Refutation of Accusations Against Ibn Taymiyyah Part 4

Refutation of Accusations Against Ibn Taymiyyah Part 4



As-Suyutee quotes from
az-Zamlakaanee that he said, "our Master, our Shaykh, the Imaam, the Scholar,
the Unique (al-Awhad), the Haafidh, the Mujtahid, the Ascetic, the
Worshipper (Aabid), the Example, the Imaam of the Imaams, 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
Islaam, the Proof of the Scholars (A`laam), the proof of the
Mutakallimeen, the effacer of the innovators, endowed with exalted and amazing
sciences, the Reviver of the Sunnah. The one by whom Allaah has greatly favoured
us with, and established the proof with against His enemies. …Taqee ad-Deen ibn
Taymiyyah…"


Then as-Suyutee follows
this up by saying, "I have quoted this biography from the handwriting of the
Allaamah, the unique individual of his time, Shaykh Kamaal ad-Deen
az-Zamlakaanee, may Allaah 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-Ashbaah
wa an-Nadhaa’ir an-Nahwiyyah’ (3/681), see also ‘Dhail alaa Tabaqaat al-Hanaabila’
(2/392-393)]


As-Suyutee said in the
course of discussing his biography, "Shaykh al-Islaam, the Haafidh, the Faqeeh,
the Mujtahid, the distinguished Mufassir, the rarity of his time, Scholar of the
Ascetics" [‘Tabaqaat al-Huffaadh’ (pg. 516 no. 1144), and ‘al-Asbaah wa al-Nadhaa’ir’
(3/683) of as-Suyutee.]


We could mention many more
scholars who praised him but insha’Allaah what we have quoted above is
sufficient to paint a more just and true picture of this Imaam. As for those
scholars that applied the title ‘Shaykh al-Islaam’ to him then they are numerous
and would require a separate volume to list them [As has been done by some
scholars, from amongst them ibn Naasir ad-Deen in the aforementioned book
‘ar-Radd al-Waafir’]


The Accusations against
him:


From what has preceded it
is clear that Shaykh al-Islaam 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.


What follows is an
investigation of the points of belief that ibn Taymiyyah was accused of having
deviances in. We have left out the various legal positions he had for which he
was attacked for due to their relative unimportance.


On the works of Taqi ad-Deen
Subki and his son Taaj ad-Deen Subki:


Much of what is written
against ibn Taymiyyah are based upon the works of these two scholars. ‘Rasaa`il
as-Subkiyyah’ of Shaykh Taqi ad-Deen and the various biographical works of Taaj
ad-Deen for example ‘Tabaqaat ash-Shaafi`iyyah’.


As for the works of Taqi
ad-Deen then adh-Dhahabee wrote to him, censuring him for what he had written,
and his erroneous claims, to which as-Subkee replied saying, "As for what you
say with regard to ash-Shaykh Taqi ad-Deen, then I am convinced of the great
scope, the ocean-like fullness and vastness of his knowledge of the transmitted
and intellectual sciences, his extreme intelligence, his ijtihaad and his
attainments in that which surpass description. And I have always held to this
opinion. Personally, his status in my eyes is greater and more esteemed, for the
asceticism, piety, religiosity, his helping the truth and standing firm on it
for the sake of Allaah alone, his adherence to the path of the salaf and his
abundant taking from it, and his strangeness in this time, nay any time." [‘ad-Durar
al-Kaamina’ of ibn Hajr under the biography of ibn Taymiyyah (1/159) and ‘Dhail
Tabaqaat al-Hanaabilah’ (2/392) of ibn Rajab al-Hanbalee.]


As for his son, Taaj ad-Deen,
then unfortunately, he went to extremes in criticising ibn Taymiyyah, due to his
highly partisan and sectarian attitude. Such that as-Sakhaawee endorsed the
following words about him, following his statement, "did any of the Hanbalees
raise their heads (i.e. become prominent)":


"This is from the strangest
of things, and the most sectarian/partisan of attitudes, and this is why the
Qaadee of our time, and Shaykh of the madhab al-Izz al-Kanaanee wrote under this
statement, ‘and likewise Allaah did not raise the heads of the Mu`attila’
and then he said about Taaj ad-Deen Subki, ‘he is a man having little manners,
lack of scholarly integrity, ignorant of Ahl as-Sunnah and their ranks.’" [
‘al-I`laan bi at-Tawbeekh liman Dhamma at-Taareekh’ (94-95) of as-Sakhaawee]


A glimpse of his attacks
can be seen in ‘Albani Unveiled’ (pp 114-116) and in what follows the truth of
the above criticism will become clear, and a more severe and devastating reality
will become apparent, and that is the amount of lies that are heaped around the
pillars of Ahlus Sunnah in all ages by individuals that claim to be supporting
the truth.


On the book ‘Naseehah
adh-Dhahabiyyah’:


A book ascribed to
adh-Dhahabee in which he launches a severe attack on ibn Taymiyyah, but in
reality was not written by him, but falsely ascribed to him, this due to many
reasons:





- No one who is familiar
with the works of adh-Dhahabee mentioned this as one of his works.


- Adh-Dhahabee remained the
student of ibn Taymiyyah until the latters death.


- All of the sayings of
adh-Dhahabee in the books that are affirmed to be from him, to do with ibn
Taymiyyah, revolve around praise and respect of him. (A glimpse of these has
preceded).


- This letter is written in
the handwriting of ibn Qaadee ash-Shuhba, an enemy of ibn Taymiyyah.


We have not seen one who
ascribes this book to adh-Dhahabee after Qaadee ash-Shuhba except for his
contemporary, al-Haafidh as-Sakhaawee, may Allaah have mercy on him, who merely
followed him. [From the book, ‘at-Tawdeeh al-Jallee fee ar-Radd alaa Naseeha
adh-Dhahabiyyah al-Manhula alaa al-Imaam adh-Dhahabee’ (pp85-86) by Shaykh
Muhammad bin Ibraaheem ash-Shaybaanee, with summary]





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



Amongst those contemporary,
and recent writers who accused Shaykh al-Islaam 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
Allaah a jism (body):


"Entering into this
category is al-Harraanee (i.e. ibn Taymiyyah)…who has affirmed tajseem (Allaah
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 Allaah, 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 Allaah who originated the heavens and the Earth - your saying
is ignorance and misguidance. Is not Allaah - 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-Islaam
ibn Taymiyyah, where he clearly stated: Qaaloo (they said)!!


From them: that Saqqaaf
overlooks the words of Shaykh al-Islaam ibn Taymiyyah - may Allaah have mercy
upon him - concerning the overall usage of this term in reference to Allaah -
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
Allaah.


Shaykh al-Islaam 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-Islaam - may Allaah 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-Islaam has labelled
ascribing Allaah 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-Islaam
mentions the intended meaning of ascribing Allaah 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 Allaah) - then he is the
most disbelieving of people and the most ignorant. Indeed, his statement is more
evil than the one who says that Allaah 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 Ramadaan al-Bootee
who says, "and we are amazed when we see the extremists declaring ibn Taymiyyah,
may Allaah have mercy upon him, of being an unbeliever. And also at them saying
that he was one who held Allaah 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 Allaah 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 Allaah 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-Islaamee’ (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 Allaah 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