Reality of Ibn Taymiyyah the so called "Shaykh ul Islam" Some people try to praise this person of past by quoting words of other scholars. These same people consider Taqlid to be Haram but suddenly they make a 180 degree turn and start doing taqlid in Aqida themselves, which even we Ahlus Sunnah consider to be Haram (we only consider it allowed in Furu i.e. Fiqh) Ibn Taymiyyah is proven as an utterly misguided person from his own words and there is no need to turn towards sayings of scholars. I want to clarify that Hafidh Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani (rah) thought that Ibn Taymiyyah repented and had become an "Ash'ari" which is why he (Ibn Hajr) praised him, otherwise he has stripped Ibn Taymiyyah in his greatest work called Fath ul Bari on the issue of "Traveling to visit the grave of Prophet (Peace be upon him)" Shaykh ul Islam, Imam Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani (rah) destroys Ibn Taymiyyah by saying in his world renowned Sharh of Sahih Bukhari called Fath ul Bari in regards to Ibn Taymiyyah's absurd fatwa that It is haram to travel for visiting the grave of Prophet (Peace be upon him) Ibn Hajr said: "THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST UGLY THINGS REPORTED FROM IBN TAYMIYYAH" نٌفرطلا نم كلذ حرش ًفو ،كلذ ةروص انركنأو مّلسو هٌلع الله ىلص الله لوسر اندٌس ربق ةراٌز ىلإ لحرلا دش مٌرحتب ةٌمٌت نبا اومزلأ ةٌمٌت نبا نع ةلوقنملا لئاسملا عشبأ نم ًهو ،لوط [Fath ul Bari, Sharh Sahih ul Bukhari (3/386)] In the end Imam Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani (rah) destroys the viewpoint of Ibn Taymiyyah and his ilk by proving travel for graves of Awliya let alone Anbiya, Ibn Hajr says: ملعأ اللهو نٌحلاصلا روبق نم هرٌغو فٌرشلا ربقلا ةراٌز ىلإ لاحرلا دش عنم نم لوق كلذب لطبٌف Translation: So the Qawl (saying) of him is proven Batil (لطبٌف) who says it is forbidden to make a journey towards ‘’Qabr Shareef’’(of Rasul Ullah salallaho alaihi wasalam) and other graves of ‘’Saliheen’’ ( روبق نٌحلاصلا), and Allah knows the best. [Fath ul Bari, ibid] However in his Durar al Kaamina, he bashed Ibn Taymiyyah and also showed praise on him, why he showed praise is known from this following quote: عقوو ةعلقلا ىلإ رضحأو هنم نٌرشعو ثلاثلا ًف لولأا عٌبر ًف جرخأف لضف لآ رٌمأ انهم هٌف عفش نأ ىلإ بجلا ًف ةٌمٌت نبا لزٌ ملو يرعشأ انأ لاق هنأب رضحم هٌلع بتكف ءاهقفلا ضعب عم ثحبلا لاو فرحب سٌلو قولخم رٌغ وهو ةمٌدقلا هتاذ تافص نم ةفص وهو الله تاذب مئاق ىنعم نآرقلا نأ دقتعا يذلا هصن امب هطخ دجو مث ًف لوقلاك لوزنلا ًف لوقلاو الله لاإ هملعٌ لا لب هب دارملا هنك ملعأ لاو هرهاظ ىلع سٌل ىوتسا شرعلا ىلع نمحرلا هلوق نأو توص هٌلع دهشو 707 ةنس لولأا عٌبر ىرشع سماخ ًف كلذو اراتخم كلذ ًف انٌامم بات هنأ هٌلع اودهشأ مث ةٌمٌت نب دمحأ هبتكو ءاوتسلاا مهرٌغو ءاملعلا نم مج عمج كلذب Translation: He (Ibn Taymiyyah) was kept in Jail till Ameer of Aal al Fadhl did Shaf’aat (intercession) for him. In the month