Imam Abu Hanifa’s High Rank in Hadith: Reply to al-Albani et al


All praise is due to Allah, the Patron of the pious and the righteous. May the most complete and enduring prayers and blessings be upon the Messenger of guidance and the Imam of the pious who is sent as a mercy to the worlds, and upon his family, his companions, and his beneficent followers until the Day of Judgement. Ameen!

This is a beneficial, precious, glorious unique book titled “Abu Hanifa’s High Rank in Hadith” written by the late Muhammed Abdur Rashid al-Nu’mani (may Allah protect him [1]) who was a great investigative scholar, critic, and Hadith Master. He held the post of Grand Shaykh of Hadith and its sciences at the University of Al- Ulum Al-Islamiyyah in Karachi, Pakistan. This school was founded by our teacher, magnificent scholar, Hadith Master, jurist of applied and theoretical law, Al-Mahasin Al-Sayyid Muhammed Yusuf Al-Hussaini al-Banuri – may Allah have mercy on him.

This edition [of the book] is distinguished from former editions in that it was read to the author (may Allah have mercy on him) and he took the time to make some minor changes. He also added a significant amount of important new material. The author, may Allah have mercy on him, spared no effort in collecting many jewels for this book.

Besides the followers of Abu Hanifa, quite a few jurists, Hadith Masters and historians wrote books to eliminate the confusion that some fanatics have stirred up regarding the stature of Imam Abu Hanifa (may Allah be pleased with him). Among these great scholars, are the great Imam, jurist and Hadith Master of North-West Africa, Abu Umar ibn Abd al Barr (follower of Maliki school), the great Imam, Hadith master and critic Shams Al-Din Al-Dhahabi (follower of Shafi’i school), the great Imam, jurist and Hadith Master Yusuf bin Hasan bin Abd Al-Hadi Al-Dimashqi Al-Salihi (follower of Hanbali school) who is more commonly known as ibn Al-Mibrad who died in the year 909 [2]. [In addition to those just mentioned,] the great Imam and the Hadith Master and critic Al-Suyuti (follower of Shafi’i school), the great Imam Hadith Master and critic Muhammed bin Yusuf Al-Salihi (follower of Shafi’i school), the great Shafii Jurist Imam Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami Al-Makki also wrote on this subject.

They authored long books narrating the virtues and excellence of Imam Abu Hanifa, stating his greatness and stature as an [Independent] Jurist. They defended the Imam against disgraceful and envious insulters.

Since the disease of the belittlement of the rank of Imam Abu Hanifa in Hadith has become epidemic in some Arab countries [3] where [earnest] readers are seeking access to refutational publications like this in order to counter accusations of the [smear] campaign against the Imam, we introduced this book to inform people about what the [true] masters of Hadith Science and Jurisprudence have to say about him. This work strives to serve as a lighthouse for those who seek guidance and as a reminder for those who are dreadful partisans. Verily Allah is the guide to the straight path and may the prayers and peace be upon our Prophet, Messenger and Master Muhammed and upon his family and companions, all of them. All praise is due to Allah the Lord of the worlds.

Abd Al-Fattah Abu Ghudda

1 Dhi Al-Qaada 1415, Riyadh



1 At the time Shaykh Abd Al-Fattah Abu Ghudda was preparing this book for publication in the Middle East, the author was alive, but now both the author and the editor passed away. We ask Allah to cover them both in His mercy and turn their graves into a garden of Paradise. Ameen! [Tr]

2 The dates in this book are based on the Islamic Hijri calendar unless otherwise noted.

3 The said disease is spreading rapidly among the Anglophones and hence we decided to make this brilliant work available to the English speaking Muslims. May Allah accept it from us and make it beneficial for those seeking the truth. Ameen! [Tr.]

To download the work please click – HERE

Why do they wear Taweez (Amulets) ?



Shaykh Sulaymaan ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab said:

Know that the scholars among the Sahaabah and Taabi’een andthose who came after them differed as to whether it is permissible to hang up amulets which only contain words from the Qur’aan or names and attributes of Allaah. 

One group said that this is permissible. This was the view of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas and others. I say, this appears to be the view of Ibn al-Qayyim. 

