala' al-'Aynayn fi Muhaakamah al-Ahmadayn, meaning Ahmad ibn Taymiyah and Ahmad ibn Hajar al-Haytami (may Allah have mercy on them).

You may also see the book Da'aawa al-Munaawi'een li Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, which is an academic research by Dr. 'Abd-Allah ibn Saalih al-Ghusun.

Fifthly:

What is mentioned in the question about Shaykh al-Islam having deviated from sound 'aqeedah and ascribed to Allah, may He be exalted, the attributes of His creation, is an utter fabrication and a blatant lie against Shaykh al-Islam and his methodology and 'aqeedah. Anyone who reads any of his major or minor books will realize that. Among these texts and rules which it would be too difficult to refer to all of them, let alone quote them, are his words:

The early generation of this ummah and its imams are unanimously agreed that there is nothing like unto Allah, either in His essence or His attributes or His actions. One of the imams said: Whoever likens Allah to His creation is a kaafir, and whoever denies that which Allah has ascribed to Himself is a kaafir; there is nothing like unto that which Allah has ascribed to Himself or His Messenger has ascribed to Him. End quote.

Fataawa Shaykh al-Islam (2/126).

And he (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The comprehensive statement concerning all of this matter is that Allah is to be described as He has described Himself or His Messenger has described Him, and as the early generation have described Him, and we are not to go beyond what the Qur'an and hadeeth say.

Imam Ahmad (may Allah be pleased with him) said: Allah is not to be described except as He has described Himself or His Messenger has described Him, and one is not to go beyond the Qur'an and hadeeth.

The approach of the salaf was to describe Allah as He described Himself and as His Messenger described Him, without distorting or denying, and without asking how or likening Him to His creation. We know that what Allah has ascribed to Himself is true, and there is nothing mysterious or puzzling in it, rather its meaning is to be understood as the One Who said it meant it to be understood, especially when the one who said it is more knowledgeable of what he says than all other people and the most eloquent and most able to explain what he wanted to explain, and the most fluent in explaining, defining and guiding.

In addition to all of this, there is nothing like unto Allah, either in His holy essence or His names and attributes or actions. We believe firmly that He has a real essence and that He has real actions, and real attributes. There is nothing like unto Him, in his essence, attributes or actions. If there is anything that implies shortcomings or that He has a beginning, He is far above that in a real sense, and He is to be thought of as perfect in such a way that there is no perfection above it. He has no beginning and He cannot have been created, because there was never a time when He did not exist. For anything to be created implies that there was a time when it did not exist, and that creation would require a creator, but He has always existed from eternity.

The view of the salaf is one of moderation, neither denying the divine attributes nor likening Allah to His creation. They do not liken the attributes of Allah to the attributes of His creation, as they do not liken His essence to the essence of His creation. They do not deny that which He ascribes to Himself or that His Messenger ascribes to Him, which leads to denying His beautiful names and sublime attributes, and to displacing words from (their) right places (cf. al-Nisa' 4:46) and turning away from (Fussilat 41:40) the names and signs of Allah.

Both those who deny Allah's attributes and those who liken Him to His creation are guilty of both errors. Those who deny His attributes failed to understand the names and attributes of Allah except in a manner that is befitting to created beings, so they denied these concepts and thus they have combined both errors; first of all they likened Him to His creation, then they denied His attributes as a result. That is likening the names and attributes to what may be understood from the names and attributes of His creation, then they denied the attributes that He deserves to have that are befitting to Allah, may He be glorified and exalted.

Fataawa Shaykh al-Islam (5/26-27)

The texts of Shaykh al-Islam concerning this issue are very many, as we have indicated, but what we have quoted is sufficient, in sha Allah.

And Allah is the Source of strength.

Source: Islam Question and Answer - The 'aqeedah of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah and the praise of the imams for him and Ibn Hajar's attitude towards him

[salman]

Reply to Accusations Against Shaykh ul-Islam ibn Taymiyyah

The Accusation that ibn Taymiyyah held Allah to be a body, of composite parts having organs

Amongst those contemporary, and recent writers who accused Shaykh al-Islam of this are: al-Habbashee al-Huraree, as-Saqqaaf and his mentor Zaahid al-Kawtharee. In fact all the attacks that are about to be raised will find their origins with one, or all of the three personalities mentioned above, from the writers of recent and contemporary times.

As-Saqqaaf says, after previously quoting an-Nawawees ruling of unbelief on the one who ascribes to Allah a jism (body):

"Entering into this category is al-Harraanee (i.e. ibn Taymiyyah),who has affirmed tajseem (Allah having a body) in many of his books. So from this is his saying in 'at-Ta`sees' (1/101): 'and there is not in the Book of Allah, nor in the Sunnah of His Messenger, nor a statement from any of the Salaf of this ummah and it's Imaams that He is not a jism, and that His Attributes are not bodily, consisting of organs.' I say: By Allah who originated the heavens and the Earth - your saying is ignorance and misguidance. Is not Allah - the Most High's - saying, "there is nothing like Him" sufficient in negating tajseem and it's reality, O al-Harraanee?!! And what about the Imaams of the Ummah and the Salaf - O al-Harraanee - and their censure of tashbeeh.." ['Daf Shubah at-Tashbeeh' (pp 245-246) with it' s footnotes by Saqqaaf. ]

Shaykh Mashur Salmaan said in reply to this, "These words are from one who does not know what fairness is, who acts haphazardly in his rulings, and who falsely accuses the scholars of wickedness. This becomes apparent in a number of ways:

From them: that the previously stated words are not from the writings of ibn Taymiyyah in which he is clarifying his own views, or even stating them. Rather he is quoting the saying of the People of Kalaam (innovated speech and rhetorics). However as-Saqqaaf has conveniently omitted the beginning of the quotation from Shaykh al-Islam ibn Taymiyyah, where he clearly stated: Qaaloo (they said)!!