of Rabi ul Awwal dated 23rd Ibn Taymiyyah was brought to the fortress where he debated with some scholars, then a report was written that “IBN TAYMIYYAH ADMITTED TO BE AN ASH’ARI” His handwriting is found with what he wrote verbatim, namely: "I believe that the Qur'an is a meaning which exists in Allah's Entity, and that it is an Attribute from the pre-eternal Attributes of His Entity, and that it is uncreated, and that it does not consist in the letter nor the voice, and that His saying: "The Merciful established Himself over the Throne" (20:4) is not taken according to its literal meaning (laysa `ala zahirihi), and I don't know in what consists its meaning, nay only Allah knows it, and one speaks of His 'descent' in the same way as one speaks of His 'establishment.'" It was written by Ahmad ibn Taymiyya and they witnessed over him that he had repented of his own free will from all that contravened the above. This took place on the 25th of Rabi` al-Awwal 707 and it was witnessed by a huge array of scholars and others. [Ibn Hajr al Asqalani in al-Duraar al Kameena (1/47)] So do Wahabis accept that Ibn Taymiyyah repented and became an “ASH’ARI” plus also he wrote in his own hand writing that “ISTAWA IS NOT TO BE TAKEN LITERALLY”?? If not then his repentance is not proven from “TAWATUR” and he will remain an "Utterly misguided person" who died with big lice getting into his head as a curse. Here is clear proof of his absurd beliefs amongst many Proof # 1 Ibn Taymiyyah while explaining Nazul of Allah says: ةفص لاو سمشلا وه سٌل ،سمشلا ببسب ثدحٌ ضارعلأا نم ضرع وه ضرلأا ىلع رهظٌ يذلا عاعشلاو ،لزنت لا سمشلا سفن نإف هب ةمئاق Translation: The nafs of sun itself does not descend, and the sun rays that are on earth are neither the sun nor its attribute, but an accident (‘arad) caused by the sun *Majmua al Fatawa (5/438)] Look how this person is grossly comparing Allah to the sun and it's rays. Proof # 2 Ibn Taymiyyah said: ةروص ًف ًبر تٌأر الله لوسر لاق لاق سابع نبا نع ةمركع نع ةداتق نع عوفرملا حٌحصلا ثٌدحلا ًف امك نٌع ةٌؤر اهنأ حضتٌف ءارضخ ةضور ًف ططق دعج ةرفو هل درمأ Translation: It is concluded that sight was from the eyes because it has come in “AUTHENTIC AND ELEVATED” report narrated via route of Qatada>>Ikrama>>Ibn Abbas (RA) who narrates from the Prophet (Peace be upon him) who said: I saw my God in form of a beardless (person) who had long and curly hair, plus he was in a green garden (ASTAGHFIRULLAH, NAUUDHOBILLAH, THIS HADITH IS MAWDHO AND DAJL OF IBN TAYMIYYAH) [Ibn Taymiyyah in Tasees fi ar-Rad ala Asaas al Taqdees (3/214)] Now a person who tries to prove God as a beardless person with long and curly hair cannot be a true Muslim let alone Shaykh ul Islam. This report is fabricated even according to Wahabis Proof # 3 (From Nasir ud din Albani himself) Nasir ud-din Albani exposes Ibn Taymiyyah’s ignorance in hadith methodology امأ و , ثٌدحلا نم لولأا رطشلا فعض دق , ةٌمٌت نب ملاسلإا خٌش تٌأر ًننأ هعرست نم يرٌدقت ًف ةجتانلا هتغلابم نم اذه و !