Shaykh Haafiz Hukami said:

If they – i.e., amulets – contain clearly-written Qur’aanic verses or saheeh ahaadeeth, there was some dispute among the salaf – the Sahaabah, the Taabi’een and those who followed them – as to whether they are permissible.

Some of them – i.e., some of the Salaf – said that this was permissible. This was narrated from ‘Aaishah (may Allaah be pleased with her), Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn ‘Ali, and others among the salaf.

Some of them said that this was not allowed; they regarded it is makrooh and not permitted. They include ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Akeem, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr, ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Aamir, and ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood and his companions such as al-Aswad and ‘Alqamah, and those who came after them such as Ibraaheem al-Nakha’i and others – may Allaah have mercy on them.


” The view that amulets are not allowed even if they contain words from the Qur’aan is the view of our shaykhs:

The scholars of the Standing Committee said:

” The scholars are agreed that it is haraam to wear amulets if they contain anything other than Qur’aan, but they differed concerning those which do contain Qur’aan.

Some of them said that wearing these is permitted, and others said that it is not permitted. 

The view that it is not permitted is more likely to be correct because of the general meaning of the ahaadeeth, and in order to prevent means of shirk.”

 ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz,  ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ghadyaan,  ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Qa’ood. (Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, 1/212)

 al-Albani said:

” This misguidance is still widespread among the Bedouin, fellahin (peasants) and some of the city-dwellers. Examples include the pearls which some drivers put in their cars, hanging them from the rear-view mirror. Some of them hang an old shoe on the front or back of the car; some hang a horse-shoe on the front of their house or shop. All of that is to ward off the evil eye, or so they claim.
And there are other things which are widespread because of ignorance of Tawheed and the things which nullify it such as actions of shirk and idolatry which the Messengers were only sent and the Books were only revealed to put an end to. It is to Allaah that we complain of the ignorance of Muslims nowadays, and their being far away from their religion. (Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth al-Saheehah, 1/890, 492)

Ibn Tayimyyah


وَيَجُوزُ أَنْ يَكْتُبَ لِلْمُصَابِ وَغَيْرِهِ مِنْ الْمَرْضَى شَيْئًا مِنْ كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَذِكْرُهُ بِالْمِدَادِ الْمُبَاحِ وَيُغْسَلُ وَيُسْقَى كَمَا نَصَّ عَلَى ذَلِكَ أَحْمَد وَغَيْرُهُ قَالَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أَحْمَد: قَرَأْت عَلَى أَبِي ثَنَا يَعْلَى بْنُ عُبَيْدٍ؛ ثَنَا سُفْيَانُ؛ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ أَبِي لَيْلَى عَنْ الْحَكَمِ؛ عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ؛ عَنْ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ قَالَ: إذَا عَسِرَ عَلَى الْمَرْأَةِ وِلَادَتُهَا فَلْيَكْتُبْ: بِسْمِ اللَّهِ لَا إلَهَ إلَّا اللَّهُ الْحَلِيمُ الْكَرِيمُ سُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَرْشِ الْعَظِيمِ الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ {كَأَنَّهُمْ يَوْمَ يَرَوْنَهَا لَمْ يَلْبَثُوا إلَّا عَشِيَّةً أَوْ ضُحَاهَا} {كَأَنَّهُمْ يَوْمَ يَرَوْنَ مَا يُوعَدُونَ لَمْ يَلْبَثُوا إلَّا سَاعَةً مِنْ نَهَارٍ بَلَاغٌ فَهَلْ يُهْلَكُ إلَّا الْقَوْمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ} . قَالَ أَبِي: ثَنَا أَسْوَدُ بْنُ عَامِرٍ بِإِسْنَادِهِ بِمَعْنَاهُ وَقَالَ: يُكْتَبُ فِي إنَاءٍ نَظِيفٍ فَيُسْقَى قَالَ أَبِي: وَزَادَ فِيهِ وَكِيعٌ فَتُسْقَى وَيُنْضَحُ مَا دُونَ سُرَّتِهَا قَالَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ: رَأَيْت أَبِي يَكْتُبُ لِلْمَرْأَةِ فِي جَامٍ أَوْ شَيْءٍ نَظِيفٍ. وَقَالَ أَبُو عَمْرٍو مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ أَحْمَد بْنِ حَمْدَانَ الحيري: أَنَا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ سُفْيَانَ النسوي؛ حَدَّثَنِي عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أَحْمَد بْنِ شبوية؛ ثنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ

الْحَسَنِ بْنِ شَقِيقٍ؛ ثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ الْمُبَارَكِ؛ عَنْ سُفْيَانَ؛ عَنْ ابْنِ أَبِي لَيْلَى؛ عَنْ الْحَكَمِ؛ عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ؛ عَنْ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ قَالَ: إذَا عَسِرَ عَلَى الْمَرْأَةِ وِلَادُهَا فَلْيَكْتُبْ: بِسْمِ اللَّهِ لَا إلَهَ إلَّا اللَّهُ الْعَلِيُّ الْعَظِيمُ لَا إلَهَ إلَّا اللَّهُ الْحَلِيمُ الْكَرِيمُ؛ سُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ وَتَعَالَى رَبُّ الْعَرْشِ الْعَظِيمِ؛ وَالْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ {كَأَنَّهُمْ يَوْمَ يَرَوْنَهَا لَمْ يَلْبَثُوا إلَّا عَشِيَّةً أَوْ ضُحَاهَا} {كَأَنَّهُمْ يَوْمَ يَرَوْنَ مَا يُوعَدُونَ لَمْ يَلْبَثُوا إلَّا سَاعَةً مِنْ نَهَارٍ بَلَاغٌ فَهَلْ يُهْلَكُ إلَّا الْقَوْمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ} . قَالَ عَلِيٌّ: يُكْتَبُ فِي كاغدة فَيُعَلَّقُ عَلَى عَضُدِ الْمَرْأَةِ قَالَ عَلِيٌّ: وَقَدْ جَرَّبْنَاهُ فَلَمْ نَرَ شَيْئًا أَعْجَبَ مِنْهُ فَإِذَا وَضَعَتْ تُحِلُّهُ سَرِيعًا ثُمَّ تَجْعَلُهُ فِي خِرْقَةٍ أَوْ تُحْرِقُهُ.

Ibn Taymiyyah said in his Fatawa (19:64): It is permissible to write for the one afflicted [with the evil eye] and others of the sick something from the Book of Allah and His dhikr with permissible ink, and wash [the ink off the paper] and give it to drink, as Ahmad and others have explicated.

Abdullah ibn Ahmad said: ‘I read unto my father: Ya’la ibn ‘Ubayd narrated to us: Sufyan narrated to us: from Muhammad ibn Abi Layla: from al-Hakam: from Sa’id ibn Jubayr: from Ibn ‘Abbas (Allah be pleased with him): he said: When labour becomes difficult for a woman one should write: ‘In Allah’s name, there is no god but Allah, the Clement the Honourable. Glory to Allah Lord of the Magnificent Throne. All praise to Allah Lord of the Worlds. On the day when they behold it, it will be as if they had but tarried for an evening or the morn thereof (79:46), On the day when they behold what they were promised, it will be as if they had but tarried for an hour of a day, A clear message. Shall any be destroyed save evil-living folk? (46:35)’

My father said: ‘Aswad ibn ‘Amir narrated to us with his chain [of narration] the same thing and he said: one writes [the ta’widh] in a clean vessel and gives it to drink’. My father said: ‘and Waki’added in his narration: she is given to drink [from it] and it is sprinkled below her navel. ‘Abdullah said: I saw my father writing [a ta’widh] for a woman on a cup or something clean.’”

Ibn Taymiyyah then transmitted this narration of Ibn ‘Abbasthrough another route, and he said at the end of it: “‘Ali (meaning Ibn al-Hasan, the nephew of the narrator of this narration) said: ‘one writes [the ta’widh] on paper and ties it around the upper arm of a woman’. ‘Ali said: ‘indeed we tried this and did not see anything more remarkable than it. When she delivered, it was quickly disposed of, by subsequently shredding it or burning it.’”

Ibn Taymiyya writes:

“It is permissible to [to recite du’a’s and then] blow upon the sick in Islam, but the words must be from the Qur’an or ahadith. If the words are not, then it is not permissible” [Ibn Taymiyya, At-Tawassul, Chapter on Blowing onto the Sick]

Ibn Taymiyyah in Majmu’ Fataawa, Vol. 19, page 63/64, states:

“It is permissible to write from Kitaabullah (Qur’aan ) and His Thikr (Dhzikar) with permissible ink something for the benefit of one stricken (with a problem) and for sick persons, and to wash (what has been written from the Qur’aan) and to give it to them (the stricken and the sick) to drink as Imaam Ahmad and others have explicitly said.

