Sunday, 15 February 2015

The Creator is clear from Anthropomorphism - Part3 (1000AH - 1400AH)





Part 3

===========
1,000 AH
===========

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 علىاثبات 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:

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 sleepSecond, 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.] 
--
Imām Rabbānī Shaykh Ahmad al-Farūqī al-Sirhindī writes.
"In Paradise Muslims will see Allâhu ta’âlâ without direction,without being opposite Him, without realizing how He is, without being surrounded, i.e., without being in any shape. We believe in seeing Allâhu ta’âlâ in the Hereafter. We do not think of how He will be seen. For, mind cannot understand seeing Him. We have no other choice but to believe. Shame upon philosophers, upon those Muslims called the Mu’tazila, and upon all the groups, except the Ahl as-sunnat, because they were too blind and were deprived of this belief. Attempting to liken something which they did not see or know to those things which they saw, they deprived themselves of the honor of îmân. [Maktubat 2:67]


-------------------------
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 asIbn ‘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.
 1083AH), 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 400Years -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 Ahmad Ibn Muhammad As-Sawi al-Misri al-Maliki (d.1241 AH) In his book "Hashiyyatou s-Sawi" is a commentary on al-tafsir Jalalayn.
Shaykh As-Sawi says the hadith on the rise (al-Miraj) and declared disbeliever those who attribute to Allah the place. In his book "Hashiyyatou s-tafsir al-Sawi ala Jalalayn," 
Shaykh As-Sawi said about the hadith of al-Isra wa-l Miraj:
"قوله" قال فرجعت الى ربي "اي الى المكان الذي ناجيت فيه ربي و ليس المراد ان الله في ذلك المكان و رجع له فإن اعتقاد ذلك كفر"
Rough translation:
"His word (that is to say the Prophet)" قال فرجعت الى ربي "(qala farajatou ila Rabbi) means the place where I received the revelation of my Lord. And it is not that Allah is mentioned in there and he (the Prophet) would be returned to Him. Of course, believing in it is disbelief”
He says the word "فرجعت الى ربي" (ila Rabbi farajatou) does not mean that the Prophet would have returned to a place to find God. Shaykh As-Sawi says clearly that those who believe it is a disbeliever.

The meaning of the word "فرجعت الى ربي" (Rabbi farajatou ila) is: "I went back to where my Lord had revealed to me."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 خالفواالكتاب والسنة والاجماع فضلوا واضلوا كثيرا قاتلهم الله انى يؤفكون ومأواهم جهنم وساءت مصيرا وقدابتلى المسلمون بكثير من هذا الفريق سلفا وخلفا فكانوا وصمة وثلمة في المسلمين وعضوا فاسدا يجبقطعه 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 u
p 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 كتابه  فيض الباري علىصحيح البخاري ” 4/447 : ( وأما الحافظ ابن تيمية فحققها في الخارج حتى قارب التشبيه ، كما كنتسمعت من حاله أنه كان جالساً على المنبر فسأله سائل عن نزوله تعالى فنزل ابن تيمية إلى الدرجةالثانية 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 رجلاًبليداً قليل العلم ، فكان يتسارع إلى الحكم بالكفر ، ولا ينبغي أن يقتحم في هذا الوادي إلا من يكون متيقظاًمتقناً 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
--
Anwar Shah al-Kashmiriibn Taymiyya Thought Deen was Revealed According to his Understanding
Anwar Shah al-Kashmiri mentioned once during a lesson:
ibn Taymiyya thought that the Deen of Allah was revealed according to his understanding, which is why he was so bold”. [Malfudhat Muhaddith Kashmiri, pg. 204]

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

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 بأشياءإلى 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 bookapparently 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 theanthropomorphists.
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 وربماتجد 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' iskafir". 
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 Taimiyahon 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)
Shaykh Muhammad Said Ramadan Al-Bouti (d.2013)
Shaykh Al-Sayyid Nazim al-Qubrusi al-Haqqani (d.2014)
...
to continue...In Sha Allaah
---

Imam Al-Qurtubīy in his commentary in the Qur’ān narrates from his Shaykh Ibn Al-‘Arabīy regarding the those who say Allāh has a body: "The sound verdict is that they are blasphemers, because there is no difference between them and those that worship idols and pictures." (Tafsiir Al-Qurţubiyy, 4/14).
--
Imam Al-Ghazali states 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 worshiper
--
Ali Al-Qariy’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.]
................................

"It was We Who created man, and We know what dark suggestions his soul makes to him: for We are nearer to him than (hisjugular vein. (50:16)
"To Allah belong the East and the West: "WHITHER SOEVER YE TURN, THERE IS PRESENCE OF ALLAH" For Allah is all-Pervading, all-Knowing. (2:115)
...  


Imam Al-Tabari on the Question: Where is Allah?
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-Tabari interprets this as:
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(s), 'Where is our Lord?' And so, Allah, Exalted is His mention, revealed: 'And when My servants ask concerning Me…'"
-------------------------

Edited by ADHM

CREDIT: THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WA'LJAMA'AH