Friday, 11 March 2011

Does such a person become a Kaafir?



Ibn Taymiyyah
---

Aliyy Al-Qaariy’s states in Sharh Al-Fiqh Al-Akbar:

“Who is more unjust than the one that lied about Aļļaah, 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.]

---

To have belief as defined in Islamic terminology, one must label as true in one’s heart, and accept in submission, what is necessarily known to be of the Prophet Muĥammad’s religion.

When someone denies any of it, he is not a Muslim.

Now, when someone utters the creedal statement to show his Islam, we have apparent belief from him, but the reality of the person’s heart is unseen to us. Accordingly, when someone later makes an expression which shows that he denies some of the religion, it is apparent to us that he is not a Muslim.The blasphemy of a person is established by utterances that reflect blasphemous positions if the apparent language provides for only a blasphemous meaning.

For example, Aļļaah gave us the judgment in the Qur’aan that those that say that God is three, or Jesus is the son of God, or Jesus is God are blasphemers.

This is without regard to what they intend to mean; they commit blasphemy merely by saying that. Aļļaah said (9,30):

وَقَالَتِ الْيَهُودُ عُزَيْرٌ ابْنُ اللَّهِ وَقَالَتِ النَّصَارَى الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ اللَّهِ ذَلِكَ قَوْلُهُمْ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ يُضَاهِئُونَ قَوْلَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ قَبْلُ قَاتَلَهُمُ اللَّهُ أَنَّى يُؤْفَكُونَ


Which might be translated to mean:

“The Jews said: “ˆUzayr is the son of God,” and the Christians said “the Messiah is the son of God.” This is what they say by their tongues. Their saying is like that of those who blasphemed anciently.

Aļļaah has cursed them.

How extreme they are in their lies!”


This judgment of blasphemy is absolute for the person who says that Aļļaah has a son, regardless of his intention or actual belief. We know from this aayah that plainly blasphemous statements makes a person a non-Muslim, even if he intended by it a metaphorical meaning that is not kufr.

This is clear, because the phrase, “son of so and so” is used widely to mean “close to,” or “beloved.” This is especially true in Arabic. For example, the phrase “son of the road” in Arabic means “traveler.” This aayah gives an example of an apparent and clear blasphemous statement, and the reason why such statements are not interpreted with a figurative meaning, in order to avoid saying that the one who said it is a blasphemer, is twofold:

First, in this life religious judgment is given based on what is apparent. This means that one must judge the one who utters plainly blasphemous statements with apparent blasphemy.

Second, inwardly, even if this person really had intended a non apparent meaning that is not blasphemy, he is still a blasphemer inwardly and in Aļļaah’s judgment, because by being willing to use such an expression he has shown disrespect for the religion. In other words, he was willing to state something reflecting a blasphemous position, without ascribing it to someone else. An example is:

وَلَئِنْ سَأَلْتَهُمْ لَيَقُولُنَّ إِنَّمَا كُنَّا نَخُوضُ وَنَلْعَبُ قُلْ أَبِاللَّهِ وَآيَاتِهِ وَرَسُولِهِ كُنْتُمْ تَسْتَهْزِئُونَ (65) لا تَعْتَذِرُوا قَدْ كَفَرْتُمْ بَعْدَ إِيمَانِكُمْ [التوبة : 65 ، 66]

Meaning: And if you ask them, they will say ‘We were only talking idly and joking around. Say ‘Were you mocking Aļļaah, His signs and His Messenger? Do not make excuses for yourselves, you have committed blasphemy after believing.” (At-Tawbah, 65-66)


The great Ĥadiitħ Master and Maalikiy scholar Ibn Al-ˆArabiy commented on the above statement in the Qur’aan saying:

“What those people said was either in seriousness or without being serious (not meaning it), and it is in any case blasphemy, because to say something that you understand has only a blasphemous meaning from is kufr, even if you do not mean it.”

The great Sħaafiˆiy scholar Al-Ramliy, also called “the Small Al-Sħaafiˆiy”, said in his book Nihaayah Al-Muĥtaaj:

“The Imam (Al-Juwayniy, the teacher of Al-Għazaaliy) narrated from the scholars of belief and foundations of jurisprudence that intending a non-apparent meaning when saying something that does not have this possibility has committed blasphemy. (This is) both apparently and inwardly (in the heart, and in Aļļaah’s judgment), because he has shown disrespect. This is thus different from accepting it (such an intention as an excuse) in matters like divorce, where he would be divorced apparently (in court) only (but would still be married in Aļļaah’s judgment).”

Al-Bazdawiyy, the great scholar of belief and foundations of jurisprudence said in Uşuul Al-Bazdawiyy:

“Not being serious in (uttering statements that have) blasphemy is blasphemy. Not by believing the words he said while not serious, but by the act of not being serious… because it is disrespectful of the religion.”

In the Encyclopedia of Jurisprudence published by the Ministry of Islamic Affairs in Kuwait, it states regarding judging someone as having committed kufr (takfiir):

ب – التكفير بالقول : 9 – اتفق العلماء على تكفير من صدر منه قول مكفِّر , سواء أقاله استهزاء , أم عنادا , أم اعتقادا لقوله تعالى : { قل أبالله وآياته ورسوله كنتم تستهزئون لا تعتذروا قد كفرتم بعد إيمانكم } . وهذه الألفاظ المكفرة قد تكون صريحة كقوله : أشرك أو أكفر بالله , أو غير صريحة كقوله : الله جسم متحيز أو عيسى ابن الله , أو جحد حكما علم من الدين بالضرورة , كوجوب الصلاة وحرمة الزنى .

Moreover, the scholars affirm that one may commit blasphemy out of ignorance:


Aļļaah said in the Qur’aan (24,15):
وَتَقُولُونَ بِأَفْوَاهِكُمْ مَا لَيْسَ لَكُمْ بِهِ عِلْمٌ وَتَحْسَبُونَهُ هَيِّنًا وَهُوَ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ عَظِيمٌ “,


Which might be translated to mean: “And you say by your mouths what you have no certain knowledge of, and you think it is a simple matter, while it is in Aļļaah’s judgment gruesome.”

Ibn Katħiir commented on the meaning of “you think it is a simple matter, while it is in Aļļaah’s judgment gruesome.”:

“In Muslim and Al-Bukħaariyy’s authentic ĥadiitħ collections something similar is stated: “Verily a man may say a word that brings Aļļaah’s punishment to an extent he does not know, and he falls due to it into the Hellfire further than the distance between the sky and the earth.” In another narration it is stated “a word he thinks nothing of.”

As for the scholarly saying “we do not make takfiir for the people of the Qiblah,” this is a slogan meant to oppose the Khawaarijites who claimed that a person who commits a sin falls out of Islam, even if he believes it is a sin.

As for Aţ-Ţaĥaawiyy, he is pretty clear about this, he says (in brackets):

{And we call the people of our Qiblah} i.e. the Kaˆbah as a prayer direction {“Muslims”and “Believers” as long as they admit to be true whatever Muĥammad brought} of knowledge {and believe in, and do not deny, any of what he said.} In other words, what is less sinful than that, such as drinking wine does not make one a non-Muslim. This is provided that one believes it to be wrong, and one does not deny or have scorn towards its prohibition.