بذك هنأ معزف , رخلآا رطشلا اهٌف رظنلا ققدٌ و اهقرط عمجٌ نأ لبق ثٌداحلأا فٌعضت ًف Translation: When I saw Sheikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyah considering the Hadith (For whosoever I am Mawla then Ali is his Mawla) as weak/doubtful in its first half and “LIE IN ITS SECOND” then I had to write in length over this issue. In my viewpoint, the reason behind such exaggeration (of Ibn Taymiyah) was that he used to be hasty in deciding the inauthenticity of some Hadiths before seeing them properly [Silsilat ul Ahadith as-Sahiha, Volume No.4, Page No. 344] Important Note: The Hadith of “Man Kunto Mawla” is a “Mutawattir” hadith and calling it a lie is like Takdheeb of Qur’an, denying Mutawattir hadiths is equivalent to denying Qur’an so even on this point Ibn Taymiyyah has indulged in severe heresy. Proof # 4 Ibn Taymiyyah al-Mubtadi said: هِ ِباحَ صْ َأوَ هِ ِئافََلخُ نْ مِ دٌحَ َأ هُ َلعَ فَ لاَوَ مََّلسَ وَ هِ ٌَْلعَ ُاللهَّ ىَّلصَ ِاللهَّ لُ وسُ رَ هُ َلعَ فَ لاَوَ نَ ٌمِ ِلسْ مُ لْا ءِ امَ َلعُ نْ مِ دٍحَ َأ دَنْعِ اعً ورُ شْ مَ سَ ٌَْل ةِ ٌَّنِّلا ظِ فَْلِب رُ هْ جَ لْا لَ ِتُق كَ ِلذَ ىَلعَ رَّ صَ َأ نْ ِإفَ لِ وْقَلْا اذَهَ نْ مِ هُ تُبَاتَِتسْ اوَ ةَ عَ ٌرِ شَّ لا هُ ُفٌرِ عْتَ بُ جِ ٌَ هُ نَِّإفَ بٌ جِ اوَ هُ نََّأوَ ِاللهَّ نُ ٌدِ كَ ِلذَ نَّ َأ ىعَ دَّا نْ مَ وَ اهَ ِتمَّ ِئَأوَ ةِ مَّ ُلأْا فِ َلسَ وَ Translation: To make recitation of Niyyah (intention) in loud manner is not allowed, this is not the opinion of any of the scholars of Muslims, it is also not done by Prophet, nor is it done by one of the Khulafa, Sahaba, Salaf or Imams. Anyone who claims it to in religion of Allah and to be Wajib, he should be taught the shariah and made to repent from the opinion, “IF HE INSISTS THEN HE SHOULD BE KILLED” *Majmua al Fatawa (22/236)+ What a lunacy. Remember to make minor sins into major is clear trait of Khawarij (also remember reciting Niyyah loudly is accepted opinion in Hanafi school, so all Ahnaaf i.e. Majority of Muslims in the world are to be killed according to this Mubtadi Ibn Taymiyyah?) Proof # 5 Ibn Taymiyyah said: هِ ٌَْلعَ ىسَ ومُ وَ ةِرَ جَ شَّ لا ًِف تَ وْصَّ لاوَ مَ لاَ كَ لْا قَ َلخَ امَ نَِّإوَ امً ٌِلكْ تَ ىسَ ومُ مِّْلكَ ٌُ مَْل َاللهَّ نَّ إ : لَ اقَ لٍ جُ رَ ًِف: – ُاللهَّ هُ مَ حِ رَ – مِلاَ سْ ِلإْا خُ ٌْشَ لَ ِئسُ وَ لاَ مَْأ بِ اوَصَّ لا ىَلعَ وَهُ لْ هَ فَ . ظِ وُفحْ مَ لْا حِ وَّْللا نْ مِ ُهذَخَ َأ امَ نَِّإوَ نِ آرْ ُقلْاِب لَ ٌرِ بْجِ مِّْلكَ ٌُ مَْل لَّ جَ وَ زَّ عَ َاللهَّ نَّ َأوَ ِاللهَّ نْ مِ لاَ ةِرَ جَ شَّ لا نْ مِ عَ مِ سَ مُ لاَ سَّ لا بَ اجَ َأفَ : لَ ِتُق لاَِّإوَ بَ اتَ نْ ِإفَ بَ اتَتَسْ ٌُ نْ َأ بُ جِ ٌَ رٌ ِفاكَ وَهُ لْ بَ اهَ ِتمَّ ِئَأوَ ةِ مَّ ُلأْا فِ َلسَ قِ افَتِّاِب بٌ ذِاكَ رٍ تَفْمُ للٌّ اضَ اذَهَ لْ بَ بِ اوَصَّ لا ىَلعَ اذَهَ سَ ٌَْل ، َِِّ دُمْ حَ لْا A question