Thursday, 1 January 2015

The Creator is clear from Anthropomorphism


Anthropomorphism
The attribution of human characteristics or behaviour togod, animal, or object.[Oxford Dictionaries]
Derived from the Greek anthropos (“human”) and morphe (“form”)
[Encyclopaedia Britannica]
---
Guru of Anthropomorphism

Ibn Taymiyyah condones of the claim that Aļļaah sits saying:
It has been narrated through the acceptable scholars and Muslim saints (‘awliyaa’) that Muĥammad, the Messenger of Aļļaah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) will be seated by His Lord on His throne with Him.

قال ابن تيمية في مجموع الفتاوى – (4 / 374) فَقَدْ حَدَثَ الْعُلَمَاءُ الْمَرْضِيُّونَ وَأَوْلِيَاؤُهُ الْمَقْبُولُونَ : أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يُجْلِسُهُ رَبُّهُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ مَعَهُ .
[Aĥmad Ibn Taymiyyah.Al-Ĥarraaniyy, Majmuuˆu-l-Fataawaa, 4 / 374.]
---
Ibn Taymiyyah says:
فقد ثبت بموجب هاتين المقدمتين صحة قول القائلين بالجهة وقول القائلين بأنه جسم وكونه جسما يستلزم القول بالجهة
“…. It is established from what necessarily follows from these two premises, the correctness of the saying of those who say that Aļļaah is in a direction, and the saying of those who say that He is a body, and that Him being a body necessarily implies Him being in a direction
(Bayaan Talbiis Al-Jahmiyyah, 2 / 125).”
---
Ibn Taymiyyah says Aļļaah is divisible
In Ibn Taymiyyah’s book Bayaan Talbiis Al-Jahmiyyah:
قال ابن تيمية: قولك إن كان منقسما كان مركبا وتقدم إبطاله تقدم الجواب عن هذا الذي سميته مركبا وتبين أنه لا حجة أصلا على امتناع ذلك بل بين أن إحالة ذلك تقتضي إبطال كل موجود ولولا أنه أحال على ما تقدم لما أحلنا عليه وتقدم بيان ما في لفظ التركيب والتحيز والغير والافتقار من الاحتمال وإن المعنى الذي يقصد منه بذلك يجب أن يتصف به كل موجود سواء كان واجبا أو ممكنا وإن القول بامتناع ذلك يستلزم السفسطة المحضة (بيان تلبيس الجهمية ج 1 ص 33).
[Fakħruddiin Ar-Raaziyy says,] if He (Aļļaah) was divisible, then He would be composed (i.e. and therefore attributed with multitude of parts) which contradicts oneness and we have already showed that this is an invalid claim….
[Ibn Taymiyyah responds:] Rather, it is clear that if this (i.e. that Aļļaah should be divisible) was impossible, then this would mean nothing could exist….
(Bayaan Talbiis Al-Jahmiyyah, 1/33)
---
Ibn Taymiyyah said Aļļaah has a size
Ibn Taymiyyah said:
قال ابن تيمية: فأما كون الشيء غير موصوف بالزيادة والنقصان ولا بعدم ذلك وهو موجود وليس بذي قدر فهذا لا يعقل (بيان تلبيس الجهمية, ج3/ص146).
That something existing should not be increasing, or decreasing, or neither increasing nor decreasing, and yet exist and not have a size – this is impossible (Bayaan Talbiis Al-Jahmiyyah, 3/146).
---
Ibn Taymiyyah’s understanding of the ĥadith of lowering a bucket
Ibn Taymiyyah says in Majmuuˆu-l-Fataawaa1:

فَإِنَّ قَوْلَهُ : { لَوْ أُدْلِيَ أَحَدُكُمْ بِحَبْلِ لَهَبَطَ عَلَى اللَّهِ } إنَّمَا هُوَ تَقْدِيرٌ مَفْرُوضٌ ؛ أَيْ لَوْ وَقَعَ الْإِدْلَاءُ لَوَقَعَ عَلَيْهِ لَكِنَّهُ لَا يُمْكِنُ أَنْ يُدْلِيَ أَحَدٌ عَلَى اللَّهِ شَيْئًا ؛ لِأَنَّهُ عَالٍ بِالذَّاتِ وَإِذَا أُهْبِطَ شَيْءٌ إلَى جِهَةِ الْأَرْضِ وَقَفَ فِي الْمَرْكَزِ وَلَمْ يَصْعَدْ إلَى الْجِهَةِ الْأُخْرَى لَكِنْ بِتَقْدِيرِ فَرْضِ الْإِدْلَاءِ يَكُونُ مَا ذَكَرَ مِنْ الْجَزَاءِ .(مجموع الفتاوى – (6 / 571)
Verily his (the Prophet’s) statement: “If one of you lowered a bucket by a rope, then it would fall on Aļļaah.” This is a hypothetical consideration, that is, if the lowering happened, then it would fall on Him. It is not possible for anyone to lower anything on Aļļaah, however, because His self is high, and if anything was lowered in the direction of the Earth, then it would stop at the center, and would not go up in the opposite direction (from there). However, if there was a hypothesized lowering, then what he said would happen. (6/571)

He explains more about his problem with the concept of “lowering”, which is that it would in reality be rising, saying:
فَكَذَلِكَ مَا يَهْبِطُ مِنْ أَعْلَى الْأَرْضِ إلَى أَسْفَلِهَاوَهُوَ الْمَرْكَزُلَا يَصْعَدُ مِنْ هُنَاكَ إلَى ذَلِكَ الْوَجْهِ إلَّا بِرَافِعِ يَرْفَعُهُ يُدَافِعُ بِهِ مَا فِي قُوَّتِهِ مِنْ الْهُبُوطِ إلَى الْمَرْكَزِ فَإِنْ قُدِّرَ أَنَّ الدَّافِعَ أَقْوَى كَانَ صَاعِدًا بِهِ إلَى الْفَلَكِ مِنْ تِلْكَ النَّاحِيَةِ وَصَعِدَ بِهِ إلَى اللَّهِ وَإِنَّمَا يُسَمَّى هُبُوطًا بِاعْتِبَارِ مَا فِي أَذْهَانِ الْمُخَاطَبِينَ أَنَّ مَا يُحَاذِي أَرْجُلَهُمْ يَكُونُ هَابِطًا وَيُسَمَّى هُبُوطًا…. وَهُوَ إنَّمَا يَكُونُ إدْلَاءً حَقِيقِيًّا إلَى الْمَرْكَزِ وَمِنْ هُنَاكَ إنَّمَا يَكُونُ مَدًّا لِلْحَبْلِ وَالدَّلْوِ لَا إدْلَاءَ لَهُ…. وَلَكِنَّ فَائِدَتَهُ بَيَانُ الْإِحَاطَةِ وَالْعُلُوِّ …. وَالْمَقْصُودُ بِهِ بَيَانُ إحَاطَةِ الْخَالِقِ سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَى كَمَا بَيَّنَ أَنَّهُ يَقْبِضُ السَّمَوَاتِ وَيَطْوِي الْأَرْضَ وَنَحْوَ ذَلِكَ مِمَّا فِيهِ بَيَانُ إحَاطَتِهِ بِالْمَخْلُوقَاتِ. (مجموع الفتاوى – 6 / 572-573)
Likewise, what descends from a high point on Earth to its lowest point, which is it’s center, does not rise from there in that direction, except by someone lifting it, resisting its downwards pull down towards the center (i.e. the gravity pull.) If it was hypothesized that the lifter was stronger (than the gravity pull), then it would be rising towards the celestial sphere from there, and would rise to Aļļaah. It was only called lowering from the viewpoint of what is in the minds of the listeners in that what faces their feet is called falling…. even if it was actually lowering only to the point of the (Earth’s) center, and from there one would only be giving rope to the bucket, and there would be no actual lowering….. However, the beneficial point is to clarify the surrounding and highness from all directions (of the Earth)…. The purpose (of the ĥadiith) is to clarify the meaning of the Creator’s surrounding (سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَى) just as He said that He grabs the Skies and folds the Earth and the like, which all explains His surrounding of created things. (6/572-573)

In other words, according to Ibn Taymiyyah, this surrounding is the physical surrounding of something with physical boundaries, size and shape.

Ibn Taymiyyah’s view on the ĥadith from a viewpoint of belief
In the final analysis of this ĥadith Ibn Taymiyyah says:

وَكَذَلِكَ تَأْوِيلُهُ بِالْعِلْمِ تَأْوِيلٌ ظَاهِرُ الْفَسَادِ مَنْ جِنْسِ تَأْوِيلَاتِ الْجَهْمِيَّة ؛ بَلْ بِتَقْدِيرِ ثُبُوتِهِ يَكُونُ دَالًّا عَلَى الْإِحَاطَةِ . وَالْإِحَاطَةُ قَدْ عُلِمَ أَنَّ اللَّهَ قَادِرٌ عَلَيْهَا وَعُلِمَ أَنَّهَا تَكُونُ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ بِالْكِتَابِ وَالسُّنَّة وَلَيْسَ فِي إثْبَاتِهَا فِي الْجُمْلَةِ مَا يُخَالِفُ الْعَقْلَ وَلَا الشَّرْعَ .
Likewise, interpreting this ĥadiitħ in term of knowledge (I.e falling by Aļļaah’s knowledge it clearly false, and of the Jahmiyy kind of interpretation. Rather, based on the assumption that the ĥadiitħ is authentic, then it explains (Aļļaah’s) surrounding, and it is known that Aļļaah is able to surround and that it is going to be on the Day of Judgment as stated in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. There is nothing, in general, in affirming this ĥadiith, that is in conflict with reason or Islamic Law. (6/574)
---
Ibn Taymiyyah’s Affirmation of Limits for Allah in the Six Physical Directions
In his Bayān Talbīs al-Jahmiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah affirms that Allah has boundaries and limits (hadds/ghāyahs) in the six physical directions, namely: up, down, back, front, left and right.
He mentions this in the context of discussing Qādī Abū Ya‘lā’s discussion on ascribing hadd to Allah.

Qādī Abū Ya‘lā is one of the notorious anthropomorphists taken to task by Hāfiz Ibn al-Jawzī in his Daf‘ Shubah al-Tashbīh.

First, Ibn Taymiyyah quotes Qādī Abū Ya‘lā relating two purported statements of Imām Ahmad:
1. The first that Allah has a hadd that only He knows
2. And the second that He does not have a hadd.

Then he quotes Qādī Abū Yalā’s attempt at reconciling these two purported statements:
فالموضع الذي قال (أحمد) إنه على العرش بحد معناه ما حاذى العرش من ذاته فهو حد له وجهة له والموضع الذي قال هو على العرش بغير حد معناه ما عدا الجهة المحاذية للعرش وهي الفوق والخلف والأمام والميمنة والميسرة
That is, Abu Ya‘la said: “The place in which Ahmad said that He is on the throne with a hadd, its meaning is [the part] of His essence that is in line with the ‘Arsh, so it (the ‘Arsh) is His hadd and His direction; and the place which he said He is over the throne without hadd, its meaning is what is besides the direction in line with the ‘Arsh – that is, above, behind, front, right and left.” (Bayān Talbīs al-Jahmiyyah, 3:735)
And he goes on to make it even more explicit. 
Abū Ya‘lā said:
“The difference between the downwards direction parallel to the ‘Arsh and other than it which we mentioned [i.e. the other five directions] is that:
The downward direction is in line with the ‘Arsh as established from evidence, and the ‘Arsh is limited (mahdūd) so it is possible to describe [the part] of the self [of Allah] that is in line with it and that it [the ‘Arsh] is a limit and direction. That is not so in other than it [i.e. other than the downward direction], because it is not in line with that which is limited, but it is traversing through the right and the left, up, front and behind, without a limit. This is why none of these [five directions] are described with Hadd or direction; whereas the direction of ‘Arsh is parallel to what opposes it from the direction of [Allah’s] self, but it is not in line with the whole [of Allah’s] self because it has no limit.”

In brief, Qādī Abū Ya‘lā is saying that the self or essence of Allah is limited by the ‘Arsh in the downward direction (from the perspective of Allah’s self); but in the other directions, i.e. up, right, left, front and back, there are no limits, and Allah’s self is endless. That is, he believes Allah is a physical body but an infinitely large body. Hence, Abu Ya‘lā reconciles the two purported statements of Imam Ahmad as follows: the negation of hadd is for the five directions and the affirmation is for the downward direction.

Ibn Taymiyyah, however, does not agree with Qādī Abū Ya‘lā. 

According to Ibn Taymiyyah, the difference between the downward direction and the other directions is not that the first is limited and the others unlimited, but that the limit in the first is known while the limits in the other five directions are unknown. This is also how Ibn Taymiyyah reconciles the two purported statements of Imam Ahmad. He says the affirmation is affirmation of limits themselves (i.e. that Allah Himself has limits in all six directions), and the negation is negation of known limits in the five directions besides the downward direction. He says: “Where he [Ahmad] negated it, he negated a definer defining Him and his knowledge of His hadd, and where he affirmed it, he affirmed it in itself.” (حيث نفاه نفى تحديد الحاد له وعلمه بحده وحيث أثبته أثبته في نفسه).

Ibn Taymiyyah says: “As for what Qadi said of affirming hadd from the direction of ‘Arsh only (faqat)…it is the view of a group of the people that affirm (the attributes), and the majority hold the contrary view and that is correct.” (وأما ما ذكره القاضي في إثبات الحد من جهة العرش فقط فهذا قد اختلف فيه كلامه وهو قول طائفة من أهل الإثبات والجمهور على خلافه وهو الصواب)
What is the contrary view? It is the opposite of what Abū Ya‘lā said that Allah does not have a hadd above, behind, left, right and front. That is, according to Ibn Taymiyyah, Allah does have a hadd in all these directions, but it is just that we do not know what those hadds are.
He also says that the fact the hadd of Allah is not known (as mentioned in Imam Ahmad’s purported statement) shows that the hadd is not limited to the direction of ‘Arsh, as that is known to us! Hence there are hadds in the other directions which we do not know! (ولو كان مراد أحمد رحمه الله الحد من جهة العرش فقط لكان ذلك معلوما لعباده فإنهم قد عرفوا أن حده من هذه الجهة هو العرش فعلم أن الحد الذي لا يعلمونه مطلق لا يختص بجهة العرش)

Hence the clear meaning of Ibn Taymiyyah’s speech is that Allah has hadds from the six physical directions.

This is Ibn Taymiyyah’s view with respect to the self of Allah itself: that it is bounded by limits in the six physical directions (just like every single physical object). However, he does not believe the limited self is contained within creation (i.e. hulūl). The two issues should not be confused.

Scholars of lughah and other sciences, like Rāghib al-Asfahānī clearly defined “jism” as that which has length, breadth and depth. Imam al-Ghazāli defined jism in this way also:
أعني بالجسم عبارة عن مقدار له طول وعرض وعمق يمنع غيره من أن يوجد حيث هو إلا بأن يتنحى عن ذلك المكان
By jism I mean [something with spatial] measurement of length, breadth and depth, which prevents something else from being present where it is, unless it moves from that place.”

Ibn Taymiyyah affirms that Allah’s self is bounded by limits in the six physical directions which is the very definition of jism. Hence, Ibn Taymiyyah was explicitly promoting tajsīm (corporealism) in this passage.
---
Ibn Taymiyyah says Aļļaah has 6 limits, one of which is adjacent to the ˆArsħ
Ibn Taymiyyah said:
قال ابن تيميةفهذا القول الوسط من أقوال القاضي الثلاثة هو المطابق لكلام أحمد وغيره من الأئمة وقد قال إنه تعالى في جهة مخصوصة وليس هو ذاهبا في الجهات بل هو خارج العالم متميز عن خلقه منفصل عنهم غير داخل في كل الجهات وهذا معنى قول أحمد “حد لا يعلمه إلا هو” ولو كان مراد أحمد رحمه الله الحد من جهة العرش فقط لكان ذلك معلوما لعباده فانهم قد عرفوا أن حده من هذه الجهة هو العرش فعلم أن الحد الذي لا يعلمونه مطلق لا يختص بجهة العرش (بيان تلبيس الجهميةج1/ص438).
This moderate saying among the three sayings of Al-Qaađii Abuu Yaˆlaa is the one that agrees with what Aĥmad says and others among the imaams. He [i.e. Aĥmad ibn Ĥanbal – and this is a lie, Aĥmad believed what Muslims believe, but that is another matter (Trans.)] has stated, “Aļļaah is in a particular direction, and He is not spread out in all directions. Rather, He is outside the world, distinct from His creation, separate from it, and He is not in every direction.” This is what Aĥmad, may Aļļaah have mercy upon him, meant when he said,He has a limit that only He knows.” If Aĥmad had meant the direction towards the ˆArsħ (Throne) only, then this would be known to Aļļaah’s slaves, because they know that Aļļaah’s limit from this direction is the ˆArsħ, so we know then that the limit they do not know is unqualified, and is not specified for the direction of the ˆArsħ
(Bayaan Talbiis Al-Jahmiyyah, 1/438).
---
Ibn Taymiyyah says Aļļaah has composition, settles in a place, has different sides/parts, and needs
[Ibn Taymiyyah continues to say:] We have already clarified what possibilities (in terms of what they mean) are associated with the words composition, settling in place, being other (having different sides or parts), and need, and that the meaning meant by this is something all existing things must be attributed with, whether necessary in existence (he means Aļļaah) or possible in existence (creation.) Verily, to say that this is impossible (for Aļļaah to be attributed with,) is pure sophistry. (Bayaan Talbiis Al-Jahmiyyah, 1/33)
---
Ibn Taymiyya said in his Fatawa: "The establishment of Allah over the Throne is real, and the servant's establishment over the ship is real (وللّه ـ تعالى ـ استواء على عرشه حقيقة، وللعبد استواء على الفلك حقيقة،) [Majmu` al-Fatawa, (5/199)].
---                                                                        Here   

Astaghfirullah 

---

The Holy Prophet (صلىالله عليه وآله وسلم)is related to have said in Sahih Muslim:
“O Allah, You are the first: there is nothing before You; and You are the last:
there is nothing after You. You are the Manifest (al-Zahir): there is nothing above You. You are the Hidden (al-Batin): there is nothing below You.”
The Holy Prophet (صلىالله عليه وآله وسلمsaid: "Allah was when there was nothing else than Him, and His Throne was upon the water, and He wrote in the Reminder (al-dhikr) all things, and He created the heavens and the earth."
--
Narrated from 'Imran ibn Husayn by al-Bukhari, Sahih, book of the Beginning of Creation.
There are other wordings of this hadith such as the wordings: kâ na allâ hu wa lâ shay'a ma'ahu / ghayruhu / qablahu - "Allah was and there was nothing other than Him /together with Him /before Him." 
Narrated from Burayda by al-Hakim in al-Mustadrak (2:341), who declared it sound (sahîh) - al-Dhahabi concurred - and from 'Imran ibn Husayn by Bukhari, Ibn Hibban with two sound chains in his Sahih (14:7 #6140, 14:11 #6142), and Ibn Abi Shayba in his Musannaf. 
=======
40AH
=======
Sayyidina Ali bin Abi Talib (d.4oAH) is reported to have said:
تفسير مدارك التنزيل وحقائق التأويل/ النسفي
قول علي رضي الله عنه: الاستواء غير مجهول والتكييف غير معقول والإيمان به واجب والسؤال عنه بدعة لأنه تعالى كان ولا مكان فهو على ما كان قبل خلق المكان لم يتغير عما كان
.
“al-Istiwa is not unknown, and the modality is altogether inconceivable. To affirm it is obligatory and to ask questions about it is an innovation, this is because Allah was, when there was nothing, and He created place before there was a place, and He is in no need for a place”.
[Reported (without chain)in Tafsir Madaarik al-Tanzeel wa Haqaa’iq al-Ta’weel by an-Nasafi, under surah Taha (20) ayat (5)]

Sayyidina Ali bin Abi Talib is also reported to have said:
قال الإمام علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه :-" من زعم أن إلهنا محدود فقد جهل الخالق المعبود" ا.هـ رواه أبو نعيم في حلية الأولياء
"He who a claims that our Lord is limited is ignorant about the Creator who is worshipped."
[Reported by Hafidh Abu Nu'aym (without chain)*
 in his Hilyatul Awliya]
1.*  Read  Here
--
Sayyidina  Imam ‘Ali ibn abi Talib said; “Indeed, Allah the Exalted created the Throne as a manifestation of His Power and not a place for His Essence. He was in the beginning, while there was no place or time and He is now as He ever was” [Imam ‘Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi, Al-Farq Bayn al-Firaq, page, 41]
--
Ibn Hajar al-Haytami  (d.974AH) writes: "When a Jew asked: Sayyidina Ali,
"Since when is the existence of our Allah?" 
Sayyidina Ali's colour changed and he said:
"He existed without how when there was no makan and nothing. He does not have a "before" or an "end" with respect to time. Everything other than Him comes to an end."
Source:
[Al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, Section on Imam Ali's virtues (Section 9, Part 4: The part on Sayyidina Ali's Karamats, Judgements, Knowledge, Wisdom and Zuhd). Translated from Turkish.]

--
Sayyidina Imam Ali  is also reported to have said:
عن علي رضي الله عنه قال: سيرجع قوم من هذه الأمة عند اقتراب الساعة كفارا قال رجل:يا أمير المؤمنين كفرهم بماذا أبالاحداث أم بالانكار فقال:بل بالانكار ينكرون خالقهم فيصفونه بالجسم و الأعضاء
في كتاب نجم المهتدي لابن المعلم القرشي ص 588
 "Some people from this ummah will revert to blasphemy near the time of the day of judgement, a man said: Is it because of innovations or denial? He said: Denial (of Allah or His attributes), they deny the Attributes of their creator and attribute to him with the body and organs (bodily parts)".
=======
50AH
======
Sayyidah Aishah (d.58AH) said that the Prophet(s) said: "If you find the people who follow the Mutashabih from the Qur'an, then those whom Allah said about them (there's misguidance (Zaygh) in their hearts), so be warned from them" [Narrated by al-Bukhariy.]
--
Taking Mutashabih verses in al-Qur'an literally contradicts the Qurt'an itself and the hadith, and so it leads to Tashbeeh and Tajseem. (Mushabbihah, those who liken Allah to his creations, Mujassimah, those who attribute the body and bodily parts to Allah). More info Here
---
Sayyidina Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas (68 AH)
Ibn Abbas and the Companions of the Prophet, sallahu alayhi wa salam:
Concerning the verse, “The day that a Shin will be laid bare,” (Quran 68:42) 
Ibn Abbas interpreted the “shin” to mean “severity.” Commenting on this verse, Imam al Tabari said, “A group of the Prophet’s companions and their disciples, and the people of figurative interpretation have said, ‘He will uncover a severe matter.’ And among those who interpreted the shin to mean ‘severity’ from the Imams of Quranic exegesis are Mujahid, Said Bin Jubayr, Qataba and others. Allah be He exalted said, ‘And the sky we built with hands. And it is We who give expanse.’ (Quran 51:47).
 Ibn Abbas said concerning it: “With strength.” (Tafsir al Tabari) That is, “We built it with strength.”
--
{ يَوْمَ يُكْشَفُ عَن سَاقٍ وَيُدْعَوْنَ إِلَى ٱلسُّجُودِ فَلاَ يَسْتَطِيعُونَ }
On a day when shin shall be exposed, they shall be ordered to prostrate, but be unable” (Qur’an 68:42)
It shows that the great Sahabi, Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas actually made ta’wil (figurative interpretation) of this word. It is also a rebuttal to those who disputed its authenticity.
Ta’wil of Saaqfrom Ibn Abbas: Read  Here
--
"...The Holy Prophet(s) said: May Allah grant him (Ibn Abbas) deep understanding of religion." 
[Sahih Muslim Book :031, Hadith No.6055]
Sa`ad ibn Abi Waqqas said,  Ibn Abbas would speak and Umar would not disregard what he had to say.”
--
Ibn Abbas said, “I am of those well grounded in knowledge, who know the meaning (of the allegorical verses).” [Imam Suyuti, Itqan, Vol: 2, page, 4]
------
Abû al-Aliya (d. 90AH) and al-Rabî (d. 139AH) said of 2:210: "It means the angels come in the clouds. It is confirmed by His saying: {A day when the heaven with the clouds will be rent asunder and the angels will be sent down, a great descent} (25:25)."
[Narrated from Abû al-`Aliya [al-Riyâhî the student of Ibn `Abbâs] by al-Bayhaqî in al-Asmâ' (Kawtharî ed. p. 448; Hâshidî ed. 2:370 §943) through al-Hâkim with a chain containing Abû Ja`far al-Râzî (`Isâ ibn Abî `Isâ Mâhân) whom al-Khatîb and Ibn Hajar declared "truthful but poor in memorizing" - although considered trustworthy (thiqa) by Ibn al-Madînî, Ibn Ma`în, Abû Hâtim, and al-Diyâ' al-Maqdisî - and by al-Tabarî, Ibn Abî Hâtim, al-Qurtubî, and al-Suyûtî in their Tafsîr (verse 2:210), also by Abû `Ubayd ibn Sallâm and Ibn al-Mundhir as stated in al-Suyûtî's al-Durr al-Manthûr.]
--
Al-Bayhaqî said: "[Abû al-`Aliya's] commentary rightly establishes that the clouds are a place and vehicle only for the angels, whereas there is neither place nor vehicle for Allâh Almighty." [Al-Bayhaqî, Al-Asmâ' wal-Sifât (Kawtharî ed. p. 448; Hâshidî ed. 2:370).]
Read more:Here
------
Imam Zayn al-'Abidin (d.95AH) is reported to have said:
وروى الحافظ اللغوي محمد مرتضى الزَّبيديُّ في شرح الإحياء بالإسناد المتصل أن الإمام عليًّا زين العابدين كان يقول: "سبحانك لا يحويك مكان" اهـ، وزين العابدين كان أفضل أهل البيت في زمانه
“glory be to you who has no place”

[Documented in Imam Murtada Zabidi’s Sharh al-Ihya 'ulum ud Deen, with a Mutasil Isnad]
--
Imam Zayn al-‘Abidin ‘Ali Ibnul-Hussayn said: “You are Allah, the One who is not confined to place” [‘as-Sahifah as-Sajjadiyyah’]
========
100AH
========
Imam Mujahid ibn Jabar  (d. 102 AH)
This is the most widespread interpretation (ta’wîl) of the issue among the Salaf: al-Baghawi said that the meaning of the verse ( The Merciful established Himself over the Throne) (20:5) according to Ibn ‘Abbas and most of the commentators of Qur’an is "He elevated Himself" (irtafa‘a). This is the interpretation quoted by al-Bukhari in his Sahih from the senior Tâbi‘i Rufay‘ ibn Mahran Abu al-‘Aliya (d. 90).
Al-Bukhari also cites from Mujahid (d. 102 AH) the interpretation "to rise above" or "exalt Himself above" (‘alâ). Ibn Battal declares the latter to be the true position and the saying of Ahl al-Sunna because Allah described Himself as "the Sublimely Exalted" -- ( al-‘Alî) (2:255) and said: ( exalted be He (ta‘âlâ) over all that they ascribe as partners (unto Him)!) (23:92).
--
The ‘Makan’ Narration Attributed to Imam Mujahid
...some observations on the narration attributed to Imam Mujahid ibn Jabar regarding the ascription of a Makan (“Place”) for Allah… Read Full Artical: Here
-------
Imam Al-Hasan al-Basri (d.110AH)
Imam Al-Hasan interpreted the verse “Nay, both His hands are spread wide, and He bestows as He wills” (5:64) to refer to Allah’s kindness and goodness. [Ibn al-Jawzi, Daf` Shubah al-Tahsbih(Saqqaf ed. p. 115).]
Similarly, he interpreted Allah’s qadam to mean “those whom He has sent forth” (qaddamahum) in the hadith of the Prophet — Allah bless and greet him –:
Hellfire will keep asking: “Is there more?” until the Lord of Might places His qadam (lit. “foot”) in it. Then it will say: “Enough! Enough!” (qatt qatt) and gather up all its parts together. There will still remain room in Paradise until Allah originates a creation which He will place in the remainder of Paradise.[ Narrated from Anas by Bukhari and Muslim.
Al-Khattabi said: “The meaning of qadam here is possibly a reference to those whom Allah has created of old or `sent forth’ for the Fire in order to complete the number of its inhabitants. Everything that is `sent forth’ is a qadam, in the same way that the verbal noun of demolishing (hadama) is a hadm or ruin, and that of seizing (qabada) is qabd or a seizure. Likewise Allah said: “They have a sure foundation (qadam sidq) with their Lord” (10:2) with reference to the good works which they have sent forth. This explanation has been transmitted to us from al-Hasan al-Basri. It is supported by the Prophet’s saying in the aforementioned hadith: `As for Paradise, Allah will create for it a special creation.’ Both meanings (i.e. respectively pertaining to the Fire and Paradise) are in agreement with the sense that Paradise and hellfire will be provided with an additional number of dwellers to complete their respective numbers, at which point they will be full.” Al-Khattabi, Ma`alim al-Sunan (Hims ed. 5:95). Cf. Ibn al-Jawzi, Daf` Shubah al-Tahsbih(Saqqaf ed. p. 15).]
--
For example: the establishment is the conquering (istila') and dominion (tasallut), Allah's hand is His strength in His saying: "Allah's hand is over their hand" (48:10) and His generosity in His saying: "Nay, both His hands are spread wide, and He bestows as He wills" (5:64). [Ibn al-Jawzi interpreted the former verse as Allah's favor (ni`ma) and power (qudra), and the latter, according to Hasan al-Basri, as His kindness and goodness.] [Ibn al-Jawzi, Daf` shubah al-tahsbih p. 115.]
--
Abu Sulaiman said: "The meaning of the qadam here is possibly a reference to those whom Allah has created of old or "sent forth" for the Fire in order to complete the number of its inhabitants. Everything that is "sent forth" is a qadam, in the same way that the verbal noun of demolishing (hadama) is a hadm or ruin, and that of seizing (qabada) is qabd or a seizure. Likewise Allah said: "They have a sure foundation (qadam sidq) with their Lord" (10:2) with reference to the good works which they have sent forth. This explanation has been transmitted to us from al-Hasan al-Basri.
------
Imam Abu Ja’far al-Sadiq (d.148AH) : Whoever claims that Allāh is in something, or from something, or on something has associated a partner with Allāh , because if He was in something, then He would be confined; and if He was on something, then He would be carried; and if He was from something, then He would be something that has a beginning.”
--
Imam Abu Ja’far al-Sadiq  said: He who claims that Allah is in anything or on anything or from anything commits shirk (type of blasphemy). Because, had He been on anything, He would have been carried, had He been in anything, He would have been contained, and had He been from anything, He would have been a creation”. [Narrated by Imam al-Qushayriyy (d.465AH) in his book ‘ar-Risalah’.]
--
[Al-Risala al-Qushayriyya Fi 'Ilm al-Tasawwuf'. The author of the Epistle on Sufism, Abu ’l-Qasim al-Qushayri (b.376/986–d.465/1074), was a famous Sunni scholar and mystic (Sufi) from Khurasan in Iran. His Epistle is probably the most popular Sufi manual ever. from the Great Books of Islamic Civilization series.
Written in 437/1045, it has served as a primary textbook for many generations of Sufi novices down to the present. [More Info: Here ][Also see below his son Imam Abu Nasr ibn al-Qushayri (d.514 AH)]
------
Imam Abu Hanifa (d. 150AH) said: "Had He been in a place and needing to sit and rest before creating the Throne, then the question: 'Where was Allah?' would have applied to Him, which is impossible."
[Abu Hanifa, Wasiyya al-Imam al-A'zam Abu Hanifa, ed. Fu'ad 'Ali Rida (Beirut : Maktabat al-Jamahir, 1970) p. 10.]


