💌*ᗯᕼO IS Iᗷᑎ TᗩYᗰIYᗩ?**
💌*ᖇESᑭOᑎSES TO ᗩᑕᑕᑌSᗩTIOᑎS ᗩGᗩIᑎST ᕼIᗰ*
🌿He is the mujtahid and reformer of his age, Ahmad ibn ‘Abdul-Halim ibn ‘Abdus-Salam ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Abu Qasim ibn Taymiyyah al-Harrani Taqi ad-Din Abu’l-Abbas ibn Shihab ad-Din. He rose the flag of the belief and understanding of Ahlus-Sunnah in his time, at a time when innovation, misguidance, and corruption was widespread, being preached by even some of the People of Knowledge that became well known in later times.
Due to Ibn Taymiyyah’s firm stance against all that was false and corrupt he earned the envy and hatred of all those that he opposed – who were many – and as such had many lies heaped around him.
The purpose of this section is to show this scholar in his true light and expose those lies heaped around him.
Al-Hafidh Al-Bazzar said, depicting the opponents of Ibn Taymiyyah, “You would not see a scholar opposing him (Ibn Taymiyyah), dissuading from him, filled with hatred for him, except that he was the most greedy of them in gathering the worldly goods, the most cunning of them in acquiring them, the most ostentatious of them, the most desirous for reputation.and the most prolific of them in having lies on his tongue.”
▪︎[Al-A’lam al-Uliyyah (p. 82) of Al-Bazzar]
👉🏻❤*TᕼE ᑭᖇᗩISE Oᖴ TᕼE SᑕᕼOᒪᗩᖇS Oᖴ ᕼIᗰ*
Many of the scholars of his time and after his time praised Shaykh ul-Islam for his knowledge, asceticism,الزهد
piety, and following closely the way of the salaf. Many of these statements of praise were collected in a book written by Al-Hafidh Ibn Nasir ad-Din entitled ‘Radd al-Wafir’ refuting the extreme claim of the one that said calling Ibn Taymiyyah, ‘Shaykh ul-Islam’, was unbelief.
Al-Hafidh Adh-Dhahabi said:
👉🏻He was a sign from the signs of Allah in tafsir and expounding upon it
👉🏻his legal rulings in the various sciences reached three hundred volumes,
👉🏻All scholars conceded that he was an ocean having no limits and a treasure having no equivalent
👉🏻he was an overflowing ocean
[Ad-Durar al-Kaminah of Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani under the biography of Ibn Taymiyyah]
he surpassed his contemporaries in every science, and you would not see one like him,
The Sufis took transferred his matter to the King of Egypt and as a result he (Ibn Taymiyyah) was arrested and put in prison
🌺Hafidh Silah ad-Din al-Bala’i says:
He is the Shaykh, the Imam, the alim who understands the affairs, the deeply devoted, the ocean (of knowledge), the pole of light, the Imam of Imams, the blessing to the Muslim nation, the sign of the scholars, the inheritor of the Prophets, the last of the Mujtahids, unique amongst the scholars of the Religion – Shaykh ul-Islam, proof of the scholars, the example for the creatures, proof for the learned ones, effacer of the innovators, sword of the disputers, ocean of knowledge, beneficial treasure, the interpreter of the Qur’an, the amazement of the times, unique in this age and others
🌺Ibn Kathir says:
He was intelligent and had much committed to memory, and he became an Imam in tafsir and everything linked to it and knowledgeable in fiqh. Indeed it was said he was more knowledgeable of the fiqh of the madhahib then the followers of those very same madhahib in his time and other than his time. He was a scholar in Usul and the branches of the religion and grammar and the language and other textual and intellectual sciences. No scholar of a science would speak to him except that he thought that that science was the speciality of Ibn Taymiyyah. As for hadith then he was the carrier of its flag, a hafidh and able to distinguish the weak from the strong, fully acquainted with the narrators.” [‘Al-Bidayah wa’n-Nihayah’ (14/118-119) of Ibn Kathir]