was asked to “SO” called Shaykh ul Islam: Translation: There is a man who says that Allah did not talk to Moses (Peace be upon him) “BY HIMSELF” but rather Allah created a voice from side of the tree, therefore Moses heard from the tree not Allah. (He also says) Allah did not talk to Gibreel (a.s) through the Qur’an, rather Gibreel took it from Lawh al Mahfooz. Is such a person correct or not? Ibn Taymiyyah (al-Mubtadi) replies: All Praise belongs to Allah, that person is not correct, rather he is misguided, a liar “ACCORDING TO CONSENSUS OF ISLAAF AND THE SCHOLARS” Rather he is a “KAFIR” who should repent if not then he is to be “KILLED” *Majmua al Fatawa (12/502)+ Note: He is proven at least misguided in reply to first question, he believed that Allah Himself came down and talked to Moses from the tree (Naudhobillah) Proof # 6 Ibn Taymiyyah tried to prove “BODY (JISM)” for Allah. اماسجأ تسٌل هتافص نأو مسجب سٌل هنأ اهتمئأو ةملأا فلس نم دحأ لوق لاو هلوسر ةنس لاو الله باتك ًف سٌلو Translation: Nothing is there in the Book of Allah nor Sunnah of Prophet (Peace be upon him), nor in sayings of one from Salaf, nor Imams of this Ummah that “ALLAH IS NOT A BODY AND HIS ATTRIBUTES ARE NOT OF A BODY” *Bayaan Talbees al Jahmiyyah which this Lunatic wrote against Imam Fakhr ud din Razi – Rahimahullah by declaring him kafir – Naudhobillah (Volume # 1, Page # 101)] Ibn Taymiyyah also said: ةمئأ نم مامإ كلذ لاق لاو مسجب سٌل الله نأو ةثدحم اهلك ماسجلأا نأب قطنٌ مل عامجلإاو ةنسلاو باتكلا نأ مولعملا نمف ةعٌرشلا نع لاو ةرطفلا نع جورخ لوقلا اذهل ًكرت ًف سٌلف ، نٌملسملا Translation: It is (well) known that Qur’an, the Sunnah and consensus did not say that “ALL BODIES ARE CREATED” plus they also did not say that “ALLAH IS NOT A BODY” it is also not said by any Imams of Muslims. Hence if I also reject (that Allah is not a body) then I do not deviate from instinct nor shariah. [Talbees al Jahmiyyah (1/118)] What a clever sophist, he is cleverly trying to prove body in these quotes, Qur’an, Sunnah and Salaf did not also say whether Allah is an animal (Naudhobllah) so would Ibn Taymiyyah also use similar approach there? Proof # 7 Ibn Taymiyyah’s cunning lie attributed to Ishaq bin Rahwayh (rah) ًضتقٌ كلذ نأ همهوتل لزنٌ هنأ هٌلع لكشأو ،شرعلا قوف الله نأ فرعٌ ناك ناسارخب رملأا ًلو نم راٌخ نم وهو ـ رهاط نب اللهدبعو :رٌملأا هل لاقف شرعلا هنم ولخٌ نأ رٌغ نم لزنٌ نأ ردقٌ :هل لاقو ،شرعلا قوف هنأ ىلع قاحسإ ماملإا هرقأف ،شرعلا هنم ولخٌ نأ قحسإ هل لاقف ،معن His report from Ishaq ibn Rahawayh's words to the Emir `Abd Allah ibn Tahir: "He is able to descend without the Throne being vacant of Him" (yaqdiru an yanzila min ghayri an yakhlua minhu al- Arshu)[Majmua al Fatawa (5/378)] Allah descending without leaving the throne? HUH we need a Qati’i nass or Mutawattir hadith to prove such things and look how cleverly he is attributing lies to Imam Ishaaq bin Rahwayh (rah) to prove his point. Proof # 8 The late Muhadith of Arab world i.e. Imam Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari (Rahimuhullah) destroyed the knuckles of Ibn Taymiyyah by saying: ههجو الله مرك ًلعل سمشلا در ثٌدح ححص هنلأ ًساقلا مكحلا اذه هٌلع مكحٌ هارتف. هفارحنا ًفانٌ ثٌدحلا اذه ةحصب فارتعلاا نوكٌف هثدحت تاوطخ نم ةوطخ لك ًف ملاسلا هٌلع ًلعل هضغب راثآ هملاك ىلع ودبتو .