We know this from his statement “as long as.”

This clarifies what Al-Asħˆariy and other scholars mean when they say, “I do not say that any of the People of the Qiblah is a non-Muslim.”

The purpose of this expression of theirs is to deny that a sinful Muslim falls out of Islaam as long as he believes and admits that what he is doing is sinful. It is a statement meant to refute the saying of the Kħawaarij sect, which says that committing sins, such as drinking wine, makes one a non-Muslim, even if one believes it is a sin. It does not mean that anyone who prays towards the Qiblah is a Muslim, regardless of anything he believes, says or does. After all, some of those people say that ˆAliyy was a prophet, or similarly clearly blasphemous sayings.

I have already mentioned some of the scholars’ statements of takfiir, including the consensus stated in the Encyclopedia of Fiqh. Also, Aţ-Ţaĥaawiyy says: {Whoever attributed to Aļļaah an attribute that has a meaning among the meanings that apply to humans has committed blasphemy.} Which is another statement of takfiir.

Other examples are:

Asħ-Sħaafiˆiyy, as narrated by Imam Al-Laalakaa’iyy in Sħarĥu ‘Uşuul Iˆtiqaad Ahli-s-Sunnah wa-l-Jamaaˆah, said that Ĥafş Al-Fard, the Muˆtazilite, is a kaafir.

As for those who think Asħ-Sħaafiˆiyy meant that he was unthankful, this is wrong, because Ĥafş said, “Asħ-Sħaafiˆiyy wanted to kill me (2/253).”

Al-Suyuuţiyy said: “Al-Shāfi’īy said: I do not say that the people that have somewhat deviant ideas (ahlu-l-ahwā’) are non-Muslims,” but he exempted those who say that Allāh has a body and those who say that Allāh does not know all details of things (Al-Asħbaah wa-n-Naţħaa’ir, 488).”

In other words, those who have deviance to the extent of blasphemy.

The takfiir of Abuu Ĥaanifah, Maalik and Aĥmad for the Muˆtazilites is famous. When the great Imaam Maalik was asked about marrying one of them he responded by reciting:

وَلَعَبْدٌ مُؤْمِنٌ خَيْرٌ مِنْ مُشْرِكٍ وَلَوْ أَعْجَبَكُمْ [البقرة/221]
Meaning: “Verily a Muslim slave is better than an idolater, even if he impresses you with his wealth, beauty or social status.” (Al-Baqarah, 221)

[...]

Yes, many do not know how extreme he was in anthropomorphism, and those statements you relate from people are nice. However, I am afraid that despite such statements, many are not at all clear about what “unlike creation” means.

Even Ibn Taymiyyah pays lip service to such phrases, although what he means is something like “unimaginably big”. Most of them have been fed a solid feeding of the ideas of physical aboveness and location.

One child, for example was told by a teacher at school that Allaah is in the sky. The child said, “this is not true, Allaah is not in a place.” The teacher insisted and got the kids on her side against the child. Later, the mother faced the teacher saying, “don’t you know that Allaah is the creator of places and is not in a place?” She responded, “Yes, I know, but the parents will not accept my to say that.” She committed kufr for a few hundred dollars teacher salary. This, by the way, was not even in Saudi.

Note that you cannot say “may Allaah forgive Ibn Taymiyyah”

* IF you also believe that he had anthropomorphic beliefs.

* Allaah does not forgive a kaafir, and anthropomorphism is kufr as stated by

* Aţ-Ţaĥaawiyy above. To ask Allaah to forgive a kaafir is disbelief in the Qur’aan:


إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَعَنَ الْكَافِرِينَ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمْ سَعِيرًا خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا أَبَدًا
Meaning: “Verily Aļļaah cursed the blasphemers, and prepared for them a fire that they will be in forever.” (Al-’Aĥzaab, 64-65)

I am speaking of the teachings of Ibn Tayimiyyah and his books that are full of kufr and promoted night and day by his followers. Whether he really repented or not, or said those things or not, is irrelevant.

We cannot sit idly by and let them spread these terrible beliefs based on the idea that he might not have said it or might have repented, or that some scholars claimed he was a waliyy etc. The Ibn Tayimiyyah that is known today is that kaafir who believed that Allaah is a shrinkable spacemonster with a limit sitting on a throne and moving around.

ˆAliyy Al-Qaariy on anthropomorphism

For those that might think that ˆAliyy Al-Qaariy was soft on believers in Aļļaah having a direction, or bodily attributes, because he did not hate Ibn Taymiyyah should think again. The only reason for this was that he did not think that Ibn Taymiyyah had such beliefs. There are many scholars that were in this boat in the past, because Ibn Taymiyyah’s works had not been gathered and consolidated.

Anyway, here is ˆAliyy Al-Qaariy’s view on anthropomorphic beliefs, he states in Sħarĥ Al-Fiqh Al-Akbar:

“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 Aļļaah, 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 ash-Shafi’i who was among the Salaf (b.150 d.204AH, 749/803) said:
رَوَى البَيْهَقِيُّ عَنِ الإِمامِ الشَّافِعِيِّ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ أَنَّهُ قالَ : المجسِّم كافرٌ. رواهُ عنهُ الحافظُ السّيوطيّ في كتابِ الأشباهِ والنظائر.
Means: “The one who attributes to Allàh bodily characteristics is a blasphemer.” This statement was relayed by the Hadith narrator, Imam Ass-Suyoutiy in his book Al Ashbah Wan-Natha’ir.

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal who was among the Salaf (b.163 d.241AH, 762/840) said:
الإمامُ أحمدُ أَبن حنبل رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قالَ : مَنْ قالَ اللَّهُ جِسمٌ لا كالأجسامِ كَفَر. رواهُ عنه الإمامُ الحافظ المحدّثُ بدرُ الدينِ الزَّركَشِي في كتابِ تشنيفِ المسامع.
Means: “The one who says Allàh is body not like other bodies blasphemes.” This statement was relayed by the Hadith narrator, Imam Badr Ad-Dine Az-Zarkashiy in his book Tashnif al Masami^.

The Fatwà of Imam Abu Hanifah in regards to the blasphemy of those who maintain that Allah is in the sky. In his book Al-Fiqh Al-Absat, Imam Abu Hanifah said:
الإِمامَ أَبا حَنِيفَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قالَ : مَنْ قالَ لا أَعْرِفُ اللَّهَ أَفي السَّماءِ هُوَ أَمْ في الأَرْضِ فَقَدْ كَفَر. لأن هذا القول يوهم أن للَّه مكانا، ومن توهم أن للَّه مكانا فهو مشبه.
Means: “Whoever says: ‘I don’t know if Allàh is in the sky or on the earth’, commits blasphemy.” This is because they imagined Allàh in a place and whoever imagines Allàh in a place, is a person who likens Allàh to the creations.

In the book Ar-Risalah (The Message) by Abul-Qasim al-Qushayriyy, Imam Ja^far as-Sadiq (d.148AH) who is among the Great Salaf said:


قالَ الإِمامُ جَعْفَرُ الصَّادِقُ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ : مَنْ زَعَمَ أَنَّ اللَّهَ في شَيْءٍ أَوْ عَلَى شَيْءٍ أَوْ مِنْ شَيْءٍ فَقَدْ أََشْرَكَ إِذْ لَوْ كانَ في شَيْءٍ لَكانَ مَحْصُورًا أَوْ عَلَى شَيْءٍ لَكانَ مَحْمولاً وَلَوْ كَانَ مِنْ شَيْءٍ لَكانَ مُحْدَثاً أَيْ مَخْلُوقاً.