Abdullah, the son of (Imaam) Ahmad said: ‘I recited to my father(Imaam Ahmad) —the chain of the Hadith – that Ibn Abbaas (radhiyallahu anhu) said: ‘When birth pangs become difficult for a woman, then write: (The relevant Qur’aanic verses)

My father (Imaam Ahmad) said: ‘Aswad Bin Aamir narrated with his Chain of Narration similarly, and he said: ‘It should be written in a clean basin and given to drink.’ My father (Imaam Ahmad) said: Waqee’ added: ‘It should be given to her to drink and (the balance of the water) should be sprinkled (on the area) below her navel.’ Abdullah (Imaam Ahmad’s son) said: ‘I saw my father write (these Qur’aanic verses and the other athkaar) on a clean basin for a woman (in labour).”

Imam Ibn Kathir:

”Whilst doing ghusl they saw Ibn taymiyyah had a taweez (thread) around his neck, he had nits so the taweez was to protect him from them (lice). That taweez was then auctioned, it was sold for 150 dirhams” [al Bidaya wal Nihaya]

”It is said he had lice so he was wearing a mercury thread around his neck. That was then auctioned, it was sold for 150 dirhams.” [Al-‘Uqood ad-Durriyah min Manaaqib… Ibn Taymiyyah]

The original narration can also be found in the Muannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah (‘Awwāmah #23974) with the same chain as mentioned by Imam Ahmad above

حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُسْهِرٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي لَيْلَى، عَنِ الْحَكَمِ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، قَالَ: إِذَا عَسِرَ عَلَى الْمَرْأَةِ وَلَدُهَا، فَيَكْتُبُ هَاتَيْنِ الْآيَتَيْنِ وَالْكَلِمَاتِ فِي صَحْفَةٍ ثُمَّ تُغْسَلُ فَتُسْقَى مِنْهَا: «بِسْمِ اللَّهِ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا هُوَ الْحَلِيمُ الْكَرِيمُ، سُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ رَبِّ السَّمَوَاتِ السَّبْعِ وَرَبِّ الْعَرْشِ الْعَظِيمِ» {كَأَنَّهُمْ يَوْمَ يَرَوْنَهَا لَمْ يَلْبَثُوا إِلَّا عَشِيَّةً أَوْ ضُحَاهَا} [النازعات: 46] {كَأَنَّهُمْ يَوْمَ يَرَوْنَ مَا يُوعَدُونَ لَمْ يَلْبَثُوا إِلَّا سَاعَةً مِنْ نَهَارٍ، بَلَاغٌ فَهَلْ يُهْلَكُ إِلَّا الْقَوْمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ} [الأحقاف: 35]

As for the different riwāyāt, then these are mentioned in various hanbalī texts, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah gathers many of them in hisZād al-Ma’ād (Beirut: Mu’assasat al-Risālah 4/326-7)

كِتَابٌ لِلْحُمَّى: قَالَ المروزي: بَلَغَ أبا عبد الله أَنِّي حُمِمْتُ، فَكَتَبَ لِي مِنَ الْحُمَّى رُقْعَةً فِيهَا: بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ، بِسْمِ اللَّهِ، وَبِاللَّهِ، مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ، {قُلْنَا يَا نَارُ كُونِي بَرْدًا وَسَلَامًا عَلَى إِبْرَاهِيمَ} [الأنبياء: 69] ، {وَأَرَادُوا بِهِ كَيْدًا فَجَعَلْنَاهُمُ الْأَخْسَرِينَ} [الأنبياء: 70] ، اللَّهُمَّ رَبَّ جَبْرَائِيلَ، وَمِيكَائِيلَ، وَإِسْرَافِيلَ، اشْفِ صَاحِبَ هَذَا الْكِتَابِ بِحَوْلِكَ وَقُوَّتِكَ وَجَبَرُوتِكَ، إِلَهَ الْحَقِّ آمِينَ.