In his “Al-Fiqh Al-Akbar” Imam Abu Hanifah said,

ومعنى الشىءِ إثباتُهُ بلا جسمٍ ولا جوهرٍ ولا عَرَضٍ، ولا حدَّ لهُ، ولا ضدَّ لهُ، ولا ندَّ له، ولا مِثلَ لهُ.
“When we say that Allah is shay’ we mean that He exists without a body, essence, or temporary attributes. He does not have a limit, an opposite, a substitute, or a like in any sense of likeness at all.” (Al Fiqh Al Akbar 63)
Imam Abu Hanifah said in Al Fiqh Al Absat:
كان الله ولا مكان ، كان قبل أن يخلق الخلق ، كان ولم يكن أين ولا خلق ولا شىء وهو خالق كل شىء فمن قال لا أعرف ربي أفي السماء أم في الأرض فهو كافر . كذلك من قال إنه على العرش ولا أدري العرش أفي السماء أم في الأرض
Allah existed and there was no place. He existed before he created creation. He existed and there was no “where,” no creation or anything else. He is the Creator of everything.  So the one that says, “I do not know about by Lord, is He in the Sky or on Earth,” is a blasphemer. Likewise, the one who says “Verily He is over the throne, but I do not know whether the throne is in the sky or on Earth.”
[Abu Hanifah, An Nu`maan ibn Thaabit (80-150 AH/ 699-767. Al Fiqh Al Akbar. KairoEgypt: Maktabah Al-Azhariyah Li Al-Turaath, 1421/2001.]
Imam Abu Hanifah said this because in both expressions it is clear that the speaker ascribes a place to Allah, and is not intending to say aboveness without direction or place. This is obviously what Abu Hanifah means, as he stated right before it, “Allah existed and there was no place.”
Note again that the Prophet made it clear that Allah’s abovenes is not in place or direction, but in status, when He said: “You are Al-Thahir so there is nothing above You. And You are Al Batin, so there is nothing below you.” This hadith makes it explicit that Allah’s aboveness is not one of place and direction."
Read the Full article here: Abuu Ĥaniifah
--------------------
Sufyan al-Thawri (d. 161 AH) interpreted istiwâ’ in the verse (The Merciful established Himself over the Throne) (20:5) as "a command concerning the Throne" (amrun fi al-‘arsh), as related by Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni and quoted by al-Yafi‘i in the latter’s book Marham al-‘Ilal al-Mu‘dila fi Daf‘ al-Shubah wa al-Radd ‘ala al-Mu‘tazila ("Book of the Resolution of Difficult Problems for the Removal of Doubts and the Refutation of the Mu‘tazila"):
The understanding of istiwâ’ as the turning of Allah to a particular command concerning the Throne is not far-fetched, and this is the ta’wîl of Imam Sufyan al-Thawri, who took as corroborating evidence for it the verse: (Then turned He (thumma istawâ) to the heaven when it was smoke) (41:11), meaning: "He proceeded to it" (qasada ilayhâ).
--
Sufyan al Thawri said concerning Allah’s saying, “And He is with you where ever you are” (Quran 57:4) “It means with His knowledge.” (Tashih al Mahafim al Aqadiyya)
------
Imam Malik (d.179AH) answered: ’Istiwa s not unknown, and its how [manner] is not conceivable (al-istiwa ghayr majhul wa l-kayf ghayr ma’qul).
(Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani (d.386AH)  Kitab al-Jami fi s-sunan wa al-adab wa l-maghazi wa t-tarikh)
--
Imam Malik said: ‘"The Merciful is established over the Throne" just as He described Himself. One cannot ask "how." "How" does not apply to Him.
From Yahya ibn Yahya al-Tamimi and Malik’s shaykh Rabi`a ibn Abi `Abd al-Rahman:
Imam Malik  said: ‘The establishment is not unknown; the "how" is not conceivable;”
(Narrated by Imam al-Bayhaqi(d.458AH) with a sound chain in al-Asma' wa al-Sifat)
More info Here
------
Ibn Al-Mubarak (d.181 AH)
The statement of Ibn al-Mubarak :
Quote:
[قال ابن المبارك : "لا نقول كما قالت الجهمية إنه في الأرض ههنا، بل على العرش استوى" وقيل له : كيف تعرف ربنا ؟ قال : " فوق سماواته على عرشه " ]
 Khalq says: Ibn al-Mubarak said: We do not say what the Jahmiyyah said that Allah is here on the earth, but we say that He rose on the Throne / ala al-arsh istawa .
Ibn al-Mubarak was also asked:
How do you know of our Lord? He replied: That He is above His heavens above His Throne.
--
Answer: Yes, we attribute Allah with whatever He attributed Himself with and He has attributed Himself with being established on the throne. Therefore, we do not say what the Jahmites say that He is in every location - we seek refuge with Allah!- but rather He is without locality and distinct from His creation.
We know this by what has come in clear texts and reports of His being above the throne. This is affirmation of that which is textually established in the Book and the Sunna, without any affirmation of an outwardly sensory meaning.
--
Imam al-Bayhaqi says in al-Asma' wal-Sifat (Kawthari ed. p. 426-427; Hashidi ed. 2:334-336:… so He is on the Throne as He related. By saying this, he meant to belie the Jahmiyya who claimed that He is in every place. His other report confirms this
From `Ali ibn al-Hasan ibn Shaqiq: 'I heard `Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak say, "We know our Lord to be above (fawq) seven heavens, [He established Himself over His Throne], distinct (ba'in) from His creation, and we do not say as the Jahmiyya said, that He is right here' - and he pointed to the ground (hahuna fil-ard)."'
By the term 'distinct' he means, as he explained directly afterwards, to negate the claim [of intermixing (imtizaj)] of the Jahmiyya, NOT to suggest direction on the opposite side. He means what the Law said in absolute terms
 'Abd Allah Ibn al-Mubarak was simply emphasising the point that Allah is not mixed in creation but rather He is distinct from it. More Info: Here
--
Quote: “Ishaq bin Ibraheem Al-Handhali narrated that Ibn Al-Mubarak said: "The Top of the Minaret is closer to Allah than it's Bottom" ? Answer/Reply:  Here
-------
Imam Sufyan bin Uyayna (d.198AH) said: All that Allah described Himself with in the Glorious Qur'an then "ITS RECITATION IS IT'’S INTERPRETATION. There is no Kayfia (asking how it's meant) nor likeness (tamtheel or tashbeeh) [As-Sifaat” by Imam al Daraqutni, Page # 70]
=========
200AH
=========
Imam Al-Shafi'i (d.204 AH) is reported to have stated,
"
إنه تعالى كان ولا مكان فخلق المكان وهو على صفة الأزلية كما كان قبل خلقه المكان لا يجوز عليه التغيير في ذاته ولا التبديل في صفاته " اهـ. [إتحاف السادة المتقين (2/ 24 ]
"Verily, He the exalted was, without makaan (station or place). He created Makaan and He was upon His attribute of eternality just as He was before he created makaan. It is not permitted upon Him to change his essence or to change in His attributes." 
[It-Haaf As-Saadah Al Muttaqeen 2/24]
--
Imam Al-Shafi'i has stated: "If it is said that "Allahu ta'ala said "Rahman did istiwa over Arsh,"" then the following response is given:
These (types of) ayats are among the mutashabihat that perplex those who don't have the desire to achieve depth in ilm when answering these and others like them. That is, they should accept these ayats as they are and they should refrain from research and talking about them. This is because, one cannot ensure avoiding doubt and danger when he does not have rusukh [deep understanding] in ilm. He must believe in Allahu ta'ala's attributes as we have mentioned. No makan can contain Allahu ta'ala. Time does not pass over Him. He is exalted beyond having limits and end points; He is mustaghni [independent] from makan and directions. "There is nothing like Him." (42/11)"

Source: Imam ash-Shafi'i, al-Fiqh al-Akbar, 17. Quoted by: Dr. Ebubekir Sifil, Milli Gazete [daily newspaper in Turkish], Jan 8, 2006. Dr. Sifil states: See Kashf al-Zunun, II, 1288. Katib Chalabi points out the doubt about the attribution of this book to Imam ash-Shafi'i. However, Professor Fuad Sezgin  reports that a copy of this book written in the year 292 is present in the al-Azhar Library and states: "If this date is correct, the doubt about the attribution of this book to Imam ash-Shafi'i is removed." (Tarikh al-Turath, I, 491) 

--
Imam al-Shafi'i said: 'The one who attributes to Allah bodily characteristics blasphemes.' This was narrated by Imam al- Suyuti in the book: Al-Ashabah wa Anatha'ir. (Al Ishbah Wa'n Nadha'ir Fi Qawa'id wa Furu Fiqh Shafi'i see here
-------------------------------
Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (d.241AH) said:
'The one who says Allah is a body not like other bodies Blasphemes'.
[Narrated by Abu Muhammad al Baghdadiy in his book: Al Khisal and Badr al-Din al-Zarkashi in his book: Tashnif Al Masami']

Similarly, Hafiz al-Bayhaqi quotes Imam Ahmad in Manaqib Ahmad:
"A person commits an act of disbelief (kufr) if he says Allah is a body, even if he says: Allah is a body but not like other bodies."

In I'tiqad Imam Ahmad bi Riwaya Tamimi (page 4) the Imam is quoted as saying:
Allah ta'ala has Yadayn. They are attributes of His Essence which are not two limbs, nor two composite parts, nor a body...وكان يقول إن لله تعالى يدين وهما صفة له في ذاته ليستا بجارحتين وليستا بمركبتين و لا جسم ولا من جنس الأجسام ولا من جنس المحدود والتركيب ولا الأبعاض والجوارح

Itiqaad Al-Imaam Al-Mubajjal Ibn Ĥanbal, Page, 297:
"Aļļaah taˆaalaa did not change or experience any substitution (in His attributes), and has not been attributed with any limits before creating the Arsħ and not after creating it
--
Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said about ‘Istawa”[Istiwa’]: It means height/exaltation (`uluw) and elevation (irtifa`). Allah – Most High – is ever exalted (`ali) and elevated (rafi`) without beginning, before He created the Throne. He is above everything (huwa fawqa kulli shay’), and He is exalted over everything (huwa al-`ali `ala kulli shay’). He only specified the Throne because of its particular significance which makes it different from everything else, as the Throne is the best of all things and the most elevated of them. Allah – Most High – therefore praised Himself by saying that He {established Himself over the Throne}, that is, He exalted Himself over it (`alayhi `ala). It is impermissible to say that He established Himself with a contact or a meeting with it. Exalted is Allah above that! Allah is not subject to change, substitution, nor limits, whether before or after the creation of the Throne(Tabaqat al-Hanabila, 2:296-297).
----
Dhun Nun al-Misri (245AH)
Az-Zahid, Shaykh of Misr (Egypt), Thawban bin Ibrahim. He narrated from Imam Malik, Imam Layth, Bin Luhay’a, Fudayl bin ‘Ayyad, Salim al-Khawwas, Sufyan bin ‘Uyayna and others. Those who narrated from him include: Ahmed bin Sabih al-Fayumi, Rabi’ah bin Muhammed at-Tai, Ridwan bin Muhaymid, Hasan bin Mus’ab, al-Junayd bin Muhammed az-Zahid, Miqdam bin Dawud ar-Ra’ini, and others. He narrated only a few hadith, and wasn’t an expert in it. 
Daraqutni said, “he narrated from Malik Ahadith, in which are difficulties, and was a religious orator.” 
Bin Yunus said, “he was a wise eloquent scholar he passed away in Dhil Qi’dah in the year 245 Hijri.”
‘Ali bin Hatim said, ‘I heard Dhu an-Nun say, ‘Quran is the Speech of Allah ta’ala, and is not created (is eternal).
 Yusuf bin al-Husayn said, “I heard Dhu an-Nun say, “what image comes in your mind, then Allah is not that”.
--
Dhul Nūn al-Misrī  was asked about the saying of Allāh: “al-Rahmān `alāl `arsh istawā
 He answered: “He affirmed His existence, and denied that He has a place. So He Himself exists independently, while other things exist by His Wisdom as He Wills.”
--
Imam Ibn Kathir , Bidaya wa an-Nihaya:
‘Thawban bin Ibrahim, one of famous Mashayikh, Ibn Khalkan wrote a biographical note about him in al-Wafayat, and mentioned his merits and states, and stated his death was in the year 245 Hijri. He’s considered amongst those who narrated Muwatta from Imam Malik, Ibn Yunus mentioned him in Tarikh Misr, and he was eloquent and wise.”
--
It should be kept in mind that there is no censure on the terminology (of the Sufis) as long as the meaning is sound, and what Dhun Nun al-Misri spoke about and is recorded doesn't contradict any ‘Aqidah of Ahlus Sunnah, his statements of ‘Aqidah, two of which are recorded here, are in clear conformity with Ahlu Sunnah. Scholars have accepted him and quoted him abundantly which shows that he wasn't deviant, scholars such as Imam Nawawi, Hafidh Ibn Hajar, Hafidh Ibn Qayyim and others. 
---------------------
Imam al-Bukhari (d.256 AH), in the chapter of Exegesis (Kitab at-Tafsir) of his Sahih, in volume 3 p.171 of the edition used, says:
Surat al-Qasas : kullu shay’in haalikun illa wajhah :’Everything will be destroyed, except His  wajh [i.e.]: except His ‘Dominion’ ( illa mulkah).’
[Explanation: This phrase means ‘Everything will be destroyed except his ‘wajh‘. The term wajh has several meanings: the one that comes immediately to the mind is ‘face’, however this is not a meaning suitable for Allah as this would contradict the explicit verses from the Qur’an such as the one meaning that He does not resemble anything. Therefore, that is why al-Bukhari here explains the term wajh with one of its other meanings which is ‘Dominion’, i.e. everything will be destroyed, but the fact that Allah owns and controls everything will not be destroyed.]. (The commentary of Imam as-Sindi (d.1138AH) can be seen on the margin confirms that this interpretation is correct.)
--
Sahih al-Bukhari:  from Abu Hurayra that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, Allah Most High laughs about two men, one of whom kills the other, but both of whom enter paradise: the one fights in the path of Allah and is killed, and afterwards Allah forgives the killer, and then he fights in the path of Allah and is martyred, the hadith master al-Bayhaqi records that the scribe of Bukhari [Muhammad ibn Yusuf] al-Farabri related that Imam al-Bukhari said, "The meaning of laughter in it is mercy[Kitab al-asma’ wa al-sifat, 298)]
Imam al- Bukhari believed that Allah exists without a place. Imam Ibn Hajar repeats the belief that Allah is without a place many times. (ibn hajar, fath al-bari 13:357; Cf. 3:23, 6:102, 13:309,328,351,354,355,357,366,369-370, 414.)
Sahih Bukhari states:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar: The Prophet(s) saw expectoration in the direction of the Qibla of the mosque while he was leading the prayer, and scratched it off. After finishing the prayer, he said, "Whenever any of you is in prayer he should know that Allah is in front of him. So none should spit in front of him in the prayer." [Volume 1, Book 12, Number 720]
[Imam al-Bukhari attributed a specific meaning to the term "illa wajhahu" in Surat al ­Qasas, ayah 88. He said, "illa mulkahu," i.e., he said that word "wajh" which is an attribute of Allah means "Mulk" or "Dominion."
 Following this method, one would say: "His istiwa' means 'He preserves the throne,' His yad means 'His Care,' His wajh means 'His Self,' 'His Dominion, as al-Bukhari said' or 'His Qiblah.' as Ibn Abbas and Mujahid said.

In Surat al-Qalam, ayah 42, Allah said: {يوم يكشف عن ساق} The scholars of the Salaf explained the term "saq" by 'hardship,' and the ayah to mean 'a day of anguish and hardship.' This explanation is known to have been given by: Ibn Abbas, Mujahid, Ibrahim an Nakhiy, Qatadah, Said Ibn Jubayr…others]
--------------------------
Imam al-Tirmidhi (d.279AH)
Imam al Tirmidhi in his al-Jami (vol.5, pp. 376-377, no. 3298, under Kitab Tafsir al Qur'an, as edited by the "Salafi" - Ahmad Shakir) narrated:
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم حدثنا عبد بن حميد ، وغير واحد ، والمعنى واحد ، قالوا : حدثنا يونس بن محمد قال : حدثنا شيبان بن عبد
الرحمن ، عن قتادة ، قال : حدث الحسن ، عن أبي هريرة ، قال : بينما نبي الله صلى الله عليه وسلم جالس وأصحابه إذ أتى عليهم سحاب ، فقال نبي الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : " " هل تدرون ما هذا ؟ " " فقالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " هذا العنان هذه روايا الأرض يسوقه الله تبارك وتعالى إلى قوم لا يشكرونه ولا يدعونه " " ثم قال : " " هل تدرون ما فوقكم " " ؟ قالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " فإنها الرقيع ، سقف محفوظ ، وموج مكفوف " " ، ثم قال : " " هل تدرون كم بينكم وبينها ؟ " " قالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " بينكم وبينها مسيرة خمس مائة سنة " " . ثم قال : " " هل تدرون ما فوق ذلك ؟ " " قالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " فإن فوق ذلك سماءين ، ما بينهما مسيرة خمسمائة عام " " حتى عد سبع سماوات ، ما بين كل سماءين ما بين السماء والأرض ، ثم قال : " " هل تدرون ما فوق ذلك ؟ " " قالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " فإن فوق ذلك العرش وبينه وبين السماء بعد ما بين السماءين " " . ثم قال : " " هل تدرون ما الذي تحتكم " " ؟ قالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " فإنها الأرض " " . ثم قال : " " هل تدرون ما الذي تحت ذلك " " ؟ قالوا : الله ورسوله أعلم . قال : " " فإن تحتها أرضا أخرى ، بينهما مسيرة خمس مائة سنة " " حتى عد سبع أرضين ، بين كل أرضين مسيرة خمس مائة سنة . ثم قال : " " والذي نفس محمد بيده لو أنكم دليتم بحبل إلى الأرض السفلى لهبط على الله " " . ثم قرأ هو الأول والآخر والظاهر والباطن وهو بكل شيء عليم . هذا حديث غريب من هذا الوجه . ويروى عن أيوب ، ويونس بن عبيد ، وعلي بن زيد ، قالوا : لم يسمع الحسن من أبي هريرة ، وفسر بعض أهل العلم هذا الحديث ، فقالوا : إنما هبط على علم الله وقدرته وسلطانه . علم الله وقدرته وسلطانه في كل مكان ، وهو على العرش كما وصف في كتابه *
The red highlighted portion of the Hadith translates as:
"By Him in whose hand Muhammad's soul is, if you were to drop a rope to the lowest ard (land/earth), it would descend upon Allah."
Imam al-Tirmidhi
expounded on this narration by saying (blue text):
"Some of the people of knowledge explained this Hadith by saying: Verily it would descend upon the knowledge of Allah, and His power and His authority, for Allah's knowledge, His power and His authority is in every place, and He is upon the Throne, as He described Himself in his Book"

Now, ibn Qayyim al Jawziyya, the student of ibn Taymiyya commented on this in his al-Sawa'iq al-Mursala:
قال ابن القيم في الصواعق ص 400

فقوله " لو دليتم بحبل لهبط على الله " اذا هبط في قبضته المحيطة بالعالم فقد هبط عليه والعالم في قبضته وهو فوق عرشه , ولو ان احدنا امسك بيده او برجله كرة قبضتها يده من جميع جوانبها ثم وقعت حصاة من اعلى الكرة الى اسفلها لوقعت في يده وهبطت عليه , ولم يلزم من ذلك ان تكون الكرة والحصاة فوقه وهو تحتها , ولله المثل الاعلى وانما يؤتى الرجل من سوء فهمه او من سوء قصده من كليهما , فاذا هما اجتمعا كمل نصيبه من الضلال
واما تأويل الترمذي وغيره له بالعلم فقال شيخنا : هو ظاهر الفساد من جنس تأويلات الجهمية بل بتقدير ثبوته , فانما يدل على الاحاطة , والاحاطة ثابتة عقلا ونقلا وفطرة
The red portion above states that the Ta'wil of al Tirmidhi and other than him was commented on by his Shaykh - meaning ibn Taymiyya - as follows:

"It is manifest depravity (zahir al fassad) from the sort of figurative interpretation's (Ta'wilat) of the Jahmiyya..." Quote to:  ibn Taymiyya's own work (Al-Risala al -Arshiyya)
Here
=========
300AH
=========
Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (d.310 AH)
Imam al-Tabari says in his Muqaddimah to his Tarikh, “That (essence) which is not devoid of al-Hadath (accidents) there is no doubt that it is Muhdath (has a beginning).”
Imam al-Tabari says in Tabsir, “He’s the speaker (al-Mutakallim) upon whom silence is not allowed (i.e. It is negated).”
He says in another place, “There is consensus of the people of Tawhid from the Ahlul Qiblah upon the incorrectness or falacy of qualifying Allah ta’ala with Harakat (movement) and Sukun (stillness).”
Imam al-Tabri says in his Tafsir, “Indeed Allah ta’ala negated regarding Himself through it (the following): change (Taghayur), movement (tanaqqul) from one place to another, occurrence of change which occurs in humans and other creation,”
--
Imam al-Tabari says in At-Tabsir fi Ma’alim ad-Din, “And whoever rejects what we said regarding it, it will be said to him, “tell us about the speech which you described that the Eternal is Mutakallim, did He created it in His Essence or created it in something else or subsists in His essence? “If he believes that He created it in His Essence then he has necessitated that His Essence is a locus for creation, and this is Kufr according to everyone.”
--
Imam al-Tabari's tafsir of the ayah [2:186]:

{
وَإِذَا سَأَلَكَ عِبَادِي عَنِّي فَإِنِّي قَرِيبٌ أُجِيبُ دَعْوَةَ ٱلدَّاعِ إِذَا دَعَانِ فَلْيَسْتَجِيبُواْ لِي وَلْيُؤْمِنُواْ بِي لَعَلَّهُمْ يَرْشُدُونَ }

And when My servants ask you, [O Muhammad], concerning Me - indeed I am near. I respond to the invocation of the supplicant when he calls upon Me. So let them respond to Me [by obedience] and believe in Me that they may be [rightly] guided.
--
Imam al-Tabri interprets:
يعنـي تعالـى ذكره بذلك: وإذا سألك يا مـحمد عبـادي عنـي أين أنا؟ فإنـي قريب منهم أسمع دعاءهم، وأجيب دعوة الداعي منهم.
By that, the Most High means: And when My servants, O Muhammad, ask you about Me and where I am, then verily I am near to them: I hear their supplications and respond to the supplicant among them
and he goes on to quote a Mursal hadith from al-Hasan al-Basri:
حدثنا الـحسن بن يحيى، قال: أخبرنا عبد الرزاق، قال: أخبرنا جعفر بن سلـيـمان عن عوف، عن الـحسن، قال: سأل أصحاب النبـي صلى الله عليه وسلم النبـي صلى الله عليه وسلم: أين ربنا؟ فأنزل الله تعالـى ذكره: { وَإذَا سألكَ عِبَـادي عَنِّـي فإنّـي قَرِيبٌ أُجِيبُ دَعْوَةَ الدَّاعِ إذَا دَعان... } الآية.
Al-Hasan said, "The Prophet's Companions  asked the Prophet, 'Where is our Lord?' And so, Allah, Exalted is His mention, revealed: 'And when My servants ask concerning Me. . .'"
--
Imam al- Tabri In the Tafseer of Aayatul Kursi (2:255):
The explanation Al Imam At Tabari gave in his tafseer for the Highness of Allah :
والعلـيّ: ذو العلوّ والارتفـاع علـى خـلقه بقدرته.
And Al 'Alee: The One possessing Highness and Exaltedness over His creation through His Omnipotence (bi qudratih).
And he also said in his explanation of the name The Exalted or Elevated (Al Muta'aali) {13:9} :
الـمتعال: الـمستعلـي علـى كلّ شيء بقدرته
The Elevated (Al Mutal'aali) He who is elevated over everything in His Omnipotence (bi qudratih)
In both places, his definition of Allah's Highness was not Him being physically high in Himself (bi Nefsihi) or His essence (bi thaatihi), but high above everything in power.
--
Imam al-Tabari Refutes the Christians and in Doing so Refutes Pseudo-Salafis - Allah is not located in a place:

للَّهِ مُلْكُ ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَٱلأَرْضِ وَمَا فِيهِنَّ وَهُوَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ }
يقول تعالى ذكره: أيها النصارى { لِلَّهِ مُلْكُ السَّمَوَاتِ والأرْضِ } يقول: له سلطان السموات والأرض، { وَما فِيهِنَّ } دون عيسى الذين تزعمون أنه إلهكم ودون أمه، ودون جميع من في السموات ومن في الأرض فإن السموات والأرض خلق من خلقه وما فيهنّ وعيسى وأمه من بعض ذلك بالحلول والانتقال، يدلان بكونهما في المكان الذي هما فيه بالحلول فيه والانتقال أنهما عبدان مملوكان لمن له ملك السموات والأرض وما فيهنّ. ينبههم وجميع خلقه على موضع حجته عليهم ليدبروه ويعتبروه، فيعقلوا عنه. { وَهُوَ على كُلّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ } يقول تعالى ذكره: والله الذي له ملك السموات والأرض وما فيهنّ، قادر على إفنائهن وعلى إهلاكهن وإهلاك عيسى وأمه ومن في الأرض جميعاً كما ابتدأ خلقهم، لا يعجزه ذلك ولا شيء أراده لأن قدرته القدرة التي لا يشبهها قدرة وسلطانه السلطان الذي لا يشبهه سلطان ولا مملكة.
Imam Tabri in his tafsir of Surah Ma'idah verse 120 he refutes the Christians and in doing so negates that fact that God can be in a place - again a very rough translation:
"To Allah doth belong the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is therein, and it is He Who hath power over all things. "
The Exalted said: O Christians "To Allah doth belong the dominion of the heavens and the earth]", He said: He has sovereignty over the heavens and the earth "and what they contain" without, you claim, 'Isa (Jesus) whom you consider your God, and without his mother, and without all of those who are in heaven and on earth. The heavens and the earth are a creation from amongst His creations and what they contain - Isa (Jesus) and his mother are part of it. By dwelling in it and displacement (Al hulul wal intiqal) it is proven that they are in a place and, therefore they are two slaves belonging to the One who has sovereignty over the heavens and the earth and all it contains.