Means: “He who claims that Allàh is in something or on something or from something, commits shirk . Because, had Allàh been in something, He would be contained, had Allàh been on something, He would be carried, had Allàh been from something, He would be something that has a beginning [creation].”



--------------------------------------------------

Ibn Taymiyyah Indulged himself in Kufr

Mullah Ali Qari (rah) who in his later works i.e. Sharh ash-Shifa accepted Ibn Taymiyyah to be indulged in Kufr.

However this time our motive will be to expose Ibn Taymiyyah from his own writings so that the blind lovers of Ibn Taymiyyah are left with no excuse to defend this Mubtadi.


Ibn Taymiyyah compared Allah’s existence to that of Moon/Sun

Let us first see this beautiful hadith of Bukhari:

Volume 1, Book 12, Number 720: (Sahih Bukhari)

Narrated Ibn 'Umar:The Prophet 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."

This hadith goes against the Aqida of Ibn Taymiyyah so here is complete quote from Sharh al Aqida al Wastiyyah (Translated by Muhammad Rafiq Khan, Published by leading Salafi Publishing house i.e. Dar us Salam and I have the book right infront of me)

Ibn Taymiyyah compared Allah to Moon/Sun

Quote:

"Sheikh ul Islam has said in Al-Aqeedatul Hamawiyah that the hadith is true in its manifest meaning that Allah the Exalted is over the Throne and that He is " IN FRONT OF THE FACE OF THE WORSHIPPER" This attribute is in fact proved for the "CREATURE ALSO" that if man prays to the heavens or to the "SUN OR THE MOON" then heaven, the sun and the moon will be "ABOVE HIM AND ALSO IN FRONT OF HIS FACE"

Reference: Sharh al Aqida al Wastiyyah, Page No. 140 - Last Paragraph

Here Ibn Taymiyyah is putting Allah and the creation on par and saying that just like Sun and Moon also come in-front of us similarly Allah is above the heaven but also comes in-front of us… Audhobillah Min Dhalik!! This concept is directly against Surah al-Ikhlaas which states: “And there is none comparable unto Him. (112:4)

And also against this Quranic ayah: (He is) the Creator of the heavens and the earth: He has made for you pairs from among yourselves, and pairs among cattle: by this means does He multiply you: ”THERE IS NOTHING WHATEVER LIKE UNTO HIM” and He is the One that hears and sees (all things).(42:11)

If Salafis are persistent to defend Ibn Taymiyyah then I ask them to prove Ibn Taymiyyah’s repentance from this concept.

Now let me come towards the second great blunder made by Ibn Taymiyyah, It is often said that Ibn Taymiyyah was Ghustakh (degrader) of Prophet (Peace be upon him) and his Ahlul Bayt, now there are variety of issues where he has gone over the board and disrespected the Prophet, for example his rejection of Waseela is also a Ghustakhi but I will not talk about such issues because on this people can argue but I will give a proof which will prove that Ibn Taymiyyah “OPENED ALL DOORS OF DISRESPECT IN COURT OF PROPHET” and nobody before him had ever made such vulgar claims!

Ibn Taymiyyah

forbade travel to Blessed Grave of

Holy Prophet(PBUH)

Ibn Taymiyyah forbade “TRAVELLING TO VISIT THE GRAVE OF PROPHET (PEACE BE UPON HIM)” yes hear it again, Ibn Taymiyyah forbade travelling to visit the grave of Prophet.

Now being Muslims you would be wondering how could someone forbid the visit to grave of Prophet which is amongst the holiest of Muslim places? A place for which we can die and spend our whole lives just to have a glimpse of it.

Ibn Taymiyyah being hasty in hadith (as approved even by Albani) used this hadith as proof:

Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Do not set out on a journey except for three Mosques i.e. Al-Masjid-AI-Haram, the Mosque of Allah's Apostle , and the Mosque of Al-Aqsa, (Mosque of Jerusalem)."[Sahih Bukhari 2:281]

And he claimed that travelling to visit the grave of Prophet (Peace be upon him) is Haram (Naudhobillah), now this is proof of utter ignorance because If this hadith is taken literally then travelling of any sort to other places would become Haram, for example travelling for trade, travelling for seeking knowledge, Jihad etc…

Regarding this outrageous fatwa of Ibn Taymiyyah Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani (rah) said in his magnificent Fath ul Bari Sharh Sahih ul Bukhari:

ابن تيمية بتحريم شد الرحل إلى زيارة قبر سيدنا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وأنكرنا صورة ذلك، وفي شرح ذلك من الطرفين طول، وهي من أبشع المسائل المنقولة عن ابن تيمية

Translation: Ibn Taymiyyah declared it haram to travel for visitng the grave of Sayyidna Rusul Ullah (
صلى الله عليه وسلم ), and of shortening the prayer there. (Ibn Hajr al Asqalani said): "THIS IS THE UGLIEST MATTER EVER REPORTED FROM IBN TAYMIYYAH" [Ibn Hajr al Asqalani, Fath ul Bari Sharh Sahih ul Bukhari, Volume No.3, Page No. 386, Published by Dar ul Fikr, Beirut, Lebanon]

Imam Ibn Hajr's

strong refutation of Ibn Taymiyyah

Then after analyzing this matter deeply Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani (rah) said:

فيبطل بذلك قول من منع شد الرحال إلى زيارة القبر الشريف وغيره من قبور الصالحين والله أعلم

Translation: The Qawl of him is proven Batil (
فيبطل) who says it is forbidden to make journey towards ‘’Qabr Shareef’’ and other “GRAVES OF SALIHEEN (قبور الصالحين)” [ibid]

Before I write Sharh of that hadith from other Shariheen, I want to ask all Salafis whether Ibn Taymiyyah was Bidati or Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani (rah) who called this “THE UGLIEST MATTER EVER REPORTED FROM IBN TAYMIYYAH” and even allowed travelling to visit graves of other Saliheen was bidati?