قَالَ المروزي: وَقَرَأَ عَلَى أبي عبد الله – وَأَنَا أَسْمَعُ – أبو المنذر عمرو بن مجمع، حَدَّثَنَا يونس بن حبان، قَالَ: سَأَلْتُ أبا جعفر محمد بن علي أَنْ أُعَلِّقَ التَّعْوِيذَ، فَقَالَ: إِنْ كَانَ مِنْ كِتَابِ اللَّهِ أَوْ كَلَامٍ عَنْ نَبِيِّ اللَّهِ فَعَلِّقْهُ وَاسْتَشْفِ بِهِ مَا اسْتَطَعْتَ. قُلْتُ: أَكْتُبُ هَذِهِ مِنْ حُمَّى الرِّبْعِ: بِاسْمِ اللَّهِ، وَبِاللَّهِ، وَمُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ إِلَى آخِرِهِ؟ قَالَ: أَيْ نَعَمْ.

وَذَكَرَ أحمد عَنْ عائشة رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهَا، وَغَيْرِهَا أَنَّهُمْ سَهَّلُوا فِي ذَلِكَ.

قَالَ حرب: وَلَمْ يُشَدِّدْ فِيهِ أَحْمَدُ بْنُ حَنْبَلٍ، قَالَ أحمد: وَكَانَ ابْنُ مَسْعُودٍ يَكْرَهُهُ كَرَاهَةً شَدِيدَةً جِدًّا. وَقَالَ أحمد وَقَدْ سُئِلَ عَنِ التَّمَائِمِ تُعَلَّقُ بَعْدَ نُزُولِ الْبَلَاءِ؟ قَالَ: أَرْجُو أَنْ لَا يَكُونَ بِهِ بَأْسٌ.

قَالَ الخلال: وَحَدَّثَنَا عبد الله بن أحمد، قَالَ: رَأَيْتُ أَبِي يَكْتُبُ التَّعْوِيذَ لِلَّذِي يُفْزَعُ، وَلِلْحُمَّى بَعْدَ وُقُوعِ الْبَلَاءِ.

[كِتَابٌ لِعُسْرِ الْوِلَادَةِ]

ِ: قَالَ الخلال: حَدَّثَنِي عبد الله بن أحمد: قَالَ رَأَيْتُ أَبِي يَكْتُبُ لِلْمَرْأَةِ إِذَا عَسُرَ عَلَيْهَا وِلَادَتُهَا فِي جَامٍ أَبْيَضَ، أَوْ شَيْءٍ نَظِيفٍ، يَكْتُبُ حَدِيثَ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ: لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ الْحَلِيمُ الْكَرِيمُ، سُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَرْشِ الْعَظِيمِ، الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ: {كَأَنَّهُمْ يَوْمَ يَرَوْنَ مَا يُوعَدُونَ لَمْ يَلْبَثُوا إِلَّا سَاعَةً مِنْ نَهَارٍ بَلَاغٌ} [الأحقاف: 35] [الْأَحْقَافِ: 35] ، {كَأَنَّهُمْ يَوْمَ يَرَوْنَهَا لَمْ يَلْبَثُوا إِلَّا عَشِيَّةً أَوْ ضُحَاهَا} [النازعات: 46] [النَّازِعَاتِ: 46] .

قَالَ الخلال: أَنْبَأَنَا أبو بكر المروزي، أَنَّ أبا عبد الله جَاءَهُ رَجُلٌ فَقَالَ: يَا أبا عبد الله! تَكْتُبُ لِامْرَأَةٍ قَدْ عَسُرَ عَلَيْهَا وَلَدُهَا مُنْذُ يَوْمَيْنِ؟ فَقَالَ: قُلْ لَهُ: يَجِيءُ بِجَامٍ