From them: that Saqqaaf overlooks the words of Shaykh al-Islam ibn Taymiyyah - may Allah have mercy upon him - concerning the overall usage of this term in reference to Allah - the Mighty and Majestic - and he halted where he halted upon with knowledge. However justice is very rare - and there is no movement and power except with Allah.

Shaykh al-Islam said, in the course of this topic, 'indeed the term al-Jism (body), al-Arad (organs), al-Mutahayyiz (extent) are newly invented terminoligies. We have mentioned many a time before that the Salaf and the Imaams have not spoken about such things - neither by way of negation, nor by way of affirmation. Rather they declared those who spoke about such matter to be innovators, and went to great lengths to censure them.'

This is what has repeatedly been affirmed by Shaykh al-Islam - may Allah have mercy on him - in many of his books, such as: 'Sharh Hadeeth an-Nuzool' (pp. 69-76), 'Majmoo' al-Fataawaa' (3/306-310, 13/304-305), 'Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah' (2/134-135, 192, 198-200, 527). Indeed in 'Sharh Hadeeth an-Nuzool' Shaykh al-Islam has labelled ascribing Allah with the term jism, by saying, 'an innovation in the Sharee`ah, a corruption of the language, and a contradiction to the [sound] intellect. Rather it is repudiated by the Sharee`ah, the language and the [sound] intellect.'

And from them: Shaykh al-Islam mentions the intended meaning of ascribing Allah with the term jism, by saying: 'whosoever alleges that the Lord is a jism - with the meaning that he accepts division, separation and partition (for Allah) - then he is the most disbelieving of people and the most ignorant. Indeed, his statement is more evil than the one who says that Allah has a son - with them meaning that a part of Him split and thus became His son.'" [ 'al-Asaalah' magazine (no.4 pp.54-55), see also his 'Rudood wat Ta'qubaat' (pp 21-23) ]

And at this point we quote from a writer of the own ranks of the accusers: Dr. Sa`eed Ramadan al-Bootee who says, "And we are amazed when we see the extremists declaring ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy upon him, of being an unbeliever. And also at them saying that he was one who held Allah to be a body (mujassid), and I have studied long and hard as to where I could find a statement or a word from ibn Taymiyyah that he wrote or said which would indicate his holding Allah to be a body as was quoted from him by as-Subki and others [This is a clear indication from al-Bootee of the injustice done against ibn Taymiyyah by the likes of as-Subki and others], and I have not found anything from him like this. All I found was him saying in his legal rulings, 'Indeed Allah has a Hand as He said, and has risen over the Throne as He said, and He has an Eye as He said'"

And he adds to this, "I referred to the last work written by Abu al-Hasan al-Ash`aree, 'al-Ibaanah', and I found him saying exactly what ibn Taymiyyah said [on the issue of the Names and Attributes of Allah]." ['Nadwa Ittjaahaat al-Fiqr al-Islamee' (pp 264-265) of al-Bootee.]

The Claims of ibn Batuta:

Amongst the contemporaries of ibn Taymiyyah who accused him of tajseem was the travelling historian, ibn Batuta who said, "I was present in Damascus on Friday where he (ibn Taymiyyah) was admonishing and reminding the people from the minbar (pulpit) of the congregational mosque. During his speech he said: Indeed Allah descends to the lowest heaven of the world just as I am descending now. He then descended one step of the minbar." ['al-Rihlah' (1/110) of ibn Batuta.]

The Falsehood of this can be seen from many angles:

This contradicts the madhab of ibn Taymiyyah concerning the Attributes of Allah - the Most High - which was the same as the madhab of the Salaf, being built upon the saying of Allah, 'There is nothing like Him, He is the Hearing and the Seeing'.

Ibn Taymiyyah says in 'at-Tadmuriyyah' (pg. 20), "It is a must to affirm that which Allah affirms for himself, whilst negating any likeness to Him with His creation. Whosoever says: His Knowledge is like my knowledge, His Power is like my power, or Love like my love, or Pleasure like my pleasure, or Hand like my hand, or Ascending like my ascending, or His Nuzool (descent) is like my descent - then he has resembled and likened Allah to the creation. Rather it is a must to affirm (Allah's Attributes) without resemblance, and to negate (what Allah negates for Himself), without ta`teel (divesting Allah of His Attributes)."

Likewise he said in 'Majmoo` al-Fataawaa' (5/262), "whosoever considers the Attributes to be like the attributes of the creation - such that Istawaa of Allah is like the ascending of the creation, or His Nuzool is like the descending of the creation, or other than that - then he is a deviated innovator." And he repeats this principle over and over again in his works.

It is not possible that ibn Batuta witnessed ibn Taymiyyah deliver this speech, since ibn Batuta clearly states in his 'Rihla' (1/102) that he entered Damascus on the 9th of Ramadhaan in the year 728H. However Shaykh al-Islam was - before, during and after that time - in prison. Ibn Katheer states in 'al-Bidaayah wan Nihaayah' (14/135) that ibn Taymiyyah was imprisoned on the 6th of Sha'baan in the year 728H and remained there until his death on the 20th of Dhul Qa'dah 728H [These dates are endorsed in 'al-A`laam al-Uliyyah' (pg.84) of al-Bazzaar, and 'Sahdharaat adh-Dhahab' (6/80) of ibn al-Amaad.]

Ibn Batuta, may Allah have mercy upon him, did not write the book 'Rihla' with his own hand, rather it was collected by Muhammad bin Jazee al-Kalbee who writes in the introduction to 'Rihla', "and I have quoted the meaning of the words of Shaykh Abu Abdullaah (ibn Batuta) with words that give the meaning that he intended.."

Ibn Batuta started his journey on the 2nd of Rajab 725H and completed it on the 3rd of Dhul Hijjah 756H and he did not write anything down, rather after this journey he dictated to al-Kalbee the events of his journey from memory. Hence the door is open for mistakes, and it is highly likely that ibn Batuta did not witness what he claimed to have witnessed, but merely conveyed the accusations that were in vogue at that time against Shaykh al-Islam from his enemies.