Imam Jalal ud din Suyuti (rah), the Mujaddad of his time said: Except for these 3 mosques other mosques should not be travelled ‘’for attaining more thawaab’’, however to visit the Qabr of a Salih (righteous man) and travelling for other purposes is not included in this prohibition, this is known from riwaya of Musnad Ahmed which states that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) said: To set out on a journey towards any mosque “FOR PRAYING SALAAT” there is not allowed except for Masjid ul Harram, Masjid al Aqsa and mine. [Imam Jalal ud-din Suyuti, Sharah Sunnan Ibn Majah (1/102)]

Imam Nawawi
(rah) beautifully said:

قال القاضي : وقوله صلى الله عليه وسلم : ( وهو يأرز إلى المدينة ) معناه أن الإيمان أولا وآخرا بهذه الصفة لأنه في أول الإسلام كان كل من خلص إيمانه وصح إسلامه أتى المدينة , إما مهاجرا مستوطنا , وإما متشوقا إلى رؤية رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ومتعلما منه ومتقربا ثم بعده هكذا في زمن الخلفاء كذلك , ولأخذ سيرة العدل منهم والاقتداء بجمهور الصحابة رضوان الله عليهم فيها ثم من بعدهم من العلماء الذين كانوا سرج الوقت وأئمة الهدى لأخذ السنن المنتشرة بها عنهم فكان كل ثابت الإيمان منشرح الصدر به يرحل إليها ثم بعد ذلك في كل وقت إلى زماننا لزيارة قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم والتبرك بمشاهده وآثاره وآثار أصحابه الكرام فلا يأتيها إلا مؤمن هذا كلام القاضي

Translation: Qadhi Iyaad (rah) said: The Messenger of Allah (Peace be upon him) said: (Imaan) returns to Madina, this means that the attribute of Faith in the beginning and last would remain same, because in the beginning of Islam every person whose Faith and Islam were pure they used to visit Madina as an immigrant or just for the sight of Prophet (Peace be upon him), or to learn from Prophet or to attain his nearness. Then in the time of Khulafa ar Rashideen the People with faith had the same attitude so that they can learn justice from them as the rule of majority of Companions was also there (in Madina). After the rightly guided caliphs, the scholars who were Lamps and Imams of guidance kept on coming to gather Prophetic sayings from them, therefore every true believer who was firm in belief kept on travelling towards Madina, then after these Scholars till today people come for “Ziyarah of Grave of Prophet (Peace be upon him) in order to obtain Blessings (Tabarruk) from left overs of Prophet and Sahaba” so Only that person comes to Madina who is a true believer.[Sharh Sahih Muslim by Imam al-Nawawi (2/144), Published by Dar ul Fikr, Beirut, Lebanon]



Mullah Ali Qari
(rah) quotes Imam al Ghazzali (rah) the Proof of Islam who in his exceptional work Ihya Uloom ud Din said: ” In my sight this hadith actually orders to visit Maqabir of Saliheen” because Prophet (Peace be upon him) said: I used to forbid you from visiting graves but now I allow you [Agreed upon], however in the hadith [travelling to 3 mosques] it is forbidden to travel to other mosques ‘’just for the sake of seeking more Thawaab’’, so except for these three Masajid thawaab in every other mosque is same, as a matter of fact there is no population on earth where they don’t have a masjid so why would anyone specifically travel to a mosque which is far for attaining more thawaab, “but the Maqabir are not equal in virtue rather the virtue of visiting them depends on the piety...

...and virtue of the one who is burined inside the Qabr, It is a shame that some people forbid travelling towards qaboor of even Ibrahim (a.s), Hadrat Musa (a.s) and Hadrat Yahya (a.s), to stop others from visiting qaboor is a strange act [Mullah Ali Qari, Mirqat Sharh al Mishqaat (2/190)]


This leaves behind no doubt that not only travelling to visit graves of Prophets but also “TRAVELING TO VISIT GRAVES OF AWLIYA” is allowed in sight of greatest commentators of Sahihayn and leading authorities, so according to Salafis not only Ibn Taymiyyah should become Bidati but also all these great scholars should turn out to be Mushrikeen who allowed travelling to visit the “SHRINES OF AWLIYA”

Wahabi/Salafi forgery

The outrageous verdict of Ibn Taymiyyah is so blindly followed by Salafis that they even forged the text of Imam al Nawawi (rah) and everywhere Imam Nawawi mentioned “QABR” they changed it to “MOSQUE” in order to make him correspond to fatwa of Ibn Taymiyyah (i.e. it is fine to make intention for mosque but not grave)

Imam al Mujtahid Muhayuddin Abi Zakriyyah Yahya bin Sharaf al Nawawi (Rahimuhullah) said in his Kitab al Adhkaar:

Click Here to Enlarge scan

Translation: "Section: The Visit to the Tomb of the Messenger of Allah (Allah Bless Him and Give Him Peace), and the Remembrances of Allah Made There"

Know that "Everyone" who performs the hajj "Should set out" (
اعلم أنه ينبغي لكل من حجّ) to visit the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace), "Whether it is on one’s way or not" (سواء كان ذلك طريقه أو لم يكن), for visiting him (Allah bless him and give him peace) is one of the most important acts of worship, the most rewarded of efforts, and best of goals.

When one sets out to perform the visit, one should do much of the blessings and peace upon him (Allah bless him and give him peace) on the way. And when one’s eye falls on the trees of Medina, and its sanctum and landmarks, one should increase saying the blessings and peace upon the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), "Asking Allah Most High to benefit one by one’s visit to him" (Allah bless him and give him peace) [
وسألَ اللّه تعالى أن ينفعَه بزيارته صلى اللّه عليه وسلم], and grant one felicity in this world and the next through it. One should say, "O Allah, open for me the doors of Your mercy, and bestow upon me, through the visit to the tomb of Your prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)[اللَّهُمَّ افْتَحْ عَليَّ أبْوَابَ رَحْمَتِكَ وَارْزُقْنِي في زِيارَةِ قَبْرِ نَبِيِّكَ], that which You have bestowed upon Your friends, those who obey You. Forgive me and show me mercy, O Best of Those Asked" (Imam al-Nawawi in Kitab ul-Adhkar, Page # 178).

Now Salafis not only forged the translation but they forged the actual Arabic of this statement, they changed “EVERYONE SHOULD” into “IT IS PREFERABLE” and everywhere there is mention of “GRAVE” they changed it to “MOSQUE” and finally they removed the whole passage in which Imam Nawawi (rah) is proving “WASEELA” through Prophet (Peace be upon him).

This forgery has been done in the 1409/1988 printing of this work, published by Dar al-Huda in Riyad, Saudi Arabia, under the inspection and approval of the Riyasa Idara al-Buhuth al-‘Ilmiyya wa al-Ifta’ or "Presidency of Supervision of Scholarly Studies and Islamic Legal Opinion but they were caught doing cheating red-handed.

Now the Salafis instead of running towards Aqwaal of Ulama should concentrate on the sayings of Ibn Taymiyyah himself, and they should stop doing taqlid and accept openly that Ibn Taymiyyah was a misguided Bidati.

Ibn Taymiyyah said in his book At-Tawassul wal Waseela:

وكذلك الأنبياء والصالحون، وإن كانوا أحياء في قبورهم،

It means: Similarly the prophets and righteous people, and even if they were alive in their graves…


Wahabi/salafi claim that Ibn Taymiyyah was not sure about Hayaat of Anbiya in their respective graves, wahabi/salafi are proudly claiming that Ibn Taymiyyah used the wording “EVEN IF”

Now here is reply from Prophet (Peace be upon him)

حدثنا أبو الجهم الأزرق بن علي حدثنا يحيى بن أبي بكير حدثنا المستلم بن سعيد عن الحجاج عن ثابت البناني عن أنس بن مالك : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم : الأنبياء أحياء في قبورهم يصلون
إسناده صحيح
رواه أبو يعلى والبزار ورجال أبي يعلى ثقات

Translation: On the authority of Anas the Prophet (Peace be upon him) said: The Prophets are alive in their graves and praying [Musnad Abu Ya’la with Sahih Isnad, Volume No.6, Page No. 147, Hadith No. 3428] –

Imam al-Haythami after this hadith said: Abu Ya’la and Bazzar narrated it and all the narrators of Abu Ya’la are “THIQA” [Majma al Zawaid Volume 8, Page No. 386, Hadith No. 13812]

So we give full credit to wahabi/salafis that Ibn Taymiyyah said “EVEN IF” but on the other hand our beloved Prophet (Peace be upon him) is clearly saying that “PROPHETS ARE ALIVE AND PRAYING IN THEIR GRAVES”

Some wahhabis claim to be "Hanafi Muqalid who do tark of Raf al Yaddain (note raful yaddain is the top most masla of wahabis in fiqh)" and in Aqida they respect the stance of Sheikh ul Akbar Muhayuddin Ibn Arabi (rah), also note that Ibn Arabi (rah) is outright kafir in sight of Wahabis, some wahhabi/Deobandis also considers Ibn Taymiyyah to be deeply mistaken on variety of issues (not only in fiqh but aqida) but still they keeps on defending Ibn Taymiyyah because for them Aqida is not important but love of Ibn Taymiyyah is more important...