وَاسِعٍ، وَزَعْفَرَانٍ، وَرَأَيْتُهُ يَكْتُبُ لِغَيْرِ وَاحِدٍ، وَيَذْكُرُ عَنْ عكرمة، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ قَالَ: ( «مَرَّ عِيسَى صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَى نَبِيِّنَا وَعَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَلَى بَقَرَةٍ قَدِ اعْتَرَضَ وَلَدُهَا فِي بَطْنِهَا، فَقَالَتْ: يَا كَلِمَةَ اللَّهِ! ادْعُ اللَّهَ لِي أَنْ يُخَلِّصَنِي مِمَّا أَنَا فِيهِ، فَقَالَ: يَا خَالِقَ النَّفْسِ مِنَ النَّفْسِ، وَيَا مُخَلِّصَ النَّفْسِ مِنَ النَّفْسِ، وَيَا مُخْرِجَ النَّفْسِ مِنَ النَّفْسِ، خَلِّصْهَا. قَالَ: فَرَمَتْ بِوَلَدِهَا، فَإِذَا هِيَ قَائِمَةٌ تَشُمُّهُ» ) . قَالَ: فَإِذَا عَسُرَ عَلَى الْمَرْأَةِ وَلَدُهَا، فَاكْتُبْهُ لَهَا. وَكُلُّ مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِنَ الرُّقَى، فَإِنَّ كِتَابَتَهُ نَافِعَةٌ.

وَرَخَّصَ جَمَاعَةٌ مِنَ السَّلَفِ فِي كِتَابَةِ بَعْضِ الْقُرْآنِ وَشُرْبِهِ، وَجَعْلِ ذَلِكَ مِنَ الشِّفَاءِ الَّذِي جَعَلَ اللَّهُ فِيهِ.

كِتَابٌ آخَرُ لِذَلِكَ: يُكْتَبُ فِي إِنَاءٍ نَظِيفٍ: {إِذَا السَّمَاءُ انْشَقَّتْ – وَأَذِنَتْ لِرَبِّهَا وَحُقَّتْ – وَإِذَا الْأَرْضُ مُدَّتْ – وَأَلْقَتْ مَا فِيهَا وَتَخَلَّتْ} [الانشقاق: 1 – 4] [الِانْشِقَاقِ: 1-4] وَتَشْرَبُ مِنْهُ الْحَامِلُ، وَيُرَشُّ عَلَى بَطْنِهَا.

Ibn al-Qayyim actually goes on to narrate from Ibn Taymiyyah the following (when a person has a nose bleed 4:328)

كَانَ شَيْخُ الْإِسْلَامِ ابْنُ تَيْمِيَّةَ رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ يَكْتُبُ عَلَى جَبْهَتِهِ: {وَقِيلَ يَاأَرْضُ ابْلَعِي مَاءَكِ وَيَا سَمَاءُ أَقْلِعِي وَغِيضَ الْمَاءُ وَقُضِيَ الْأَمْرُ} [هود: 44] [هُودٍ: 44] . وَسَمِعْتُهُ يَقُولُ: كَتَبْتُهَا لِغَيْرِ وَاحِدٍ فَبَرَأَ، فَقَالَ: وَلَا يَجُوزُ كِتَابَتُهَا بِدَمِ الرَّاعِفِ، كَمَا يَفْعَلُهُ الْجُهَّالُ، فَإِنَّ الدَّمَ نَجِسٌ، فَلَا يَجُوزُ أَنْ يُكْتَبَ بِهِ كَلَامُ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى.

Ibn Al Qayyim has mentioned that it is permissible for one to write verses and duas with saffron in a clean plate, or clean paper, then it should be washed for the patient to drink the washing. (Zaadul-Ma’ad).

Shaikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah bin Baz, while referring to this says ‘there is no harm in that’ [Fatawa Islamiyah vol.1 pg. 50]

Ibn Qayyim al Jawziyyah says:

Some of our rightly guided ancestors stated that there is no harm if some ayat (Verse) from the Qur’an were written in ink and then washed with water and that the sick person drinks that water. Mujahid issues a statement to that effect and so did Abu Qilabah. It was also reported that Ibn ‘Abbas once commanded that two verses from the Qur’an to be written for a woman who had hard pregnancies and that the verses were then washed with water and she was to drink the water. Also Ayub said, “I saw Abu Qilabah write some Verses from the Qur’an wash it with water and then give the water to a person who was suffering from some type of illness to drink it [Tibb an Nabawi by Ibn Qayyim, Page No. 154, English version]

Ibn Kathir and Qadi Shawkani write:

“Amr ibn Shu’aib (may Allah be pleased with him) said that ‘Rasulu’llah(may Allah bless him and grant him peace) taught my father and grandfather a du’a which we would read before going to sleep, to protect us from fear and anguish.We told our elder children to recite this du’a before going to sleep as well.But for those children who were not yet literate, we would write it and then put it around their necks”
[Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal vol.2;Abu Dawud, in ‘Chapter of Medicine’ [5:67] ;