--
Imam, Hafidh and Mujtahid Abu Jafar Muhammad Ibn Jarir at-Tabariyy (d. 310 AH) In his book ‘Tarikh al-‘Umam wal-Muluk’ the History of Nations and their Kings), said on the subject of the Attributes of Allah said: “Delusions cannot grasp the Reality of Allah, places do not contain Him, sights do not attain Him, rather He knows about them all. Verily He is The One Whose Reality cannot be grasped by delusions and Whose Knowledge encompasses all”.
--
Imam Ibn Jarir al-Tabari (d.310) said in his commentary on the verse “Then turned He (Thumma istawa) to the heaven” (2:29): The meaning of istiwa in this verse is height and elevatio, but if anyone claims that this means displacement for Allah, tell him, He is high and elevated over the heaven with the height of sovereignity and power, not the height of displacement and movement to and fro. (ibn jarir al-tabari, tafsir 1:192)
The above position is exactly that of the Ash‘ari school, as shown by Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi’s and Ibn Hajar’s numerous comments to that effect directed against those who attribute altitude to Allahn their interpretation of His ‘uluw such as Ibn Taymiyya. The latter stated: "The Creator, Glorified and Exalted is He, is above the world and His being above is literal, not in the sense of dignity or rank." This doctrine was comprehensively refuted by Ibn Jahbal al-Kilabi (d. 733) in his Radd ‘ala Man Qala bi al-Jiha ("Refutation of Ibn Taymiyya Who Attributes A Direction to Allah ") and Shaykh Yusuf al-Nabahani (1265-1350) in his Raf‘ al-Ishtibah fi Istihala al-Jiha ‘ala Allah ("The Removal of Doubt Concerning the Impossibility of Direction for Allah"). More info: Here
----
 Imam Al-Zajjaj (d.311AH)  (from the era of the Salaf) interprets 'istawa' as 'istawla' (dominated by His omnipotence) [as Reported by Imam Al-Nasafi]
In his famous tafsir when explaining the verse, "
ٱلرحمن على ٱلعرش ٱستوى" "Al-Rahman 'ala al-'arsh istawa" (Surah Taha/5), Imam Al-Nasafi said :
"The meaning of "istawa" is "dominated by His omnipotence" (istawla) according to Al-Zajjaj"
 The Arabic Language Specialist (Linguist) Abu Ishaq Ibrahim Ibn Mouhammad Ibn al-Sourri Al-Zajjaj Al-Baghdadi, is one of the best-known linguists and was from the Salaf. He is often cited as a reference by the exegetes (mufassirun).
Here it says that the meaning of "istawa" in verse "Ar-Rahman-3ala the 'arsh istawa" is "dominated by His omnipotence" (istawla). We recall that Az-Zajjaj is not only of the Salaf, but he is also one of the leading experts of the Arabic language (linguists).
In relation to God, the meaning of "istawla" is not: to dominate/conquer after battling to overcome, which would imply a change, and change does not apply to Allah the Exalted.
or to physically dominate with an elevated position, which would imply a place and a direction, which does not apply to Allah ta3ala.
Az-Zajjaj himself relates the interpretation of "istawla" in his book "
غريب القرءان و تفسيره" (Gharib al-Qur'an wa Tafsirih).
--
Al-Zajjaj, The Grammarian and Mufassir
Ibrahim bin as-Sirri bin Sahl Abu Ishaq az-Zajjaj, was from the people of virtue and religion, of good path and belief, from his works are Ma’ani al-Quran an exegis, Khalq ul Insan, Tafisr Jami’ al-Mantiq, He said in his last breath, “O Allah ta’ala raise me upon the madhab (path) of Ahmed bin Hanbal, as is mentioned in Mawdu’at al-‘Ulum of Tash Kobri and Tarikh Mir’at al-Jinan.” (Page 16 Tabaqat al-Mufassirin of Ahmed bin Muhammed al-Udnarwi)
--
Ibn Kathir in Al-Bidaya wan Nihaya: “Ibrahim bin as-Sirri bin Sahl Abu Ishaq az-Zajjaj, he was a virtuous religious individual, of good (correct) belief, he authored great works, from them Ma’ani al-Quran and other beneficial works.”
Ibn al-Jawzi says the same in al-Muntadham, page 512. That he was of good ‘Aqidah.
Al-Imam, the Grammarian of his time, Abu Ishaq…” Siyar al-‘Alam an-Nubala’ li Dhahabi, Page: 2588)

--
Major Mufassirin quote him in their works. For those who want to attack him because of ta’wil, then it should be made clear that the Salaf did ta’wil, and what Zajjaj did wasn't something new or in contradiction to Ahlus Sunnah.
---------------------------------
Imam Abu Jafar Al- Tahawi (d.321AH)


Imam Abu Jaf’ar al-Tahawi:  “ Only a fanatic follows another blindly! ”
- 38وتعالى ( 5 ) عن الحدود والغايات والأركان والأعضاء والأدوات لا تحويه الجهات الست كسائر المبتدعات (6
"He is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs. Nor is He contained by the six directions as all created things are." 
--
Imam Al-Tahaawi in his Aqidah, who stated at the beginning of it: {This is a detailed remembrance of the belief of the People of the Sunnah and the Jamaa`ah according to the method of the jurists of this religion, Abu Hanifah Al Nu`maan ibn Thaabit Al-Kufi, Abu Yusuf Ya`qub ibn Ibrahiim Al Ansari, and Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Al Hasan Al Shaybaani…} Then he said later {in brackets}: {Allah is above} the status of {having limits, extremes, corners, limbs or instruments. The six directions} up, down, front, back, left and right {do not contain Him} because that would make Him {like all created things}.
Aqidah al-Tahawiyya by Imam Abu Ja'far al-Tahawi al-Hanafi :
Read Here: The Creed of Al Tahawi – Translated by Shaykh Abu Adam
--
 Imam abu Ja^far At-Tahawi in his book: Al-^Aqidah At-Tahawiyyah statement #37 said:
قالَ الإِمامُ أَبُو جَعْفََََََرٍ الطَحاوِيُّ رَحْمَةُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ في بَيانِ عَقِيدَةِ أَهْلِ السُّنَّةِ وَالْجَماعَةِ :
وَتَعَالَى عَنِ الْحُدُودِ وَالغَايَاتِ وَالأرْكَانِ وَالأَعْضَاءِ وَالأَدَوَاتِ. لا تَحْوِيهِ الْجِهَاتُ السِّتُّ كسائرِ الْمُبتَدَعاتِ.
Means: Allàh is clear of all limits, boundaries, sides, organs and limbs. Nor is He contained by the six directions as all the created things are. The six directions are (above, below, in front, behind, right and left). These six primary directions which are created by Allah contain only the created things.
It must not be believed or said that Allàh exists inside everyone or He is everywhere. What we as Muslims believe and say: ‘Allàh has knowledge about everything that is, wherever it is’.
------------------------------------
Imam Abu al-Hasan Al-Ashari (d.324AH) 
 Stated:
“Allah is established on the Throne in the sense that He said and the meaning that He wills, with an establishment that transcends touch, settlement, location, immanence, and displacement. The throne does nto carry him, rather the throne and its carriers are carried by the subtleness of His power, subdued under His grip, and He is above the throne and above everything down to the extremities of the lower earth, with an aboveness that does not make him any closer to the throne or to the heavens. Rather, He is as exalted high over the throne as He is exalted high over the lower earth, and together with this He is near every creature, and He is nearer to His servant than his jugular vein, and He is witness over everything.” [al-ibana an usul al-diyana, ed. Fawqiyya Husayn Mahmud (Cairo: dar al-ansar, 1977 p.21]
--
Imam Al-Ash'ari said:
'Allah existed when there was no place; then He created the Throne and the Footstool (al-'arsh wa al-kursî ) without ever being in need of place, and He is, after creating place, exactly as He was before creating it.' [In Tabyin Kadhib al-Muftari (Saqqa ed. p. 150).]
--
In Brief: some of Imam al-Asharis Books-Refutations:
Al-Fusul ("The Sub-Headings") in twelve volumes, a refutation of the philosophers, perennialists, and members of various religions such as Brahmans, Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians. It contains a refutation of Ibn al-Rawandi’s claim that the world exists without beginning.
Al-Istita`a ("Potency"), a refutation of the Mu`tazila.
Al-Luma` fi al-Radd `ala Ahl al-Zaygh wa al-Bida` ("The Sparks: A Refutation of Heretics and Innovators"), a slim volume.
Naqd al-Balkhi fi Usul al-Mu`tazila ("Critique of al-Balkhi and the Principles of the Mu`tazila"), a refutation of the book of the Mu`tazili scholar al-Balkhi entitled Naqd Ta’wil al-Adilla ("Critique of the Interpretation of the Textual Proofs").
Al-Qami` li Kitab al-Khalidi fi al-Irada ("The Subduer: A Refutation of al-Khalidi’s Book on the Will"), a refutation of a-Khalidi’s doctrine whereby Allah creates His own will.
Al-Radd `ala Ibn al-Rawandi ("Refutation of Ibn al-Rawandi") concerning the Divine Attributes and the Qur’an.
Al-Radd `ala al-Mujassima ("Refutation of the Anthropomorphists").
Al-Sifat ("The Attributes"), a description of the doctrines of the Mu`tazila, Jahmiyya, and other sects that differ from Ahl al-Sunna on the topic of the Divine Attributes. It contains a refutation of Abu al-Hudhayl, Ma`mar, al-Nazzam, al-Futi, and al-Nashi, and an affirmation that the Creator possesses a face and hands.
Hikayat Madhahib al-Mujassima ("The Tales of the Schools of the Anthropomorphists"), a refutation of the proofs they adduce.
Mutashabih al-Qur’an ("The Ambiguities in the Qur’an"), in which he brought together the stands of the Mu`tazila and the atheists in their invalidations of the ambiguities in the hadith.
A refutation of Abu al-Hudhayl on the limitlessness of the foreknowledge and decisions of Allah Almighty and Exalted and another on motions.
Al-Jism ("The Body"), a proof of the Mu`tazila’s inability to answer essential questions that pertain to corporeality, contrary to Ahl al-Sunna.(For more List of Books/Refutations: Here)
For  more info: Here also Here
--
Imam Ibn Asakir (d.571AH) In Tabyin Kadhib al-Muftari fima nusiba ila l-imam al-Ash’ari, said, p.150:
Also, the ‘Najjariyyah’ say that the Creator, may He be exalted, is in all places without being diffused and without a direction, whereas the ‘Hashawiyyah’ and the ‘Mujassimah’ say that He is present on the Throne, that the Throne is His place, and that He is sitting on itAs for him [i.e. al-Ash’ari], he chose a middle way between the two, and he said that Allah existed and there was no place, then He created the Throne and the Kursi’, He does not need a place, and He is, after having created the places, as He has always been before He created them.
--
Ibn Asakir (d.571AH) said:
The Mu`tazila said: [Allah’s] “Descent” (nuzul) is the descent of any given sign of His, or that of His angels. The Mushabbiha and Hashwiyya said: Descent is the descent of His person (dhat) through movement (haraka) and displacement (intiqal). Al-Ash`ari took the middle road and said: Descent is one of His attributes. (Ibn `Asakir, Tabyin Kadhib al-Muftari (p. 151)
Al-Bayhaqi (d.458AH) further reports that Imam Al-Ash`ari said:
“What is meant by the descent is an act brought to be by Allah in the nearest heaven every night, which [the Prophet — Allah bless and greet him –] has named a descent, without movement nor displacement. Exalted is Allah above the characteristics of creatures!”
(As quoted by al-Bayhaqi in al-Asma’ wa al-Sifat (Hashidi ed. 2:371)
------
Imam Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (d.333 AH) said;
The foundation of this issue is that Allah Almighty was when there was no place, then locations were raised while He remains exactly as He ever was. Therefore, He is as He ever was and He ever was as He is now. Exalted is He beyond any change or transition or movement or cessation! For all these are portents of contingency (hudth) by which the contingent nature of the world can be known, and the proofs of its eventual passing away…”  [Kitab at-Tawhid Imam Maturidi p. 72]
--
Imam al-Maturidi said: Allah was when there was no place. It is possible that no place exists with Him remaining as He was. Therefore, He is as He was, and He was as He is now. He is exalted from change, movement and transforming. (Kitab al-Tawheed, page 69).
Imam al-Maturidi said: As for the raising of the hands to the heaven [in supplication], it is done so out of worship [only, not that Allah is actually in the heaven]. Allah can make His servants worship Him in any manner He wishes. He can make them face anywhere He wishes. If someone thinks that the raising of the gazes to the heaven is because Allah is in that direction is just like that person who thinks that Allah is in the direction below the earth due to the fact that the face is placed on the earth in [prostration], or like the person who thinks Allah is in the east and the west due to the fact that one faces these directions in [the end of] prayer, or like the person who thinks that Allah is towards Makkah due to the fact that one sets out in that direction for Pilgrimage. Allah is exalted from all that. ( Kitab al-Tawheed, page 75- 76).
--
Imam al-Maturidi said: when talking about the affirmation of the vision of Allah by the Muslims in the Hereafter: 
If it is said 'How will He be seen?', it would be said that He shall be seen without modality, as modality is only for one who possesses an image. So He shall be seen without the descriptions of standing or sitting, leaning or suspension, connection or separation, being in front or behind, short or long, light or darkness, stationary or moving, touching or separate, outside or inside, or any meaning that can be comprehended by any stretch of the imagination or estimated by sense - all because He is exalted from all that. (Kitab al-Tawheed, page 85).
----
Imam Ibn Hibban (d.354 AH)  in his Thiqaat says:
"الحمد لله الذي ليس له حد محدود فيحتوى، ولا له أجل معدود فيفنى، ولا يحيط به جوامع المكان ولا يشتمل عليه تواتر الزمان". الثقات (1/ 1)
He also stated in his Saheeh:
"
كان- الله- ولا زمان ولا مكان"
"Allah was - without Time and without Makaan (station)." 
[Sahih ibn Hibban]
----
Shaykh Abu Bakr Muhammad Ibn Ishaq al-Kalabadhi (d.380 AH), a Hanafi scholar, In his book: ‘At-Ta’rif li-Madhhab Ahlit-Tasawwuf’ (The Guidance to the methodology of the true sufis),  said: “The Sufi scholars unanimously agree that Allah is not contained by place nor is He subject to time”.
---
Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani (d.386AH) said in his book: Kitab al-Jami fi s-sunan wa al-adab wa l-maghazi wa t-tarikh, p.123: A man asked Malik: « O Abu Abd Allah [he recited the verse:] ‘al-Rahman ‘ala ‘arshi stawa': how ‘istawa’  ?”.
Imam Malik(d.179AH) answered: ’Istiwa s not unknown, and its how [manner] is not conceivable al-istiwa ghayr majhul wa l-kayf ghayr ma’qul). To ask the question about this topic is an innovation, and to believe in it is an obligation; and I believe you are among the [bad] innovators” and he had him taken out”.
Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani is a great Maliki scholar
This version is the correct version of what Imam Malik said on the topic of Istiwa. 
To say that the istiwa of ALLAAH is without a how is therefore the correct way to follow Imam Malik as he said ‘The how is inconceivable’. It is not the same as saying ‘ we do not know how‘ Imam Malik never said that.
There are several narrations of this event. However the one presented here is the most reliable one, as it is narrated from different people in the SAME way, and in different books. This version is authentic. 
Imam Malik never said al-istiwa ma’lum wa l-kayf majhul . He never said ‘the istiwa is known and its manner/how  is unknown’. Those who claim that he did say that do not have the beginning of a chain of narration for it. Rather he said ‘the how is not conceivable’, i.e. : there is no ‘how’, no manner to it.
---
Imam al-Khattabi (d.388 AH) in A'lamul Hadith pg. 1474 explains the meaning of the statement 'Allah is above the throne' saying:
وليس معنى قول المسلمين "إن الله على العرش" هو أنه تعالى مماس له, أو متمكن فيه, أو متحيز في جهة من جهاته. ولكنه بائن من جميع خلقه
“And the statement of the Muslims, Allah is ‘alal ‘arsh (upon the throne) does not mean that He is touching it or is in the place above it, or that He is located in a direction from it. But He is separate / distinct from all of His creations”
--
Allah is distinct or separate “baa’in” from His creation after he negated Allah being in a place or in a direction from the throne. This shows that their understanding of distinctness and separateness meant that they believed that Allah was totally OTHER than His creation and that the laws of physics did not apply to Him in the first place. Hence, the dissimilarity of Allah to the creation is the type of "separateness" and "distinctness" we as Ahl al-Sunnah affirm.'
--
Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani , in volume 13, page 414, of his book Fath l-Bari, while explaining a hadith relating the Mi’raj (ascension to the skies) of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said:

Al-Khattabi said that in this version there is another term narrated by Sharik which makes it different from the other [versions] and which has not been narrated by anyone else. It is [where it is said] : “fi’lan bihi, i.e. from Jibril to Allaah (al-Jabbaar) and  [Sharik] said : “wa huwa makaanuhu” [i.e. literally it would mean 'and it is his place'], and [later on] the Prophet said  “O My Lord alleviate for us [the number of prayers]. He [i.e. al-Khattabi] said : a place cannot be attributed to Allaah, therefore here it is the place of the Prophet which is meant, i.e. that he returned where he was standing before leaving.’
More info: Here and Here Also: Here
=========
400AH
=========
Imam Al-Baqillani (d.403AH) Here is an explicit statement showing that he did not mean that Aļļaah is in a direction:
And Aļļaah, (تعالى) is neither ascribed with directions, nor that He is in a direction. [Al-Inşaaf, 177.]
قال الباقلاني في كتابه الإنصاف : والله تعالى لا يوصف بالجهات، ولا أنه في جهة.
[الباقلاني, الإنصاف, 177.]
He also said:
If someone said, “How is He?” then it is said to him, “If you mean by howness composition, form or kind, then (the answer is that) He has no form or kind to tell you about. If you meant by “how is He?” to ask, ”What is His attribute?” then the answer is that He is attributed with Life, Knowledge, Power, Hearing and Seeing. If you meant by “How is He?” to say, “How does He deal with His creation?” then the answer is: “By justice and grace.” [Tamid, 300.]
قال الباقلاني (ت 403 هـ) في [التمهيد : "فإن قال قائل وكيف هو قيل له إن أردت بالكيفية التركيب والصورة والجنسية فلا صورة له ولا جنس فنخبرك عنه. وإن أردت بقولك كيف هو أي على أي صفة هو فهو حي عالم قادر سميع بصير. وإن أردت بقولك كيف هو أي كيف صنعه إلى خلقه فصنعه إليهم العدل والإحسان" اهـ

All Al-Baqillani is doing is saying that Aļļaah is ascribed with aboveness, but not in the sense of direction, just as many of the Salaf did, like Aţ-Ţabari.
They did not explain it further, and simply left it at that. This is what we call tafwiid. Then there are those that explain it further, such as Al-Qurţubiyy in this quote.
Note that the wahabis (so called "salafis") have also claimed explicitly or implied that:
Abuu Ĥaniifah, Al-Qurţubiyy, An-Nawawiyy and Al-ˆAsqalaaniyy believed Aļļaah to be in a direction. We have shown this to be false. Click the ^above links!
--
Al-Qadi (Judge) Abu Bakr al-Baqillaniyy (d.403AH), a renowned Malikiyy scholar In his book ‘Al-‘insaf fima yajibu ‘i’tiqaduhu wa la yajuzu al-jahlu bihi’ (the just ruling regarding what one is obligated to believe in and cannot be ignorant of) said: “We do not state that the Grand ‘Arsh (Throne) is a residence or a location for Allah, due to the fact that Allah, the Exalted, is eternally existent and place is not, hence when place was brought into existence by His Creating He did not change”.
----
Imam Ibn Furak al-Shafi’i (d.406 AH)
Imam Abu Bakr Muhammad Ibn al-Hussayn, also known as Imam Ibn Furak, In his book ‘Mushkil al-Hadith’ said: “It is intellectually impossible for Allah, the Exalted, to occupy places, by reason of the impossibility of limits and ends applying to Him which is in turn due to the impossibility that Allah is created”.
--
The statement of Ibn Mas'ud 
وقال بن مسعود في قوله "ثم استوى على العرش" قال العرش على الماء ولله فوق العرش وهو يعلم ما أنتم عليه
Ibn Mas'ud said about the Istiwaa verse: The Throne is on water, and Allah is above the Throne, and He knows what you are on [i.e. what you are doing]
Ibn Mas'ud is explaining that Allah [subhanahu wa ta’ala] does not require a local presence amongst us in order to have knowledge regarding, in this case, our deeds.  As previously described in this thread one of the Salaf's sayings regarding “istawa ˆala-l-ˆArsh” is that it means that Allah is distinct from His creation, not in a place,location or direction, because there is nothing beyond the ˆArsh.
--
Imam Ibn Furak Explains the Statement ‘Allah is Above His Creation’
Know that when we say that Allah, Mighty and Majestic, is above what He has created that does not mean that He is above in terms of a physical place, or that He has risen above physical places by a certain distance and He supervises these places by applying Himself to something from them. Rather, our saying that He is above them carries two sensesWhat is Meant When We Say Allah is Above What He Created
Imam Ibn Furak al-Shafi’i
A short excerpt from the article:
: one of them means that He is the Absolute Master, in charge of them and establishing His all-encompassing power over them, as well as His comprehensive mastery over them and them being under his direction, progressing in accordance with His knowledge and His will. 
The second sense is that He is above them meaning He is distinct (mubāyin) of His creation. He is different in terms of His attributes and qualities, and that which is possible for temporal beings, such as defects, imperfection, incapacity, problems, and needs, are not befitting of Him at all and it is not possible for him to be attributed with any of them. It is also commonplace in the language that it is said that ‘so-and-so is above so-and-so’ , and what is meant is a higher rank and position. Allah, Mighty and Majestic, is above His creation in both senses while the third sense is impossible for him, which is, being confined in some direction, or in a specific place as opposed to another place.
----
Abul Fadl At Tameemi (d.410AH) said about the creed of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal:
وأنكر على من يقول بالجسم وقال: إن الأسماء مأخوذة بالشريعة واللغة. وأهل اللغة وضعوا هذا الإسم على كل ذي طول وعرض وسمك وتركيب مصورة وتأليف. والله خارج عن ذلك كلهفلم يجز أن يسمى جسما لخروجه عن معنى الجسميةولم يجئ في الشريعة, فبطل. أهـــ
"And he (Imam Ahmaddisapproved of anyone stating that Allah is a “jism”. And he would say, “Names of Allah are taken from the Sharee’ah and from the Arabic Language. The people of the Arabic Language coined that term for whatever has length, width, depth, composition, and form. And Allah the Exalted is free from all of that. So it is impermissible to call him a "jism", since He is free from what a "jism" means. Furthermore, it did not come in the Sharee’ah [so it is null and void]."
----
Al-Raghib al-Isfahani (d. 425 H) explained that Allah Tal’a  is the Manifest because His existence is intuitively evident to us through everything we see in the creation, while He is the Hidden because we can not comprehend the nature of His existence. (Mufradat al- Qur`an; Damascus, Dar al-Qalam; Beirut, Dar al-Shamiyya, 1992, p.131)
--------------------------------------
Imam Abu Manşur Al-Baghdadi (d.429AH) states about those who say that Aļļaah has a body, or that events happen in Him or His attributes(such as hearing or seeing one thing after another as they happen to creation) : 
“All those who disagreed with them say that they are blasphemers, so in this respect they are the worst of all the deviant sects (‘Uşuulu-d-Diin, 338).” 

He also commented: “By claiming tha
Aļļaah has events happen to Him, they ruined for themselves the proof of the monotheists which holds that bodies are creations since they have events in them. Based on this principle of theirs, they cannot prove that the world has a beginning, and thus they have no way of knowing the Creator of the world. Consequently, they are like all others who do not know Him (‘Uşuulu-d-Diin, 337-338).” (Ed. That is, they are idolaters.)

--
Imam abu Mansur Al-Baghdadi , in his book:  Al-Farqu Baynal-Firaq, that Imam Ali ibn abi Talib  said:
قالَ الإِمامُ أَبو مَنْصُورٍ البَغْدادِيُّ في كِتابِهِالفَرْقُ بَيْنَ الفِرَقِأَنَّ الإِمامَ عَلِيَّ بْن أَبِى طالِبٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قالَ :
كانَ اللَّهُ وَلا مَكان، وَهُوَ الآنَ عَلَى ما عَلَيهِ كانَ.
Means: “Allàh existed eternally and there weren’t any places created and after He created all the places, He is now as He was without a place.”
Imam abu Mansur Al-Baghdadi related that Imam Ali ibn abi Talib said:
قَالَ الإِمامُ سَيِّدُنا عَلِيُّ بْن طالِبٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ : إِنَّ اللَّهَ خَلَقَ الْعَرْشَ إِظْهارًا لِقُدْرَتِهِ وَ لَمْ يَتَّخِذْهُ مَكاناً لِذاتِهِ.
رَوَاهُ الإِ مامُ أَبُو مَنْصُورٍ البَغْدَادِيُّ.
Means: Allàh created the ^Arsh as an indication of His Power and did not take it as a place for Himself.
It is Allàh who created the ^Arsh as a ceiling for Paradise and did not create the ^Arsh as a place for Himself to sit on as some people wrongly claim.
--
The saying: "Allah existed eternally without a place, and He is now as He ever was" is related - without chain - from 'Ali ibn Abi Talib -- Allah be well-pleased with him. 
As cited by 'Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi (d.429AH) in his al-Farq Bayn al-Firaq (p. 256)
[Ibn 'Ata' Allah al-Sakandari (d. 709AH) cites it as one of his Hikam (#34).]
--
Regarding: al-Imam Abdul Qahir ibn Tahir Al Baghdadi Al Tamimi, also known as Abu Mansur,
Al Dhahabi (d. 748 AH) described him in his book Siyar A`lam al Nubala’ as:  “the great, outstanding, and encyclopedic scholar” …. “He used to teach 17 different subjects and his brilliance became the source for proverbs.” Al Dhahabi said that he would have like to write a separate, more complete article about him, and quoted Abu Uthman Al Sabuni saying: Abu Mansur is by scholarly consensus counted among the heads of the scholars of belief and the methodology of jurisprudence, as well as a front figure of Islam.
--------------------------------
Imam al-Hafidh al-Bayhaqi (d.458AH) said in his book, Al-Asma' was-Sifat, on page 400 [Kawthari edition]:
والذي روي في اّخر هذا الحديث إشارة إلى نفي المكان عن الله تعالى، وأن العبد أينما كان فهو في القرب والبعد من الله تعالى سواء، وأنه الظاهر فيصح إدراكه بالأدلة، الباطن فلا يصح إدراكه بالكون في مكان. واستدل بعض أصحابنا في نفي المكان عنه بقول النبي صلّى الله عليه و سلّم أنت الظاهر فليس فوقك شىء، وأنت الباطن فليس دونك شىء، وإذا لم يكن فوقه شىء ولا دونه شىء لم يكن في مكان

".... What was mentioned towards the end of the hadith is an indication of denying Allah has a place and denying the slave is alike to Allah, wherever he was, in proximity or remoteness. Allah, the Exalted, is adh-Dhahir--hence, it is valid to know about Him by proofs. Allah is al-Batin--hence, it is invalid that He would be in a place."
He also said:
"Some of our companions used as a proof to refute the place to Allah the saying of the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam : 'You are adh-Dhahir and there is nothing above You, and You are al-Batin and there is nothing underneath You.' Therefore, if there is nothing above Him and nothing underneath Him, He is not in a place."
Similarly, regarding this same hadith [from Sahih Muslim]:
O Allah, You are the first: there is nothing before You; and You are the last: there is nothing after You. You are the Manifest (al-Zahir): there is nothing above You. You are the Hidden (al-Batin): there is nothing below You.
Al-Raghib al-Isfahani (d. 425 AH) in his Mufradat al-Qur`an explained that Allah is the Manifest because His existence is intuitively evident to us through everything we see in the creation, while He is the Hidden because we can not comprehend the nature of His existence.
[Mufradat al-Qur`an, (Damascus, Dar al-Qalam; and Beirut, Dar al Shamiyyah, 1992), p.131.]
--
 “O Allah, You are the first: there is nothing before You; and You are the last: there is nothing after You. You are the Manifest (al-Zahir): there is nothing above You. You are the Hidden (al-Batin): there is nothing below You.” [ Sahih Muslim, kitab al-dhikr wal-du`a wal-tawba wal-istighfar, bab ma yaqulu `ind al-nawm wa-akhd al-madhja, #7064]
--
Imam Al-Bayhaqi also said, commenting on a haditħ: “What is at the end of this hadith is a hint to the fact that Allah exists without a place…. Some of our companions used as a proof for Allah not being in a place the saying of the Prophet (about Aļļaah): 
َYou are Al-Thaahir so there is nothing above You. And You are Al-Baatin, so there is nothing below You.” If there is nothing above Him and nothing below Him, then He is not a body or in a direction, and He does not have physical specification.”
(Al-Asmaa’ wa Sifaat 2/391).
--
Imam Al-Bayhaqi said, “He means separation of self in the sense of being isolated or at a distance, because contact and separation, of which the latter is the opposite of the former, and standing and sitting, are attributes of bodies, and Allah is One, did not beget and was not begotten, and there is nothing that resembles Him. So it is impossible that what is possibly true of bodies should be possibly true of Him.” (Al-Asmaa’ wa Sifaat 2/412).
--
Imam Al-Bayhaqi, al-Asma' wa al-Sifat, chapter entitled "The Beginning of Creation": Allah ( said: (He it is Who produces creation then reproduces it( (30:27). 'Abd Allah ibn 'Amr ibn al-'As narrated that the Prophet ( said: "Allah foreordained (qaddara) all the destinies (al-maqâ dî r) before creating the heavens and the earth by fifty thousand years." [Narrated from 'Abd Allah ibn 'Amr ibn al-'As by al-Tirmidhi (hasan sahîh gharîb) and Ahmad; also by Muslim with the following wording: "Allah inscribed (kataba) the destinies of all created things before creating the heavens and the earth by fifty thousand years, while His Throne stood upon the water (wa 'arshuhu 'alâ al-mâ')."] 'Imran ibn Husayn narrated ... that the Prophet said - Allah bless and greet him: "Allah was when there was nothing other than Him. His Throne stood upon the water...." His words "Allah was when nothing was other than Him" indicate that there was nothing else other than Him - neither water, nor the Throne, nor anything else, since all of that is "other than Him." His words: "His Throne stood upon the water" means that He then created water, and He created the Throne upon the water, after which He inscribed all things in the Remembrance, as we narrated in the hadith of 'Abd Allah ibn 'Amr ibn al-'As.
--
From the most authentic variants transmitted from Imam Malik with Isnad is the following version narrated by Hafiz Al-Bayhaqi:
قال البيهقي: أخبرنا أبو عبد الله الحافظ أحمد بن محمد بن إسماعيل بن مهران، ثنا أبي حدّثنا أبو الربيع بن أخي رشدين ابن سعد قال: سمعت عبد الله بن وهب يقول: كنا عند مالك بن أنس فدخل رجل فقال: يا أبا عبدالله الرَّحْمَنُ عَلَى العَرْشِ اسْتَوَى كيف استواؤه؟، قال: فأطرق مالك وأخذته الرحضاء ، ثم رفع رأسه فقال: (( الرحمن على العرش استوى كما وصف نفسه، ولا يقال كيف، وكيف عنه مرفوع، وأنت رجل سوء صاحب بدعة أخرجوه، قال: فأُخرج ))( ).
البيهقي الأسماء والصفات (2/304)،
قال الذهبي في العلوّ: (( وساق البيهقي بإسناد صحيح عن أبي الربيع الرشديني عن ابن وهب ... )) وذكره . مختصر العلوّ (ص:141).
وقال الحافظ ابن حجر: (( وأخرج البيهقي بسند جيِّد عن ابن وهب ..)) وذكره. فتح الباري (13/406،407 ـ