Quote,Wahhabi said, after seeing the absurd aqida of Ibn Taymiyyah comparing Allah to the moon/sun: Note: I personally disagree with the statement of Sheikh ul Islam but even it is not Shirk Because Imam Abu Hanifa Hold the Same Belief (that of Ibn e Taymiya (RA)).

Alhamdulillah he first accepted to disagree with this absurd aqida of Ibn Taymiyyah, but in the same passage he made a big Buhtaan on Imam al Adham Abu Hanifa (rah) that he had the same belief that Allah comes in-front of us just like Sun and Moon come infront of us… Audhobillah Min Dhalik.

Wahhabis after quoting the hadith of seeing Allah on day of judgment said: I WANT TO ASK PROPHET PEACE BE UPON HIM IS MATCHING ALLAH WITH MOON AND SUN NAUDHUBILLAH OR WHAT?

Everyone first say "Audhobillah Min Dhalik" loudly because this type of wahabi in their blind love of Ibn Taymiyyah have compared the wording of Prophet (Peace be upon him) to "personal taweel" of Ibn Taymiyyah and he has also grossly misinterpreted both the issues. So according to sahih ahadith a person who gives false Taweel on Quran or Hadith then he will be occupy his seat in hell fire!

Remember the hadith of Bukhari which I cited clearly says that "ALLAH IS IN-FRONT OF THE BELIEVER DURING PRAYER" and in interpretation of this hadith Ibn Taymiyyah said that Allah comes in front of us just like "SUN/MOON BEING IN SKY ALSO COME INFRONT OF US"

First of all I want asim to swear upon Allah that he did not say to me on phone that he accepts attributes of Allah “BILA KAYF WA TASHBIH” Secondly he is forgetting that Sun and Moon are in "CREATION" whereas Allah is not "IN CREATION" so Ibn Taymiyyah comparing Allah coming in-front of us equivalent to Sun/moon coming in-front of us is nothing short of Kufr.

On the other hand Prophet (Peace be upon him) saying that we will see Allah on day of judgment just like we have no trouble in seeing the full moon. This has absolutely no relevance and it does not justify Ibn Taymiyyah's clear Tashbih of Allah’s existence to Sun/Moon!

The Lord of Ibn Taymiyyah puts his Foot in Hell!

This is just the beginning and I wanted Salafis to come towards teachings of Ibn Taymiyyah. They often misguide people by quoting other scholars but they always hide the actual teachings of Ibn Taymiyyah because they know teachings of Ibn Taymiyyah were absurd.

Now here is another shocker for Salafis.

It states in same "Sharh al Aqidat-il-Wastiyyah"

The Prophet (
صلى الله عليه وسلم) says that people will be constantly thrown into Hell but it will go on asking if there are some more. Thus, Allah the Lord of Might "WILL PUT HIS FOOT IN IT" and in one narrative it has occoured that "HE WILL PUT HIS STEP IN IT" and Hell get contracted and say, 'Enough, enough.' (Al-Bukhari 6/353)

(Ibn Taymiyyah explained): The Hadith afffirms that Allah possesses "FEET AND STEPS" and this attribute is exactly like other attributes. This will be proved worthy of the Grandeur of Allah. The rationale behind putting "THE STEP INTO HELL" is that Allah has promised that He will fill up Hell. [Sharh al-Aqidat-il-Wastiyah, Page No. 136, Published by Dar us Salaam, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia]

Here Ibn Taymiyyah is literally affirming that Allah will place his foot “IN HELL” Audhobillah Min Dhalik whereas classical scholars have rightly explained that Al-Qadam mentioned in this hadith refers to “PREVIOUS ONES” like we say “Mutaqadimeen”

Hafidh Ibn al-Jawzi (rah) explains this hadith as:

In considering this hadith, it is our duty to believe that God’s essence, Mighty and Majestic, does not divide into parts, “PLACE CANNOT CONTAIN IT” and it cannot be characterized by change and going from one place to another. Abu Ubayd al-Harawi (rah) related that Hasan al-Basri (rah) said: “Al-Qadam (literally a foot)” is a reference to “THOSE FROM THE WORST OF GOD’S CREATURES WHO HAVE BEEN EARMARKED AND DESIGNATED FOR HELL...

Abu Manzur al-Azhari (rah) said: “Al-Qadam” are those who have been preordained to reside everlastingly in the Fire. And things that have been placed out in front are refered to in Arabic as “Qadam” while things that have been demolished are called “Hadam” … How feeble minded this belief is (of Allah literally putting foot in hell)! Be it “FAR REMOVED FROM THE CREATOR” ..GOD IS EXALTED ABOVE THE FOOLISHNESS OF THOSE WHO LIKEN HIM TO A HUMAN BODY”

[Ibn Jawzi in Daf’ Shubah al-Tashbih bi-Akaff al-Tanzih, Page No.78-80]

So Shame on Ibn Taymiyyah for literally putting the foot of Allah in Hell fire … AstaghfirUllah!

The reasons are given in my posts, Ibn Taymiyyah was a person who gave wrong literal interpretations of Zaat and Sifaat of Allah, he is the person who disrespected the Prophet (Peace be upon him) to the extent that he even declared Traveling to visit his blessed grave as "HARAM" ..Naudhobillah. He is the person who insulted Ahlul Bayt (Family of Prophet) which I will prove later in discussion.

Ibn Taymiyyah's hatred for Ahlul Bayt

After proving his absurd Aqida about Existance of Allah being like Sun/Moon (Naudhobillah), Allah literally putting his "FEET IN HELL FIRE" (Naudhobillah) and his utter disrespect in court of Prophet (Peace be upon him) by forbidding even travel to visit his grave.

Now let me come towards his disrespect in the court of Ahlul Bayt.

The Ahlus Sunnah wal Jammah and even Salafis of today accept the hadith of Prophet (Peace be upon him) which states: "For Whosoever I am Mawla then Ali is his Mawla: References: Sunnan Tirmidhi 6:79 (#3713), Sunnan Ibn Majah (Hadith # 124), Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal (Hadith # 642, 953, 964, 1323, 18967, 22563,22724, 22760) Sunnan Nasai al Kubra (Hadith # 8051), Mussanaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (Hadith # 27808) and many others.