Tafsir Ibn Kathir, under Sura al-Mu’minun, verse 97; Qadi Shawkani, Fath al-Qadir, under Sura al-Mu’minun, verse 97 ]

Qadi Shawkani writes: “If the Qur’an’s du’a’s are recited and blown on the sick, they will be cured.When the non-believers recite the Qur’an, their blasphemic disease will be cured” [Tafsir Fath al-Qadir, under Sura Bani Isra’il, verse 82]

Allama Sa’idi writes:

Imam an-Nawawi in Sharh Muslim states: ‘There are two types of ahadith concerning blowing. [reciting a du’a and then blowing onto a person]. One of the types is transmitted in Bukhari: ‘There will be people who will enter Paradise without any questioning, who have never been blown upon.’ Imam Muslim has also recorded a hadith in support of those who do not ask to be blown upon.
Imam Bukhari in the chapter on Tibb [Medicine] has written du’as that our Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) recited when doing damm [reciting a du’a and then blowing onto a person].
Imam Muslim states in ‘The Chapter on Virtues of the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace)’ that: “When our Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) was ill, the Angel Jibrilcame to him and performed the blowing.” The above types of ahadith apparently seem to contradict each other but in reality there is no contradiction.

“The former type of hadith refers to the prohibition of having read something that is not from the Qur’an and Sunna [i.e.something that has pictures, diagrams or words not from the Qur’an or Sunna] and then blow upon someone. The latter types of ahadith which permit damm refer to those kalimat [words or verses] which have been taught by the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace)”

[Allama Sa’idi, Sharh Sahih Muslim, Chapter of Tibb]


Following explanation by Imam al-Qurtubi (rah) on the topic taken from his Tafsir:

Qur’an States: And We are sending down in the Qur’an what is healing and mercy for the believers. And it only increases the wrongdoers in loss.  [Quran 17:82]

In explanation of the verse Imam Qurtubi (rah) writes.

وننزل من القرآن شيئاً شفاء؛ ما فيه كله شفاء.

الثانية: اختلف العلماء في كونه شفاء على قولين: أحدهما ـ أنه شفاء للقلوب بزوال الجهل عنها وإزالة الرّيب، ولكشف غطاء القلب من مرض الجهل لفهم المعجزات والأمور الدالة على الله تعالى. الثاني ـ شفاء من الأمراض الظاهرة بالرُّقى والتعوّذ ونحوه.

عن أبي سعيد: فأفاق وبرأ. فبعث إلينا بالنُّزل وبعث إلينا بالشاء، فأكلنا الطعام أنا وأصحابي وأبَوْا أن يأكلوا من الغنم، حتى أتينا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فأخبرته الخبر فقال: «وما يدريك أنها رقية» قلت: يا رسول الله، شيء ألقي في رُوِعي. قال: كلوا وأطعمونا من الغنم ”

Translation: It has been said that he who does not seek cure through the Qur’an, Allah does not cure him.

Secondly: The scholars interpret that verse in two ways however: the first is that cure is for the hearts, by the removal of ignorance and doubt which hinder the understanding of miracles and matters pointing to Allah Almighty; the second, that cure is for outward diseases, through the use of healing verses [ruqya] and seeking refuge and the like.

(Bukhari and Muslim relate the hadith of ruqiyya through) Abu Sa`id al-Khudri [‘a Companion healed an Arab from scorpion-bite by reciting al-Fatiha on him seven times, and the Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) later asked him: How did you know it was a ruqya?’].

(Qurtubi then lists instructions for making a kind of ruqya called nushra: various verses are recited over a clean container which is then filled with water; the water is then used for wudu’ by someone who already has a valid wudu’, and who also soaks his head and limbs with it but does not use it for ghusl or istinja’; it may be drunk; he then prays two rak`as at the conclusion of which he asks for healing, and so for three days.)