هنع الله ًضر ًلع نع Translation: Don’t you see him (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah), how he passed a ruling on (Imam at-Tahawi) with his rigid judgment, he did this only because Imam Tahawi authenticated the hadith of Sun being returned for Sayyidna Ali – Karam Allahu Wajahu – the authentication of this hadith contradicted the deviation (hatred) for Ali which he had. The traits of Bughz (hatred) against Sayyidna Ali appear in words of Ibn Taymiyyah rather in every sentence of his. [Hawi fi Sirat at-Tahawi, Page # 27] Remember the sahih hadith of Bukhari that “ONLY A MUNAFIQ WOULD NURSE A GRUDGE AGAINST SAYYIDNA ALI (RA)” Ibn Taymiyyah al-Mubtadi did not just stop here, he said: It is “STRANGE” that Qadhi Iyaadh (rah) with his great immense and greatness in knowledge of Hadith considered this hadith to be proven and Rijaal to be Thiqa. In reply to this Imam al-Zarqani (rah) beautifully said: There is nothing to be amazed in this because the chain of hadith from Asma bint Amays (RA) is“HASAN (FAIR)” similarly the hadith from Abu Huraira (ra) also has a “HASAN CHAIN”. Imam Jalal ud-din Suyuti (rah) has explained this in detail (After this az-Zarqani showed the analysis of Imam Suyuti and proven mistake of Ibn Jawzi). It is a principle in science of hadith that a Hasan hadith after meeting another Hasan hadith or having multiple chains “BECOMES SAHIH” so“STRANGNESS UPON STRANGNESS IS ON THE KALAAM OF IBN TAYMIYYAH NOT QADHI IYAADH”because Qadhi Iyaadh’s (authentication) is according to the known principles as is mentioned in books of Hadith principles like “Alfiya tal Hadith li Iraqi” and even junior students of hadith know them (whereas Ibn Taymiyyah is ignorant) *Sharh az- Zarqani ala Mawahib al Laduniya (6/488)] Proof # 9 Clear proof of Ibn Taymiyyah trying to bash Sayyidna Ali (RA), hence he carried a trait of Munafiq, sure shot 100% Ibn Hajr al Asqalani (rah) writes: رضحتسٌ مل ًتلا داٌجلا ثٌداحلأا نم ًارٌثك هدر ًف در هنكل ،تِ اٌَهِ اوَلاو تاعوضوملا نم كلذ مظعم ناك نإو ،رهّ طَ مُ لا نبا اهدروٌ ًتلا ملاك نٌهوتل ةغلابم نم مكو ،ناٌسنلل دماع ناسنلإاو ،هِرِ دْصَ ًف ام ىلع لكِ تٌََّ ،ظفْحِ لا ًف هعاستلا ناك هنلأ اهناظم فٌنصتلا ةلاح هنع الله ًضر ًلع صٌقنت ىلإ ًاناٌحأ هتاذ ًضفارلا Translation: The reports which Ibn Muthar al-Hilli (Rafidhi Shia) narrated then indeed most of them are fabrications and cooked up (lies) but “IBN TAYMIYYAH EVEN REJECTED THE STRONG (AUTHENTIC) HADITHS” which he did not remember properly while writing his book. Ibn Taymiyyah