Ibn Batuta himself was opposed to ibn Taymiyyah, for he states in 'Rihla' (1/309), 'and from the great Hanbalee Legal Jurists of Damascus was ibn Taymiyyah, except that he was lacking in his intellect.' Hence it would have been easy for him to take on board the accusations without verifying them.

Ibn Taymiyyah has a separate book concerning Allah's Descending called, 'Sharh Hadeeth an-Nuzool'. In it is no trace whatsoever of the anthropomorphic beliefs that he has been falsely accused of.

Ibn Taymiyyah was not the khateeb of the aforementioned masjid, rather it was Qaadee al-Qazwaynee. Ibn Batuta himself says in his 'Rihla' (1/107), "and at the time of my entering it (Damascus) their Imaam was Qaadee Jalaal ad-Deen Muhammad bin Abd ar-Rahmaan al-Qazwaynee from the great legal jurists, and he was the khateeb of the masjid.."

Ibn Taymiyyah did not used to give admonitions and reminders to the people from the minbar, rather he used to sit upon a chair. Al-Haafidh adh-Dhahabee said, "and he became very famous and well-known, and he started giving tafseer of the Might Book from his memory, on the days of Jumu`ah, sitting upon a chair." And ibn Batuta states in his 'Rihla' (1/108), "it was the habit of the scholars of hadeeth to read books of hadeeth on a raised chair." And a raised chair in the Arabic language is called, 'minbar'. ['Lisaan al-Arb' (5/189)]

This is why ibn Hajr mentioned in his 'Durar al-Kaaminah', "and he used to speak on the minbar in the way of the explainers of fiqh and hadeeth, and he used to mention in an hour, what another was unable to mention in many sittings, as if the sciences were displayed in front of his eyes" Meaning by this that he sat on a chair as done by the scholars of hadeeth.

[The above discussion is taken from 'Min Mashaaheer al-Mujaddidayn' (pp 27-29) of Shaykh Saalih al-Fowzaan, and 'ibn Taymiyyah al-Muftaraa alayhi' (pp 50-60) of Shaykh Saleem al-Hilaalee.

Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaanee also mentioned in 'Durar al-Kaaminah' (pg. 154) quoting from at-Tufee that, "and they mentioned that he mentioned the hadeeth of Descent and he descended two steps of the minbar and he said, 'Like this descending of mine' so he was imputed with tajseem (fa nusiba ilaa at-tajseem)"

This statement is by no means an evidence against ibn Taymiyyah as it only states 'they mentioned' mentioning no eye witnesses, And in fact it only confirms, along with all that has preceded, that these were lies being spread against ibn Taymiyyah. This is the reason that at-Tufee only said, 'he was imputed with tajseem' using uncertain phraseology.]

So with the above it is clear that the account of ibn Batuta cannot be depended upon due to his obvious confusion and the lack of coherency of his account, and due to it's clear contradiction to the written words of ibn Taymiyyah.

And with this the gross exaggeration of Taaj ad-Deen Subki can also be discerned, where he said, "none of them (scholars) denied that he had said, 'Allah had directions and is a composition of particles coming together'" See 'Albani Unveiled' (pg.116)]

The Accusation that ibn Taymiyyah held Allah to be subject to direction (jihha)

Nowhere in the works of ibn Taymiyyah has he used the word jihha in describing Allah. Rather the basis of this accusation arises from his following our Salaf and clearly stating that Allah is outside of His creation, above the heavens, over His Throne. When reading this, the misguided philosophers (mutakallimeen) argued that this position of ibn Taymiyyah necessitated that Allah have a direction.

The Position of the Salaf as to Allah being distinct from creation:

Know that the verses of the Qur`aan on this issue, clear and unequivocal in their meaning, run into hundreds, and likewise the ahaadeeth, that Allah is above His creation and over His Throne. These are well known so we will suffice here with stating the position of the Salaf on this issue as it is they who understood the Qur`aan and Sunnah the best.

Below is a translation of some points from 'Khalq Af`aal al-Ebaad' of Imaam Bukhaaree (RH), pp.13+. All narrations quoted are authentic insha`Allah according to the takhreej done of the works quoted. The narrators are mainly Taabi`ee and those that came immediately after.

"6) Wahb bin Jareer said, 'The Jahmiyyah are heretics, they think that He has not risen over His Throne.'

13) Ibn al-Mubaarak said, 'we do not say as the Jahmiyyah say that Allah is on the earth, rather He has risen over His Throne.'

14) And it was said to him, 'how should we know our Lord?' He said, 'above the Heavens, over/upon (`alaa) His Throne'

29) Sufyaan ath-Thawree was asked about the verse, "and He is with you wheresoever you are". He said, 'His Knowledge.'

64) Sadqa said, 'I heard Sulaiman at-Taimi saying, 'if I were asked, "where is Allah?" I would say, "above (fee) the heaven". And if it said, "where was the Throne before the Heaven?" I would say, "over the water." And if it is said, "where was the Throne before the water?" I would say, "I do not know."'

And Imaam Bukhaaree said, 'and that (i.e. his answer) was because of the saying of Allah, "and they cannot encompass anything of His Knowledge except what He wills." i.e. except what He explains.'

[This shows that the question 'where is Allah' was considered allowed by the Salaf, and how could it be otherwise when the Prophet (SAW) himself asked the slave girl, "where is Allah" as is established firmly in the saheeh of Imaam Muslim. So do not be misguided by the neo-Jahmiyyah of today, Saqqaaf and al-Habbashee and their likes who try to declare the above hadeeth of Muslim as weak, and make out that the above question is a bid`ah, having only the classical Jahmiyyah as their precedents.]

66) Muhammad bin Yusuf said (one of the teachers of Bukhaaree), 'the one who says that Allah is not over (`alaa) His Throne is a kaafir. And the one who thinks that Allah did not speak to Moses is a kaafir.'