From Ibn Wahb: "We were with Malik when a man asked him: ‘O Abu `Abd Allah! "The Merciful is established over the Throne" (20:5): how is His establishment?’ Malik lowered his head and began to sweat profusely. Then he lifted up his head and said: ‘"The Merciful is established over the Throne" just as He described Himself. One cannot ask "how." "How" does not apply to Him. And you are an evil man, a man of innovation. Take him out!’ The man was led out."
[Narrated by al-Bayhaqi with a sound chain in al-Asma' wa al-Sifat (2:304-305 #866), al-Dhahabi in the Siyar (7:416), and Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 13:406-407; 1989 ed. 13:501).]
Imam al-Dhahabi said regarding this: al Bayhaqi brought it with an authentic isnad from abi rabi' from Ibn Wahb....
Imam Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar said: Al-Bayhaqi's isnad from Ibn Wahb is good.
Implication: If 'How' does not apply to Him then the idea of Tafwid of 'How' is impossible.
Read more:Here
--
 Imam al-Bayhaqiyy,In his book al-Asma’a was-Sifat, narrated with a strong chain of narrators that the cousin of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon him), 
whose name is Abdullàh ibn Abbas said:
قال ابن عباس رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ : تَفَكَّرُوا في خَلْقِ اللَّه وَلا تَفَكَّرُوا في ذَاتِ اللَّه. رَوَاهُ البيهقيُ.
Means: Think about the creations of Allàh, but do not attempt to imagine the Self of Allàh.
--------
Abul-Mudhaffar al-‘Asfarayini (d. 471 AH) In chapter 15 of his book ‘At-Tabsir fid-Din’ (The Guide to the Religion) for the purpose of elucidating the creed of Ahlussunnah wal-Jama’ah, the Faqih and well-known scholar of Tawhid said: “The slave must know that anything which dictates creationism such as limits, extremes, place, direction, stillness and movement is impossible to apply to Allah, the One clear of all the creations’ attributes”.
---
Imam and Faqih Abu Ishaq ash-Shiraziyy (d.476 AH), In his book ‘al-‘Isharah ila madhhab ahlil-Haqq’ (The Guide to the methodology of the People of Truth) said: “Allah is eternally existent and eternally place did not exist. Allah created the place, and He is still existent as He eternally was (i.e. without a place)”.
------
Shaykh Abul-Ma ali  Abdul-Malik al-Juwayni (d. 478 AH), a great Shafii scholar known as Imam al-Haramayn , In his book ‘Ash-Shamil fi ‘Usul ad-Din’ said: Know that the creed of the righteous people is that the Almighty Lord is clear of engaging a space as He is clear of pertaining to any direction”.
--
Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni said in his al-Irshad as quoted by al-Yafi`i in the latter's book Kitab marham al-`ilal al-mu`dila:
Care must be taken to show the vulgar anthropomorphists (hashwiyya) the verses upon which they do practice ta'wil so that when they invoke as proof of their belief in Allah's "settling" (istiqrar) the external meaning of "The Merciful is established on the Throne" (20:4), ask them for the meaning of "And He is with you wheresoever you are" (57:4). If they take the latter according to its external sense also, then they annul the external sense of His being established on the Throne which they claim, and they also proclaim the disgrace of their beliefs for all reasonable persons to see; however, if they understand it as referring to His encompassing us with His knowledge, then they have applied ta'wil, and it is no longer forbidden for us to do the same in interpreting His establishment as "subduing" (qahara) and "prevailing over" (ghalaba), as is permitted by the Arabic language... Moreover, istiwa' in the sense of istiqrar, or settling, presupposes a prior state of disturbance, and to hold this is disbelief (kufr)....
If they say: Why don't you let the verse pass according to its external sense without interpreting it, and only say that it is among the mutashabihat whose meaning only Allah knows? We say: If the questioner wants to let istiwa' pass according to the external sense it commonly suggests, which is physical settlement, then such a sense drives us to anthropomorphism, but if that is explicitly shown to be impossible, then the external sense ceases... at which time it is not far-fetched to understand the verse rightly and reasonably according to the demands of the divine Law and the obligation to avoid ta'wil, lest wrong belief results.
=========
500AH
=========
Shaykh al-Islam Imam Al-Ghazali (d.505 AH) says in “Iljaam Al-Awaam” that denying bodily characteristics for Aļļaah is a primary duty of all Muslims, scholars and commoners alike.
He makes it clear that believing that Allaah is a body (i.e. something that has size) is kufr and idolatry: I mean by “body” something with length, width and depth that prevents something else to exist where it exists…. 
So if it came to someone’s mind that Aļļaah is a body composed of limbs, then this person is an idol worshipper
The reason is that all bodies are created, and to worship something created is kufr. 
After all, idol worship is kufr because the idol is created, and the idol is created because it is a body.
Hence, the one who worships a body is a kaafir by the consensus of the Muslim Nation, both the salaf and those later.
---
Shaykh Abul-Wafa’ ‘Ali Ibn ‘Aqil al-Baghdadiyy (d. 513 AH), the head of the Hanbali School at the time, was quoted in a book called ‘Al-Baz al-Ashhab’: “Allah is clear of having the attribute of occupying places, for this is exactly the blasphemous belief of tajsim (attributing Allah with bodily concepts)”.
--
Ibn `Aqil al-Hanbali  One of the great early authorities of the Hanbali school  said:  "Exalted is Allah above having an attribute which occupies space -- this is anthropomorphism itself! Nor is Allah divisible and in need of parts with which to do something. Does not His order and His fashioning act upon the fire? How then would He need the help of any part of Himself, or apply Himself to the fire with one of His attributes, while He is the one Who says to it: "Be coolness and peace" (21:69)? What idiotic belief is this, and how far remote it is from the Fashioner of the dominions and the firmaments! Allah gave them the lie in His book when He said: "If these had been gods, they would never have gone down to it" (21:99): how then can they think that the Creator goes down to it? Exalted is Allah above the ignorant pretenses of the mujassima!"" [Ibn al-Jawzi, Daf` shubah al-tashbih p. 172-174. ]
-----
Imam Abu Nasr ibn al-Qushayri (d.514 AH) described the method that the anthropomorphists use to lead people to adopt wrong beliefs. He mentioned this in his book at-Tadhkirat ash-Sharqiyyat. Imam Murtada az-Zabidi quotes an excerpt of this book in volume 2 of his own book Ithaf Sadat al-Muttaqin pages 176-177 (last paragraph of page 176, first paragraph  of page 177), where Ibn al-Qushayri says :
A group of people has appeared, and if it were not for the fact that they approach laymen by what is close to their way of thinking and what is imagined in their illusions, I would have honoured this book by avoiding to [even] mention them.
They say: ‘We follow the apparent meaning, and the verses which suggest resemblance [between Allaah and His creations], for example the narrations which suggest a limit and a member [to Allaah], we give them the apparent meaning, and it is not permissible to interpret in another meaning, for any of those issues.‘  They pretend to be following the saying of Allaah ta’aala  وما يعلم تأويله إلا الله (wa ma ya’lamu ta’weelahu ‘illallaah) which means “And only Allaah knows its ta’weel”, and these people, by Allaah, are more harmful to Islam than the Jews, the Christians, the fire-worshippers and the idol-worshippers. Indeed, the deviations of the non-Muslims are obvious, and the Muslims steer clear away from them, whereas these people have launched an attack on the religion and on the laymen in a way which can fool the weakest among them.
They have suggested these bad innovations to their followers, and they have introduced in their hearts the fact of attributing to the one who is worshipped subhaanah: members, senses, ascending, descending, lying down, sitting, as well as moving into the different directions.
Therefore, the one who goes by the apparent meaning, he will start to imagine, with his illusions, things which are perceptible by our senses, and he will then have as a belief unacceptable things, and the tide will take him away without him even realising.
He also says, page 179:
The truth of the matter is that the very people who prohibit others to make interpretations [actually] believe in assimilation, tashbih [i.e. making Allah resemble His creations] but they try to hide it by saying “Allah is attributed with a Yad which is not like other yads, and Allah is attributed with a Qadam but not like other qadams, and Allah is attributed with al-Istiwa’ by Himself, but not like the istiwa’ we can perceive.”
Let the person who is among the people of the truth and who has been granted [proper] understanding say to them: ‘These statements need further clarification. For you to say ‘We take the text according to its apparent meaning, but we cannot understand its meaning’, is contradictory.
If you take the literal meaning of the ayah يوم يكشف عن ساق    ‘Yawma yukshafu ‘an saaq,’ which means: ‘A day when a saq is uncovered” then the literal meaning of  ‘saq’ is the organ which is composed of skin, flesh, nerves, bone and marrow. And if you take this literal meaning, and make it binding upon yourself to accept these other organs, it is therefore blasphemy. And if  it is not possible for you to take this literal meaning, then where is your rule  of taking the apparent meaning (i.e.  how is it that you claim to adhere to the literal meanings?).  Wouldn’t you [actually] leave out the apparent meaning and acknowledge that the Lord ta’aala is free from what is suggested by the apparent meaning? And if the enemy says “These literal interpretations (adh-dhawaahir) do not have a meaning in the first placethen it is as if he is saying that these ayahs are invalid and that there is no benefit in these verses, and this is impossible.
--
Imam Abu Nasr ibn al-Qushayri is the son of the renowned Imam Abu l-Qasim al-Qushayri (d.465 AH) Imam Murtada az-Zabidi, who quotes this statement, is also a great scholar who died in (d.1205 AH) and who wrote Taj al-Arus min Jawahir al-Qamus which is an Arabic dictionary  in twenty volumes and the absolute reference in its genre. The book from which this statement by al-Qushayri is taken is from another one of his famous books entitled Ithaf Sadat al-Muttaqin  and it is a commentary of the book Ihya’u ‘Ulum ad-Dinby Imam al-Ghazali (d.505 AH).
Look at how contemporary his sentences sound! He says: ‘these people, by Allaah, are more harmful to Islam than the Jews, the Christians, the fire-worshippers and the idol-worshippers. Indeed, the deviations of the non-Muslims are obvious, and the Muslims steer clear away from them, whereas these people have launched an attack on the religion and on the laymen in a way which can fool the weakest among them.’
Also pay attention to  ‘Therefore, the one who goes by the apparent meaning, he will start to imagine, with his illusions, things which are perceptible by our senses, and he will then have as a belief unacceptable things, and the tide will take him away without him even realising.’
And finally:  ‘The truth of the matter is that the very people who prohibit others to make interpretations [actually] believe in assimilation, tashbih [i.e. makingAllah resemble His creations] but they try to hide it by saying “Allah is attributed with a Yad which is not like other yads, and Allah is attributed with a Qadam but not like other qadams, and Allah is attributed with al-Istiwa’  by Himself, but not like the istiwa’ we can perceive.’
 --
It is obvious that the arguments he was refuting at the time are those still in use nowadays by some people. Instead of only saying “We recite the revelation in Arabic and do not add anything to it (which would have been correct), they say: “We take the verses according to their apparent meaning, but we do not know how“, which Imam Ibn al-Qushayri rigorously exposed  as a nonsensical statement. [More info/Scans: Here]
----
Malik Ibn Anas’ al-Qadi (The Judge) Abu Bakr Ibn al-‘Arabi (d. 543 AH), a great Maliki scholar from Andalusia (presently known as Spain) In his book ‘al-Qabas fi sharh Muwatta’ said: Allah, Who is ‘Al-Bari’ (The Creator) is clear from the limitation of the six directions or the envelopment of places”.
---
Ima-m Muhammad al-Shahrastani (d. 548 AH)
For post-classical Sunni theologians, tafwid and ta’wil were the two ways of warding off the literalist interpretations that they attributed to heretical corporealist (mujassima) groups such as the Karramiyya and Hashwiyya. 
Ibn Taymiyya rejected both options, and it is thus not surprising that a scholar such as Ibn Hajar al-Haytami should have castigated him for having the same heretical views.
Already the theologian and heresiographer al-Shahrastani  had expressed the view that the origin of all shades of heretical anthropomorphism (tashbih) lay in the insistence on going beyond the tafwid of the salaf:
A group of later people added to what the salaf have said. They said: It is imperative to keep to the literal sense and to understand it as it appears, without presuming to reinterpret or suspend judgement as regards the literal meaning (la budda min ijra’iha ‘ala dhahiriha wa-al-qawl bi-tafsiriha kama waradat min ghayr ta’arrud li-al-ta’wil wa la tawaqquf fi al-zahir). Hence they fell into pure anthropomorphism (tashbih). This is contrary to what the salaf believed.
[Muhammad al-Shahrastani, Kitab al-milal wa-al-nihal, ed. by W. Cureton (Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz, 1923 [reprint of 1846 edition], 64.]
--
Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdil-Karim ash-Shahrastaniyy, a great Shafi’i scholar (d.548 AH) In his book: ‘Nihayat al-‘Iqdam’,  said: “The creed of the People of Truth is that Allah, the Exalted, does not resemble any of the creations, and none of them resembles Him in any sort of similarity or equivalence. Verse 11 of Surat ash-Shura means: [There is absolutely nothing that resembles Allah, and He is attributed with Hearing and Sight]. Hence Allah is not a constituent part of an object, a mass, a bodily characteristic, nor is He located in any place or subject to time”.
---
Muhiyudeen Shaikh Abd Al Qadir Al Jilani al Hanabali (d.561AH) in his Kitab sirr al Asrar wa Mazhar al Anwar said:
" Our Master the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wassallam) said, ' The hearts of the children of Adam are between the two fingers of the All-Merciful. He turns them whichever way He wills.'
The two fingers of Allah are His attributes of the irresistible power of punishment and the loving and delicate beauty of the beneficence. "
(chapter 14, interpreted/translated by Shaykh Tosun Bayrak al-Jerrahi al-Halveti)
---
Imam Ibn Asakir (d.571AH) in his book: Tabyin Kadhib al-Muftari fima nusiba ila l-imam al-Ash’ari
Page,150: Also, the ‘Najjariyyah’ say that the Creator, may He be exalted, is in all places without being diffused and without a direction, whereas the ‘Hashawiyyah’ and the ‘Mujassimah’ say that He is present on the Throne, that the Throne is His place, and that He is sitting on it. As for him [i.e. al-Ash’ari], he chose a middle way between the two, and he said that Allah existed and there was no place, then He created the Throne and the Kursi’, He does not need a place, and He is, after having created the places, as He has always been before He created them.
He explains here that the belief of Imam al-Ash’ari is that Allah does not need places.
--
Abul-Qasim ‘Ali Ibn al-Husayn Ibn Hibatillah known as Ibn ‘Asakir ad-Dimashqiyy (d.571 AH) In his book ‘Tabyin kadhib al-Muftari’ on the subject of the Attributes of Allah, the Exalted, said: “He (Allah) is eternally existent and eternally place did not exist, He created the ^Arsh and Kursiyy without the need for place. He still exists, after place was brought into existence, as He was before creating the place (i.e. without a place)”.
---
Shaykh Ahmad Ar-Rifa’i ash-Shafi’i (d. 578 AH) In his book ‘Al-Burhan al-Mu’ayyad’ (The Substantiated Proof), the prominent Shaykh and Imam of true sufis, said: “Clear your beliefs from interpreting the Arabic term ‘Istiwa’’, when in reference to Allah, as physical establishment in a way similar to the ‘istiwa’’ of bodies upon other bodies which dictates the act of occupation because Allah is clear of that. And do not sanction attributing to Allah a directional above or below, a location, a physical hand or an eye or interpreting the word ‘Nuzul’ as physically descending or moving”.
-----------------------------------------------------
Imam Abu Faraj 'Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Jawzi, (d.597 AH
Ibn al-Jawzi’s book against the so-called Hanbali anthropomorphists has received many editions and is widely available. The title is: ‘Daf` shubah al-tashbih bi akuffi al-tanzih‘, “The Repelling With the Hands of Purification of the Sophistries of Anthroporphism”, also known as ‘al-Baz al-ashabb al-munqadd `ala mukhalifi al-madhhab al- hanbali’, “The Flaming Falcon Swooping Down on the Dissenters of the Hanbali Madhhab”! Editions: Damascus, 1926; Cairo, 1977?; Beirut, 1987; Amman, 1991; and recently, a new edition by Imam Abu Zahra]
--
Ibn al-Jawzi: “You have made this madhhab such a shameful disgrace that when it is said, “Humbali,” it is understood that he is someone who likens GOD to His creation.
You have then made your way to be that of bigotry and intolerance, showing fanatical support for Yazid ibn Muawiyyah, when you well know that the founder of the madhab permitted cursing him”.
(Ibn al Jawzi rejected and repudiated Yazid for his behavior)
And, Abu Muhammed Tamimi used to say about one of your imams that:
“[he] has disgraced the madhhab in a terrible way and it will not be cleansed until the day of resurrection.” [Daf` Shubah al-Tashbih bi Akuff al-Tanzih]More Info:Here
--
Ibn al-Jawzi:
"After they imagined a huge image on the Throne, they took to interpreting away all that contradicts its being located on the Throne.
So I ask you where is Allah?They also said that the statement of Allah should come unto them in the shadows of the clouds (2:210) must be understood literally to mean the coming of His very Essence. So they declare it permissible one year and they declare it forbidden another. 
They said: 'We affirm this according to its external sense!'
Then they placated the commonality by adding: 'But we do not affirm limbs.'
It is as if they said: 'So-and-so is standing but he is not standing.'
Those are less intelligent than Juha...
... CAUTIONING AGAINST SUCH PEOPLE IS WORSHIP."
[Ibn al-Jawzi, Sayd al-Khatir (p. 91-95).]More Info: Here
=========
600AH
=========
Imam Fakhrud-Din ar-Raziyy (d.606 AH), In his book authored on interpreting the Qur’an known as ‘at-Tafsir al-Kabir’ (The Great Interpretation) said: “Regarding the Ayah { وهو العلي العظيم } it is impossible for the meaning of the word ‘Aliyy’, when attributed to Allah, to refer to aboveness in terms of an upward direction or place, as evidence confirms the fallacy therein. Hence, this mandates that the meaning of the word ‘Aliyy’ is that Allah is clear of resembling all intellectual possibilities and of any similarity to the creation”.
--
Shaykh Al-Islam Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi(d.606AH/1209CE)
As for the saying of the Most High, ‘What prevented you from prostrating to the one that I created with My Two Hands [yaday]?
we reply: Imam al-Razi’s Interpretation of ‘Two Hands
--
الدليل دل على أن من قال إن الإله جسم فهو منكر للإله تعالى، وذلك لأن إله العالم موجود ليس بجسم ولا حال في الجسم، فإذا أنكر المجسم هذا الموجود فقد أنكر ذات الإله تعالى، فالخلاف بين المجسم والموحد ليس في الصفة، بل في الذات، فصح في المجسم أنه لا يؤمن بالله أما المسائل التي حكيتموها فهي اختلافات في الصفة، فظهر الفرق. وأما إلزام مذهب الحلولية والحروفية، فنحن نكفرهم قطعاً، فإنه تعالى كفر النصارى بسبب أنهم اعتقدوا حلول كلمة { ٱللَّهِ } في عيسى وهؤلاء اعتقدوا حلول كلمة { ٱللَّهِ } في ألسنة جميع من قرأ القرآن، وفي جميع الأجسام التي كتب فيها القرآن، فإذا كان القول بالحلول في حق الذات الواحدة يوجب التكفير، فلأن يكون القول بالحلول في حق جميع الأشخاص والأجسام موجباً للقول بالتكفير كان أولى.
Imam al-Razi:
Proofs tell us that the who says that God is a body is a disbeliever in God (who is greatly above and clear of flaws). The reason is that the God of the World exists, and He is not a body, or stationed in a body. So if the one who believes that God is a body denies this non-bodily existence, then he has disbelieved in God Himself. This means that the disagreement between the one that believes that God is a body, and the monotheist (i.e. in the Islamic sense, namely that God does not have a partner, part or a like in His self of attributes), is not based on a disagreement regarding attributes, but regarding the self (i.e. the identity of the one attributed with godhood.) It is sound to say then, that the one who believes that God is a body does not believe in Allah….
As for the
Hululiyyah (those who believe that Allah settles in created things, such as the sky or a human body) and Hurufiyyah (those who believe that Allah’s attribute of Kalam/Speech consists of letters and sounds) sects, we say that they are unequivocally disbelievers. This is because Allah declared the Christians blasphemers for believing that Allah’s speech entered into Jesus, whereas the Hurufiyyah believe that it settles in the tongue of all those who recite Quran, and in all physical things that the Quran was written on. Accordingly, if the belief in its settlement in one single body (Jesus) is blasphemy, then it is even more blasphemous to believe that it settles in all shapes and bodies
[Fakhruddin Al Razi. Mafatiĥ Al-Għayb. altafsir.com] (More Info: Al Tafsir Al Kabeer in Arabic: Here 
------
Imam Ibn 'Abd al-Salam (d.660 AH) said, in his statement of doctrine:
He was before He brought place and time into existence, and He is now as He ever was.
[ Ibn 'Abd al-Salam, al-Mulha fi I`tiqad Ahl al-Haqq in his Rasa'il al-Tawhid (p. 11).]


The position of Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari is similarly summed up by Abu al-Qasim ibn 'Asakir: The Najjariyya said: 'The Creator is in every place without indwelling (hulû) nor direction (jiha).' The Hashwiyya and mushabbiha said: 'The Creator took His place (hâ llun) on the Throne, the Throne is His location (makâ n), and He is sitting on top of it.' Imam Al-Ash'ari took a middle ground and said: 'Allah existed when there was no place; then He created the Throne and the Footstool (al-'arsh wa al-kursî ) without ever being in need of place, and He is, after creating place, exactly as He was before creating it.' (In Tabyin Kadhib al-Muftari (Saqqa ed. p. 150). This is the position of al-Ash'ari also as given by Ibn Jahbal al-Kilabi (d. 733AH): "The words of the Shaykh [Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari] concerning direction are: 'Allah was when there was no place, then He created the Throne and the Footstool, without ever needing place, and He is, after creating place, exactly as He was before creating it.'"  (In Tabaqat al-Shafi`iyya al-Kubra (9:79).
--
Imam al-Izz ibn Abd al-Salam  was asked in his Fatawa: "What do you say about Abu Zayd al-Qayrawani al-Maliki's (d. 386) saying: "Allah is above His exalted Throne in person (bi dhatihi), and He is in every place with His knowledge": Does such an affirmation attribute a direction to Allah or not? And is the one who holds such belief declared a disbeliever (kafir) or not?"
He replied: "The apparent meaning of what Ibn Abi Zayd said attributes direction for Allah, because he has made a difference between Allah's being on the Throne and His being with His creation. As for the second question: the more correct position is that the one who holds belief in Allah's direction is not declared a disbeliever, because the scholars of Islam did not bring such as these out of Islam, rather, they adjudicated inheritance from Muslims for them, burial in Muslim grounds, sanctity of their blood and property, and the obligation to pray over their remains. The same is true of all the upholders of innovations: People never ceased to apply to them the rulings that apply to Muslims. Pay no attention to what the common people claim about their disbelief."
--
Imam Ibn 'Abd al-Salam said:Allah is not a body and thus Has no form, He is not an entity and thus Has no measured limits. He does not resemble anything and nothing resembles Him. The six directions do not surround Him, nor do the earths and skies enclose Him. He is eternally existent before creating the creations. He created time, and He still exists as He eternally was (i.e. without a place)”.‘Mulhat al-I’tiqad’
More Info: Here
--------
Note: Ibn Tayimyyah was born (661 AH)
--------

Imam Al-Qurţubi (d.671 AH) 
Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Ahmad al-‘Ansariyy al-Qurtubi a well-known Maliki scholar and explainer of the Holy Qur’an
Imam Al-Qurtubi states:

I say accordingly that Aļļaah’s aboveness and His highness refers to His highness of glory and attributes and greatness. That is, nothing is above Him when it comes to the meanings of greatness that are necessarily ascribed to Him, and there is nothing that shares His aboveness with Him. Rather He is the most High in the absolute sense, subĥaanah. (Tafsiir Al-Qurţubi, 7 / 220)
--
Note that because aboveness in location is relative, unlike the absolute aboveneness that
Al-Qurţubiyy affirms, those who believe in it are bound to attribute flaw to Aļļaah.
In Al-Asnaa Al-Qurţubiy says this explicitly:
It is said to them [the anthropomorphists who believe Aļļaah is in a place or direction, etc.]: “If Allaah was specified by a specification, formed by a form, limited by a limit and end, existing in a specific direction, [or] changing by emergent [previously non existing] attributes in Himself, then He would have been emergent and specified by whatever He was specified with in terms of quantity and form, and [thus] requiring a specifier [for the quantity and form], and if He required a specifier, then He would have been in need and emergent. And if this is invalid, then it is true that He is without a limit or an end, and that He is Self-existent in the sense that He does not need a place to confine Him or a body to be in, or something to hold Him, or another that He gets help from. His attributes of His self do not change by His actions or leaving them. (Al-Asnaa, 2/21)
In short, Al-Qurţubiyy says that believing Allaah’s aboveness is one of direction/ location necessitates believing He has a flaw. This is because it necessitates likening Him to things that need a creator to specify it.
It also necessitates another flaw. This additional flaw is that they will either have to say that Aļļaah can create a body above Himself, and thereby become below, or that He cannot, and have thereby attributed to Him lack of power to create bodies anywhere He chooses.

They have also made Him, according to their belief, dependent on creating something below Himself, in order to achieve aboveness. No wonder then, that Ibn Taymiyyah said Aļļaah must create something or another. According to him, the Creator would lose His aboveness if He did not! Such is the dilemma of the relative aboveness doctrine of wahabism.
--
Al-Qurtubi said in his book al-Asnaa, page,193:
It is a duty for every accountable person to know that Allaah is attributed with absolute greatness [of status], and there is nothing greater than Him [in status]. Further, He is clear of any attribute that is bodily or related to having size, as He cleared Himself of that by His saying: الكبير المتعال
[which may be interpreted to mean : Allaah is the One attributed with absolute greatness and being above non-befitting attributes such as having a shape or size. –Ed.]
By this He informed us that He is Al-Kabiir, and the definitive particle “Al” indicates absoluteness. Then Allaah said “Al-Mutaˆaal” and by that He declared Himself clear of what makes bodies and bulky things great. [For] who believes that [Allaah has bodily greatness, i.e. in terms of shape or size] is likening Allaah to a body, and is an idolater.

--
Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Ahmad al-‘Ansariyy al-Qurtubi (d. 671 AH),  In his book ‘Al-Jami’ li‘Ahkam al-Qur’an’ said: “The name of Allah ‘Al-^Aliyy’ refers to His greatness in status, and does not refer to an elevated place because Allah is clear of occupying space”.
---
Imam al-Qurtubi did not say: “ the salaf believed Allah was in a direction
Read Here
----


Shaykh ul-Islam Imam An-Nawawi (d.676 AH)  
Imam An-Nawawi said in his commentary on Muslim’s ĥaditħ collection:

المنهاج شرح صحيح مسلم بن الحجاج , النووي , دار إحياء التراث العربي , 1392 – (3 / 19): اِعْلَمْ أَنَّ لِأَهْلِ الْعِلْم فِي أَحَادِيث الصِّفَات وَآيَات الصِّفَات قَوْلَيْنِ : أَحَدهمَا : وَهُوَ مَذْهَب مُعْظَم السَّلَف أَوْ كُلّهمْ أَنَّهُ لا يُتَكَلَّم فِي مَعْنَاهَا ، بَلْ يَقُولُونَ : يَجِب عَلَيْنَا أَنْ نُؤْمِن بِهَا وَنَعْتَقِد لَهَا مَعْنًى يَلِيق بِجَلَالِ اللَّه تَعَالَى وَعَظَمَته مَعَ اِعْتِقَادنَا الْجَازِم أَنَّ اللَّه تَعَالَى لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْء وَأَنَّهُ مُنَزَّه عَنْ التَّجَسُّم وَالِانْتِقَال وَالتَّحَيُّز فِي جِهَة وَعَنْ سَائِر صِفَات الْمَخْلُوق ، وَهَذَا الْقَوْل هُوَ مَذْهَب جَمَاعَة مِنْ الْمُتَكَلِّمِينَ ، وَاخْتَارَهُ جَمَاعَة مِنْ مُحَقِّقِيهِمْ وَهُوَ أَسْلَم . وَالْقَوْل الثَّانِي : وَهُوَ مَذْهَب مُعْظَم الْمُتَكَلِّمِينَ أَنَّهَا تُتَأَوَّل عَلَى مَا يَلِيق بِهَا عَلَى حَسَب مَوَاقِعهَا ، وَإِنَّمَا يَسُوغ تَأْوِيلهَا لِمَنْ كَانَ مِنْ أَهْله بِأَنْ يَكُونَ عَارِفًا بِلِسَانِ الْعَرَب وَقَوَاعِد الْأُصُول وَالْفُرُوع ، ذَا رِيَاضَة فِي الْعِلْم
Know that the scholars, with regard to the ĥadiths and ayahs that mention attributes, have two sayings:
One of them, and it is the saying of most of the Salaf, or all of them, is that one does not speak about their meaning. Instead they say, “we must believe in them and be sure that they have a meaning that befits the greatness and glory of Aļļaah, with the firm belief that Aļļaah does not resemble anything, and that He is clear of having a size, movement, a location in a direction, and all other attributes of creation. This saying is the saying of a number of the Kalaam scholars, and it is the chosen saying of a number of scholarly authenticators and verifiers, and it is the safest path.
The second saying, and it is the choice of most kalaam scholars, is that they are interpreted according what befits the context. This interpretation, however, is only acceptable from someone that is qualified by being an expert in the Arabic language (i.e. as used and understood by the companions) as well as the rules and principles of the religion, both in fundamentals and details, and this (work of interpretation) is a kind of exercise of (one’s) knowledge (i.e. for those qualified). [Al-Nawawiy, Sharĥ Saĥiiĥ Muslim Li-l-Nawawiy (Beirut, Lebanon: Dar Ihyaa’ Al-Turath Al-Arabi, 1392), 3/19.]
--

المنهاج شرح صحيح مسلم بن الحجاج , النووي , دار إحياء التراث العربي , 1392 – (6 / 36-37): قَوْله صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : ( يَنْزِل رَبّنَا كُلّ لَيْلَة إِلَى السَّمَاء الدُّنْيَا فَيَقُول : مَنْ يَدْعُونِي فَأَسْتَجِيب لَهُ ) هَذَا الْحَدِيث مِنْ أَحَادِيث الصِّفَات ، وَفِيهِ مَذْهَبَانِ مَشْهُورَانِ لِلْعُلَمَاءِ سَبَقَ إِيضَاحهمَا فِي كِتَاب الْإِيمَان وَمُخْتَصَرهمَا أَنَّ أَحَدهمَا وَهُوَ مَذْهَب جُمْهُور السَّلَف وَبَعْض الْمُتَكَلِّمِينَ : أَنَّهُ يُؤْمِن بِأَنَّهَا حَقّ عَلَى مَا يَلِيق بِاَللَّهِ تَعَالَى ، وَأَنَّ ظَاهِرهَا الْمُتَعَارَف فِي حَقّنَا غَيْر مُرَاد ، وَلَا يَتَكَلَّم فِي تَأْوِيلهَا مَعَ اِعْتِقَاد تَنْزِيه اللَّه تَعَالَى عَنْ صِفَات الْمَخْلُوق ، وَعَنْ الِانْتِقَال وَالْحَرَكَات وَسَائِر سِمَات الْخَلْق . وَالثَّانِي : مَذْهَب أَكْثَر الْمُتَكَلِّمِينَ وَجَمَاعَات مِنْ السَّلَف وَهُوَ مَحْكِيّ هُنَا عَنْ مَالِك وَالْأَوْزَاعِيِّ : أَنَّهَا تُتَأَوَّل عَلَى مَا يَلِيق بِهَا بِحَسْب مَوَاطِنهَا . فَعَلَى هَذَا تَأَوَّلُوا هَذَا الْحَدِيث تَأْوِيلَيْنِ أَحَدهمَا : تَأْوِيل مَالِك بْن أَنَس وَغَيْره مَعْنَاهُ : تَنْزِل رَحْمَته وَأَمْره وَمَلَائِكَته كَمَا يُقَال : فَعَلَ السُّلْطَان كَذَا إِذَا فَعَلَهُ أَتْبَاعه بِأَمْرِهِ . وَالثَّانِي : أَنَّهُ عَلَى الِاسْتِعَارَة ، وَمَعْنَاهُ : الْإِقْبَال عَلَى الدَّاعِينَ بِالْإِجَابَةِ وَاللُّطْف . وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَم .


The saying of the Prophet (صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ) (literal unmeant translation):”Our Lord descends every night to the sky of the world, then says ‘who calls me, so that I will answer him?” This ĥaditħ are one of the ĥaditħs mentioning attributes. There are two famous ways of the scholars regarding them, that have been explained previously in the chapter on belief. Their brief description is that one is the approach of most of the Salaf, and some Kalaam scholars, which is to believe it is true in a sense that befits Aļļaah, and that its apparent, usual meaning for us, is not meant, and one does not speak about its meaning. This is accompanied with the belief that Aļļaah is clear of having attributes of created things, and of movement, movements, and all descriptions that are for created things. The other approach is that of most Kalaam scholars, and groups among the Salaf, and they are narrated here from Malik and Al-‘Awzaaˆiy, is to interpret these according to what befits the context. Accordingly, they interpreted this ĥadiitħ in two ways. One of them is that of Malik and others, which is to say that it means: Aļļaah’s mercy, orders and angels descend, just as it is said, “the king did so and so”, when it was actually his followers that did it. The other interpretation is metaphorical, and its meaning is: “accepting those who call by answering them and showing them mercy.” [Ibid., 6/36-37.]