did such a thing because he used to rely on his chest due to his capacity of memorizing, and It is nature of mankind that he returns towards Nisyaan (forgetfulness). Ibn Taymiyyah went to the long extents in refuting the Ahanaat in sayings of Rafidhi to the extent that “IBN TAYMIYYAH HIMSELF STARTED TO FIND FAULTS IN ALI (RADHI ALLAHO ANHO) AT CERTAIN PLACES” *Lisaan ul Mizaan (6/390)+ Proof # 10 Deobandi stance on Ibn Taymiyyah: Moulana Sayyid Ahmad Rada’ Bijnori (the complier of Anwar al-bari and student of Moulana Anwar Shah Khashmiri) further states that: Imam Ibn Taymiyyah ىلاعت الله همحر holds more than one hundred views contrary to that of Jamhoor (Majority of scholars) of which approximately thirty-nine are contrary to Ijma al-Ummah (consensus of the Ummah). (Anwar Al-bari vol.19.pg.573. Idarat Talifat Ashrafiyyah) Now a person who opposes Ahlus Sunnah in more than 100 views and 39 contrary to Ijma, such a person could not be considered a sincere Muslim, ok assuming 1 scholar can make mistake to oppose Ijma in 2- 3 matters and he could be excused, but to oppose in 39 matters makes someone 100% Mubtadi and it can even reach stage of Kufr because opposing Ijma is kufr. Proof # 11 Ibn Hajr al Haytami (Rahimuhullah) writes in his Fatawa al Hadithiyyah Page No. 105 نمو ،هلاوقأ بذكو هلاوحأ داسف اونٌب نٌذلا ةمئلأا حرص كلذبو ،هَّلذأو همصأو هامعأو هَّلضأو الله هلذخ دبع ةٌمٌت نبا خٌشلاو جاتلا هدلوو ًكبسلا نسحلا ًبأ داهتجلاا ةبترم هغولبو هتللاجو هتمامإ ىلع قفتملا دهتجملا ماملإا ملاك ةعلاطمب هٌلعف كلذ دارأ ضرتعا لب ةٌفوصلا يرخأتم ىلع هضارتعا رصقٌ ملو ،ةٌفنحلاو ةٌكلاملاو ةٌعفاشلا نم مهرٌغو ،مهرصع لهأو ةعامج نب زعلا ماملإا ًتأٌ امك امهنع الله ًضر بلاط ًبأ نب ًلعو باطخلا نب رمع لثم ىلع. انزاجأو ،هلدعب الله هلماع لاغ لهاج لّ ضِّ مُ و لّ اض عدتبم هنأ هٌف دقتعٌو ،نزَ حَ و رعْ وَ لّ ك ًف ًمرٌ لب نزو هملاكل ماقٌ لا نْ أ لصاحلاو نٌمآ هلعفو هتدٌقعو هتقٌرط لثم نم Translation: Ibn Taymiyya is a servant whom Allah forsook, misguided, blinded, deafened, and debased. That is the declaration of the imams who have exposed the corruption of his positions and the mendacity of his sayings. Whoever wishes to pursue this must read the words of the mujtahid Imam Abu al-Hasan (Taqi al-Din) al-Subki, of his son Taj al-Din Subki, of the Imam al-`Izz ibn Jama`a and others of the Shafi`i, Maliki, and Hanafi shaykhs... It must be considered that he is a misguided and misguiding innovator (mubtadi` dall mudill) and an ignorant who brought evil (jahilun ghalun) whom Allah treated with His justice. May He protect us from the likes of his path, doctrine, and actions[Fatawa al Hadithiyyah Page No. 105, Published by Maktaba Mishkaat al Islamiyyah] Proof # 12 Ibn Taymiyyah says: إطهخٔ اشقف ٗهص اًن ٌٕنٕقذ اي إًهؼذ ٗرح ٖساكس ىرَأٔ جلاصنا إتشقذ لا إُيآ ٍٚزنا آٚأ اٚ ٗهػ ٙف ٗناؼذ الله لضَأ ذقٔ Translation: “Allah has revealed for Ali {O you who have believed, do not approach prayer