103) Ibn Mas`ud (RA) said about His saying, "then He rose over His Throne", - 'the Throne is over the water, Allah is above (fawqa) the Throne and He knows what you are upon.'

104) Qataada said about His saying, "and He is Allah in the Heaven and in the Earth" - 'the One Who is worshipped in the heaven and in the earth.'"

Below are further points translated from 'Sharh Usul I`tiqaad Ahlus Sunnah' of al-Laalikaa`ee (d.414, pp396+)

"660) Abdullaah bin Abbaas (RA) said, 'Verily Allah was above His Throne before He created anything, then He created the creation and decreed what was to exist until the Day of Judgement.'

662) Bashr bin Umar said, 'I heard more then one of the Mufassir say about the verse, "The Most Merciful istawaa upon the Throne" - istawaa means rose above.'

665) Rabee`(one of the teachers of Maalik) was asked about the verse, "The Most Merciful rose over His Throne" - 'how did He rise?' He replied, 'al-Istawaa (rising) is known, and the how is not comprehensible, and from Allah is the message, and upon the Messenger is the preaching, and upon us is believing.'

670) Maqaatil bin Hayaan said about His saying, "and there is no secret discourse of 3 people except He is the fourth, or of 5 people and He is the sixth" - 'He is above His Throne, and nothing is hidden from His knowledge.'

673) Imaam Ahmad was asked, 'Allah is above the seventh heaven, above His Throne, distinct from his creation, and His Power and Knowledge are in every place?' He replied, 'yes, above the Throne and His Knowledge is in every place.'

675) Imaam Ahmad was asked about the verse, "and He is with you wheresoever you are", and the verse, "there is no secret discourse of 3 people except that he is the fourth." - he replied, '(meaning) His Knowledge, He is the Knower of the seen and the unseen, His knowledge encompasses everything, and our Lord is above the Throne without setting limits and giving description, and His Kursi is as the expanse of the heavens and the earth with His Knowledge.'"

Imaam Awzaa`ee said, "we used to say, while the Taabi`een were many, 'indeed Allah is above His Throne, and we believe in what occurs in the Sunnah to do with His Attributes'" [ Related by al-Bayhaqi in 'Asmaa was Sifaat' (pg. 408) and ibn Hajr declared it's chain of narration to be good as in 'Fath al-Baaree' (13/406).]

Imaam Abdullaah bin Ahmad quoted Abdullaah ibn Mubaarak as saying, '...I bear witness that You are above Your Throne above the seven heavens and this is not as the enemies of Allah say, the heretics.' [ 'Sharh as-Sunnah' of Imaam Abdullaah]

He also quoted Abdullaah ibn Mubaarak as saying, 'we know that our Lord is above the seven heavens over the Throne, and we do not say as the Jahmiyyah say that he is here,' pointing with his hand to the earth. [Ibid.]

Abu Haneefah (RH) said, when asked of his opinion of the one who says, 'I do not know whether Allah is in the heavens or on the earth.'-

'He has disbelieved, because Allah says, "The Most Merciful rose above the Throne.", and His Throne is above His seven heavens.' He was then asked, 'what if he said that Allah is above His Throne but he does not know whether the Throne is in the heavens or on the earth?' He said, 'He has disbelieved, because He has denied that He is above the heavens and whosoever denied that He is above the heavens has disbelieved.' ['al-Uluww' of adh-Dhahabee, also 'Sharh aqeedah at-Tahaawiyyah' of ibn Abee al-Izz al-Hanafee.]

Ibn Khuzaymah (the Imaam of the muhadditheen of his time) said, 'whosoever does not affirm that Allah is above His heavens, over/upon (`alaa) His Throne and He is distinct from His creation, must be forced to repent. If he does not repent then he must be beheaded and thrown in the garbage dump so that the Muslims and thimmis (Jews and Christians living under the Islamic State) would not suffer from his stinking smell.' ['at-Tawheed' of ibn Khuzaimah, also quoted by al-Haakim in 'al-Ma`rifah']

Imaam Abul Hasan al-Ash`aree (d.290) in 'al-Ibaanah' brings a whole chapter on 'Istawaa' (Allah Rising over His Throne), in the course of his discussion he said, 'and some people say, from the Mu`tazila and Jahmiyyah and Hururiyya, about the saying of Allah, "The Most Merciful rose upon His Throne", that he istawla (conquered), Milak (owned), Qahr (dominated), and that Allah is in every place, and they denied Allah being above His Throne, as the People of Truth say...'

['al-Ibaanah' (pg. 120+) containing an excellent refutation of the above claim. This also refutes clearly what Abu Mansur al-Baghdaadee states in his 'Farq bayna al-Firaq' that, "The majority go the way of saying that the meaning of "Istawaa" is establishing dominance (al-qahr) and victory (al ghalaba), that is, the Merciful vanquished the Throne (al-rahmanu ghalaba al-`arsh) and overcame it (wa qaharahu). He mentioned the Throne specifically because it is the greatest of created things (a`dhamu al-makhluqat)."

It should be said to him, 'establish the throne and then sit on it', what majority? When the totality of the Salaf held that Istawaa meant that Allah has risen over His Throne. Not only that but the very Imaam that Abu Mansur claims to follow, al-Ash`aree refutes his very claim as being misguidance!]

The quotes on this run into the hundreds from the salaf, and the books written on this by the early scholars of Islam are many but we do not wish to lengthen the discussion beyond what is necessary.

So we say to those that accuse ibn Taymiyyah of giving Allah a direction, because of this belief of his: Your accusation necessitates that all of the above Salaf also held Allah to have a jihha, including the two great Companions, ibn Mas`ud and ibn Abbaas. So if you were to declare ibn Taymiyyah as misguided due to this, then you must do the same with the Salaf. We seek refuge with Allah from such misguidance!