🌺The Qadhi of Qadhis Ibn al-Huriri said, “If Ibn Taymiyyah was not Shaykh al-Islam than who is?” [‘Hayat Shaykh ul-Islam’ (p. 26)
🌺Al-Hafidh ‘Abdur-Rahman ibn Rajab al-Hanbali said, “He is the Imam, the legal Jurist, the Mujtahid, the Scholar of Hadith, the Hafidh, the Explainer of the Qur’an, the Ascetic, Taqi ad-Din Abu’l-Abbas Shaykh ul-Islam, the most knowledgeable of the knowledgeable, it is not possible to exaggerate his renown when he is mentioned … he, may Allah have mercy upon him, was unique in his time with respect to understanding the Qur’an and knowledge of the realities of faith.” [‘Adh-Dhayl ‘ala Tabaqat al-Hanabila’ (2/387-392) of Ibn Rajab]
🌺The Imam of the Hanafis, Badr ad-Din (Mahmud ibn Ahmad) al-‘Ayni said, “Whosoever says Ibn Taymiyyah is a kafir then he is in reality himself a kafir, and the one who accuses him of heresy is himself a heretic. How is this possible when his works are widely available and there is no hint of deviation or dissension contained therein.” [‘Radd al-Wafir’ (p. 245)]
💌As-Suyuti quotes from Az-Zamlakani that he said, “Our Master, our Shaykh, the Imam, the Scholar, the Unique (al-Awhad), the Hafidh, the Mujtahid, the Ascetic, the Worshipper (abid), the Example, the Imam of the Imams, the example for the Nation, the sign of the scholars, the inheritor of the Prophets, the Last of the Mujtahids, unique (Awhad) scholar of the Religion, the Blessing for Islam, the Proof of the Scholars (A’lam), the proof of the Mutakallimin, the effacer of the innovators, endowed with exalted and amazing sciences, the Reviver of the Sunnah. The one by whom Allah has greatly favoured us with, and established the proof with against His enemies … Taqi ad-Din Ibn Taymiyyah.”
👉🏻Then As-Suyuti follows this up by saying, “I have quoted this biography from the handwriting of the Allamah, the unique individual of his time, Shaykh Kamal ad-Din az-Zamlakani, may Allah have mercy on him, who used to say, ‘one who had more memorised than him has not been seen in the last five hundred years.’ ” [‘Al-Ashbah wa’n-Nadha’ir an-Nahwiyyah’ (3/681), see also ‘Dhayl ala Tabaqat al-Hanabila’ (2/392-393)]
👉🏻As-Suyuti said in the course of discussing his biography, “Shaykh ul-Islam, the Hafidh, the Faqih, the Mujtahid, the distinguished Mufassir, the rarity of his time, Scholar of the Ascetics.” [‘Tabaqat al-Huffadh’ (p. 516 no. 1144), and ‘Al-Asbah wa’n-Nadha’ir’ (3/683) of As-Suyuti]
👉🏻Shaykh ul-Islam had many enemies, and many jealous rivalries who plotted against him together to try to make out that he was an innovator. So we advise anyone who wishes to criticise the Shaykh that he must make sure that his criticisms are based firmly upon the written works of Ibn Taymiyyah, not merely upon the words of other than him, as done by his opponents
👉🏻TᕼE ᗩᑕᑕᑌSᗩTIOᑎ TᕼᗩT Iᗷᑎ TᗩYᗰIYYᗩᕼ ᕼEᒪᗪ ᗩᒪᒪᗩᕼ TO ᗷE ᗩ ᗷOᗪY, Oᖴ ᑕOᗰᑭOSITE ᑭᗩᖇTS ᕼᗩᐯIᑎG OᖇGᗩᑎS*
His opponent As-Saqqaf has conveniently omitted the beginning of the quotation from Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, where he clearly stated: Qalu (they said)!!
Shaykh ul-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 Imams 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 ul-Islam – may Allah have mercy on him – in many of his books, such as: ‘Sharh Hadith an-Nuzul’ (pp. 69-76), ‘Majmu’ al-Fatawa’ (3/306-310, 13/304-305), ‘Minhaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah’ (2/134-135, 192, 198-200, 527).
Indeed in ‘Sharh Hadith an-Nuzul’ Shaykh ul-Islam has labelled ascribing Allah with the term jism, by saying, ‘an innovation in the Shari’ah, a corruption of the language, and a contradiction to the [sound] intellect. Rather it is repudiated by the Shari’ah, the language and the [sound] intellect.’