His commentary in his Sharh of Sahih Muslim regarding the narration of “descent/an-Nuzul”:
هذا الحديث من أحاديث الصفات، وفيه مذهبان مشهوران للعلماء: أحدهما وهو مذهب السلف وبعض المتكلمين أنه يؤمن بأنها حق على ما يليق بالله تعالى وأن ظاهرها المتعارف في حقنا غير مراد، ولا يتكلم في تأويلها مع اعتقاد تنزيه الله تعالى عن صفات المخلوق وعن الانتقال والحركات وسائر سمات الخلق، والثاني مذهب أكثر المتكلمين وجماعات من السلف وهو محكي هنا عن مالك والأوزاعي على أنها تتأول على ما يليق بها بحسب مواطنها، فعلى هذا تأولوا هذا الحديث تأويلين أحدهما: تأويل مالك بن أنس وغيره، معناه تنزل رحمته وأمره وملائكته، كما يقال فعل السلطان كذا إذا فعله أتباعه بأمره، والثاني: أنه على الاستعارة ومعناه الإقبال على الداعين بالإجابة واللطف.
This hadith is from the hadith of the Sifat (of Allah), and regarding it there are two well known madhdhabs: the first, and it is the madhhab of the salaf and some of the Mutakallimin (scholars of kalam) that it is believe in their [i.e. the attributs] reality according to what befits Allāh ta’ala, and that the literal meaning that we commonly apply to ourselves is not what is meant, and that one does not speak regarding its interpretation while holding the belief that Allah ta’alā is free from the attributes of the created, and from translocation, and movement, and the rest of the attributes of created beings. The second is the madhdhab of the majority of the Mutakallimīn, and a group from amongst the Salaf, and it is what is reported from Mālik and al-Awzā’ī that they are interpreted figuratively but only according to their appropriate contextual meanings. On this basis there are two interpretations (ta’wils). The first is the ta’wil of Imam Malik ibn Anas and other than he, that its meaning is the descent of His mercy and decree and His angels. [as is said regarding the Sultan …] and the Second interpretation is that it is an Isti’arah (metaphor) to signifiy turning to (iqbal) to those who supplicate to Him with fulfillment by answering [the du’aa] and showing lutf (kindness, generosity) [to those beseeching Him].[Sharh Sahih Muslim; Kitab Salat al-Musafirin]

Imam an-Nawawi denies the literal meaning, the creed of Ibn Tayimyyah, for Allah’s descent, and says the way of the salaf and the Mutakallimin is both tafwid and ta’wil.
Imam An-Nawawi also quoted Imam Malik elsewhere in his Sharh of Sahih Muslim regarding this issue of the “descent” of Allah,
فقد سئل الإمام مالك رحمه الله عن نزول الرب عزّ وجلّ، فقالينزل أمره تعالى كل سَحَر، فأما هو عزّوجلّ فإنه دائم لا يزول ولا ينتقل سبحانه لا إله إلى هو
Imam Malik was asked about the “descent” of Allah and he said, “His, the majestic’s, command descends every night, and as for Allah ‘azza wa jall, then he is eternal, he does not move or displace, glorified be He, and there is no god but He!”[6/37]
--
He says regarding the hadith of the “slave girl”:
هذا الحديث من أحاديث الصِّفات، وفيها مذهبان تقدَّم ذكرهما مرَّات في كتاب الإيمان: أحدهما:الإيمان به من غير خوض في معناه، مع اعتقاد أنَّ الله ليس كمثله شيء،وتنزيهه عن سمات المخلوقات.والثَّاني:تأويله بما يليق به. فمن قال بهذاأي التأويلقال: كان المراد امتحانها هل هي موحِّدة تقرُّ بأنَّ الخالق المدبِّر الفعَّال هو الله وحده، وهو الَّذي إذا دعاه الدَّاعي استقبل السَّماء،كما إذاصلَّى المصلِّي استقبل الكعبة،وليس ذلك لأنَّه منحصر في السَّماء، كما أنَّه ليس منحصراً في جهة الكعبة، بل ذلك لأنَّ السَّماء قبلة الدَّاعين، كما أنَّ الكعبة قبلة المصلِّين.أو هي من عبدة الأوثان العابدين للأوثان الَّتي بين أيديهم، فلمَّا قالت: في السَّماء علم أنَّها موحِّدة وليست عابدة للأوثان.
“This hadith is from the narrations of the attributes of Allah, and there are two madhdhabs regarding this, and I have mentioned them both in the chapter of Iman. The first is to believe in it without delving into its meaning, while believing that Allah has no similitude to Him at all, and negating for him the attributes of created beings. And the second school is that it is interpreted in a manner that befits Him.” […then he gives the interpretations…]
--
When Muslims lift their hands and face towards the sky when performing du^aa (supplicating to Allàh for something beneficial), it does not mean that Allàh exists in the skies.

Imam Al-Nawawi  said:
في شَرْحِ صَحِيح مُسْلِم يَقولُ الإِمَامُ النَّوَوِيُّ : السَّمَاءُ قِبْلَةُ الدُّعَاء
.
Means: The skies are the direction for the du^aa (i.e. supplication). Muslims lift their hands and face towards the skies, because it is the direction for the du^aa, just as the Ka^ba (Mecca) is the direction for all Muslims around the world to face towards when praying to Allàh. It is from the skies that the mercies and blessings from Allah descend. The Mushabbihah say that the skies are the direction to perform du^aa to use it as their so-called proof that Allàh occupies the skies. The Prophet made du^aa when his forehead was facing the ground while in prayer.
The Messenger of Allàh, Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon him) said:
مَا في السَّمَاءِ مَوْضِعُ أَرْ بَعِ أَصَابِعَ إلا وَفِيهِ مَلَكٌ قَائِمٌ أَوْ رَاكِعٌ أَوْسَاجِدٌ يَذْكُرُ اللَّهَ تَعَالى. رَوَاهُ الترمذي عن أبي ذر الغفاري.
Means: There is no space in the sky equal to the width of four fingers, except one would find an Angel worshipping and glorifying Allàh, either in standing, bowing or prostrating position. The Angels stay as such until the Day of Judgement, worshipping Allàh their Creator. This saying of the Messenger of Allàh is another proof that Allàh does not exist in the skies. This is because those whoever claim that Allàh exists in the upper skies, are claiming that Allàh is in between the Angels and His size is the width of four fingers? This is impossible, because the Creator is not a body, object, size, form or shape.
--
Imam an-Nawawi makes no mention of the madhdhab of the literalists who delve into the literal meaning and affirm it for Allah! 
He also says in his Sharh of Sahih Muslim:
إن الله تعالى ليس كمثله شيء وإنه منزّه عن التجسيم والانتقال والتحيز في الجهة وعن سائر صفات المخلوق
“Verily there is nothing like Allah ta’ala, and he is free from tajsim (corporeality), and displacement, and being within direction, and from the rest of the attributes of the created beings.” [3/19]

This is in direct contradiction to the creed of Ibn Taymiyyah who said that he does not deny “jism” – body/corporeality – for Allah.
He said,
“It is well known that the Book , the Sunnah, and the Consensus nowhere say that all bodies (ajsaam) are created, and nowhere say that Allah Himself is not a body! Nor did any of the Imams of the Muslims ever say such a thing. Therefore if I also choose not to say it, it does not expel me from fitra nor from Shari’ah!” [At-Ta’sis 1:118 ]

Such stupidity only shows the ignorance of Ibn Taymiyyah in issues of creed! “The Book” does say He is not a body when He says “There is nothing like unto Him, and He is As-Sami’ al-Basir!” This is a verse of denial of everything in similitude with creation! For jism (corporeality/body) is an attribute of the created, and is thus tamthil.
Allah never ascribes himself with a body (jism), yet Ibn Taymiyyah is more than happy to do so for Him, exalted is He above what this deviant ascribed to Him! 
Imam An-Nawawi disagreed with Ibn Taymiyyah, and this is a clear refutation of the claim of “Ijma'” by Ibn Taymiyyah 

As Allah says in the Qur’an,

فَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ افْتَرَىٰ عَلَى اللَّهِ كَذِبًا أَوْ كَذَّبَ بِآيَاتِهِ
“And who is more unjust than one who invents about Allah a lie or denies His verses?” [7:37]
So the Qur’an does say He is not a body. But a question to ask the proponents of Tajsim (and this is what it is): Where does Allah ascribe to Himself a “body”? What proof do you have? Or is it that you do take the literal meaning of hand, shin, waist, foot, eyes, and with your sensual perception imagine Allah as the pagan Christians do as a body (jism), unlike other bodies – in other words with a bigger hand than humans. These folk have invented a lie upon Allah by saying about Him what He has denied about Himself!
Imam An-Nawawi is the complete opposite in creed of Ibn Taymiyyah. In fact, Imam An-Nawawi does not even recognize the school of Ibn Taymiyyah as being from Ahlus Sunnah, as you can see from his commentary in Sahih Muslim, rejecting the “literal” meanings as what is intended.
Imam An-Nawawi also said in his Sharh of Sahih Muslim:
من العلماء من يمسك عن تأويلها ويقول نؤمن بأنها حق وأن ظاهرها غير مراد ولها معنى يليق بها وهذا مذهب جمهور السلف وهو أحوط وأسلم والثاني أنها تتأول على حسب ما يليق بتنزيه الله تعالى وإنه ليس كمثله شيء
“And from the scholars are those who refrain from interpretating [the narratives of attributes]. They say we believe that they are real and that the literal meanings of the texts are not what are intended, and the meaning is what befits His majesty and this is the madhhab of the majority of the Salaf, and it is most upright, and safest. The second school is one of interpretation of the texts in a manner which befits His Majesty, while denying any imperfections from Allah ta’ala, as there is nothing like unto Him!” [16/166]

Also Imam An-Nawawi quotes Imam Al-Mazari, the Maliki Asha’ri, in refutation of Ibn Qutaybah regarding his belief that Allah has an “image unlike other images” regarding the hadith “Allah created Adam in His image…”.
--
Imam al-Nawawi  has also stated in his Sharh of Saheeh Muslim;
وهذا أشهر المذهبين للمتكلمين: وقال آخرون لا تتأول بل يمسك عن الكلام في معناها ويوكل علمها إلى الله تعالى ويعتقد مع ذلك تنزيه الله تعالى وانتفاء صفات الحادث عنه: فيقال مثلا نؤمن بأن الرحمن على العرش استوى ولا نعلم حقيقة معنى ذلك والمراد به مع أنا نعتقد أن الله تعالى (ليس كمثله ش&#1574 وانه منزه عن الحلول وسمات الحدوث وهذه طريقة السلف أو جماهيرهم وهي أسلم إذ لا يطالب الانسان بالخوض في ذلك فإذا اعتقد التنزيه فلا حاجة إلى الخوض في ذلك والمخاطرة فيما لا ضرورة بل لا حاجة إليه فان دعت الحاجة إلى التأويل لرد مبتدع ونحوه تأولوا حينئذ: وعلى هذا يحمل ما جاء عن العلماء في هذا والله أعلم
"If there is a need for interpretation (ta'wil) in order to refute innovators and their like, then they (the Salaf) went ahead and applied interpretation. This is the correct understanding of what has reached us from the scholars concerning this subject, and Allah knows best.”
--
An-Nawawiyy and Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ said they are not Muslims:
قوله صلى الله عليه و سلم ( فليكن أول ما تدعوهم إليه عبادة الله فإذا عرفوا الله فأخبرهم إلى آخره ) قال القاضي عياض رحمه الله هذا يدل على أنهم ليسوا بعارفين الله تعالى وهو مذهب حذاق المتكلمين في اليهود والنصارى أنهم غير عارفين الله تعالى وان كانوا يعبدونه ويظهرون معرفته لدلالة السمع عندهم على هذا وان كان العقل لا يمنع أن يعرف الله تعالى من كذب رسولا قال القاضي عياض رحمه الله ما عرف الله تعالى من شبهه وجسمه من اليهود أو اجاز عليه البداء أو أضاف إليه الولد منهم أو أضاف إليه الصاحبة والولد وأجاز الحلول عليه والانتقال والامتزاج من النصارى أو وصفه مما لا يليق به أو أضاف إليه الشريك والمعاند في خلقه من المجوس والثنوية فمعبودهم الذى عبدوه ليس هو الله وان سموه به اذ ليس موصوفا بصفات الاله الواجبة له فاذن ما عرفوا الله سبحانه فتحقق هذه النكتة واعتمد عليها وقد رأيت معناها لمتقدمى أشياخنا وبها قطع الكلام ابوعمران الفارسى بين عامة اهل القيروان عند تنازعهم في هذه المسألة هذا آخر كلام القاضي رحمه الله تعالى. (المنهاج شرح صحيح مسلم بن الحجاج , النووي , دار إحياء التراث العربي , 1392, 1 / 199-200)
The saying of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) "let the first you call them to be the worship of Aļļaah, then when they know Aļļaah tell them…" etc.
Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ (رحمه الله) said: "This (i.e. the foregoing statement of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم)) indicates that they (the Christians) do not know Aļļaah, and this is the saying of the brilliant kalaam scholars regarding the jews and the Christians; that they do not know Aļļaah (تعالى) even if they worship Him (i.e. call what they worship by His name) and making it appear as if they know Him, based on what they narrate amongst themselves, even though it is not impossible in the mind’s eye that someone who disbelieves in a messenger does know Aļļaah."

Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ (رحمه الله) said: The one that likened Aļļaah to His creation, or believed Him to be bodily among the jews and Christians, or believed that He gains knowledge over time, or claimed He has a child, or a female companion and a child, or said he could exist in created things, or move from one place to another, or be mixed with creation, among the Christians or attributed to Him what is not befitting, or associated with Him a partner or opponent in creating among the Magians an dualists; what they worship is not Aļļaah, even if they called it that. This is because it is not attributed with the attributes that are necessarily His. Accordingly, they do not know Aļļaah (سبحانه), so realize this point well, and depend on it, and I have seen this point made by our predecessor shaykhs."
---
Shaykh Ahmad Ibn Idris al-Qarafiyy (d.684 AH), an Egyptian Malikiyy scholar, In his book ‘Al-Ajwibah al-Fakhirah’  said: “And He (Allah) is not in any direction, and when we are admitted to Paradise Allah will grant us the honour of seeing Him without Him being in any direction”.
---
--------------------------------
Note: Ibn Taymiyyah’s first clash with the scholars occurred in (698 AH) in Damascus when he was barred from teaching after he issued his Fatwâ Hamawiyya in which he unambiguously attributes literal upward direction to Allâh.
--------------------------
=========
700AH
=========
Ibn 'Ata' Allah al-Sakandari (d. 709AH) cites it as one of his Hikam (#34):
The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم)  said:
"Allah was when there was nothing else than Him, and His Throne was upon the water, and He wrote in the Reminder (al-dhikr) all things, and He created the heavens and the earth."
[ Narrated from 'Imran ibn Husayn by al-Bukhari, Sahih, book of the Beginning of Creation.]
--
Ibn `Ata' Allah al-Iskandari - Debate with Ibn Taymiyya Read: Here
More Info: Here
---
Imam An-Nasafi (d.710 AH) states in his Tafsir:

إنه تعالى كان ولا مكان فهو على ما كان قبل خلق المكان، لم يتغير عما كان.
“Verily He, the exalted, was without place, and He is as He was before creating (the entity of) ‘place’, not changing as He was [Tafsīr An-Nisfi ,Surah Taha, Volume: 2]
--
Imam al-Nasafi states;  “ He (Allah) is not a body (jism), nor an atom (jawhar), nor is He something formed (musawwar), nor a thing limited (mahdud), nor a thing numbered (ma’dud), nor a thing portioned or divided, nor a thing compounded (mutarakkab), nor does He come to end in Himself. He is not described by quiddity (al-ma’hiya), or by quality (al-kayfiyya), nor is He placed in space (al-makan), and time (al-zaman) does not affect Him. Nothing resembles Him, that is to say, nothing is like Him.” (See: Sa’d al-Din al-Taftazani & Najm al-Din al-Nasafi, Sharh al-Aqa’id al- Nasafiyya, 92-97).
--
Imam Abu l-Barakat Abdullah ibn Ahmad an-Nasafi, wrote on page 164, volume: 2 of his Tafsir of the  Qur’an :
[About the following verse :

وَلِلّهِ الأَسْمَاء الْحُسْنَى فَادْعُوهُ بِهَا وَذَرُواْ الَّذِينَ يُلْحِدُونَ فِي أَسْمَائه 
Walillaahi l-asmaa’u l-husna fa-d’uhu bihaa wa dharu l-ladheena yulhiduna fi asmaa-ihi
which means : “And ALLAAH has the perfect names, therefore invoke Him by these names, and stay away from those who are guilty of ilhaad [atheism] towards these names”. Surate al-A’raf verse 180].
It is atheism (ilhaad) to call ALLAAH a ‘body’ (jism)  or an ‘elementary particle’  (jawhar)
or  a ‘mind/reason’ (‘aql)  or a ’cause’  (‘illah)’
--
Imam Abu l-Barakat Abdullah ibn Ahmad an-Nasafi was a  great exegete, i.e. a scholar specialised in the interpretation of the Qur’an. His Tafsir is famous. He is not to be confused with other great Hanafi scholars also named an-Nasafi, such as Najm ad-Din Abu Hafs an-Nasafi (d..537 AH)  who wrote the book al-Aqaid, which has been commented by at-Taftazaani, and which a reference in terms of books of belief, or Maymun ibn Muhammad an-Nasafi, the theologian who wrote the book Tabsirat al-Adillah (d.508AH).
To explain what ‘ilhaad’ means in this verse, Imam an-Nasafi says that it is a type of atheism to call ALLAAH ‘jism’ or ‘illah’, i.e. ‘body’ or ’cause’ . Indeed, these two names are not among the names of Allaah narrated in the religious texts, and on top of that their meaning does not comply with Islamic teachings. ALLAAH is not a body, He is not composed of parts. And He is not a ’cause’ because this would equal saying that He does not have a will, and that is the reason why imam an-Nasafi has considered this naming as an act of blasphemy.
---
------------------
Ibn Tayimyyah  was refuted by his contemporary:

Imâm Ibn Jahbal al-Kilâbî (d.733AH), in a lengthy reply which Tâj al-Dîn al-Subkî reproduced in full in his Tabaqât al-Shâfi`iyya al-Kubrâ.

Ibn Jahbal wrote: "How can you say that Allâh is literally (haqîqatan) in (fî) the heaven, and literally above (fawq) the heaven, and literally in (fî) the Throne, and literally on (`alâ) the Throne?!"
--
Ibn Jahbal also says in his Refutation of Ibn Taymiyya: 22. We say: Our doctrine is that Allah is pre-eternal and pre-existent (qadî ­ azalî ). He does not resemble anything nor does anything resemble Him. He has no direction nor place. He is not subject to time nor duration. Neither "where" (ayn) nor "at" (hayth) applies to Him. He shall be seen, but not as part of an encounter, nor in the sense of an encounter (yurâ lâ'an muqâ bala wa lâ 'alâ muqâ 'ala). He was when there was no place, He created place and time, and He is now as He ever was. This is the madhhab of Ahl al-Sunna and the doctrine of the shaykhs of the [Sufi] Path - may Allah be well-pleased with them. (Tabaqat al-Shafi`iyya al-Kubra(9:41).
--
Ibn Jahbal refuted such kufristic insinuations in his refutation of Ibn Taymiyyah that has been translated and published 
--
The Refutation of Him (Ibn Taymiyyah) Who Attributes Direction to Allah by Ibn Jahbal
We say to him: What do you say concerning the mention of “several eyes” (a‘yun), the mention of the “flank” (janb), the mention of the single “shin” (saq), and the mention of the “several hands” (aydi)?
If we take these literally then we must affirm a being that has one face with many eyes, a single side, many hands, and a single shin!
What being on earth is possibly uglier?
And if you take the liberty of interpreting this and that to be dual or singular, then why does Allah not mention it, nor the Prophet(s), nor the Salaf of the Community?
(Chapter 7: The Absurdity of His Literalism, pp. 221-223) More Info: Here
------
Ibn Taymiyyah then returned to his activities until he was summoned by the authorities again in (705AH) to answer for his`Aqîda Wâsitiyya.
He spent the few following years in and out of jail or defending himself from various "abhorrent charges" according to Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalânî.
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 Rabî` al-Awwal 707AH and it was witnessed by a huge array of scholars and others."
---
Fatwa (726AH) by The Four Orthodox Sunni Judges:

Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Jama’ah, ash-Shafi’i,
Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn al-Hariri, al-`Ansari, al-Hanafi,
Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr, al-Maliki, and
Qadi [Judge] Ahmad Ibn `Umar, al-Maqdisi, al-Hanbali.

Ibn Taymiyah was imprisoned by a fatwa (religious edict) signed by four orthodox Sunni judges in the year (726 AH) for his deviant and unorthodox positions.
Note that each of the four judges represents the four schools of Islamic jurisprudence that Sunni Muslims belong to today. This illustrates that Ibn Taymiyah did not adhere to the authentic teachings of orthodox Sunni Islam as represented by the four schools of Sunni jurisprudence. There is no evidence to indicate that there was a “conspiracy” against Ibn Taymiyyah to condemn him, as Wahhabis and other Salafis purport in his defense.
-------------------------
Note: Ibn Tayimyyah died in (728AH) 
Also amid with charges of kufr for declaring that one who travels to visit the Prophet(s) commits a prohibition (Harâm), a sin (ma`siya), and an innovation (bid`a). 
-----------------------------
In the final five months of his last two-year period in jail Ibn Taymiyya was prevented from writing, at which time he turned to prayer and the intensive recitation of the Qur'ân and repented from having spent time writing doctrinal refutations instead of focussing on the commentary of the Qur'ân.

At that time he confided to his faithful student Ibn al-Qayyim: "My Paradise and my Garden are in my breast - meaning his faith and knowledge - and wherever I go they never depart from me. My prison is seclusion, my execution is martyrdom, and my exile is an excursion."  [In Ibn al-Qayyim, al-Wâbil al-Sayyib min al-Kalim al-Tayyib (p. 66).]

Al-Safadî said: "He wasted his time refuting the Christians and the Râfida, or whoever objected to the Religion or contradicted it, but if he had devoted himself to explaining al-Bukhârî or the Noble Qur'ân, he would have placed the guarland of his well-ordered speech on the necks of the people of knowledge." [Al-Safadî, al-Wâfî bi al-Wafayât (7:19-22), cf. Ibn Taymiyya as related from al-Dhahabî by Ibn Rajab in Dhayl Tabaqât al-Hanâbila (2:401-402).]

Al-Nabahânî said in Shawâhid al-Haqq: "He refuted the Christians, the Shî`îs, the logicians, then the Ash`arîs and Ahl al-Sunna, in short, sparing no one whether Muslim or non-Muslim, Sunni or otherwise." 
--
Al-Tawfiq al-Rabani written by a group of Sunni scholars, page 32: علمه أكثر من عقله فأداه اجتهاده إلى خرق الاجماع في مسائل كثيرة قيل انها تبلغ ستين مسألة فأخذته الألسنة بسبب ذلك وتطرق إليه اللوم وامتحن بهذا السبب وأسرع علماء عصره في الرد عليه وتخطئته وتبديعه ومات مسجونا بسبب ذلك.
Sheikh Iraqi regarding ibn Tayimyyah,  said "... his knowledge exceeded the capabilities of his brain, and he therefore contradicted the 'Ijma' of Muslims on many issues. They said on around 60 matters. They therefore criticized and blamed him, and he has been examined due to that. The scholars of his time refuted him, presented his mistakes, and deemed him a heretic. He was also imprisoned due to that.”
----
Imam Abu Zayd ibn al-Imam Tilimsani (d. 742AH) Successfully Disputed with ibn Taymiyya in Egypt
Changing Views of ibn Taymiyya by Khaled el-Rouayheb:
Ibn Taymiyya had also gained notoriety for his literal interpretation of the hadith al-nuzul to which Sanusi alluded, i.e. the tradition stating that Allah descends to the lowest heaven during the last third of the night (or according to a variant, on the night of mid-sha’ban). The later North African scholar Baba al-Tunbukti (d. 1624; 1036AH), author of a popular biographical dictionary of Maliki scholars, referred precisely to Ibn Taymiyya’s literal interpretation of this Hadith. Al-Tunbukti noted that the scholar Abu Zayd ibn al-Imam Tilimsani (d. 742AH) had gone to Egypt and while there had disputed successfully with Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiyya. He added that:
The mentioned Taqi al-Din had some repugnant claims, such as taking literally the Hadith al-nuzul, saying: “like I descend now”…. May Allah protect us from this claim! And someone said that the attribution of this to him is not certain, and Allah knows best.
[Ahmad Baba al-Tunbukti, Nayl al-ibtihaj bi-tatriz al-Dibaj. Printed on the margins of Ibn Farhun, al-Dibaj al-mudhahhab fi ma’rifat a’yan al-madhhab (Cairo: Matba’at al-Sa’ada, 1329AH), 166.]
----


Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi (d. 745AH) stated that he had seen this work Kitab al-‘arsh, of  Ibn Taymiyya who had written there that God is literally seated on the throne, and had left a place on it for the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) to sit next to him.[ Ibid., 2:1438]
--
Muhammad Ibn Yusuf known as Abu Hayan al-Andalusiyy (d.745 AH) In his book ‘al-Bahr al-Muhit’ explaining verse 19 of Surat al-Anbiya’ the great linguist and interpreter and reciter of the Holy Qur’an, said: “The word ‘inda’ in this Ayah does not have the function of an adverb of place because Allah is clear of occupying places. Rather, it is used in the context of honourable status and high standing.”
--
Abu Hayyan al-Andalouci denounces kufr of Ibn Taymiyya.
Indeed, Abu Hayyan al-Andalouci questioned Ibn Taymiyya whereas before he was just doing his praise, and he could not conceive that we can not love Ibn Taymiyya. But after I visited Al-Andalouci walked away disappointed having seen the arrogance of Ibn Taymiyya. But mostly he began to curse him after seeing the book Kitabou l-'Arsh of Ibn Taymiyya his word that Allah would sit on the Koursiyy and He would have left room to seat His Prophet.
Abu Hayyan al-Andalouci said: "I saw it in his book, his own book and I know his handwriting. "
He mentioned this in his Tafsir, exegesis of his Qour-year Nahrou called An-l-Madd mina l-Bahr.
----

Imam al-Dhahabi (d.748AH) mentions that ibn Taymiyya’s followers weakened, and that he was forbidden from issuing fatawa due to his views on talaq, yet he remained stubborn on his views:
“His followers weakened and he involved himself in weighty questions that neither the intellects of his contemporaries nor their learning could bear, such as: the question of the expiation of the oath of repudiation (talaq), the opinion that repudiation (talaq) uttered three times is valid only once, and the opinion that repudiation (talaq) during menstruation is not valid. He composed writings about these topics in the order of some forty quires. Because of this, he was forbidden to issue legal opinions (fatawa). He controlled himself in a strange way and held firm to his own opinion.”
[al-Dhahabi, Nubdha in Bori, “A New Source“, 336, (Arabic Text) – 342 (English Translation)]