Ibn Taymiyyah said,

"And when it became established in the souls of the addressees (of the revelation) that Allah is the Highest of the High, and the He is Above everything, the understanding of His saying, "Indeed He is (fee) the Heaven" became that He was High and Above everything. Likewise the slave girl when it was said to her, "where is Allah," she said, "(fee) the Heaven," meaning above, without designating for Him a created body or His being contained in His Creation..Furthermore whosoever thinks that Allah being (fee) the Heaven means that the Heaven surrounds or encloses Him, then he is a liar if he is quoting someone else or misguided if He believes this with respect to His Lord. We have not heard anyone understand this from this word (fee) just as we have not seen anyone quote this from anyone else" ['Bayaan Talbees al-Jahmiyyah' (1/559) of ibn Taymiyyah]

He said in 'Darr at-Ta`aarud' (1/253), "so when the Creator, the Exalted is separate and distinct from the creation, high above it, and there is nothing in existence save the Creator and created, then there is nothing that exists alongside Him which is besides Him, let alone that He - Subhaanahu - should be in some existing thing which surrounds and encompasses Him."

Ibn Taymiyyah said,

"The people fall into three groups over the convention of the use of the word jihha. A group that negates it, another that affirms it, and a third that explains the issue. This difference is present amongst the followers of the Four Imaams who affirmed the Attributes of Allah and the difference of the Ahlul Hadeeth and Sunnah, specifically, over this is a difference in wording, not in meaning. This is why a group from the Companions of Ahmad - like the Tameemiyyeen and al-Qaadee in one of his two sayings - negated it yet another, larger group, affirmed it - and this is the last saying of al-Qaadee. This is because the word jihha could be used to refer to that which is subject to time and space (wujood) or that which is not (ma`doom) and it is known that there is nothing present except for the Creator and creation.

So if the word jihha is used to refer to something that exists other than Allah then it refers to something created by Allah and Allah is not encompassed or confined by any of his creation. If the word is used to refer to something outside time and space, i.e. above the creation, then there is nothing there except Allah." ['Minhaaj as-Sunnah' (1/216) of ibn Taymiyyah.]

So it is clear with all of this that ibn Taymiyyah did not believe Allah to be subject to any of the created direction, nor did he believe Allah to be surrounded in any way by His creation.

The Accusation that ibn Taymiyyah held Allah to be subject to limitation (hadd)

The innovators looked into the works of ibn Taymiyyah and saw him mentioning the word hadd with respect to Allah and immediately assumed that he held Allah to be subject to limitation and without and further research declared him as a deviant or kaafir. The error of this accusation will become clear, by the Permission of Allah.

The basis of this accusation lies with the authentic saying related from Abdullaah bin Mubaarak as is related in 'Tabaqaat al-Hanaabila' (1/267), "I said to Ahmad: it is reported from ibn al-Mubaarak that it was asked him, 'how should we know our Lord?' to which he replied, 'over (fee) the Seventh Heaven, over His Throne with hadd.' So Imaam Ahmad said: this is how we believe it." [Related by ad-Daarimee in 'Radd alaa Mareesee' (pg.34), Abdullaah bin Ahmad in 'as-Sunnah' (1/175), al-Bayhaqi in 'Asmaa was Sifaat' (pg. 467). Imaam adh-Dhahabee said in 'al-Uluww' (pg. 152 - of the mukhtasar), "this is saheeh, established from ibn al-Mubaarak and Ahmad may Allah be pleased with him." Ibn Taymiyyah said in 'al-Hamawiyyah' (5/184 - of Majmoo al-Fataawaa), "this is famous and established from ibn Mubaarak via many routes, and it is also established from Ahmad bin Hanbal, and Ishaaq bin Raahawayyah and other Imaams." See also 'Sharh aqeedah at-Tahaawiyyah' (pg. 240). See also the refutation of al-Kawtharees feeble attempts to declare this narration da`eef in 'Daf` Shubah al-Ghawiyyah' (pp73-74) of Shaykh Muraad Shukree.]

But was the meaning of the Imaams in saying this? Was it establishing limits for Allah with the meaning of the walls of a house setting its limits, or something else? Or does Allah have an Attribute of hadd? What is the reconciliation between this narration from Imaam Ahmad and the previous one mentioned above (no.675)?

Ibn Taymiyyah says,

"These words that he mentioned would be applicable if they had said that He has an Attribute and it is hadd, as suggested by this person who tries to refute them. This has not been said by anyone and neither would any intelligent person say this, for this statement has no reality to it due to their not existing a single Attribute from the Attributes that He is described with, such as Hand and Knowledge, that has been specified as hadd. All that is meant here is what distinguishes something from something else with regards to its description and measure as is well known of the word hadd when dealing with the clearly defined things. For example it is said: the hadd of man, meaning those characteristics that distinguish him as being a man." [ 'Talbees al-Jahmiyyah' (1/442) of ibn Taymiyyah.]

So historically when the Jahmiyyah, denied the Attributes of Allah, and denied his being above His Throne, rather they said He is everywhere, then some of the Salaf replied to this by saying that indeed Allah has a hadd with the meaning: that which distinguishes Him from anything else, in that He has Risen over His Throne and is distinct from creation. Ibn Taymiyyah said,

"So when the Jahmiyyah said: indeed the Creator is not distinguished from the creation, and they denied the Attributes which distinguish Him, and they denied His Power (qadr), to the extent that the Mu`tazila said, when we acknowledge that He is Living, Knowing and all-Powerful (only), then we have come to know His reality. They say: indeed He is not distinct from other than Him. Rather they depict Him, either with negative descriptions such as: He is not in the world, nor out of the world, and not this and not that, or they make Him to be encompassed by the creation.

So Abdullaah bin Mubaarak made clear that the Lord is over His Throne, distinct from the creation, and he mentioned hadd because the Jahmiyyah used to say: He does not have a hadd, and whatsoever does not have a hadd cannot be distinct from creation, and cannot be above the creation because that would necessitate a hadd. So when the Ameer al-Mu`mineen Abdullaah ibn al-Mubaarak was asked: 'How should we know Him?' He said, 'above His Heavens, over His Throne, distinct from His creation.' So they said, 'this implies that which the Jahmiyyah negate, and with this negation of theirs they negate the fact that He is present over the Throne, distinct from creation.' So they asked him, 'with hadd?' And he replied 'with hadd'.