“And from them: Shaykh ul-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-Asalah’ magazine (no. 4 pp. 54-55), see also his ‘Rudud wa’t-Ta’qubat’ (pp. 21-23)
👊Yet Sufi scholar defends him
Dr. Sa’id Ramadhan al-Buti 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-Buti 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’l-Hasan al-Ash’ari, ‘Al-Ibanah’, and I found him saying exactly what Ibn Taymiyyah said [on the issue of the Names and Attributes of Allah].” [‘Nadwa Ittjahat al-Fiqr al-Islami’ (pp. 264-265) of Al-Buti]
💌👉🏻*TᕼE ᗩᑕᑕᑌSᗩTIOᑎ TᕼᗩT Iᗷᑎ TᗩYᗰIYYᗩᕼ ᕼEᒪᗪ ᗩᒪᒪᗩᕼ TO ᗷE SᑌᗷᒍEᑕT TO ᗪIᖇEᑕTIOᑎ (ᒍIᕼᕼᗩ)*
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 (mutakallimin) argued that this position of Ibn Taymiyyah necessitated that Allah have a direction.
👉🏻👉🏻👉🏻*TᕼE ᗩᑕᑕᑌSᗩTIOᑎ TᕼᗩT Iᗷᑎ TᗩYᗰIYYᗩᕼ ᕼEᒪᗪ ᗩᒪᒪᗩᕼ TO ᗷE SᑌᗷᒍEᑕT TO ᒪIᗰITᗩTIOᑎ (ᕼᗩᗪᗪ)*
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 kafir. 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 ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak as is related in ‘Tabaqat al-Hanabila’ (1/267), “I said to Ahmad: it is reported from Ibn al-Mubarak that it was asked him, ‘How should we know our Lord?’ to which he replied, ‘Over (fi) the Seventh Heaven, over His Throne with hadd.’ So Imam Ahmad said: ‘This is how we believe it.’ ”
▪︎ [Related by Ad-Darimi in ‘Radd ala Marisi’ (p. 34), ‘Abdullah ibn Ahmad in ‘As-Sunnah’ (1/175), Al-Bayhaqi in ‘Asma wa’s-Sifat’ (p. 467). Imam Adh-Dhahabee said in ‘Al-Uluww’ (p. 152 – of the mukhtasar),
“This is sahih, established from Ibn al-Mubarak and Ahmad, may Allah be pleased with them.” Ibn Taymiyyah said in ‘Al-Hamawiyyah’
(5/184 – of Majmu al-Fatawa), “This is famous and established from Ibn al-Mubarak via many routes, and it is also established from Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and Ishaq ibn Rahawayyah and other Imams.” See also ‘Sharh ‘Aqidah at-Tahawiyyah’ (p. 240). See also the refutation of Al-Kawthari’s feeble attempts to declare this narration da’if in ‘Daf’ Shubah al-Ghawiyyah’
(pp. 73-74) of Shaykh Murad Shukri]
But was the meaning of the Imams 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 Imam 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.”
[‘Talbis 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, 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 ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak made clear that the Lord is over His Throne, distinct from the creation, and he mentiond 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 Amir al-Mu’minin ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak 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 wa’l-Jama’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 Imams of Ahlus-Sunnah said about Him: over His Heavens, above His Throne, distinct from creation.”
[‘At-Tadmuriyyah’ (p. 46)of Ibn Taymiyyah, see also for further detail, ‘Talbis 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
👉🏻TᕼE ᗩᑕᑕᑌSᗩTIOᑎ TᕼᗩT Iᗷᑎ TᗩYᗰIYYᗩᕼ ᕼEᒪᗪ TᕼE ᕼEᒪᒪᖴIᖇE TO ᑕOᗰE TO ᗩᑎ Eᑎᗪ*
👉🏻The Answer is yes Muslims who committed major sins will not be in eternally in hell
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 Imams, and the whole Ahlus-Sunnah w’al-Jama’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 (Ahlul-Kalam) 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 Imams.” [‘Bayan Talbis al-Jahmiyyah’ (1/851)]
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 said, ‘As for the People of the Fire who are it’s inhabitants, then they will neither live or die in their.’ [Sahih Muslim] What has preceded does not contradict His saying, ‘They will remain in their forever,’ and His saying, ‘And they will never leave it.’
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 tafsir of Ibn Taymiyyah in which he makes clear that certain types of people would remain in the Hellfire forever..
Summary by IIN
🌼May Allah save all the scholars of the Ummah from such falsehood they attribute to them
Summarized By IIN