This hadith is narrated by so many companions that it is "MUTAWATTIR" however Ibn Taymiyyah being ignorant as he was declared this hadith as "DAEEF AND FORGED" and this proves his utter hatred for Mawla Ali (ra)

Even Nasir ud-din Albani after declaring this hadith as "SAHIH" exposed Ibn Taymiyyah on this issue and said:

Nasir ud-din Albani exposes Ibn Taymiyyah’s ignorance in hadith methodology

أنني رأيت شيخ الإسلام بن تيمية , قد ضعف الشطر الأول من الحديث , و أما
الشطر الآخر , فزعم أنه كذب! و هذا من مبالغته الناتجة في تقديري من تسرعه
في تضعيف الأحاديث قبل أن يجمع طرقها و يدقق النظر فيها

Translation: When I saw Sheikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyah considering the Hadith (For whosoever I am Mawla then Ali is his Mawla) as weak/doubtful in its first half and “LIE IN ITS SECOND” then I had to write in length over this issue. In my viewpoint, the reason behind such exaggeration (of Ibn Taymiyah) was that he used to be hasty in deciding the inauthenticity of some Hadiths before seeing them properly [Silsilat ul Ahadith as-Sahiha, Volume No.4, Page No. 344]

Wahabi quoted Fiqh al Akbar and said: Now I don't Want batil Taweelat of this clearcut statement, Neither one should utter the silly statement like Fiqh ul Akbar Was Not Written By Imam Abu Hanifa


wahabi quoted: God knows, but not as we know; He has power, but not as we have power; He sees, but not as we see; He hears, but not as we hear; and He speaks, but not as we speak. We speak by means of the speech organs and sounds, whereas God Most High speaks with “NEITHER ORGANS NOR SOUNDS” Sounds are created, and the word of God Most High is uncreated. He is a thing, but unlike other things; by saying "thing," we intend merely to affirm His reality.”HE HAS NEITHER A BODY NOR SUBSTANCE, NEITHER ACCIDENTAL PROPERYY NOR LIMIT”, neither opposite nor like nor similitude. [Fiqh al Akbar. Point # 4]


So even if assuming Fiqh ul Akbar is written by Imam Abu Hanifa, It does not mean he had similar aqida like Ibn Taymiyyah the anthropomorphist. And kindly tell me do you really believe that “ALLAH SHALL LITERALLY PUT HIS FOOT IN HELL FIRE” is this the Allah you worship who puts his foot in hell fire literally (Naudhobillah)?

Above all how on earth did Ibn Taymiyyah change a “Singular foot” into “PLURAL FEET” this itself proves extreme Tajseem of Ibn Taymiyyah and he ventured out of Ahlus Sunnah by making taweel (i.e. chainging singal foot into plural feet)

Ibn Taymiyyah's hatred for Sayyidah Fatima (ra)

Now It is clear that Ibn Taymiyyah was an anthropomorphist and also degrader of Prophet (Peace be upon him), so let us again come towards his disrespect towards Ahlul Bayt.

He (Ibn Taimiyah) Writes:

فإن أبا بكر إمام ل يتصرف لنفسه بل للمسلمين ، والمال لم يأخذه لنفسه بل للمسلمين، وفاطمة تطلب لنفسها

Translation: Verily Abu Bakr is an Imam who did not act for himself but for the Muslims and as for the money, he did not take it for himself but for the Muslims whilst Fatima was demanding it for her “NAFS” [Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 005, Page No. 522]

Audhobillah Min Dhalik !!… Remember It is correct to say that Sayyidna Abu Bakr (ra) was right in his perspective because he knew from Rusul Ullah (Salallaho alaihi wasalam) that property of Anbiya is not inherited but this does not mean we say that Fatima (ra) was asking for money for her “NAFS” This will actually be direct Ghustakhi of Prophet (Peace be upon him) because he said in a rigorously authentic hadith:


Volume 5, Book 57, Number 61: (Sahih Bukhari)

Narrated Al-Miswar bin Makhrama:

Allah's Apostle said,

"Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry."

---


Ibn Taymiyyah said:
بذلك على أن علياً أعلم من معاذ بن جبل جاهل

Translation: Whosoever consider Ali (ra) a greater scholar than Muadh bin Jabal (ra) is “JAHIL” [Majmua al Fatawa, Volume No.4, Page No. 410]

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 5 page 522:

فإن أبا بكر إمام لا يتصرف لنفسه بل للمسلمين ، والمال لم يأخذه لنفسه بل للمسلمين ، وفاطمة تطلب لنفسها

Verily Abu Bakr is an Imam who did not act for himself but for the Muslims and as for the money, he did not take it for himself but for the Muslims whilst Fatima was demanding it for herself.


Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 4 page 132:

أو ليس الله قد ذم المنافقين الذين قال فيهم ومنهم من يلمزك في الصدقات فإن أعطوا منها ورضا وإن لم يعطوا منها إذا هم يسخطون ولو نهم رضوا ما اتاهم الله ورسوله وقالوا حسبنا الله سيوتينا الله من فضله ورسوله إنا إلى الله راغبون فذكر الله قوما رضوا إن اعطوا وغضبوا إن لم يعطوا فذمهم بذلك

Hasn’t Allah (swt) condemned the hypocrites those who said about them {And of them is he who defameth thee in the matter of the alms. If they are given thereof they are content, and if they are not given thereof, behold! they are enraged. If only they had been content with what Allah and His Messenger gave them, and had said, "Sufficient unto us is Allah! Allah and His Messenger will soon give us of His bounty to Allah do we turn our hopes} Allah mentioned people that if they are given they will be pleased, but if they are not given they get angry, and Allah condemned them.

Such blasphemy lead to Sunni scholar Mahmoud Subaih in his book Akhta ibn Taimiyah, page 63 commenting:

خطأ جسيم لابن تيمية لا يغتفر إلا إذا تاب منه قبل رحيله وهو تشبيهه غضب السيدة فاطمة الزهراء رضي الله عنها من الصديق رضي الله عنه بغضب المنافقين

A huge mistake by Ibn Taimiyah that is unforgivable,
unless he repented prior to death, was his likening the anger of Lady Fatima az-Zahra (may Allah be pleased with) towards as-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with) with the anger of hypocrites.

Ibn Taimiyah’s blasphemous views towards Imam Ali bin Abi Talib [ra]

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 8 page 230:

وعلي يقاتل ليطاع ويتصرف في النفوس والأموال فكيف يجعل هذا قتالا على الدين

“Ali fought to secure obedience and rule the people and money, so how can that be deemed as fighting for sake of religion?”

We read in Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 8 page 205:


وأما إسلام علي فهل يكون مخرجا له من الكفر على قولين

There are two opinions as to whether Ali's conversion to Islam released him from kufr or not"

Ibn Taymiyyah Hatred towards Sahabas (ra)



Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 4 page 137:

وعلي رضي الله عنه كان قصده أن يتزوج عليها فله في أذاها غرض

“Ali intended to marry so as to hurt her (Fatima) on purpose.”

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 7 page 172:

وقد أنزل الله تعالى في على يا أيها الذين آمنوا لا تقربوا الصلاة وأنتم سكارى حتى تعلموا ما تقولون لما صلى فقرا وخلطوا

“Allah had revealed for Ali {O ye who believe! Draw not near unto prayer when ye are drunken, till ye know that which ye utter,} when he prayed and recited and then got mixed up.”


Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 7 page 172:

قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وكان الإنسان اكثر شيء جدلا لما قال له ولفاطمة إلا تصليان فقالا أنما أنفسنا بيد الله سبحانه وتعالى.

The prophet said to them '{but man is more than anything contentious}'. When he said to him (Ali) and Fatima, 'Wont you pray?' They replied: 'Our souls are in the hands of Allah (swt)'

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 3 page 53:

فإنه لما أمرهم بقيام الليل فاعتل علي رضي الله عنه بالقدر وأنه لو شاء الله لأيقظنا علم النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أن هذا ليس فيه إلا مجرد الجدل الذي ليس بحق فقال وكان الإنسان أكثر شيء جدلا.

"When he (the Prophet) ordered them to offer the night prayer, Ali [ra] came up with the prepared excuse that ‘if Allah wants he will wake us up’, the prophet realized that this was merely an argument that was not right, therefore he recited {but man is more than anything contentious}".

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 8 page 161:

وعلي قد اختلف فيه هل حفظ القرآن كله أم لا

“Ali, there is disagreement about him as to whether he had memorized the whole Quran or not.”


Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 6 page 67:

ولم يحصل بقتلهم مصلحة للمسلمين لا في دينهم ولا في دنياهم بل نقص الخير عما كان وزاد الشر

“Their fighting served no benefit for the Muslims in their religion nor in their life, on the contrary the good had been decreased and the evil had been increased.”

Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 4 page 20:

قوله في على إنه كان يصلي الف ركعة فإن هذا لا فضيلة فيه

“His (Allamah Heli’s) statement that Ali would pray one thousand raka, surely there is no virtue in it”



Ibn Taimiyah attack on Imam jafar sadiq of Ahlulbayt (r.a)

in Minhaj al Sunnah, Volume 7 page 533

"These four Imams, no one of them took any thing related to jurisprudence from Jaffar."

online source: Here

Ibne Hajar Asqalani in Lisan al-Mizan, by ibn Hajar, Volume 6, page 320:

وكم من مبالغة لتوهين كلام الرافضي أدته أحيانا إلى تنقيص علي رضي الله عنه

"The exaggeration in refuting the Rafidhi text has sometimes taken him to towards belittling Ali [ra]"

---

Ibn Taimiyah believed in the extinguishing of hell fire

We read in
al-Beshara wa al-Ethaf by Allamah Hassan al-Saqqaf, page 13:

ثبت ان ابن تيمية يقول بفناء النار

“It is proven that ibn Taimiyah believed in the extinguishing of hell fire.”

Ibn Taimiyah believed that the prophet will sit next to Allah (swt) on the throne

Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 4 page 374:

فَقَدْ حَدَثَ الْعُلَمَاءُ الْمَرْضِيُّونَ وَأَوْلِيَاؤُهُ الْمَقْبُولُونَ : أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يُجْلِسُهُ رَبُّهُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ مَعَهُ .

The reliable and acceptable scholars narrated that, God shall make Muhammad the messenger of Allah sit next to Him [swt] on the throne.

Al-Nahr al-Mad by Abu Hayan, Volume 1 page 254:

وقرأت في كتاب لأحمد بن تيمية هذا الذي عاصرنا وهو بخطه سماه كتاب العرش إن الله تعالى يجلس على الكرسي وقد أخلى منه مكانا يقعد فيه معه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم

I read in a book in the hand writing of Ahmad ibn Taimiyah, who was from our era, with the title 'Kitab al-Arsh', (wherein) he said in it, that Allah sits on a throne and has a free space to make the messenger of Allah sit on it


Can there is great kufr to say Allah sits on some chair like human beings. This is absolute hindu kufr belief and anthropomorphism

Ibn Taimiyah believed that the Muslims should eat bloody meat without washing it

Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 21, page 522:

بَلْ غَسْلُ لَحْمِ الذَّبِيحَةِ بِدْعَةٌ فَمَا زَالَ الصَّحَابَةُ - رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ - عَلَى عَهْدِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَأْخُذُونَ اللَّحْمَ فَيَطْبُخُونَهُ وَيَأْكُلُونَهُ بِغَيْرِ غَسْلِهِ وَكَانُوا يَرَوْنَ الدَّمَ فِي الْقِدْرِ

Nay washing the flesh is Bida (innovation). The companions may Allah be pleased with them during the time of the Prophet [s] used to cook the meat and eat it without washing it. They would see the blood in the cooking pot.

Ibn Taimiyah believed that God can ride on a mosquito

We read in Bayan Talbis al-Jahamia by ibn Taimiyah, Volume 1 page 568:

ولو قد شاء لاستقر على ظهر بعوضة

If He (God) wants, He can sit on a mosquito's back.

Ibn Taimiyah cited this text from al-Daremi and he wrote that and he believed in it. We read in Al-Beshara wa al-Ethaf Allamah by Hassan al-Saqqaf, page 21:

ويجوز استقراره على ظهر بعوضة

“He permits the possibility of His sitting on mosquito's back”

Ibn Taimiyah believed that Allah (swt) has a body

Bayan Talbis al-Jahamia, Volume 1 page 101:

وليس في كتاب الله ولا سنة رسوله ولا قول أحد من سلف الأمة وأئمتها أنه ليس بجسم وأن صفاته ليست أجساما

“There is nothing in the book, Sunnah, nor in the statements of the Salaf, or Imams of the nation that He (Allah) is not a body and His features are not a body.”

We also read in Al-Tasis fi al-Rad ala Assas al-Taqdis by ibn Taimiyah, Volume 25 page 31:

فمن المعلوم أن الكتاب والسنة والإجماع لم ينطق بأن الأجسام كلها محدثة وأن الله ليس بجسم ولا قال ذلك إمام من أئمة المسلمين ، فليس في تركي لهذا القول خروج عن الفطرة ولا عن الشريعة

It is known that the book (Quran), Sunnah and Ijma didn’t say that all the bodies are created, also didn’t say that Allah is not a body and nor did any Imam of the Muslims, assert such a thing. Therefore, in my abandoning that statement there isn’t any deviation from neither instinct nor the law.