So this is what is understood by anyone who understands what was between the sayings of the believers of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaa`ah and the Jahmiyyah." [Ibid (1/443)]

Then ibn Taymiyyah discusses the statements of those from the salaf who negated the usage of the word hadd, and those who used it, and explains that in reality both groups were saying the same thing, and the difference was merely one of wording not of meaning:

"If the understood meaning of this word is that Allah is in any way enclosed by His creation, then Allah is Greater and more Mighty, rather His Kursi is as the expanse of the Heavens and the earth.and if what is meant by this word is that he is distinct from His creation, then He is as the Imaams of Ahlus Sunnah said about Him: over His Heavens, above His Throne, distinct from creation." ['at-Tadmuriyyah' (pg.46)of ibn Taymiyyah, see also for further detail, 'Talbees al-Jahmiyyah' (2/163)]

So after all this, it becomes clear that ibn Taymiyyah did not hold Allah to be subject to limitation, and it becomes clear that the word hadd was used by some of the Salaf with the meaning: distinguishing characteristics, when it became necessary to do so to refute the various deviant groups at that time.

continuing...

[salman]

Reply to Accusations Against Shaykh ul-Islam ibn Taymiyyah

The Accusation that ibn Taymiyyah held Allah subject to movement (Harakah)

The basis of this accusation is that, like the Salaf, ibn Taymiyyah believed that Allah descends to the Lowest Heaven in the last third of the night, and that He has the Attribute of Coming (Majee`). So the opponents adduced against him that he held Allah to move from one place to another, and this resembles Allah to His creation.

A glimpse at the belief of the Salaf to do with Descent:

Imaam al-Aajurree (d.360) says in his exposition on aqeedah, under the chapter 'to have faith and trust that Allah descends to the lowest heaven every night.'

"Faith in this is obligatory, and it is not allowed for the intelligent Muslim to say, 'how does he descend?' - and none would answer this except the Mu`tazila. [For example the saying of some, that His command descends, and the saying of others that His angels descend etc.] As for the people of truth, then they say, 'faith in this is obligatory without asking how. Because the narrations are authentic to the Messenger (SAW) - that Allah descends to the lowest heaven every night - and the ones who transmitted this narration to us are the ones that transmitted the rules of the lawful and prohibited, the knowledge of salaah, zakaah, fasting, hajj, and jihaad. So just as the scholars accepted these from them then like this they accepted from them these Sunan. They said, 'the one who opposed these is horribly misguided' - warning him and warning against him." [ 'ash-Sharee`ah ' (pg. 272)]

Then he goes on to mention the ahaadeeth that occur on this subject.

The great hadeeth master, ibn Khuzaymah brings a chapter heading in his work 'at-Tawheed', "mentioning the narrations of Descent," in which he mentions many ahaadeeth to do with this Attribute.

al-Laalikaa`ee (d.414) brings a chapter heading in his encyclopaedic work on aqeedah - Sharh Usul I`tiqaad - , "what is related about the Descent of the Lord, Blessed and Exalted, is He"

He states that the ahaadeeth that Allah descends to the lowest heaven have been reported by twenty companions and then...

"775) Fudail bin Ayaad (Taabi`ee) said, 'when you hear the Jahmi say, "I disbelieve in a Lord Who descends"- say - "I believe in a Lord Who does what He wills"'

776) Yahya bin Ma`een said, 'when you hear the Jahmi say, "I disbelieve in a Lord Who descends", then say, 'I believe in a Lord Who does what He desires."'

777) Imaam Ahmad said, 'He descends as He wills, according to His Knowledge and Power and Greatness. He encompasses everything with His Knowledge.'

Similar narrations occur in Khalq Af`aal al-Ebaad of Imaam al-Bukhaaree and 'Ghunya at-Taalibeen' of Abdul Qaadir Jeelaanee.

Imaam Abdullaah bin Ahmad narrates in his work 'as-Sunnah',

"508) After mentioning the hadeeth of Descent the people said to Shareek, 'verily there are a people who reject these ahaadeeth.' He said, 'what do they say?'

They said, 'they abuse these ahaadeeth.'

He replied, 'Those who brought (i.e. Companions) these ahaadeeth, are those who brought the Qur`aan, and that the prayers are five, and the Hajj to the House, and the fast of Ramadan. And we do not know Allah except by these ahaadeeth.'

509) Abaad bin al-Awaam said, Shareek bin Abdullaah came to us about fifty years ago. He said (Abaad), 'I said, "O Abu Abdullaah, verily there is a people with us from the Mu`tazila who reject these ahaadeeth."'

He said, 'so he narrated to me about ten ahaadeeth to do with this (i.e. the Descent of Allah) and said, "as for us we take our religion from the taabi`een from the companions of the Messenger (SAW), from where do they take theirs?"'"

Abul Hasan al-Ash`aree (d.294) said, "and we believe in all the narrations that the People of Transmission have established about the Descent to the lowest heaven and that the Lord says, 'is there one who is asking? Is there one who is seeking forgiveness?' And in the generality of what they transmit and establish, at odds to what the people of deviancy and misguidance say." ['al-Ibaanah' (pg. 60) of Abu Hasan al-Ash'aree]

He also said, "and we believe in the ahaadeeth that have come from the Messenger (SAW) that Allah descends to the lowest Heaven and says, 'is there one who is seeking forgiveness?'" ['al-Maqaalaat' (pg. 224) of Abu Hasan al-Ash'aree]

So we say yet again, if by ibn Taymiyyah's affirmation of this Attribute, that Allah indeed Descends to the lowest heaven as befits His Majesty, is misguidance then so are all of the above scholars, and in fact Ahlus Sunnah itself misguided! And so is the very Imaam that the accusers claim to follow misguided, Abu Hasan al-Ash`aree!