Imam al- Dhahabi said about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah:
مع أني مخالف له في مسائل أصلية وفرعية
However I disagree with him in creedal and legal issues.”
on page,329: of Dhayl Tareekh Al Islam: Here
 al- Dhahabi’s biography of Ibn Taymiyyah included in the compilation called, “From the Legacy of Shaikhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah”, found : Here on page, 244:
وله حدة قوية تعتريه في البحث حتى كأنه ليث حرب. أهـــ
“He had an acute harshness that would overcome him during debate, making him like a lion of war.”
وفيه قلة مداراة وعدم تؤدة غالبًا , والله يغفر له. أهـــ
“He often lacked congeniality and prudence. May Allah forgive him.”
وَقَدْ يُعَظِّمُ جليسه مرة ويهينه في المحاورة مرات. أهـــ
“He may honor his company once, yet disrespect them during debate repeatedly.”
al- Dhahabi said: Regarding ibn Taymiyya’s conduct with his opponents during debate, on page 326 and 327 of his book Dhaylu Tareekhil Islam: Here
مع اننى لا اعتقد فيه العصمة كلا فانه مع سعة علمه و فرط شجاعته و سيلان ذهنه و تعظيمه لحرمات الدين بشر من البشر تعتريه حدة فى البحث و غضب وشظف للخصم يزرع له عداوة فى النفوس و نفورا عنه وإلا والله لو لاطف الخصوم و رفق بهم ولزم المجاملة و حسن المكالمة لكان كلمة اجماع
“…although I do not believe him to be infallible (ma’soom). Most definitely not! Because despite his vast knowledge, extreme courage, overflowing intellect, and reverence for the sanctities of the religion, he was but a man. During debates he would be overcome with harshness, hot temper, and toughness with his opponents which would plant in the souls the seeds of enmity, aversion, and dislike for him. Otherwise, had he been polite and kind with his opponents and observed etiquette and a graceful mode of speech, he would have been a word of consensus.”
 al- Dhahabi describes the position of Ibn Taymiyyah’s closest companions and “fans” from the unique opinions that he has:
ولا ريب انه لا اعتبار بمدح خواصه والغلاة فيه فان الحب يحملهم على تغطية هناته بل قد يعدونها محاسن. أهـــ
“And without doubt, no consideration should be given to the praise of his closest companions or those who are extreme in their admiration for him. Their love for him will make them cover his mistakes, nay they may even count them to be from his good deeds.”Dhayl Tareekhil Islam pg. 328 – 329 : Here
al-Dhahabi said on page 327 and 328 of his book Dhailu Tareekhil Islam: Here
وإن أنت عذرت كبار الائمة فى معضلاتهم ولم تعذر ابن تيمية فى مفرداته فقد أقررت على نفسك بالهوى و عدم الانصاف. أهـــ
“If you were to excuse the eminent Scholars for their problematic verdicts yet not excuse Ibn Taymiyyah for his unique fatawas, you would be acknowledging that you yourself have leanings and unfairness.”
al-Dhahabi said in Dhuyool Al ‘Ibar fee Khabari man Ghabar, page 84: Here
وله مسائل غريبة نيل من عرضه لأجلها
“And he has strange (rulings on) issues, due to which his repute was under fire”
 al-Dhahabi said in Al Mu’jam Al Mukhtass bil Muhadditheen, on page 25 (pg 45 in the PDF reader), bio #22: Here
وانفرد بمسائل فنيل من عرضه لأجلها, وهو بشر له ذنوب وخطأ ومع هذا فوالله ما مقلت عينِي مثله ولا رأى هو مثله نفسه. أهــ
And he went alone on issues that, because of them his repute was under fire. And he is a man. He has sins and mistakes. Yet despite this, by Allah, my eyes have never seen the likes of him, nor has he seen the likes of himself.”
 al- Dhahabi in his book, Tadhkiratul Huffaadh on page 1497, mentions about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah: Here
وقد انفرد بفتاوى نيل من عرضه لأجلها وهي مغمورة في بحر علمه, فالله تعالى يسامحه ويرضى عنه فما رأيت مثله. وكل واحد من الأمة فيؤخذ من قوله ويترك فكان ماذا؟ أهـــ
“And he went alone to make unique fatawas, due to which his repute came under fire. Yet they are submerged in the ocean of his knowledge. So may Allah forgive him and be pleased with him, for I have never seen anyone like him. And since the case with everyone in the Muslim Ummah is that some of their statements may be accepted and others may be rejected, what is the problem?”
al- Dhahabi said about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah:
ولقد نصر السنة المحضة، والطريقة السلفية، واحتج لها ببراهين ومقدمات، وأمور لم يسبق إليها، وأطلق عبارات أحجم عنها الأولون والآخرون وهابوا، وجسر هو عليها، حتى قام عليه خلق من علماء مصر والشام قياماً لا مزيد عليه. أهـــ
“And he supported the pure Sunnah, and the Salafi methodology. And he argued using proofs, premises and matters that he was not preceded to. And he made statements that the earlier and later people refrained from saying and were afraid to utter. Yet he boldly said those things, until a huge group of Scholars from Egypt and Syria confronted him most sternly.”
See pg. 243: Here
al- Dhahabi on page 38 of the book, Zaghlul ‘Ilm , said about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah:
وقد تعبت في وزنه وفتشته حتى مللت في سنين متطاولة ، فما وجدت قد أخره بين أهل مصر والشام ومقتته نفوسهم وازدروا به وكذبوه وكفروه إلا الكبر والعجب ، وفرط الغرام في رياسة المشيخة والازدراء بالكبار ، فانظر كيف وبال الدعاوي ومحبة الظهور ، نسأل الله تعالى المسامحة ، فقد قام عليه أناس ليسوا بأورع منه ولا أعلم منه ولا أزهد منه ، بل يتجاوزون عن ذنوب أصحابهم وآثام أصدقائهم ، وما سلطهم الله عليه بتقواهم وجلالتهم بل بذنوبه ، وما دفعه الله عنه وعن أتباعه أكثر ، وما جرى عليهم إلا بعض ما يستحقون ، فلا تكن فى ريب من ذلك. أهـــ
“And I have tired myself from weighing him and examining him, until over the long years I became exausted. At last, what I found to be holding him back among the scholars of Egypt and Syria (Shaam), caused their souls to loathe him, and them to disdain him, and call him a liar and accuse him of disbelief was nothing else but arrogance (kibr), self admiration (‘ujb), the ardent desire to be the “head shaikh”, and belittling the eminent (figures in Islam)! So look at the outcome of false claims and love of fame! We ask Allah, the Exalted, for pardon. For indeed, the people who confronted him were not more pious than he, or more knowledgeble or more ascetic. On the other hand, they would overlook the sins of their companions and the misdeeds of their friends. Allah did not afflict him with them due to their piety (taqwa) and their nobility, but because of his sins. And what Allah deflected from him and his followers was even greater. And nothing befell them except for some of what they deserved, so do not be in doubt concerning this.” See page, 38: Here
al- Dhahabi  said in his book called Zaghlul ‘Ilm:
فما أظنك فى ذلك تبلغ رتبة ابن تيمية ولا والله تقربها وقد رأيت ما اَل أمره إليه من الحط عليه والهجر والتضليل والتكفير والتكذيب بحق و بباطل فقد كان قبل أن يدخل فى هذة الصناعة منوراً مضيئاً على محياه سيما السلف ثم صار مظلماً مكسوفاً عليه قتمة عند خلائق من الناس ودجالاً أفاكاً كافرا عند أعدائه ومبتدعاً فاضلاً محققا بارعا عند طوائف من عقلاء الفضلاء وحامل راية الإسلام وحامى حوزة الدين ومحي السنة عند عوام أصحابه هو ما أقول لك. أهـــ
“…I still don’t believe you would reach the level of Ibn Taymiyyah nor, by Allah, would you even come close to it. And I have witnessed what his affair led to, with people putting him down, abandoning him, declaring him to be a deviant, declaring him to be a disbeliever, and accusing him of lying, rightfully and wrongfully. But before he got into this field he was radiant, shining, and bearing the appearance of the Salaf on his face…” page 42 and 43: Here
--------
al-Nasiha al-Dhahabiyya to Ibn Taymiyya
Link provided: Here 
al-Nasihah al-Dhahabia li ibn Taymiyya
(Sincere Advice to Ibn Taymiyya, Maktab al-Misria 18863)
--------
Note: Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (b.691 AH - d.751 AH) Ibn Tayimyyah's Disciple!
Ibn al- Qayyim followed the same path as his teacher in his infamous poem entitled:
al-Qasida al-Nuniyya. More Info: Here also not to forget: Here
--------
al-Imam al-Mufassir Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi (d.754AH) on ibn Taymiyya’s Belief that: “Allah Most High is sitting (yajlisu) on the Kursi but has left a place of it unoccupied, in which to seat the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace)"
Excerpt from the article – ‘Reforming Classical Texts’ by Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller:
…the two-volume Qur’anic exegesis of Abu Hayyan al-Nahwi (d. 754/1353), Tafsir al-nahr al-madd [The exegesis of the far-stretching river] condensed mainly from his own previous eight-volume exegesis al-Bahr al-muhit [The encompassing sea], arguably the finest tafsir ever written based primarily on Arabic grammar. Abu Hayyan, of Andalusion origin, settled in Damascus, knew Ibn Taymiya personally, and held him in great esteem, until the day that Barinbari (d. 717/1317) brought him a work by Ibn Taymiya called Kitab al-‘arsh [The book of the Throne]. There they found, in Ibn Taymiya’s own handwriting (which was familiar to Abu Hayyan), anthropomorphic suggestions about the Deity that made Abu Hayyan curse Ibn Taymiya until the day he died. This was mentioned by the hadith master (hafiz) Taqi al-Din Subki in his al-Sayf al-saqil (85). Abu Hayyan, in his own Qur’anic exegesis of Ayat al-Kursi (Qur’an 2:258) in surat al-Baqara, recorded something of what so completely changed his mind:
I have read in the book of Ahmad ibn Taymiya, this individual whom we are the contemporary of, and the book is in his own handwriting, and he has named it Kitab al-‘arsh [The book of the Throne], that “Allah Most High is sitting (yajlisu) on the Kursi but has left a place of it unoccupied, in which to seat the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace)” [italics mine]. Al-Taj Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Abd al-Haqq Barinbari fooled him [Ibn Taymiya] by pretending to be a supporter of his so that he could get it from him, and this is what we read in it (al-Nahwi, Tafsir al-nahr al-madd, 1.254).
---
Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki (d.756AH)
Al-Dura al-Mudhia, page 5:
أحدث ابن تيمية ما أحدث في أصول العقائد ونقض من دعائم الإسلام الأركان والمعاقد بعد أن كان مستترا بتبعية الكتاب والسنة مظهرا أنه داع إلى الحق هاد إلى الجنة فخرج عن الاتباع إلى الابتداع وشذ عن جماعة المسلمين بمخالفة الاجماع
“When
Ibn Taimiyah caused what he caused in ideology and abolished the pillars of Islam after which he pretended to be an adherent of the Book and Sunnah, and pretended that he was an advocate for truth and guiding others to heaven, he went astray and (went) towards originating a heresy, and became odd by contradicting the Ijma of Muslims.”
Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki on ibn Taymiyya and his followers being from the deviant Hashwiyya sect, and that they were a minority fringe group who would teach their beliefs in secret
“As for the Hashwiyya, they are a despicable and ignorant lot who claim to belong to the school of (Imam) Ahmad (ibn Hanbal)… They have corrupted the creed of a few isolated Shafi’is, especially some of the Hadith scholars among them who are lacking in reason… They were held in utmost contempt, and then towards the end of the seventh century (AH) a man appeared who was diligent, intelligent and well-read and did not find a Shaykh to guide him, and he is of their creed and is brazen and dedicated to teaching his ideas… He said that non-eternal attributes can subsist in Allah, and that Allah is ever-acting, and that an infinite chain of events is not impossible either in the past or the future. He split the ranks and cast doubts on the creed of the Muslims and incited dissension amongst them. He did not confine himself to creedal matters of theology, but transgressed the bounds and said that travelling to visit the tomb of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) is a sin… The scholars agreed to imprison him for a long time, and the Sultan imprisoned him… and he died in prison. Then some of his followers started to promulgate his ideas and teach them to people in secret while keeping quiet in public, and great harm came from this.”
[al-Zabidi, Ithaf al-Sada al-Muttaqin, 2:11. al-Zabidi is quoting from al-Subki’s al-Sayf al-Saqil fi al-Radd ‘ala ibn Zafil, see al-Rasa-il al-Subkiyya, 84-85]
Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki on ibn Taymiyya’s view on Tawassul as cited by Imam ‘Abd al-Ra’uf al-Munawi (d. 1031AH):
“It is proper to entreat and ask for the help and intercession of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) with Allah. No one from amongst the salaf and the khalaf denied this, until ibn Taymiyya came along and disapproved of this, and deviated from the straight path, and invented a position that no scholar has said before, and he became a deterrent example for Muslims” [al-Munawi, Faydh al-Qadir, 2:170]
This was also mentioned by Imam Muhammad Amin ibn ‘Abidin al-Shami al-Hanafi (d. 1252AH) via Imam al-Munawi as follows:
نَعَمْ ذَكَرَ الْعَلَّامَةُ الْمُنَاوِيُّ فِي حَدِيثِ «اللَّهُمَّ إنِّي أَسْأَلُك وَأَتَوَجَّهُ إلَيْك بِنَبِيِّك نَبِيِّ الرَّحْمَةِ» عَنْ الْعِزِّ بْنِ عَبْدِ السَّلَامِ أَنَّهُ يَنْبَغِي كَوْنُهُ مَقْصُورًا عَلَى النَّبِيِّ – صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ – وَأَنْ لَا يُقْسِمَ عَلَى اللَّهِ بِغَيْرِهِ وَأَنْ يَكُونَ مِنْ خَصَائِصِهِ قَالَ وَقَالَ السُّبْكِيُّ: يَحْسُنُ التَّوَسُّلُ بِالنَّبِيِّ إلَى رَبِّهِ وَلَمْ يُنْكِرْهُ أَحَدٌ مِنْ السَّلَفِ وَلَا الْخَلَفِ إلَّا ابْنَ تَيْمِيَّةَ فَابْتَدَعَ مَا لَمْ يَقُلْهُ عَالِمٌ قَبْلَهُ اهـ
[Radd al-Muhtar ‘ala al-Durr al-Mukhtar Hashiya ibn ‘Abidin, vol. 6, pg. 397, Dar al-Fikr, Beirut ed.]
Imam Mustafa ibn Ahmad al-Shatti al-Hanbali (d. 1348AH) also mentioned this from Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki as follows:
“It is good to make intercession with the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) to his Lord. No one from the first generations (salaf), or those who followed (khalaf), repudiated this until Ibn Taymiyyah arrived. He repudiated intercession, went out from the straight path and innovated what no scholar before him had said, and became known for that among the people of Islam.”
[al-Shatti, al-Nuqul al-Shar’iyya fi al-Radd ‘ala al-Wahhabiyya, translated into English by al-Hajj Abu Ja’far al-Hanbali as The Divine Texts, pg. 57]
Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki on ibn Taymiyya’s book on hell being non-eternal:
[(al-Hut, Kamal Yusuf, ed.) al-Rasa’il al-Subkiyya fi radd ‘ala ibn Taymiya wa tilmidhihi ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, 196-208 (documents, letters, and passages by Taqi al-Din al-Subki and others edited and commentated upon by al-Hut). Beirut: ‘Alam al-Kutub]
Imam al-Dhahabi praised  Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki denouncing Ibn Taymiyya.
Ibn Taymiyya was challenged by someone who had more knowledge and piety that we, ie Hafidh Taqiyyou d-Din As-Subki, and Adh-Dhahabi greatly praised in two verses of Arabic poetry:
Minbar of the Umayyad be proud when the wise ocean science, taqiyy the climbs.
Whoever remembers the most of all the Shaykh of his era,
The most eloquent of them, who control most of the laws of science 'Ali.
This is 'Ali, Ibn' Abdi Kafi l-As-Subki, aptly known as the Al-Hafidh Taqiyyou d-Din As-Subki.

Shaykh al-Islam al-Subki was a contemporary of Ibn Taymiyya and he repeatedly denounced, for example, in his book Ad-l-Dourratou Moudiyyah, as the Hafidh Abu Sa'id Al-'Ala-i which also denounced Ibn Taymiyyah in his time.
Shaykh al-Islâm al-Subkî's Rejection of  Ibn Tayimyyahs Fatwa
This most notorious of all fatwas was refuted by his contemporary the hadîth Master and Shaykh al-Islâm Taqî al-Dîn al-Subkî in his landmark book Shifâ' al-Siqâm fî Ziyârati Khayri al-Anam ("The Healing of Sickness Concerning the Visitation to the Best of Creatures") , also titled Shann al-Ghâra `alâ man Ankara al-Safar li al-Ziyâra ("The Raid Against Him Who Denied the Lawfulness of Travel for the Purpose of Visitation").
Shaykh al-Islâm adduced the hadîth "Whoever visits my grave, my intercession will be guaranteed for him" as proof against Ibn Taymiyya's claim that "all the hadîths that concern the merit of visitation are weak or rather forged" and denounced Ibn Taymiyya's unprecedented fatwâ as a flagrant innovation. 
--
As-Subkiyy calls them idol worshipers:
As-Subkiyy in his Tabaqaatu-sħ-Sħaafiˆiyyatu-l-Kubraa says regarding scripture texts that appear to be referring to bodily attributes:
طبقات الشافعية الكبرى : إنما المصيبة الكبرى والداهية الدهياء الإمرار على الظاهر والاعتقاد أنه المراد وأنه لا يستحيل على الباري فذلك قول المجسمة عباد الوثن الذين في قلوبهم زيغ يحملهم الزيغ على اتباع المتشابه ابتغاء الفتنة عليهم لعائن الله تترى واحدة بعد أخرى ما أجرأهم على الكذب وأقل فهمهم للحقائق طبقات الشافعية الكبرى ج 5 ص 192
"the saying of the mujassimah (anthropomorphists), worshipers of the idol, makes them always focus on ambiguous aayahs."
-----
Al Imam As Safadi (d.764AH) (Direct student of ibn Tayimyyah)
As Safadi said in his explanation of the poem called “Laamiyyatul ‘Ajam”
:شرح لامية العجم
يقال إن الخليل بن أحمد اجتمع يوما هو وعبد الله بن المقفع فتحادثا إلى الغداة. فلما تفرقا قيل للخليل كيف رأيته قال رأيت رجلا علمه أكثر من عقله. وقيل لابن المقفع كيف رأيت الخليل قال رأيت رجلا عقله أكثر من علمه. وكذا كان فإن ابن المقفع قتله قلة عقله وكثرة كلامه شر قتلة وشر ميتة. قلت: وكذا كان الشيخ الإمام العلامة تقي الدين أحمد بن تيمية علمه متسع جدا إلى الغاية وعقله ناقص يورطه في المهالك ويوقعه في المضايق. أهـــ
“It’s been said that one day Al Khaleel bin Ahmad met Abdullah bin Al Muqaffa’, and they talked until the morning. When they dispersed, Al Khaleel was asked, what do you think about him? He answered, he’s a man whose knowledge exceeds his intellect. And Ibn Al Muqaffa’ was asked about Al Khaleel. He answered, “His intellect exceeds his knowledge.” And thus it was. For the lacking intellect and excessive speech of Ibn Al Muqaffa’ led him to a most terrible slaughter and horrible death. 
I’ll say (As Safadi) thus was the Shaikh, the Imam, the ‘Allaamah Taqiyyud Deen Ahmad bin Taymiyyah. His knowledge was extremely vast, yet his intellect was lacking. It would lead him to destruction and make him fall into tight spaces.”
Imam Salahud Deen As Safadi : the student of ibn Taymiyya, said in his biography of Ibn Taymiyyah in his book, “Al Waafi bil Wafayaat”:
:وقال الصفدي أثناء ترجمة ابن تيمية في الوافي بالوفيات
وحكى لي عنه الشيخ شمس الدين ابن قيم الجوزية قال: كان صغيرا عند بني المنجا فبحث معهم فادعوا شيئا أنكره فأحضروا النقل فلما وقف عليه ألقى المجلد من يده غيظا، فقالوا له: ما أنت إلا جريء ترمي المجلد من يدك وهو كتاب علم، فقال سريعا: أيما خير أنا أو موسى? فقالوا موسى، فقال: أيما خير هذا الكتاب أو ألواح الجوهر التي كان فيها العشر كلمات? قالوا: الألواح، فقال: إن موسى لما غضب ألقى الألواح من يده، أو كما قال. أهـــ
Ash Shaikh Shamsud Deen Ibnu Qayyim Al Jawziyyah told me about him saying: When he was young he was in the company of (the Hanbali family of Scholars) Banu Al Munajja, so he debated with them. So they claimed something he denied. Then they brought the quote. When he saw it, he threw the book down in anger. They said to him, “You sure are bold to throw down the book when it is a book of Religious Knowledge!” Whereupon he immediately said, “Who is better, me or Musa?” So they said, “Musa”. Then he said, “Which is better, this book or the Tablets containing the Ten Commandments?” They said, “The Tablets.” So Ibn Taymiyyah said, “Well, when Musa became angry he threw the Tablets down!” – or something to this effect
This quote can also be found translated into English on page 110 and 111 of “Al Albani Unveiled”, a book definitely worth owning.
---------------------
Note:
Imam Ibn Kathir (b.701AH - d. 774 AH) is a scholar of Ahl al-Sunna who was of the Shafi‘i school (according to the first volume of his main work, Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘Azim, 1.2)
Whatever length of time Ibn Kathir studied with Ibn Taymiya, he was in his twenties when the latter died, and his long and fruitful career extended over the next forty-six years
--
Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani  is reporting in ad-durar al-kamina chapter 1,page 65 a short discussion between Ibn Kathir and the son of Ibn Al-Qayyim Al-Jawziyya.
Ibn Kathir said to him: “You do not like me because I am an Ash' ari”.
The son of Ibn Al-Qayyim replied: “Even if you had hair from head to feet, people would not believe that you are Ash' ari as your sheikh is Ibn Taymiyyah!!”
--
Imam al-Subki  mentions in “Tabaqat ash-shafi' iyya” volume: 10 page, 398 that:
"A condition to teach at the house of hadith “Al-Ashrafiyya” was to be Ash'ari in 'Aqida and that apparently Imam Ibn Kathir occupied the post of professor at this house of Hadith in the month of Muharam in the year (772 AH).
--
He (ibn Tayimyyah) says, "Every word in the Book of Allah and His messenger is conditioned by that which clarifies its meaning, in none of which is there any figurative expression (majaz); rather, all of it is literal (haqiqa)" (ibid., 78).
Compare this with what Ibn Kathir says about the verse "Then He ‘was established’ (istawa) upon the Throne" (Qur’an 7:54), (istawa here rendered as "was established" not by way of definitive interpretation, but rather out of need to answer the question):
People have many positions on this matter, and this is not the place to present them at length. On this point, we follow the position of the early Muslims (salaf)—Malik, Awza‘i, Thawri, Layth ibn Sa‘d, Shafi‘i, Ahmad, Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, as well as others among the Imams of the Muslims, ancient and modern—namely, to let the verse pass as it has come, without saying how it is meant (bi la takyif), without any resemblance to created things (wa la tashbih), and without nullifying it (wa la ta‘til): the literal outward meaning (dhahir) that comes to the minds of anthropomorphists (al-mushabbihin) is negated of Allah [italics mine], for nothing created has any resemblance to Him: "There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him, and He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing"
 (Qur’an 42:11) (Ibn Kathir: Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘Azim, 2.220). More Info:Here
 --
Arabic passage of what Imam al Hafidh Ibn Kathir said:
قال الإمام ابن كثير في التفسير القران العظيم
: تفسير:{ثُمَّ ٱسْتَوَىٰ عَلَى ٱلْعَرْشِۚ} فللناس في هذا المقام مقالات كثيرة جداً ليس هذا موضع بسطها وإنما نسلك في هذا المقام مذهب السلف الصالح مالك والأوزاعي والثوري والليث بن سعد والشافعي وأحمد بن حنبل وإسحاق بن راهويه وغيرهم من أئمة المسلمين قديماً وحديثاً وهو إمرارها كما جاءت من غير تكييف ولا تشبيه ولا تعطيل والظاهر المتبادر إلى أذهان المشبهين منفي عن الله لا يشبهه شيء من خلقه و{لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِۦ شَىْءٌۖ وَهُوَ ٱلسَّمِيعُ ٱلْبَصِيرُ

Original Translation:
{Then He did Istawa (As it befits His Majesty) upon the Throne"} People have "TOO MANY POSITIONS ON THIS MATTER AND THIS IS NOT THE PLACE TO PRESENT THEM AT LENGTH" [فللناس في هذا المقام مقالات كثيرة جداً ليس هذا موضع بسطها] On this point, we follow the position of the righteous early Muslims (Salaf) i.e. Imam Malik, Imam al-Awza‘i, Imam Sufyan ath-Thawri, Imam Layth ibn Sa‘d, Imam ash-Shaf’i, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Imam Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, as well as others among the Imams of the Muslims, past and present—(namely) " TO LET IT PASS AS IT HAS COME WITHOUT SAYING HOW IT IS MEANT "[، وهو إمرارها كما جاءت من غير تكييف], without any resemblance (to created things), and without nullifying it (wa la ta‘til): "THE OUTWARD (LITERAL)" meaning that comes to the minds of anthropomorphists is negated of Allah[والظاهر المتبادر إلى أذهان المشبهين منفي عن الله] for nothing created has any resemblance to Him: {"There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him, and He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing" (Qur’an 42:11)} [Tafsir Ibn Kathir Under 7:54]
  
Now:  Wahhabi/Salafi Fabrication:
Please note at the blue highlighted parts above and the red highlighted parts below in Wahhabi/Salafi translation:
Fabrication: (and then He rose over (Istawa) the Throne) the people had several conflicting opinions over its meaning. However, we follow the way that our righteous predecessors took in this regard, such as Malik, Al-Awza`i, Ath-Thawri, Al-Layth bin Sa`d, Ash-Shafi`i, Ahmad, Ishaq bin Rahwayh and the rest of the scholars of Islam, in past and present times. Surely, we accept the apparent meaning of, Al-Istawa, without discussing its true essence, equating it (with the attributes of the creation), or altering or denying it (in any way or form). We also believe that the meaning that comes to those who equate Allah with the creation is to be rejected, for nothing is similar to Allah. [Taken from www.tafsir.com which has been down now so you can check in hard copy of Tafsir Ibn Kathir published by Dar us Salaam, Najd (Riyadh), Saudi Arabia] Here -Also read: Tafsir of Ayat-ul-Kursi  More Info: Here
---------------------
Ibn Rajab Al Hanbali (d. 795AH), the student of Ibn Taymiyyah’s student Ibn Qayyim Al Jawziyyah, acknowledges that Ibn Taymiyyah had unique rulings when he said in his update of Al Qaadi Abu Ya’la’s son’s book on biographies of the Hanbalis called Dhaylu Tabaqaatil Hanaabilah vol. 4 pg. 505 (507 on the PDF reader) Here 
ولكن كان هو وجماعة من خواص أصحابه ربما أنكروا من الشيخ كلامه في بعض الأئمة الأكابر الأعيان، أو في أهل التخلي والانقطاع ونحو ذلك.
وكان الشيخ رحمه اللّه لا يقصد بذلك إلا الخير، والانتصار للحق إن شاء الله تعالى.
وطوائف من أئمة أهل الحديث وحفاظهم وفقهائهم: كانوا يحبون الشيخ ويعظمونه، ولم يكونوا يحبون له التوغل مع أهل الكلام ولا الفلاسفة، كما هو طريق أئمة أهل الحديث المتقدمين، كالشافعي وأحمد وإسحاق وأبي عبيد ونحوهم، وكذلك كثير هن العلماء من الفقهاء والمحدثين والصالحين كرهوا له التفرد ببعض شذوذ المسائل التي أنكرها السلف على من شذ بها، حتى إن بعض قضاة العدل من أصحابنا منعه من الإفتاء ببعض ذلك. أهـــ
“However he (‘Imaad Ad Deen Al Waasiti) and a group of Ibn Taymiyyah’s closest companions disapproved of the Shaikh’s statements about some of the eminent and high-standing Imams, or the likes of those people who would disconnect themselves from the world to be alone with their Lord (the Sufis). And the Shaikh may Allah have mercy on him did not intend anything by that but good, and defense of the truth Inshaa Allahu ta’aala. And various circles of the people of Hadeeth; including Imams, Huffaadh (memorizers of more than 100,000 hadeeths) and Fuqahaa (Jurists) used to love the Shaikh (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah) and hold him in high regard. But they did not like for him to go into in-depth issues with the theologians and philosophers – as was the methodology of the Imams of Ahlul Hadeeth like Ash Shaafi’ee, Ahmad, Ishaaq, Abu ‘Ubaid and others like them. Additionally, many ‘Ulamaa, Fuqahaa, Muhadditheen, and Saaliheen (Righteous people) disliked that he go on his own with some of his unique rulings that the Salaf disapproved of whoever went alone with. Until one of the just judges from our colleages prevented him from making those fatawas.”
Imam al-Hafidh ibn Rajab al-Hanbali  The student of ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (who in turn was the student of ibn Taymiyya)
عبد الرحمن بن أحمد بن رجب البغدادي ثم الدمشقي الحنبلي، الحافظ زين الدين بن رجبوُلد ببغداد سنة ستٍ وثلاثين وسبعمائة، وسمع بمصر من الميدومي وبالقاهرة من ابن الملوك وبدمشق من ابن الخباز وجمع جمٍّ، ورافق شيخنا زين الدين العراقي في السماع كثيرًا، ومهر في فنون الحديث أَسماءً ورجالًا وعِللًا وطرقا واطلاعًا على معانيه.
صنَّف “شرح الترمذي” فأَجاد فيه في نحو عشرين مجلدة، وشرح قطعة كبيرة من “البخاري” وشرح “الأَربعين للنووي” في مجلدة، وعمل “وظائف الأَيام” سمَّاه “اللطائف” وعمل “طبقات الحنابلة” ذيلًا على “طبقات أبي يعلى”.
وكان صاحبَ عبادَةٍ وتهجد، ونُقِم عليه إِفتاؤه بمقالات ابن تيمية ثم أَظهر الرجوع عن ذلك فنافره التيميون فلم يكن مع هؤلاءِ ولا مع هؤلاءِ، وكان قد ترك الإِفتاءَ بآخره.
قال ابن حجي: “أَتْقَنَ الفنَّ وصار أَعرف أَهل عصره بالعلل وتتبُّع الطرق، وكان لا يخالط أَحدًا ولا يتردد إِلى أَحد”. مات في رمضان رحمه اللّٰه، [و]تخرج به غالب أَصحابنا الحنابلة بدمشق.
ابن حجر العسقلاني في كتابه “إنباء الغمر بأنباء العمر، المجلس الأعلى للشئون الإسلامية ١٩٩٨:١٩٦٩، الجزء الاول، ص٤٦٠-٤٦١

Imam al-Hafidh ibn Rajab al-Hanbali stopped issuing fatawa in accordance to the views of ibn Taymiyya and was loathed by the Taymiyyun because of it:
al-Hafidh Zayn al-Din ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Ahmad ibn Rajab al-Hanbali al-Baghdadi – then al-Dimashqi. The son of Rajab, born in Baghdad in the year 736 (AH).
In Egypt he heard from al-Maydumi, in Cairo from ibn al-Muluk, in Damascus from ibn al-Khubbaz, as well as the addition of numerous others. He kept the company of our Shaykh, Zayn al-Din al-‘Iraqi in hearing (from him) a great deal. He was proficient in the disciplines of hadith – the names (asma’), the narrators (rijal), hidden defects (‘ilal), the different routes/chains (turuq), and insight in explaining (itla’) their meanings.
He authored “Sharh al-Tirmidhi” in around twenty volumes, regarding which he achieved excellent results, (he also authored) a commentary of a major portion of (Sahih) “al-Bukhari”, as well as a commentary of “al-Arba’in li al-Nawawi” (Imam al-Nawawi’s collection of fourty ahadith) in one volume. He worked on “Wadha’if al-Ayyam” (the recommended actions of each specific day) which he named “al-Lata’if”, and also worked on “Tabaqat al-Hanabila” (the ranks of the Hanbali scholars) as a follow up of “Tabaqat Abi Ya’la”.
He was a man devoted to worship and tahajjud. He was resented because of his deliverance of religious legal edicts (ifta’) based on the sayings of ibn Taymiyya. He then proclaimed retraction from that and the Taymiyyun loathed him, so he was neither (aligned) with this group, not that group. In the end, he abandoned issuing religious legal edicts (ifta’).
Ibn Hajji said: “He mastered the science (of hadith and it’s branches) and became the most recognised of the people of his time in the field of hidden defects (‘ilal) and the pursuit of the different chains of transmission (tatabbu’ al-turuq). He would not intermingle with anyone and would also rarely visit anyone.”
He passed away during the month of Ramadhan, may Allah have mercy upon him. Most of our Hanbali companions were trained/educated by him in Damascus.
[ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Inba al-Ghumr bi Anba al-‘Umr, ed. al-Majlis al-A’la li al-Shu’un al-Islamiyya 1969:1998, pt. 1, pg. 460-461]
=========
800AH
=========
Imam al-Iraqi (d.826AH)
Muhaddith Waliyyud-Din Abu Zur’ah Ahmad Ibn ‘Abdir-Rahim al-‘Iraqiyy
In his book ‘Tarh at-Tathrib fi Sharh at-Taqrib’ when explaining the saying of the Prophet sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam:> in reference to the Book positioned above the Throne which has the following words: ‘Inna Rahmati sabaqat Ghadabi’, which means that the matters Allah approves of, far exceed in number those He does not, said: “Allah is clear from the acts of sitting, occupying space and directionality. Therefore, the word “inda” in the aforementioned context does not infer place, rather, it infers honourable status. Consequently, the true meaning of the Prophet’s saying is that this book is positioned in a place Allah awarded high status and honour”.
---
Imam Taqi al-Din al-Hisni al-Shafi’i (d.829AH) mentions some points regarding Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (d.795AH) and some of his negative views concerning ibn Taymiyya:
al-Shaykh Zayn al-Din ibn Rajab al-Hanbali was from among those who firmly believed in ibn Taymiyya’s kufr (disbelief), and had (authored) refutations against him. He would say at the top of his voice during some gatherings:
“al-Subki is excused – meaning in regards to his takfir“.
[al-Hisni, Daf’ Shubah man Shabbaha wa Tamarrad, ed. Dar al-Mustafa, pg. 535]
وكان الشيخ زين الدين بن رجب الحنبلي ممن يعتقد كفر ابن تيمية وله عليه الرد. وكان يقول بأعلى صوته في بعض المجالس: معذور (173/أ) السبكييعني في تكفيره ([1]).
---
([1])
في ب: معذور السبكي في تكفيره
دفع شبه من شبه وتمرد، دار المصطفى، ص. ٥٣٥
Imam Taqi al-Din al-Hisni  on ibn Taymiyya’s anti-Ash’ari followers being a fringe minority group who had to keep their beliefs hidden due to fear of facing severe punishment:
“Discretionary punishment and floggings and imprisonment and beheadings have not ceased to be their lot, despite their concealing what they believe and their utmost secrecy in not expressing their foul beliefs except in hidden places after taking care, and locking the doors, and speaking softly, saying that the walls have ears.”
[Taqi al-Din al-Hisni, Daf’ Shubah man Shabbaha wa Tamarrada, 236-7]
Daf Shubah min Shabah, page 123:
وكان الشيخ زين الدين ابن رجب الحنبلي ممن يعتقد كفر ابن تيمية
“Sheikh Zainuddin ibn Rajab al-Hanbali was amongst those that believed that Ibn Taimiyah is a kafir”
On page 90 we read:
وكان الإمام العلامة شيخ الإسلام في زمانه أبو الحسن علي بن إسماعيل القونوي يصرح بأنه من الجهلة بحيث لا يعقل ما يقول. ويخبر أنه أخذ مسألة التفرقة عن شيخه الذي تلقاها عن أفراخ السامرة واليهود الذين أظهروا التشرف بالإسلام.
“The Imam, the Allamah Sheikh al-Islam of his time Abu al-Hassan Ali bin Ismail al-Qunuwi declared that he was ignorant and didn’t realize what he said. He (Sheikh Qunuwi) stated that he (Ibn Taimiyah) took the belief of 'Tafriqa' from his Sheikh who took it from Samirites and Jews, those who pretend to be Muslims.”
On page 125 we read:
قاله بعض الأئمة عنه من أنه زنديق مطلق
“Some scholars deemed him to be an absolute atheist (Zindeeq)”
On page 189 we read:
فنسأل الله تعالى العافية مما يرتكبه هذا الزائغ الفاجر الكذاب.
“We ask Allah to preserve us of what this abhorrent, immoral, liar performs.”
We also read:
ولقد أسفرت هذه القضية عن زندقته بتجرئه على الإفك على العلماء وعلى أنه لا يعتقد حرمة الكذب
“The result of the case was the atheism of him (Ibn Taimiyah) because he dares to attribute lies to the scholars and did not ascribe to any prohibition on telling lies.”
---------------------------------------------
Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani (d.852AH) 


Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, while explaining one of the versions of the hadith of the Prophet Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, sometimes referred to as hadith an-Nuzul (and which would give the impression that God descends on Earth every night, in his book Fath al-Bari, volume 3, page 23 (you would find pages 22 and 24 scanned (Hereonly so that you can read the full context if needed, but the passage translated below is contained in page 23):
“As for his saying ‘Yanzilu Rabbuna ‘ila s-Samaa’i d-Dunya“, those who confirm a direction to Allah, have relied on this text and said that it is the direction of ‘above’ (al-uluww), and this has been refuted by the scholars (al-jumhur), because talking like that equals limiting Allaah, who is exempted from that.  Thereafter people have diverged about the meaning of an-nuzul: some took it according to its literal meaning and verily, these are the anthropomorphists (al-mushabbihah) , and Allaah is absolutely free (exempted) from what they say. Others have resorted to deny the truthfulness of all the hadiths which have been narrated in that regard: those are the Khawaarij and the Mu’tazilah, and these are really astonishing because on the one hand they interpret what has reached [us] in the Qur’an which is similar to this, and on the other hand they deny what has come from hadith, either due to ignorance, or to stubbornness. Others have read those texts as they were revealed, believing in them in general, while freeing Allaah from the manner [kayfiyyah] of the anthropomorphists, and these are the majority of the Salaf.   [On top of that], al-Bayhaqi and others have narrated from the four imams, from the two Sufyan, the two Hammad, al-Awza’i, from al-Layth and others, that they DID interpret this text according to what befits Allaah, and what is in use in the language of the Arabs. Some other ones went so far in their interpretation that it ended up being a  type of distortion. Others [still] made a difference between what is a ‘close’ interpretation’, i.e. in use in the language of the Arabs, and what would be a ‘far-fetched’ one, and as a result they have interpreted in some cases and  made tafweed [i.e. leaving the meaning to Allaah]  in some cases, and this has been narrated from imam Malik. It has been confirmed by Ibn Daqiq al-Id that al-Bayhaqi said that the safest [of all these methods] is to believe in those texts without a how (bila kayf) and to not speak about what is intended.”
--
Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani , in volume 13, page 414, of his book Fath l-Bari, (see scan: Here
while explaining a hadith relating the Mi’raj (ascension to the skies) of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said:
 “Al-Khattabi said that in this version there is another term narrated by Sharik which makes it different from the other [versions] and which has not been narrated by anyone else. It is [where it is said] : “fi’lan bihi, i.e. from Jibril to Allaah (al-Jabbaar) and  [Sharik] said : “wa huwa makaanuhu” [i.e. literally it would mean ‘and it is his place’], and [later on] the Prophet said  “O My Lord alleviate for us [the number of prayers]. He [i.e. al-Khattabi] said : a place cannot be attributed to Allaah, therefore here it is the place of the Prophet which is meant, i.e. that he returned where he was standing before leaving.’ 
--
In his book Fath al-Bari, Amir al-Mu’minin fi l-hadith (literally the Commander of the believers as far as hadith is concerned), al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar said, in volume 13 page 358 (page 328: scan), while explaining a version of the hadith which means that there is a book above the Throne with an inscription:
“As for his saying ” ‘indahu“, Ibn Battal said that the term “ ‘inda” in the language applies to places, when Allah is free from being incarnated in a place, because being incarnated implies having an end and having been created, and having been created is not suitable for Allah. Therefore, it has been said that the meaning [of this hadith] is that His knowledge has preceded the confirmation of who will [in the end] act in obedience to Allah, and of who will be punished for having committed sins, and this [interpretation] is reinforced  by the hadith which comes next, and which says “ana ‘inda dhann ‘indi“, and it is not at all related to a place.
--
In this extract he explains the hadith in which there is a statement which could potentially be misunderstood.  It is mentioned in that hadith that a book is “‘indahu” which, if taken literally, would mean that this book is “next to God”, wa l-iyaadhu billaah. Ibn Hajar quotes other Muslim scholars to establish the different meanings of ‘‘inda‘  to explain that here ”indahu’ does not refer to the place at all, and he takes the opportunity to repeat the Muslims’ belief that Allah  exists without a place.  (More Info: Here)
--
Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibiting of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):
Al-Kirmani (d. 786AH) has said: On this issue there has been much discussion in our Syrian lands, and many treatises have been written by both parties. I say: He is referring to Shaykh Taqi al-Din al-Subki and others’ responses to Shaykh Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiyya… and the crux of the matter is that they have pointed out that his position implies that it is prohibited to travel to visit the tomb of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam)… This is one of the ugliest positions that has been reported of ibn Taymiyya. One of the things he has adduced to deny the claim that there is a consensus on the matter is the report that (Imam) Malik disliked people saying: I have visited the tomb of the Prophet. The discerning scholars of the (Maliki) school have replied that he disliked the phrase out of politeness, and not the visiting itself, for it is one of the best actions and the noblest of pious deeds with which one draws near to Allah the Majestic, and it’s legitimacy is a matter of consensus without any doubt, and Allah is the One who leads to truth.” [ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari (Cairo: Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi, 1959), 3:308]
Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani has recorded in Lisan al-Mizan (6/319, Hyderabad edn.):
وكم من مبالغة لتوهين كلام الرافضي ادته أحيانا إلى تنقيص علي رضى الله عنه
“How much did he (Ibn Taymiyya) exaggerate in order to weaken the words of the Rafidi (al-Hilli), which at times led him to diminish Ali (radiallahu ‘anh).”[ Read more Here Here]
--
Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Al-Durar al-Kamina ,Volume 1 page 46:
وعاد القاضي الشافعي إلى ولايته ونودي بدمشق من اعتقد عقيدة ابن تيمية حل دمه
“The Shafiyye judge returned back to his position and declared in Damascus that whoever ascribed to Ibn Taimiyah’s beliefs should have his blood shed”
Al-Durar al-Kamina, Volume 1 page 49:
Ibn Tayimiyyah was released in Shaam. The people had different views of him. Some of them deemed him as one that considered the likeness of Allah to His creature, due to what he said in
'Aqeeda al-Hamawiya' and 'Wasitiya' and other (books), such as the hand, foot, leg and face are real attributes of Allah, and He is sitting on the throne by Himself. Then it was said to him (Ibn Taimiyah) that the necessities of these beliefs constitute ascribing to the limitation and partition (of Allah), he (Ibn Taimiyah) replied: 'I don’t believe that limitation and partition is an attribute of a body.'
Others deemed him as one that concealed unbelief due to his saying that the Prophet is not to be sought for help (laa yustaghaathu bihi) and the fact that this amounted to diminishing and impeding the establishing of the greatness of the Prophet. Amongst the most rigid people against him was al-Noor al-Bakri, and he established a council due to that. Some of the members said: 'We shall pardon him (Ibn Taimiya)'. He (al-Bakri) replied: 'There is no meaning in that statement. If he was diminishing he must be killed. If he wasn't diminishing he will not be pardoned'.
Others considered him a hypocrite because of what he said about
Ali:... that he had been forsaken (makhdhoolan) everywhere he went, had repeatedly tried to acquire the Caliphate and never attained it, fought out of lust for power rather than religion, and said that "he loved authority while Uthman loved money." He would say that Abu Bakr had declared Islam in his old age, fully aware of what he said, while Ali had declared Islam as a boy, and that a boy's Islam is not considered sound upon his mere words.
And due to his statement about the story of his proposing to the daughter of Abu Jahl and what he attributed the praises to...Also the story of Abi al-Aas bin al-Rabee and what can be concluded from its concept. 

In totality, he said derogatory things such as these, and it was said against him that he was a hypocrite, in view of the Prophet's saying (to Ali): "Only a hypocrite would show you hatred."
Others deemed him a power seeker due to his praising ibn Tumart and constant mention of him

--
Hafidh Abu Sa‘id Al-‘Ala'i, who is the scholarof the scholars of Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar Al-‘Asqalani, said that Ibn Taymiyah said of Allah, "He has the same volume as the Arsh, neither smaller nor larger."
(Dhakha'ir Al-Qasr, pp. 32-33)
--
Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani has reported an incident in al-Durar al-Kamīna (vol. 1, pp. 164): where again Ibn Taymiyyah descended the steps of the Minbar in order to illustrate his understanding of how Allah descends (nuzūl) as early as the year 705H/1305CE (some 21 years before Ibn Battuta’s account).
Hāfidh Ibn Ĥajar’s source for this incident was one of Ibn Taymiyyah’s own disciples by the name: Sulaymân Najm al-Dīn al-Tufi al-Ĥanbalī (d. 716/1316).
Note: Also Taqī al-Dīn mentioned it! who lived before the Ĥāfidh Ibn Ĥajar al-Asqalânī.
--
Ibn Taymiyya's conception of Allah's bodily descent is also stated in his own writings, as shown from the following excerpt from his al-Ta'sis fi al-radd `ala asas al-taqdis, written as a refutation of Imam al-Razi who was a fierce enemy of the Karramiyya and other Anthropomorphists:
The Creator, Glorified and Exalted is He, is above the world and His being above is literal, not in the sense of dignity or rank. It may be said of the precedence of a certain object over another that it is with respect to dignity or rank, or that it is with respect to location. For example, respectively: the precedence of the learned over the ignorant and the precedence of the imam over the one praying behind him. Allah’s precedence over the world is not like that, rather, it is a literal precedence (i.e. in time). Similarly the elevation above the world could be said to be with respect to dignity or rank, as for example when it said that the learned is above the ignorant. But Allah’s elevation over the world is not like that, rather He is elevated over it literally (i.e. in space). And this is the known elevation and the known precedence [al-Ta’sis al-radd `ala asas al-Taqdis, vol. 1, pp. 111]
--
Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani In his book Fath al-Bari’ said: “Not because it is impossible for the upward and downward directions to apply to Allah does it entail that He cannot be attributed with “Al-‘Uluww” (Aboveness in a metaphorical sense). This is so because attributing Him with “Al-‘Uluww” (Aboveness) is from the point of status, which is impossibly applicable in a physical sense when in reference to Allah. Hence, it has been related that among the names of Allah are Al-‘Ali, Al-‘Aliyy, and Al-Muta’ali”.
--
Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani
Rejects the innovated saying that Allah is above the throne ‘bi dhatihi’
Regarding the hadith that says:  “God is between you and your qibla”  (إِنَّ رَبَّهُ بَيْنَهُ وَبَيْنَ الْقِبْلَةِ)
Ibn Hajar says that in this is a refutation on those who claim that God is upon the throne bi dhatihi (with His Essence) (فِيهِ الرَّدّ عَلَى مَنْ زَعَمَ أَنَّهُ عَلَى الْعَرْش بِذَاتِهِ). source: Here
--
Al-Asqalaani said they are not Muslims:
قال حذاق المتكلمين ما عرف الله من شبهه بخلقه أو أضاف إليه اليد أو أضاف إليه الولد فمعبودهم الذي عبدوه ليس هو الله وإن سموه به (فتح الباري, ابن حجر العسقلاني, دار المعرفةبيروت ، 1379, 3 / 359)
The brilliant kalaam scholars said: "The one that likened Aļļaah to His creation, or ascribed a hand to Him (i.e. in the sense of a part or limb) or a child; what he worships is not Aļļaah, even if he called it Aļļaah.

------
Imam Ibn Nasir al-Din Al-Dimashqi (d.846AH) The Wahhabi/Salafis love to quote Al-Dimashqi and his book al-Radd al-Wafir in defence of their Imam, ibn Taymiyya.
However, the following is a clear cut example of how many of those who defended him weren’t truly aware of all the deviant positions held by him on various issues. Imam ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi falls into this category as is evident from the following, where he declares anyone who rejects the Hadiths in relation to the reward and virtue of visiting the grave of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) a deviant. It is well known that ibn Taymiyya is the foremost proponent of the view that travelling out to visit the blessed grave of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) is a reprehensible innovation – a view which he based on the rejection of the aforementioned narrations. Imam ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi mentions:
“Visiting the grave of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) is a Sunnah of the Muslims, it is unanimously accepted as an act of reward and it is an act of virtue that is encouraged. The Hadiths on this topic have been accepted and practised upon, even though a few of these Hadiths have weakness. Only a deviant will reject them totally.”
(Jami’ al-Athar, vol.8 pg.141)
In addition, it is worth noting that Imam ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi has written extensively on this and has approved several Hadiths on this issue in the book of his which has been quoted from above (Jami’ a-Athar) – see vol.8 pgs. 129-141.
=========
900AH
=========
Imam al-Sakhawi (d. 902AH) on ibn Taymiyya:
وكذا ممن حصل من بعض الناس منهم نفره وتحامى عن الانتفاع بعلمهم مع جلالتهم علماً وورعاً وزهداً لإطلاق لسانهم وعدم مداراتهم بحيث يتكلمون ويجرحون بما فيه مبالغة كابن حزم وابن تيمية
“There are also those scholars of great learning, austerity, and asceticism whom people avoided and whose knowledge they were careful not to utilise, because of their loose tongue and lack of tact, which caused them to talk and criticise excessively. Such men were ibn Hazm and ibn Taymiyya.” [al-Sakhawi, I’lan bi al-Tawbikh (pg. 163), (English translation in ‘A history of Muslim Historiography‘, pg. 284, by F. Rosenthal)]
---
Imam Jamal al-Din Yusuf ibn ‘Abd al-Hadi ibn al-Mibrad al-Hanbali (d.909AH) mentions Imam Zayn al-Din ibn Rajab al-Hanbali’s (d.795AH) book in refutation of three talaqs (in a single sitting) being equal to one – which was a view ibn Taymiyya held and was stubborn upon:
“…ibn Rajab said in the book Mushkil al-Ahadith al-Warida fi ann al-Talaq al-Thalath Wahida (The problematic nature of the narrations in regards to three talaqs being equivalent to one)…”
[ibn al-Mibrad al-Hanbali, al-Sayr al-Hath ila ‘Ilm al-Talaq al-Thalath, ed. Dar al-Basha’ir al-Islamiyya 1997, pg. 27]
Note: Imam ibn al-Mibrad al-Hanbali then goes on to quote multiple passages from the above-mentioned book of Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali. This shows that although this book of Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali may not have survived to this day, it was known and available to those Imams who came just after his time.
قال ابن رجب في كتابمشكل الأحاديث الواردة في أن الطلاق الثلاث واحدة
- السير الحاث الى علم الطلاق الثلاث للإمام جمال الدين يوسف ابن عبد الهادي ابن المبرد الحنبلي
دار البشائر الإسلامية، ١٩٩٧
ص. ٢٧
-----------------------------------------------------
Shaykh al-Islam Imam Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (d.911 AH) on ibn Taymiyya:
ibn Taymiyya was arrogant. He was self-conceited. It was his habit to represent himself as superior to everybody, to slight the person whom he talked to, and to make fun of great Muslims” [al-Suyuti, Kam’ al-Mu’arid]
--
Shaykh al-Islam Imam Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti In his book ‘Al-‘Iklil fis-tinbat at-Tanzil’ , said: “The Ayah: {ليس كمثله شيء} holds within it a refutation to the creed of the Mushabbihah (those who liken Allah to the creation) and a confirmation that He (Allah) is not a mass, a body, a colour, a taste, and that He does not occupy a space or conform to time”.
---
Imam Jalal al-Din al-Dawani (d. 918AH) on ibn Taymiyya the Corporealist
Changing Views of ibn Taymiyya by Khaled el-Rouayheb:
In the Sharh al-‘Aqa’id al-‘Adudiyya of Jalal al-Din al-Dawani it is stated that the corporealists are of two kinds. The first are blatantly corporealist and should be regarded as unbelievers. The latter, who are wayward but not unbelievers, “hide behind the caveat bi-la kayfa“, saying that Allah had a body “unlike any other body (la ka-al-ajsam), and position unlike any position, and a relation to this spatial position that was unlike any other relation to a spatial position.” He apparently classified Ibn Taymiyya as belonging to the latter group:
Most of the corporealists are the literalists who follow the literal meaning of the Book and Sunna, and most of them are people of Hadith. Ibn Taymiyya Abu al-Abbas Ahmad and his followers strongly incline to affirm that He is in a direction, and go to extremes in attacking those who deny this. I have seen in one of his books that according to reason there is no difference to saying “He does not exist” and saying “I looked for Him everywhere and I could not find Him”, and he accused those who disagreed on this point of denying the divine attributes (ta’til). And this despite his proficiency in the rational and traditional sciences, as can be seen by anyone who reads his works.
[Jalal al-Din al-Dawani, Sharh al-‘Aqa’id al-‘Adudiyya (Islanbul: ‘Arif Effendi, 1316AH), 43.]
---------------------------------------
Imam Ahmad al-Qastallani (d. 923AH) expressing his outrage on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibition of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):
“The Shaykh Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiyya has abominable and odd statements on this issue to the effect that travelling to visit the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) is prohibited and is not a pious deed but the contrary. Shaykh Taqi al-Din al-Subki has replied to him in Shifa al-Saqam and has gratified the hearts of the believers.” [Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Baqi al-Zurqani, Sharh al-Mawahib al-Laduniyya (Cairo 1291AH), 8:343]
--
Shaykh Abul-‘Abbas Shihabud-Din Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-Qastalaniyy al-Misri (d. 923 AH) In his book ‘Irshad as-Sari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhariyy’,  said: “The Self of Allah is clear from the notions of place and direction”.
------------------------------------------------------
Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami (d. 974AH) on ibn Taymiyya’s view of impermissibility on travelling to visit the grave of the prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):
“If you say: How can you relate that there is a consensus on the permissible and commendable status of visiting and travelling to it (the Prophet’s grave [sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam]) when ibn Taymiyya among the later Hanbalis deems all of this inappropriate?
I say: Who is ibn Taymiyya so that one takes his words into consideration or relies on them in any religious matter? Is he anything but – in the words of the leading scholars who have followed his rotten statements and unsalable arguments… – a servant whom Allah has forsaken and led astray and clothed in the garments of ignominy… The Shaykh al-Islam, the scholar of the world, concerning whose status, ijtihad, rectitude and prominence there is a consensus, Taqi al-Din al-Subki – may Allah sanctify his soul and cast light on his grave – has dedicated himself to answering him in a separate work (shifa al-saqam fi ziyarat khayr al-anam) in which he has done a great service and shown with dazzling arguments the correct path.”
[ibn Hajar al-Haytami, al-Jawhar al-Munazzam fi Ziyarat al-Qabr al-Sharif al-Nabawi al-Mukarram, M. Zaynhum ed. (Cairo: Maktabat Madbuli, 2000), 29-30.]
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami has recorded in a formal legal opinion in his al-Fatawa al-Hadithiyya (1/183-84) the following:
ابْن تَيْمِية عبد خذله الله وأضلَّه وأعماه وأصمه وأذلَّه، وَبِذَلِك صرح الْأَئِمَّة الَّذين بينوا فَسَاد أَحْوَاله وَكذب أَقْوَاله، وَمن أَرَادَ ذَلِك فَعَلَيهِ بمطالعة كَلَام الإِمَام الْمُجْتَهد الْمُتَّفق على إِمَامَته وجلالته وبلوغه مرتبَة الِاجْتِهَاد أبي الْحسن السُّبْكِيّ وَولده التَّاج وَالشَّيْخ الإِمَام الْعِزّ بن جمَاعَة وَأهل عصرهم، وَغَيرهم من الشَّافِعِيَّة والمالكية وَالْحَنَفِيَّة، وَلم يقصر اعتراضه على متأخري الصُّوفِيَّة بل اعْترض على مثل عمر بن الْخطاب وَعلي بن أبي طَالب رَضِي الله عَنْهُمَا كَمَا يَأْتِي. وَالْحَاصِل أنْ لَا يُقَام لكَلَامه وزن بل يَرْمِي فِي كلّ وَعْر وحَزَن، ويعتقد فِيهِ أَنه مُبْتَدع ضالّ ومُضِّلّ جَاهِل غال عَامله الله بعدله، وأجازنا من مثل طَرِيقَته وعقيدته وَفعله آمين
“Ibn Taymiyya was a servant whom Allah abandoned, misguided, blinded, deafened, and humiliated. This has been frankly expressed by the Imams who explained the corruptness of how he was, and the mendacity of what he said. Whoever wants to check this should read the words of the Mujtahid Imam, whose Imamate, greatness, and having reached the rank of Ijtihad are universally acknowledged, Abul Hasan (Taqi al-Din) al-Subki; together with his son Taj (al-Din as-Subki), the Shaykh and Imam al-‘Izz Ibn Jama’a, the scholars of their time, and other Shafi’i, Maliki and Hanafi scholars. Nor did he confine his criticism to later Sufi’s; but censured the likes of Umar ibn al-Khattab and Ali (may Allah be pleased with them), the outcome of which is that his words are devoid of any worth or consideration, to be scattered across the wilds and wastelands, while the man himself is considered an initiator of bid’ah (reprehensible innovations), misled, misleading, ignorant and spiteful. May Allah give him what he deserves, may Allah preserve us from the likes of his way and his beliefs and works, Ameen.”
Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami , Al-Fatawa al-Hadithya, page 114:
ابن تيمية عبد خذله الله وأضله وأعماه وأصمه وأذله ، وبذلك صرح الأئمة الذين بينوا فساد أحواله وكذب أقواله.
“Ibn Taimiyah, Allah (swt) let him down, misguided him, made him blind, deaf and disgraced him, and by that the Imams both declared and exposed his false beliefs and lies.”
---
Due to being one of ibn Taymiyya’s major critics, some modern-day followers of ibn Taymiyya do not hold much love for Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami. They would like to believe that the Imam was not of great standing or knowledge, and that his beliefs were ‘deviant’. However, as a harsh reality check, Imam ‘Uthman ibn Sanad al-Basri (d. 1242AH) had the following to say in praise of Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami:
“He who looks at his works will be dazzled and say: Praise Allah who has allowed the minds of man to reach it’s subtle depths! He is the Shafi’i who mediated between the finer points of law and the subtleties of the discipline of tradition. He did not treat discipline without reaching depths that his contemporaries never hoped to reach. No one disputed with him without finding him an abounding sea of knowledge. He was firm in matters of religion while being high minded, composed and intelligent… Those who came after him have depended on what he has chosen, and thus his works are the standard reference for fatawa, and no Shafi’i will give a fatwa that is not in accordance with what he has considered. The prominent scholars esteem his works, and give it the foremost rating.”[Basri, Matali’ al-Su’ud, 113]
Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami  on ibn Taymiyya in his own time and the reality of his followers:
“The scholars of his age rose against him (ibn Taymiyya) and impelled the Sultan to either kill or imprison him, so he imprisoned him until he died and his innovations died out and his darkness disappeared. Then he was supported by followers whose heads Allah has not raised, nor has He granted them power or strength; rather they were afflicted with humiliation and remained under Allah’s wrath, due to their disobedience and their beliefs.”
[ibn Hajar al-Haytami, al-Jawhar al-Munazzam, 31]
Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami  on ibn Taymiyya’s Suggestion that the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) Let Down Part of his Turban to Mark the Spot Between his Shoulders that Allah Touched with His ‘Hand’
Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami  on ibn Taymiyya’s suggestion (via ibn Qayyim) that the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) had let down part of his turban to mark the spot between his shoulders that Allah had touched with His ‘hand':
“This is among their repulsive opinions and their waywardness, since it is based on their claim, which they argued for at length and castigated Sunnis for rejecting, that Allah is in a direction and is a body, may He be exalted above what the unjust and stubborn say! They have in this regard abominations and heresies to which the ear cannot listen, and one cannot but adjudge them a falsity, a slander and a lie. May Allah shame them and those who say that. The Imam Ahmad (ibn Hanbal) and the distinguished among his school are innocent of this ugly stain. How could it be otherwise, and it is unbelief according to many?”
[ibn Hajar al-Haytami, Ashraf al-Wasa-il ila Fahm al-Shama-il, Ahmad al-Mazidi ed. (Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, Beirut, 1998), 172-173]
Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami  on ibn Taymiyya and his student ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya and those who follow them: “Make sure you do not listen to what is in the books of ibn Taymiyya and his student ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya and other such people who have taken their own whim as their God, and who have been led astray by Allah, and whose hearts and ears have been sealed, and whose eyes have been covered by Him. And who will help them if not Allah? How these heretics (mulhidun) have crossed the lines and broken the fences of the Shari’a and the Haqiqa, thinking that they are on the right path, and they are not! Rather they are in the worst of errors, the foulest of qualities, the most odious loss, and the utmost falsity. May Allah forsake the one who follows them, and purify the earth of their likes.” [ibn Hajar al-Haytami, al-fatawa al-Hadithiyya, 110-113]
===========
1,000AH
===========
Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari al-Harawi al-Hanafi (d. 1014AH) on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibition of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):
“Amongst the Hanbalis, ibn Taymiyya has gone to an extreme by prohibiting travelling to visit the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), just as others have gone to the opposite extreme in saying: the fact that the visiting is a pious deed is known with certainty and he who denies this is an unbeliever. Perhaps the second position is closer to the truth, for to prohibit something that scholars by consensus deem commendable is unbelief, since is it worse than prohibiting what is (merely) permissible, in regards to which there is agreement (i.e. there is agreement that the prohibition of what is permissible by consensus is unbelief).” [Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari al-Harawi, Sharh al-Shifa (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 2001), 2:152]