Ibn Taimiyah believe that Allah (swt) is like a beardless man

We read in al-Tasis fi al-rad ala Asas al-Taqdis, Volume 3 page 214:

فيتضح أنها رؤية عين كما في الحديث الصحيح المرفوع عن قتادة عن عكرمة عن ابن عباس قال قال رسول الله رأيت ربي في صورة أمرد له وفرة جعد قطط في روضة خضراء

We conclude that it was eyesight as it is in the Sahih narration from Qutada from Ikrama from Ibn Abbas said that the Prophet said : ‘I saw my God in image of beardless (man), with long curly hair in a green garden’

Ibn Taimiyah believed that Allah (swt) swings on ropes to get to his intended destination

We read in Majmo'a al-Fatawa, Volume 2 page 76:

اللَّهَ قَادِرٌ عَلَى أَنْ يَخْرُقَ مِنْ هُنَا إلَى هُنَاكَ بِحَبْلِ

”Allah is able to relocate from here to there through rope”

Ibn Taimiyah h believed that chemistry is forbidden

While referring to the study of Chemistry, Ibn Taimiyah said in Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 29 page 368:

وَذَلِكَ كُلُّهُ مُحَرَّمٌ فِي الشَّرْعِ

“All that is forbidden according to Islamic laws”

وَأَمَّا جَابِرُ بْنُ حَيَّانَ صَاحِبُ الْمُصَنَّفَاتِ الْمَشْهُورَةِ عِنْدَ الْكِيمَاوِيَّةِ فَمَجْهُولٌ لَا يُعْرَفُ وَلَيْسَ لَهُ ذِكْرٌ بَيْنَ أَهْلِ الْعِلْمِ وَلَا بَيْنَ أَهْلِ الدِّينِ

Jaber ibn Hayan, the author of the renowned books in Chemistry is unknown and is not mentioned among the scholars nor the people of religion.
Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 29 page 374

Ibn Taimiyah believed that Prophet Shu'aib was pagan

We read in Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 15 page 29:

قَوْلُهُ سُبْحَانَهُ : { قَالَ الْمَلَأُ الَّذِينَ اسْتَكْبَرُوا مِنْ قَوْمِهِ لَنُخْرِجَنَّكَ يَا شُعَيْبُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مَعَكَ مِنْ قَرْيَتِنَا أَوْ لَتَعُودُنَّ فِي مِلَّتِنَا قَالَ أَوَلَوْ كُنَّا كَارِهِينَ } { قَدِ افْتَرَيْنَا عَلَى اللَّهِ كَذِبًا إنْ عُدْنَا فِي مِلَّتِكُمْ بَعْدَ إذْ نَجَّانَا اللَّهُ مِنْهَا وَمَا يَكُونُ لَنَا أَنْ نَعُودَ فِيهَا إلَّا أَنْ يَشَاءَ اللَّهُ رَبُّنَا } ظَاهِرُهُ دَلِيلٌ عَلَى أَنَّ شُعَيْبًا وَاَلَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مَعَهُ كَانُوا عَلَى مِلَّةِ قَوْمِهِمْ ؛ لِقَوْلِهِمْ : { أَوْ لَتَعُودُنَّ فِي مِلَّتِنَا } وَلِقَوْلِ شُعَيْبٍ : ( أ نَعُودُ فِيهَا { أَوَلَوْ كُنَّا كَارِهِينَ } وَلِقَوْلِهِ : { قَدِ افْتَرَيْنَا عَلَى اللَّهِ كَذِبًا إنْ عُدْنَا فِي مِلَّتِكُمْ } فَدَلَّ عَلَى أَنَّهُمْ كَانُوا فِيهَا . وَلِقَوْلِهِ : { بَعْدَ إذْ نَجَّانَا اللَّهُ مِنْهَا } . فَدَلَّ عَلَى أَنَّ اللَّهَ أَنْجَاهُمْ مِنْهَا بَعْدَ التَّلَوُّثِ بِهَا

His (swt) saying { The chiefs, those who were proud from among his people said: We will most certainly turn you out, O Shu'aib, and (also; those who believe with you, from our town, or you shall come back to our faith. He said: What! though we dislike (it)?} { Indeed we shall have forged a lie against Allah If we go back to your religion after Allah has delivered us from It, and it befits us not that we should go back to it, except if Allah our Lord please: Our Lord comprehends all things :n His knowledge; in Allah do we trust: Our Lord! decide between us and our people with truth; and Thou art the best of deciders. } serves as proof that Shu'aib and whoever was with him were on the religion of their people for his (Allah) saying:

{ or you shall come back to our faith} and for Shu'aib’s reply {What! though we dislike (it)} and His statement {Indeed we shall have forged a lie against Allah If we go back to your religion} and this proves they were on their religion. And for His statement {after Allah has delivered us from It} that proves that Allah saved them from it after they get polluted by it.

Ibn Taimiyah believed that Allah has two right hands

We read in
Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 17 page 92:

وَقَدْ جَاءَ ذِكْرُ الْيَدَيْنِ فِي عِدَّةِ أَحَادِيثَ وَيَذْكُرُ فِيهَا أَنَّ كِلْتَاهُمَا يَمِينٌ

“The hands are mentioned in several traditions and we are informed that both of them are right hands.”

Ibn Taimiyah believed that the Yazidies are Muslims and believers

We read in
Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 3 page 363:

مِنْ أَحْمَدَ ابْنِ تَيْمِيَّة إلَى مَنْ يَصِلُ إلَيْهِ هَذَا الْكِتَابُ مِنْ الْمُسْلِمِينَ الْمُنْتَسِبِينَ إلَى السُّنَّةِ وَالْجَمَاعَةِ ؛ الْمُنْتَمِينَ إلَى جَمَاعَةِ الشَّيْخِ الْعَارِفِ الْقُدْوَةِ . أَبِي الْبَرَكَاتِ عَدِيِّ بْنِ مُسَافِرٍ الْأُمَوِيِّ " - رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ وَمَنْ نَحَا نَحْوَهُمْ

From Ahmad ibn Taimiyah to whoever shall receive my message from the Muslims that belong to the Sunnah and Jam'aa who belong to the group of the wise and ideal Sheikh Abi al-Barakat Uday bin Musafer al-Umawi may Allah's mercy be upon him.

For those who don’t know
who the Yazidies and Uday bin Musafer are, allow us to present information from Sunni books. We read in Min Qamoos al-Adyan by Dr. Asad al-Sehmarani, page 63:

أصل نشأة اليزيدية يعود إلى الشيخ عدي بن مسافر

“The origin of Yazidis belongs to Sheikh Uday bin Musafir”

On page 71, we read:

عدي بن مسافر الذي ينسبون أنفسهم إليه يعود نسبه إلى مروان بن الحكم

“Uday bin Musafir, his lineage ends at Marwan bin al-Hakam”

On page 70, we read:

اليزيديون المعاصرون يصرحون بأن أصل طائفتهم وما تلتزمه يعود إلى يزيد بن معاوية

“The modern Yazidis declare that their sect and beliefs belong to Yazid bin Mu'awiya”

On page 75, we read:

يتمتع الشيطان بمكانة خاصة في معتقدات اليزيدية ....أنهم يقدسونه ويعلون مكانته

“Satan has a special status among the Yazidis beliefs…they glorify him and increase his status”.


We read in Mawsuat al-Adyan wa al-Madaheb by Abdulrazaq Aswad, Volume 3 page 264:

وتعتقد اليزيدية ان ديانتهم سماوية جاء بها يزيد بن معاوية

“TheYazidis believe that their religion is heavenly and Yazid bin Mu'awiya brought it”

Ibn Taimiyah believed in adult suckling

واختار شيخ الإسلام ابن تيميه رحمه الله التفصيل وقال إذا دعت الحاجة إلى إرضاع الكبير وأرضع ثبت التحريم

Ibn Uthaymeen said: Sheikh ul-Islam ibn Taimiyah chose to explain in detail and said that if the breast suckling by an adult was necessary and he suckled, then the prohibition (of marriage) is established."[Fatawa Nur Ala Aldarb by Ibn Uthaimeen, Volume 10 page 204]

-------

AstaghfirUllah !

Ibn Hajar al-Haythami said:

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.”

( Al-Fatawa al-Hadithya Pg 114)