Ibn Taymiyyah says, while discussing the use of the word 'harakah',

".like Harb al-Kirmaanee, and Uthmaan bin Sa`eed ad-Daarimee and others. Indeed these clearly used the word harakah and they made clear that this was the madhab of the Imaams of Ahlus Sunnah and Hadeeth from the early and the later.

Harb al-Kirmaanee mentioned that this was the saying of the Imaams of Ahlus Sunnah that he had met, like Ahmad bin Hanbal, and Ishaaq bin Raahawiyyah, and Abdullaah bin Zubair al-Humaidee and Sa`eed bin Mansur.

Sa`eed bin Mansoor and others said: indeed harakah (movement) is from the necessary qualities of life and every living thing moves. They made out that denying this was from the saying of the Jahmiyyah upon whom Ahlus Sunnah are agreed with respect to their misguidance and innovation.

Another group from the Salaf, like Nu`aym bin Hammad al-Khazaa`ee, and Bukhaaree the author of the 'Saheeh', and Abu Bakr ibn Khuzaymah, and others like Abu Umar bin Abd al-Barr, affirmed the meaning of what they (the first group) affirmed but they named it Actions (of Allah). From these were those that forbade the use of the word harakah due to its not being narrated." ['Dar at-Ta`aarud' (7/2)]

He said, "the word harakah was affirmed by a group from Ahlus Sunnah and Hadeeth and this is what was mentioned by Harb bin Ismaa`eel al-Kirmaanee in his 'Sunnah' which he relates from a group of Imaams that he met like al-Humaidee and Ahmad bin Hanbal...

Some groups of Ahlus Sunnah negated the usage of the word harakah like Abu al-Hasan at-Taymee and Abu Sulaymaan al-Khattaabee...

What is narrated from Imaam Ahmad is the rejection of the one that negatesmovement but neither is the usage of the word harakah established from him, even though he may have affirmed some types (of Attributes and Actions) that the affirmer (of the word harakah) would have placed within the ranks of the word harakah. For when he heard someone narrating the hadeeth of Descent and saying, 'He Descends without movement and transmission, and without change.' So Imaam Ahmad rejected this and said, 'say as the Messenger (SAW) said, for he was more shy of His Lord than you.'" ['al-Istiqaamah' (1/70)]

So from this we learn that:

From the salaf were those who negated the usage of the word harakah because it did not occur in the Qur'an and Sunnah when describing Allah, but they affirmed the Attributes of Descent, Coming etc.

From the salaf were those who affirmed the word harakah meaning that Allah Comes, and Descends etc. and it is not like the movement of the Creation but rather as it befits His Majesty.

Shaykh al-Islam quotes the two sayings stating that in meaning that they are the same and that there is no resembling Allah to His creation in this. He himself only affirms the Attributes of Allah without adding anything further.

Finally ibn Taymiyyah belonged to the first group above. So with all of this, the fourth accusation is cleared and all praise is due to Allah.

The Accusation that ibn Taymiyyah held the Hellfire to come to an end

Another accusation by which the opponents declared ibn Taymiyyah to be misguided due to his contradicting the 'consensus' on this issue. Yet nowhere in the works of ibn Taymiyyah does he say this, in fact what we find from him is the exact opposite, and we challenge anybody who accuses ibn Taymiyyah of this to bring his proof.

Ibn Taymiyyah says,

"The Salaf of this nation, its Imaams, and the whole Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaa`ah are agreed that there are some things from the creation that will not come to an end in their entirety like Paradise, Hellfire, the Throne, and others. No one believed that all of the creation would come to an end except for a group from the People of innovated speech (Ahl al-Kalaam) and those who agreed with them from amongst the Mu`tazila and their likes. This is an invalid opinion which contradicts the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of His Messenger and the consensus of the nation and its Imaams." ['Bayaan Talbees al-Jahmiyyah' (1/851)]

This is from one perspective, as for the other than it is over the issue of the Punishment of the Hellfire coming to an end. This is an issue over which there is a difference of opinion emanating from the Salaf themselves as the reader of the Tafseers of at-Tabari, as-Suyuti and others can see under the verse 11:107 and 6:128. It is possible to explain these narrations in two ways: the first being that the saying of some of the Companions and Taabi`een that, 'their will come a time when there will be no-one in Hellfire' is to be taken literally. The second is that it is to be taken to refer only to the Muslims in the Hellfire.

No matter how we take it, to rule someone's deviancy or unbelief based on this is not possible, for only one who contradicts a consensus that is firmly established to exist, and unequivocal in it's meaning can be ruled to be a deviant or a disbeliever. This is not the case here despite the efforts of some scholars to make it seem so. Even if it were so, then neither ibn Taymiyyah or ibn al-Qayyim held this view, so do not be deceived by what the likes of as-Subki writes in his 'al-I`tibaar bi Baqaa al-Jannah wa an-Naar' (forming part of his 'Risaa`il').

As-Subki says, in the course of his discussion on this point,

"I came across the aforementioned book and he mentioned in it three opinions over the Hellfire coming to an end. 1) both Paradise and Hell will end and he said that no one from the salaf held this opinion. 2) that both are eternal. 3) that Paradise remains and Hellfire will come to an end. And he inclined to this position and said that this was the madhab of the Salaf." ['al-I'tibaar' (pg. 201)]

The opponents who read this book, thought that as-Subki was referring to ibn Taymiyyah and hence the origin of this accusation against ibn Taymiyyah. But in reality this is from the words of ibn al-Qayyim and it seems that as-Subki did not even fully read what this Imaam had to say!"

Ibn al-Qayyim says: 'Al-Haadee al-Arwaah' (pg. 429+),

"And this is an issue over which the latter people differed over, falling into three opinions:

That both Paradise and Hell will come to an end and are not eternal, rather just as all created things they will come to an end.

That both will remain, never coming to an end.

That Paradise is eternal, and the Hellfire will come to an end.

We will mention these opinions and their proponents along with their evidences, and we will reject what contradicts the Book of Allahand the Sunnah of His Messenger.