From the above-mentioned words of Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari al-Harawi al-Hanafi, it seems he has retracted his statements in praise of ibn Taymiyya, as Jarh Mufassar (Specified Criticism) takes precedence over General Tawthiq/Ta’dil (Praise).
Anyone who wishes to object to the above should know that in his sharh (commentary) on the Shifa of al-Qadhi ‘Iyadh he mentioned his al-Mirqat Sharh al-Mishkat (al-Masabih) in 2 places – 1/24 and 1/547. 
Also, in the same Sharh al-Shifa, he referred to his sharh (commentary) on Shama-il al-Tirmidhi known as Jam’ al-Wasa-il (1/324, 343 and 2/366). This means that his Sharh al-Shifa is later than his sharh (commentary) on Mishkat al-Masabih and his sharh (commentary) on Shama-il al-Tirmidhi, and thus what he mentioned in it, is his last stance on ibn Taymiyya, as it overrides what he thought about him in the earlier two works named, in which he had praiseworthy remarks for ibn Taymiyya.
Imam Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari It is the scholar who commented al-Fiqh al-Akbar by Abu Hanifah, he is a pillar of knowledge, a very famous Hanafi scholar. He used to live in Makkah and this is  where he taught and where he died (he was born in what is  today known as Afghanistan).
In his commentary entitled  Mirqat al-Mafatih, Sharh Mishkat al-Masaabih vol.3 p.300, he says:
A whole group of them [i.e.of the Salaf] as well as of the Khalaf scholars [i.e. the era that followed that of the Salaf, until now], said:
The one who believes in a direction [for Allah] is a blasphemer (kafir), as has been clearly narrated by al-Iraqi when he said “This is the saying of Abu Hanifah, Malik, Ash-Shafii, al-‘Ashari and al-Baqillani””
Imam Mulla ‘Ali al Qari, In his book ‘Ar-Rawdul-‘Azhar fi Sharh al-Fiqh al-‘Akbar’  said: “The “Uluww” of Allah over His creation embedded in the meaning of verse 61 of Surat al-‘An’am is indeed an aboveness in status and domination, as mandated by Ahlus-Sunnah wal Jama’ah and not a physical aboveness ”.
Mulla Ali al-Qari states: “It is obligatory that you believe that your God…is not contained in any place or direction”. (Sharh ayn al-ilm)
He states elsewhere: “Allah is not located in a place, whether above or below, or any other than these, and time is inapplicable to Him, unlike what the mushabbiha and mujassima and hululiyya or incarnationists believe”. (sharh al-fiqh al-akbar)
He also cites al-hafiz Zayn al-din al-Iraqi’s statements that all four imams agree that anyone who believes Allah lies in a specific direction has commited disbelief. (al-qari, sharh ayn al-ilm wa zayn al-hilm 1:34; sharh al-fiqh al-akbar Beirut: Dar al-kutub al-ilmiyya 1404/1984 p57; al-mirqat, cited by kawthari, maqalat p. 321,362)
Mulla ‘Ali Qari states; “فمن أظلم ممن كذب على الله أو ادعى ادعاء معينا مشتملا على اثبات المكان والهيئة والجهة من مقابلة وثبوت مسافة وأمثال تلك الحالة، فيصير كافرا لا محالة) اهـ.“Who is more unjust than the one that lied about Allah, or claimed something that included affirming (to Him) a place, shape or direction such as facing, distance and the like… Such a person becomes a kaafir (non-Muslim) without doubt (P. 355).”– [Sharh Al-Fiqh Al-Akbar, Ali Al-Qari, Dar Al-Basħa’ir Al-Islamiyah, Beirut, 1998.]
-----
Imam ‘Abd al-Ra’uf al-Munawi (d. 1031AH) on there being no disagreement that ibn Taymiyya and ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya are innovators and refuting some of their incorrect beliefs:
Changing Views of ibn Taymiyya by Khaled el-Rouayheb
For example, the Egyptian Shafi’i scholar and mystic ‘Abd al-Ra’uf al-Munawi (d. 1622), in his commentary on al-Tirmidhi’s Shama’il, cited ibn Hajar’s condemnation of ibn Taymiyya’s suggestion that the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) had let down a part of his turban to mark the spot between his shoulders that God had touched with His hand. Though al-Munawi’s overall assessment of ibn Taymiyya and ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya was anything but positive, he did not believe that this particular proposition of theirs was beyond the pale:
“I say: As to them (ibn Taymiyya and ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya) being reprehinsible innovators, there is no disagreement (amma kawnahuma min al-mubtadi’a fa-musallam). As to this particular claim being based on corporealism, this is not correct. First, because they said that the mentioned seeing was during sleep… Second, because (they also said:) we believe that He has a hand unlike the created being, and hence there is nothing to prevent placing It in a manner that does not resemble the placing of a created being.”
[‘Abd al-Ra’uf al-Munawi, Sharh al-Shama-il (MS British Library; Or. 12522), fol. 148a. The passage is quoted in al-Alusi, Jala al-Aynayn, 569, though al-Alusi left out the first sentence in which al-Munawi agreed that ibn Taymiyya and ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya Were innovators (Mubtadi’a). The British Library manuscript from which I have quoted was written in 999/1590-1, 32 years before the death of al-Munawi, and may be an autograph.]
---
Imam-i Rabbani Mujaddid-i-Alf-i Thani Shaikh Ahmed Sirhindi (d.1034AH/1624CE)
Mujaddid Alf Thani wrote:
Allâhu ta'âlâ is not with time, with place or with direction. He is not at a place or at any side. He created time, places and directions. An ignorant person thinks that He is up on the Arsh. .... He created all these afterwards. Can something which has been created afterwards ever be a place for One who is eternal and always exists?...
Allâhu ta'âlâ is not a substance, an object or a state. He is not limited; He does not have dimensions. He is not long, short, wide or narrow. We say that He is Wâsi, that is, wide. But this wideness is different from what we know and understand. He is Muhît; that is, He surrounds everything. But this surrounding is not like what we understand. He is Qarîb; that is, He is close to us, together with us, but unlike what we understand from it! We believe that He is wâsi, muhît, qarîb, and together with us. But we cannot know what these attributes mean. We say that everything which comes to the mind is wrong. [Maktubat, volume 2, letter 67.]
Mujaddid Alf Thani wrote:
Know that Allâhu ta'âlâ is neither inside nor outside the âlam. He is neither separated from nor adjacent to the âlam. Allâhu ta'âlâ exists. But He is not inside or outside, adjacent to or separated from it. [Volume 2, letter 34.] 
-------------------------
Shah Abd 'al Haqq Muhaddith Dehlvi (d. 1052 AH - 1642 CE)
states:
"Firstly, the person who makes dua, begs Allah and is in need of him alone. The one in need makes the person of the grave an intermediary to Allah due to his raised rank and significance. One says: “Oh Allah! For the sake of this person whom you have bestowed your mercy upon, ease my hardship because you alone are the most generous and all giving.
Secondly, the person in hardship may also call the wali and ask him to intercede for him for the ease of difficulty. In both forms of tawassul (intercession), one’s hope is not in the pious, instead the centre of hope is Allah who will resolve the problems, help in need, and provide the asked-for. The true and absolute benefactor, and authority of change, is Allah who is the creator of all existence
.” (Asat al-Lumat sharh Mishkat 3:401, Fatwa Aziziyah 2:108)
-------------
Al-Muhaddith ash-Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali known as Ibn ‘Allan as-Siddiqiyy ash-Shafi’i (d.1057 AH) In his book ‘Al-Futuhat Ar-Rabbaniyyah’ said: “Indeed Allah is above His creation in status and domination, and not in place and direction”.
---
Imam Najm al-Din al-Ghazzi al-Dimashqi al-Shafi’i (d. 1061AH) reprimanded al-Shuwayki for secretly returning women to their husbands after three divorces in a single declaration in accordance with ibn Taymiyya’s View on Triple Talaq. He mentioned that he wrote to him as follows (wherein he says ibn Taymiyya’s deviant view is not to be followed at all and does not even constitute a legal shade of doubt, and those who follow it should be punished with the severe capital punishment for adultery):
“It is not permissible for a man to take back his wife after three divorces according to the doctrine of the Muslims, except for ibn Taymiyya’s view, which it is not permissible to imitate due to it’s deviance (li-shudhudhihi). What has been established on this matter is that he who follows the view of ibn Taymiyya must be chastised, and the doubt (shubha) constituted by his (ibn Taymiyya’s) disagreement does not cancel the prescribed punishment (hadd) of the man who has intercourse with the woman after she is returned to him, nor (the punishment) of her.” [Najm al-Din al-Ghazzi, Lutf al-Samar wa Qatf al-Thamar min Tarajim A’yan al-Tabaqa al-Ula min al-Qarn al-Hadi Ashar, Mahmud al-Shaykh ed. (Damascus: Manshurat Wizarat al-Thaqafa, 1981), 1:268]
---
Ahmad al-Khafaji (d. 1069AH) on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibition of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):
“Know that this is the hadith that led ibn Taymiyya and those who follow him, such as ibn al-Qayyim, to the despicable statement due to which he was declared an unbeliever, and against which al-Subki devoted a separate work, and this is his prohibiting the visit to the tomb of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) and travelling to it… He imagined that he protected monotheism (tawhid) on the basis of drivel that should not be mentioned, for they do not come from a rational, let alone an eminent, person, may Allah the Exalted forgive him.” [Ahmad al-Khafaji, Nasim al-Riyad, 5:100-101]
---
Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Badrid-Din Ibn Balban (d. 1083 AH), a Damascan Hambaliyy scholar, In his book ‘Mukhtasar al-Ifadat’  said: “Whosoever believes or says that Allah exists in all places or in one particular place is certainly a non-believer (kafir). It is obligatory to believe that Allah, the Exalted, does not resemble His creation, for Allah’s Existence is eternal and the existence of place is not. Allah created the place, and He still exists as He eternally did before place was created”.
==========
1,100AH
==========
Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya (?1119AH) 30 volumes
In this collection of fatwas considered authoritative in the Hanafi madh-hab in India and elsewhere, it is mentioned, volume 2 , page 359:
And if he says: ‘Allah fis-samaa” [there are two cases]: if he was aiming at merely repeating what has reached [us] apprently in the texts, he does not commit blasphemy, but if he was aiming  at the place, he commits blasphemy.’
Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya is a collection of fatwas from Hanafi scholars from the Asian continent (especially India) which gathers almost all the sayings of the school and which is a reference until present days in terms of Hanafi judgements. It has been written more than 300 years ago.
500 scholars of the Indian sub-continent worked on this collection of fatwas, each group of scholars from a given Indian state being in charge of a specific chapter), and a fatwa would only get written if no one else would challenge it.
Here, these scholars are saying that even if the person says ‘Allah  fis-samaa’, depending on what he is aiming at it can be blasphemy. Therefore one should not think that this is only an issue of translation. It is a question of understanding. The one who utters phrases in Arabic, while understanding that Allah is limited, it is blasphemy. [The original title of this collection is Fatawa-e-Alamgiri, in Persian, from the name of  the sultan Aurangzeb (d.1707 CE) who helped the Hanafi scholars to produce this work. They have very quickly been nicknamed ‘al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya’ in Arabic.]Here
------
Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdil-Baqi az-Zarqani (d. 1122 AH), a well-known Maliki scholar, In his elucidation to the book ‘Muwatta’ of Imam Malik’ said: “Imam al-Baydawi said: “Since it is confirmed through irrefutable proofs that Allah is clear from notions of body and dwelling, it follows that it is impossible that Allah would be moving from one place to another lower place”.
---
Shaykh Abdul-Ghaniyy an-Nabulusi (d. 1143 AH), a great Sufi Hanafi scholar from Damascus, Syria. In his well-known poem called ‘Kifayat al-Ghulam’ said: “Contained not He (Allah) is by place, certainly not, nor His reality can be grasped by the minds, He is in status above all the creations and is clear of all their characteristics”.
---
Muhammad ibn al-Tayyib al-Fasi (d. 1170AH); one of the teachers of the famous scholar and lexicographer Imam Muhammad Murtada al-Zabidi (d. 1205AH); in his commentary on the popular litany (hizb) of Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676AH), went on to briefly consider and reject ibn Taymiyya’s position on the popular expressions of piety such as litanies (awrad and ahzab) while quoting Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-din al-Subki (d. 756AH) and Imam Ahmad Zarruq al-Burnusi (d. 899AH) on ibn Taymiyya:
“Ibn Taymiyya criticised ahzab and rejected them in a most inappropriate manner, and went to extremes in undermining it. They have responded to him, and gone to extremes in criticising him, and have stated that his abilities are conceded as far as memory is concerned, but that he is unreliable in matters of dogma, and that he is deficient in reason, let alone mystical gnosis (‘irfan). Some have even gone to the extent of attributing to him not only heresy (zandaqa) but unbelief. The Imam of Imams, Taqi al-Din al-Subki (d. 756AH) was asked about him and said: He is a man whose knowledge is greater than his reason. Shaykh [Ahmad] Zarruq [al-Burnusi (d. 899AH)] has said: The upshot of this is that consideration is given to items of knowledge that he relates, but not to his handling of this knowledge. Hence no heed is given to his rejection, and no consideration given to his analysis and judgement. And Allah knows best.”
[Ibn al-Tayyib al-Fasi, Sharh Hizb al-Imam al-Nawawi (MS Princeton University Library: Yahuda 3861), fol. 135a-135b]
------------------
Shah Waliullah Muhadith Dehlawi (d.1176AH-1762CE) Read:Here also see Shaykh's son 
Shah Abdul Aziz Muhadith Dehalwi (d.1238AH)
===========
1,200AH
===========
Shaykh Abul-Barakat Ahmad Ibn Muhammad ad-Dardir (d. 1201 AH) from Egypt, In his well-known poem called ‘al-Kharidah al-Bahiyyah’ relating to the attributes of Allah the great Malikiyy Scholar, said: “Allah is clear from occupancy, directionality, attachment, detachment and recklessness”.
------
Note: Mu-hammed ibn Abd-al-Wahhab at-Tamimi an-Najdi (b.1117 AH - d.1206 AH /1703CE /1792CE) After 400 Years -Revived: Ibn Tayimyyah’s - Dawah/Teachings: Here
Also Note: Ibn Abd-alWahhab  known as skeikh najdi - Horn of Satan - was refuted: Here
------
Muhammad Murtada az-Zabidiyy (d. 1205 AH) of the Hanafi School,In his book ‘Ithaf as-Sadah al-Muttaqin’  said: “Allah, the Exalted, is clear of changing from one state to another, moving from place to place and physical attachment and detachment, for they all are attributes of the creations”.
---
Sulayman ibn 'Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1232AH/1817CE), the Wahhabi founder's grandson, said: Whoever believes or says: Allah is in person (bi dhâ tihi) in every place, or in one place: he is a disbeliever. It is obligatory to declare that Allah is separate (bâ 'in) from His creation, established over His throne without modality or likeness or examplarity. Allah was and there was no place, then He created place and He is exalted as He was before He created place.
[In his al-Tawdih 'an Tawhid al-Khallaq fi Jawab Ahl al-'Iraq (1319/1901, p. 34, and new ed. al-Riyad: Dar Tibah, 1984). ]
-------------------------------------------------------
Imam of Ahle Sunnah Shah Abdul Aziz Muhadith Dehalwi (d.1238AH/1823CE) stated:
"At times, the text of Ibn Tamiyah in books such as 'Minhaaj as Sunnah' and others has been very hideous, it has been very belittling particularly against Ahlulbayt, prohibits visiting the tomb of Rasulullah (s), rejects the Ghauth, Qutub and Abdaal and disgrace the Sufies... According to the views of Ahlul Sunnah, his text is cursed therefore AhlulSunnah can not be criticized because of his writings".
[Fatawa Azizi, Volume 2 page 79]  (Published in Deoband)

---
Shaykh Muhammad ‘Amin Ibn ‘Umar known as Ibn ‘Abidin (d. 1252 AH), the famous Hanafi scholar from Damascus – the author of the well-known commentary – In praising the Prophet peace be upon him.
Ibn ‘Abidin said: “And Muhammad (peace be upon him) was awarded ‘al-qurb’ (greater status) by ar-Rahman (Allah), not ‘al-qurb’ that refers to closeness in distance or place”.
---
Shaykh ‘Abdul-Ghani al-Ghunaymi al-Maydani (d. 1298 AH), a great Hanafi scholar from Damascus, Syria, In his book ‘Sharh al-‘Aqidah at-Tahawiyyah’ (The explanation of at-Tahawiyah creed) said: “Allah, the Exalted, is not a body, therefore to see Allah is different than to see the created bodies. Any seeing must be in accordance with the attributes of what is seen. Therefore, the creation which is in a certain place and direction cannot be seen except in that place and direction as part of its attributes. Furthermore, seeing a creation involves reciprocal proximity, connective optical beams and a set distance. However, seeing Allah, the One Who does not exist in a place or a direction and is not a bodily entity is just as well, without Him existing in a place or in a set direction”.
===========
1,300AH
===========
Abd al-Hayy al-Lucknawi (1304AH) after praising ibn Taymiyya, mentions the following:
And some corrupt beliefs have been conveyed from him for which he was condemned by al-Yafi’i, ibn Hajar al-Makki (al-Haytami), and others. He is a man who has committed sins and made mistakes, thus the people should be aware of his errors and acknowledge his proficiency and virtue. His death was – according to what ibn Hajar has mentioned about him – in the year 728 (AH) while in prison by the command of the ruler of his time. May the Mercy of Allah be upon him.
[Abd al-Hayy al-Lucknawi, Iqama al-Hujja with Shaykh ‘Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda’s notes, pg. 29, Maktaba Matbu’at al-Islamiyya – 1998]
وقد نُقِلَ عنه عقائد فاسدة شنَّع عليه بها اليافعي وابنُ حجر المكي وغيرها، وهو بشر له ذنوب وخطأ، فلينتبه الإنسان على خطئه، وليُقِرَّ بمهارته وفضله، وكانت وفاته – على ما ذكره ابن حجر – سنة ثمان عشرين وسبعمائة في الحبس بأمرِ سلطان زمانهمنه رحمه الله تعالى.
إقامة الحجة على أن الإكثار في التعبد ليس ببدعة” للإمام عبد الحي اللكنوي، ص٢٩، مكتبة مطبوعات الإسلامية – ١٩٩٨
Abd al-Hayy al-Lucknawi  on ibn Taymiyya’s Lacking Intellect and Inferiority
“Mawlana ‘Abd al-Hayy al-Lucknawi, the great ‘alim from India and the author of hundreds of invaluable books known to the world, said in his book Ghais al-Ghamam, ‘Like the predecessor ibn Taymiyya al-Harrani, the successor al-Shawkani (d. 1250AH) was very learned but was less intelligent. The latter was exactly alike, even more inferior than the former.’“ [Shaykh Muhammad Ziyaullah from Siyalkut, Pakistan, in his work The Truth of Wahhabism] more info:Here
----------------------------------
Imam Ahmed Raza Khan (d.1340AH-1921CE) Fatawa Razvia (30 Volumes): Here
Imams Jihad against the Insulter's of Sayyiduna Rasulallah (صلىالله عليه وآله وسلم) more infoHere
---
Shaykh ‘Abdul-Majid ash-Sharnubiyy al-‘Azhariyy (d. 1348 AH) In his book ‘Ta’iyyat as-Suluk’ said: “Allah, the Exalted is not subject to time limitations nor is carried over a certain place. In reality, He is eternally existent and eternally no place or time did exist, and now He exists as He eternally was (i.e. without being subject to place and time)”.
---
 Shaykh Muhammad Bekhit al-Mut'aei al-Hanafi (d. 1350 H), in Tathir al-Fuad, page 9:
ومن الفريق الثاني الذي طمس الله على قلبه وطبع عليه أهل البدع في العقائد والأعمال الذين خالفوا الكتاب والسنة والاجماع فضلوا واضلوا كثيرا قاتلهم الله انى يؤفكون ومأواهم جهنم وساءت مصيرا وقد ابتلى المسلمون بكثير من هذا الفريق سلفا وخلفا فكانوا وصمة وثلمة في المسلمين وعضوا فاسدا يجب قطعه حتى لا يعدي الباقي فهو المجذوم الذي يجب الفرار منه ومنهم ابن تيمية.
From the second group are those whose hearts Allah (swt) darkened, and the people of heresy seal up their hearts in beliefs that contradict the book, sunnah and 'ijma'. They therefore went astray and misguided many people, may Allah's curse be on them: how deluded are they from the truth! Their ultimate abode shall be hell, a hapless journey's end.
Verily the Muslims were tested considerably by this group, they are a mark of disgrace for the Muslims and the infected part must be removed to prevent others from being harmed, verily it is like a lesprosy from which one must away, and ibn Taimiyah is one of them
--
 Qadi Yusuf al-Nabhani(d.1351AH/1932CE) in  Shawahid al-Haq, page 191:
فقد ثبت وتحقق وظهر ظهور الشمس في رابعة النهار أن علماء المذاهب الاربعة قد اتفقوا على رد بدعة ابن تيمية ومنهم من طعنوا بصحة نقله كما طعنوا بكمال عقله
Its proven (as clear) as the midday sun in the sky that the Ulema of the four (Sunni) schools agreed on rejecting the heresies of Ibn Taimiyah, and some of them criticized his honesty in narrating. They also criticized the stability of his brain

Qâdî Yûsuf al-Nabahânî also refuted the Hamawiyya in his magnificent epistle Raf` al-Ishtibâh fî Istihâlat al-Jiha `alâ Allâh ("The Removal of Uncertainty Concerning the Impossibility of Direction for Allah (swt)") cited in full in his Shawâhid al-Haqq (p. 210-240).
---
Anwar Shah al-Kashmiri (d.1352AH) says in his book ‘Faydh al-Bari ‘ala Sahih al-Bukhari’, 4/447:
As for al-Hafidh ibn Taymiyya, then he studied them (the narrations on the attributes) externally (ie. from non-Islamic sources) until he approached anthropomorphism, just as I have heard regarding his affair – that he was sitting upon the pulpit and a questioner asked him regarding His (Allah’s) nuzul – exalted is He – so ibn Taymiyya descended to the second step and said “The nuzul is in this manner”. Thus he studied it externally and exaggerated in it until he was deluded by his anthropomorphic speech.[1]
يقول الإمام المحدث محمد أنور شاه الكشميري ( المتوفى سنة 1352 ه) في كتابهفيض الباري على صحيح البخاري ” 4/447 : ( وأما الحافظ ابن تيمية فحققها في الخارج حتى قارب التشبيه ، كما كنت سمعت من حاله أنه كان جالساً على المنبر فسأله سائل عن نزوله تعالى فنزل ابن تيمية إلى الدرجة الثانية فقال هكذا النزول ، فحققه في الخارج وبالغ فيه حتى أوهم كلامه التشبيه ) .
He also says in the same book, ‘Faydh al-Bari ‘ala Sahih al-Bukhari’, 1/171:
As for Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab al-Najdi, then indeed he was an idiotic man of little knowledge, thus he would be hasty in making takfir. Diving into this river (of takfir) is not appropriate except for the one who is cautious upon, proficient in, and well-acquainted with the existence of disbelief and it’s causes.[2]
ويقول ايضا في كتابه ( فيض الباري ، 1/171 ) : ( أما محمد بن عبدالوهاب النجدي فإنه كان رجلاً بليداً قليل العلم ، فكان يتسارع إلى الحكم بالكفر ، ولا ينبغي أن يقتحم في هذا الوادي إلا من يكون متيقظاً متقناً عارفاً بوجوه الكفر وأسبابه ).
The above quotes can be found in the Maktaba Rashidiyya edition under the following references:
[1] 7/305 [2] 1/252
-----------------------------------------------------
Imam Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari (d.1371AH) says regarding some conspiracy theorists that exist in these times:
Whoever thinks that all the scholars of his time joined in a single conspiracy against him from personal envy should rather impugn their own intelligence and understanding, after studying the repugnance of his deviations in belief and works, for which he was asked to repent time after time and moved from prison to prison until he passed on to what he’d sent ahead.” [al-Sayf al-Saqil, page 6, Reprint. Cairo, Maktaba Zahran]
Takmilat al-Sayf al-Saqil, page 177:
فأصدر الشاميون فتيا في ابن تيمية وكتب عليها البرهان ابن الفركاح الفزاري نحو أربعين سطرا بأشياء إلى أن قال بتكفيره ووافقه على ذلك الشهاب بن جهبل
The Syrian (scholars) issued a statement about ibn Taimiyah, and al-Burhan ibn al-Ferkah wrote on it forty lines wherein he declared that he (ibn Taimiyah) is a kafir, and al-Shehab bin Jabhal agreed with him
Imam Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari in his book : Maqalat al-Kawthari, said, on page 400, 2nd paragraph (Click here to read  the whole article in Arabic as a PDF ):
“Now we are going to discuss the book [entitled] Kitab as-Sunnah, and this is a warning of the Muslims against what is inside [that book] in terms of misguidance, because it may happen that some laymen be deceived when hearing the name of the author’s father. [Explanation: Kitab as-Sunnah is a book apparently written by the son of Imam Ahmad ibn HanbalIt contains a lots of serious statements of misguidance,  and this translated paragraph is at the beginning of the article that al-Kawthari dedicates to the study of this book.  For example, in that book, it is mentioned that the term ‘istiwa’ does not have any other meaning than that of ‘julus’ (i.e. sitting, even though a quick glance at any Arabic dictionary will reveal the fact that ‘istiwa’ has several meanings, as you can see in the Glossary), that supposedly Allaah will sit on the Kursi, and that a creaking sound will be heard, that Allaah would have spoken to Prophet Musa ‘with His lips’ ((a’udhu billaah!), that Allaah would have written the Tawrah while leaning on a rock and that the sound of the pen could be heard (a’udhu billaah!), that Allaah would have touched Adam, and more similar blasphemous statements! End of explanation] .
But blasphemy is blasphemy whoever the person who pronounces it is [al-kufr kufr kaa’inan man kaana an-Naatiq bihi], and misguidance is misguidance, whatever its source.  There is not, in Islam, a belief that changes when people change. Indeed, faith is faith in an absolute way, and blasphemy is blasphemy in an absolute way [wa laysa fi-l islaami deen yakhtalif bi-ikhtilaaf al-ash-khaas, fa-l’imaan imaan mutlaqan, wa l-kufr kufr mutlaqan].
Imam Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari , In his book  Maqalat al-Kawthari he wrote several articles against the anthropomorphists.
This quote is from the article entitled “Kitab yusamma kitab as-sunnah wa huwa kitab az-Zaygh” which means  “The book entitled Kitab as-Sunnah when [truly] it is the book of misguidance”.
In this article, he gives a list of all the incorrect beliefs described in this book in the name of Islam. To read the full article in Arabic, click here: the full article in PDF.
Powerful reminder from Imam al-Kawthari: Islamic belief does not change when people change: Read Here
----
Shaykh Salamah al-Quda’iyy al-‘Azzamiyy (d.1376 AH), a great Shafi’iyy scholar, In his book ‘Furqan al-Qur’an’ said: “The truthful righteous Salaf (Scholars who lived in the first three centuries after the Prophetic Migration) and Khalaf (Scholars who lived after Salaf) unanimously agree to clear al-Haqq (a name of Allah which means: The One Whose Existence is beyond doubt) the Exalted, from existing in any direction or place”.
Furqan al-Quran , page 132:
ومن عجيب أمر هذا الرجل أنه إذا ابتدع شيئا حكى عليه إجماع الأوليين والآخرين كذبا وزورا وربما تجد تناقضه في الصفحة الواحدة
The strange thing about this man is that whenever he produced a heresy, he lied and claimed that there is 'Ijma' on this from the previous and modern (scholars); and you might find him contradicting himself on the same page.”
---
Maulānā Husain Ahmad Madanī (d. 1377AH); the Shaykh al-Hadīth of Dār al-‘Ulūm Deoband (may Allāh illuminate his grave) on the title of ‘Shaykh al-Islām’ for ibn Taymiyya as mentioned by Shaykh Anwar Shah al-Kashmiri (d. 1352AH):
حضرت شیخ الاسلام مولانا حسین احمد مدنی شیخ الحدیث دار العلوم دیوبند نور الله مرقده*اور لقب شیخ الاسلام براے ابن تیمیه
حضرت الاستاذ شیخ الاسلام مولانا مدنی رحمة الله عليه تو حضرت شاه عبد العزیز رحمة الله علیه سے بهی اس (ابن تیميه كے) *معامله میں سخت تهے کیونکه انهوں نے علامه کی قلمی تالیفات کا بهی مطالعه کیا تها اور وه علامه ابن تیمیه کے لئے شیخ الاسلام کا لقب بهی پسند نه کرتهے تهے اسی ليے حضرت شیخ الحدیث مولانا محمد زکریا صاحب رحمة الله علیه کو بذل المجهود (کاتب کی غلطی؛ صحیح اوجز المسالک) میں علامه کو شیخ الاسلام لکهنے پر سخت ناراضگی کا اظهار کیا تها اور حضرت رحمة الله علیه کی الشهاب الثاقب تو احقاق حق و ابطال باطل کا بے نظیر علمی و تحقیقی شاهکار هے. رحمه الله رحمة واسعة.
ملفوظات محدث کشمیری: صفحه 414
بیت الحکمت دیوبند
“Our teacher Shaykh al-Islām Maulānā Madanī (rahmatullāhi ‘alaih) was more strict than Hadhrat Shāh ‘Abd al-Azīz (rahmatullāhi ‘alaih) on this matter regarding ibn Taymiyya because he had read the written works of ‘Allāmah (ibn Taymiyya), and he didn’t like the title of ‘Shaykh al-Islām’ being used for ‘Allāmah ibn Taymiyya. This is why he showed severe dislike towards the usage of ‘Shaykh al-Islām’ for ibn Taymiyya by Shaykh al-Hadīth Maulānā Muhammad Zakariyyā Sāhib (rahmatullāhi ‘alaih) in ‘Badhlul Majhūd’ (mistake of the scribe; correction – should be – ‘Awjāz al-Masālik’), and Hadhrat ([Husain Ahmad Madanī -] rahmatullāhi ‘alaih)’s book al-Shihāb al-Thāqib is an incomparable awesome book in terms of ‘ilm [knowledge] and tahqīq [research/verification] regarding the establishing of truth and vanquishing of falsehood – may Allāh shower him with mercy in abundance.”
[Shaykh Anwār Shāh Kashmīrī, Malfudhāt Muhaddith Kashmīrī; pg. 414, published by Bait al-Hikmat Deoband]
Also Husain Ahmad Madanī on ibn Taymiyya as mentioned by Mufti Taqi al-‘Uthmani:
حضرت شیخ الاسلام مولانا حسین احمد مدنی شیخ الحدیث دار العلوم دیوبند نور الله مرقده
درس بخاری و ترمذی دار العلوم دیوبند کے زمانے میں حافظ ابن تیمیه کے *تفردات عقاید و مسایل فروع کا نهایت شدت سے رد فرمایا کرتهے *تهے اور آپ نے بتلایا که میں نے مدینه منوره کے قیام کے *دوران ان کی تصانیف و رسائل دیکهے هیں اور بعض ایسی کتابیں بهی دیکهی هیں جو هندوستان میں شاید کسی کتب خانه میں موجود ہوں اور ان سب کے مطالعه سے میں اس نتیجه پر علی وجه البصیرت پهنچاهوں که اهل سنت والجماعت کے طریقه سے کهلا هوا انحراف و عدول ان کے اندر موجود هے
انعام الباری شرح صحیح البخاری: 13 / 463
اداره تالیفات اشرفیه، ملتان، پاکستان
During the Bukhārī and Tirmidhī lectures at Dar al-‘Ulūm Deoband he would strongly refute Hafiz ibn Taymiyya’s lone opinions on ‘aqā-id and masā-il. He also said, “While I was residing in Madīnah al-Munawwarah I read his books and literature, some are such that you would be lucky to find it in a bookshop in India. After studying all these books, I have come to the conclusion through wisdom and foresight that there is a blatant turn away found in him from the way of ahl al-sunnah wa al-jamā’ah”.’
[Mufti Taqī al-‘Uthmānī, In’ām al-Bārī Sharh Sahīh al-Bukhārī 463/13; published by Idāra Tālīfāt Ashrafiyyah, Multān, Pakistān]
---
Muhammad Idris al-Kandehlawi (d.1394AH) on ibn Taymiyya and his companions, as mentioned by Shaykh Zakariyya al-Kandehlawi (d. 1402AH):
واكثر المجسمة هم الظاهريون المتبعون لظواهر الكتاب والسنة واكثرهم المحدثون. ولابن تيمية واصحابه ميل عظيم الى اثبات الجهة ومبالغة في القدح في نفيها
الكنز المتواري في معادن لامع الدراري وصحيح البخاري
الجزء: الرابع والعشرون ، الصفحة السابع الى التاسع
تاليف: الامام الرباني شيخ الحديث العلامة محمد زكريا الكاندهلوي
الناشر: مؤسسة الخليل الاسلامية ، فيصل آباد ، باكستان

“Most of the anthropomorphists (mujassima) were literalists; followers of the apparent (dhahir) of the Book and Sunnah, and most of these (mujassima) were Muhaddithin. And ibn Taymiyya and his companions had a great inclination to establish direction (for Allah) and exaggerated in attacking those who negated it (direction)…” [Zakariyya al-Khandehlawi, al-Kanz al-Mutawārī, 24/7-9]
---
 Shah Fadhl al-Qadri al-Hindi in  Sayf al-Jabar al-Maslool ,page 42:الشقي ابن تيمية أجمع علماء عصره على ضلاله
The wretched ibn Taimiyah. There is an 'ijma' by the scholars of his time on his deviation from the right path”
Abdulghani Hamada in Fadhl al-Dhakerin, page 23:ان شيخهم ابن تيمية قال عنه علامة زمانه علاء الدين البخاري : ان ابن تيمية كافر
The Allamah of his time Alauddin al-Bukhari said about their Sheikh Ibn Taimiyah:
Ibn Taimiyah is a kafir’.
Abu al-Mahasin al-Dimashqi
 in his book Zayl Tazkirah tul Hufaz, page 316 and Shaykh Ahmed Raza Bijnawri in Anwar al-Bari, Volume 11 page 192 have recorded another statement of Shaykh Alauddin Bukhari al-Hanafi (d. 841 H) regarding Ibn Tamiyah that:
صار يصرح في مجلسه بأن من اطلق على ابن تيمية شيخ الاسلام يكفر
"He (Alauddin Bukhari) declared in his assembly that whoever deems Ibn Taymia to be 'Sheikh ul Islam' is kafir". 
Syed Ahmad Raza Bijnawri has recorded the statements of his teacher Imam Anwar Shah Kashmiri in a book ‘Anwar al-Bari Sharah Sahih Bukhari’ which has been published by Idara Talifiat Asharfiyah, Multan, Pakistan. On Volume 6 pages 221-222, there is a caption ‘The authentication of Hadith Rad al-Shams by Imam Tahawi and its criticism by Hafiz Ibn Taimiyah’ under which he stated:
“Ibn Taimiyah’s point of view represents Khariji tendencies
In Volume 11 page 119 of Anwar al-Bari, we also read that eighteen scholars of Egypt having Qazi Taqiuddin Muhammad bin Abi Bakar Akhnai Maliki as the leader gave an edict of
Kufr of Ibn Taimiyah on the basis that he (Ibn Taimiyah) used to forbid people from traveling for the pilgrimage of the graves of prophets particularly of Holy Prophet [s]. The scholars deemed it an act of blasphemy against the prophets, which was equal to Kufr and hence its punishment was execution.
=============
1,400AH
=============
Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Ahmad known as ad-Dah ash-Shanqitiyy (d.1404 AH), former Imam of al-Khatmiyyah Mosque in Sudan, In his book ‘al-‘Ayat al-Muhkamat’ said: “The scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama^ah have all unanimously agreed that Allah does not need anything and that everything is in need of Him. He exists deservedly without the need to an allocator or place. He created time and place, and He still exists as He eternally was”.
--
Shaykh Al-Islam Imam Muhammad Zahid ibn Hasan al-Kawthari(d.1951CE)
Shaykh Al-Sayyid Hafiz Abdullah ibn Siddiq al Ghumari (d.1993)
Shaykh Al-Sayyid Muhammad Alawi al-Maliki (d.2004)</