1) As for the first saying, then it was said by Jahm bin Safwaan, the Imaam of the Jahmiyyah, and he did not any precedent in this from the Salaf - neither in the Companions, nor the Taabi`een, nor any of the Imaams of Islam, or indeed anyone from Ahlus Sunnah. Rather this saying was one that was rejected by the Imaams and they declared the unbelief of the ones that held to it, as is mentioned in 'as-Sunnah' of Abdullaah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal reporting from Khaarijah bin Mus`ab that he said, "I declare the Jahmiyyah to be unbelievers due to three verses from the Book of Allah, Azza wa Jall, 'its (Paradise) provision and food is eternal' and they say it will end. 'Verily this is Our provision which will never finish', and they say they will. 'Whatever is with you will pass away, and what is with Allah will remain'".

2) As for the saying that the Hellfire is eternal, then Shaykh al-Islam said, "there are two famous opinions from the Salaf and Khalaf and this difference is known to exist amongst the Taabi`een." I say: and here are seven opinions on this:

That the one entering it will never leave, this being the saying of the Khawaarij and Mu`tazila.

That it's inhabitants will be punished for a time but then this punishment will be changed for them and they will live in a normal manner, gaining pleasure from the Fire, due to its being in conformity to their nature. This is the saying of the Imaam of the Ittihaadiyyah (anthropomorphists) ibn Arabee at-Taa`ee.

That its inhabitants will be punished for a time, then they will be removed from it, and another creation placed in Hell. This opinion was one that the Jews related to the Messenger (SAW) and he declared them liars due to it as did Allah by saying, "and they (the Jews) say: the Fire will not touch us but for a few days. Say: have you taken a covenant from Allah, so that Allah will not break His Covenant? Or is it that you say of Allah what you know not. And those who believe and do righteous deeds, they are dwellers of Paradise, they will dwell therein forever." This saying is then the saying of the enemies of Allah, the Jews, and they are the shaykhs of its proponents. The Qur`aan, Sunnah, and the consensus of the Sahaabah and the Taabi`een and the Imaams indicate this opinions invalidity. Allah says, 'and they will not leave it'...

That its inhabitants will leave it and the Fire will remain, being empty, this is related by Shaykh al-Islam (ibn Taymiyyah). And this opinion is also refuted by the Qur'an and Sunnah as has preceded.

That it will come to an end due to its being created. It is impossible for anything that is created to remain forever, this is the saying of Jahm bin Safwaan, and he does not distinguish in this between the Fire and Paradise.

That its inhabitants will die and lose movement and remain in there as inanimate things, and they will not be affected by pain. This is the saying of Abu al-Hudhail al-Alaaf, the Imaam of the Mu`tazila, and in this ruling he does distinguish between Paradise and Hell.

That its Creator and Lord will cause it to come to an end, for He has given it a limited period.

Shaykh al-Islam said, "this (last) saying was related from Umar, ibn Mas`ud, Abu Hurayrah, Abu Sa`eed and others." Abd bin Humaid related - and he is from the most noble of the scholars of hadeeth - in his famous tafseer, 'Sulaymaan bin Harb reported to us, from Salma, from Thaabit from Hasan who said, "Umar said: if the people of Hell were to remain in the Fire to the extent of the stones in amountain there would be a day that they would leave it."'

And he said, 'Hajaaj bin Minhaal, from Hammaad bin Salma, from Humaid from Hasan that Umar bin al-Khattaab said, "if the People of the Fire were to remain in the Fire to the extent of the stones in a mountain there would be a day that they would leave it.'" He mentioned this in the tafseer of His saying, "they will stay in there for periods" (Naba`a: 23).

So Abd, who is from the Imaams of the Huffaadh and scholars of Sunnah relates from these two noble personalities: Sulaymaan bin Harb and Hajjaaj bin Minhaal, who in turn narrate from Hammad bin Salma, and he narrates from Thaabit and Humaid, and these two from Hasan. And this is sufficient to show the excellence of this isnaad.

And Hasan, even if he did not hear anything from Umar, relates this also from some of the Taabi`een. If this was not authentic from Umar, according to him, then why did he narrate it and designate his narration with certainty by saying, "Umar said"? And why did those Imaams narrate it from him without rejection or refutation when it is known that they rejected anything that contradicted the Sunnah and refuted matters less than this? So if this saying was from those that contradicted the Qur'an and Sunnah and ijmaa of the Imaams then they would have been the first to reject it.

There is no doubt that the one who sticks to this opinion of Umar, and narrates it from him means a portion/type of the inhabitants of the Fire. For the people (i.e. Muslims) that are punished due to their sins, then these people would leave it and they would not stay in it the extent of the stones in a mountain. And the word, 'People of the Fire' is not specific to the believers in the Oneness of Allah, rather it is specific to their enemies, as the Prophet (SAW) said, "as for the People of the Fire who are it's inhabitants, then they will neither live or die in their." [Saheeh Muslim]What has preceded does not contradict His saying, 'they will remain in their forever' and His saying, 'and they will never leave it'."

Ibn Mas`ud said, "there will come a time in which there will be no-one in the Fire and that is after they have remained in there for periods." The likes of this is related from Abu Hurayrah, both being reported by al-Baghawee in his tafseer. Then he says after this, "and the meaning of these according to Ahlus Sunnah, if they are established, is that no one of the People of faith will remain in there.".." ['al-Haadee al-Arwaah' (pp. 429 +)]

So with this it is clear that both ibn Taymiyyah and his student did not hold the Hellfire to come to an end or that the punishment would cease for the unbelievers. Were it not for the fear of lengthening the discussion beyond what is necessary, we would quote from the tafseer of ibn Taymiyyah in which he makes clear that certain types of people would remain in the Hellfire forever, for example, Pharaoh.

Source: Reply to Accusations Against Shaykh ul-Islam ibn Taymiyyah

[loony toons]

jazaak-Allaah (seriously) for all theses articles.....