Imam al-Qurtubi wrote in detail about both types of ahadith concerning ta’wiz:

The ta’wiz that are forbidden are those ta’wiz from the Time of Ignorance – ]those which are satanic and contain an element of shirk [mantar, voodoo and magic, etc.]. The ta’wiz, which are permitted are those written with du’as evidently from Qur’an and ahadith only”

[al-Qurtubi, at-Tadhkirat, chapter on ‘Ta’wiz’]

The Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) said: Cure for my Community is in but three verses of Allah’s Book, a mouthful of honey, or cupping.(Tabari) He also said: Ruqya is allowed as long as there is no idolatry [shirk]; and if you can help your brother, help him. Malik ibn Anas said: To hang writings of Allah’s Names upon oneself is permitted for healing and blessing but not for protection against the evil eye.

Abdullah ibn `Amr used to hang a protective invocation taught by the Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) around the necks of his young children. (Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi – hasan)

The Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) and the Companions hated the pagan kind of ruqya or talisman [tamima, qilaada].

 Istishfa’ [seeking blessing] with Qur’an is not shirk, whether hung on oneself or not. The Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) said: Who hangs something (upon oneself), he is left to it for protection. Therefore who hangs Qur’an is certainly taken under Allah’s protection, and He will not leave him to other than Him. Hanging a ruqya is accepted [among the Tabi`in] by: Ibn al-Musayyib, ad-Dahhak, Ja`far as-Sadiq, and Ibn Sirin (End of Qurtubi’s words) [Reference for Above Tafsir of Qurtubi [rah] : al-Jami’ li-ahkam al-Qur’an Volume 013, Page 156-163]

In the Musannaf of Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shayba, the permissibility of hanging a ta`wiz is reported from many of the Companions and early Muslims (Salaf), including:

حدّثنا أبو بكر قال حدثنا عقبة بن خالد عن شعبة عن أبي عصمة قال: سألت سعيد بن المسيب عن التعويذ فقال: لا بأس إذا كان في أديم.

حدّثنا أبو بكر قال حدثنا يحيى بن آدم قال حدثنا حسن عن ليث عن عطاء قال : لا بأس أن يعلق القرءان

Translation: It is narrated that Sa’eed bin Musayb (one of the top ranking Tabi’i) was asked about wearing Amulets, he said: There is “No harm in doing so”

Imam al Ata (rah) the Tabi’i and Faqih of Makkah said: There is no harm in hanging (ayahs of) Quran (around the neck) [Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Volume No. 5, Page No. 439]

Mujahid, Abd Allah ibn `Amr, Ibn Sirin, `Abayd Allah ibn Abd Allah ibn `Umar, and others (Allah be well pleased with them all) also narrated it [Musannaf, 5.439]

أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ إِذَا فَزِعَ أَحَدُكُمْ فِي النَّوْمِ فَلْيَقُلْ أَعُوذُ بِكَلِمَاتِ اللَّهِ التَّامَّاتِ مِنْ غَضَبِهِ وَعِقَابِهِ وَشَرِّ عِبَادِهِ وَمِنْ هَمَزَاتِ الشَّيَاطِينِ وَأَنْ يَحْضُرُونِ فَإِنَّهَا لَنْ تَضُرَّهُ وَكَانَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ عُمَرَ يُلَقِّنُهَا مَنْ بَلَغَ مِنْ وَلَدِهِ وَمَنْ لَمْ يَبْلُغْ مِنْهُمْ كَتَبَهَا فِي صَكٍّ ثُمَّ عَلَّقَهَا فِي عُنُقِهِ

Amr ibn Shu’ayb reported from his father, from his grandfather that Allah’s Messenger (SAW) said, “If any of you gets a nightmare, let him say:

I seek refuge in the perfect words of Allah against His wrath and His punishment and the’ mischief of His slaves and from the temptations of the devils and that which they bring.

Then they will not harm him.” So, Abdullah ibn Amr used to teach this supplication to his grown up children. And, he wrote it down on something and hung it on the neck of those who had not attained puberty.  [Abu Dawud 3893 ,sunan tirmidhi Chapter 99, hadith 3539]

أَبُو دَاوُدَ وَالنَّسَائِيُّ وَالْحَاكِمُ وَقَالَ صَحِيحُ الْإِسْنَادِ

Abu Dawood [rah], Nasai [rah] and Al Hakim [rah] said the Isnad is SAHIH


قال ‏ ‏أبو عيسى ‏ ‏هذا ‏ ‏حديث حسن غريب ‏

Imam Tirmidhi after quoting it said: Abu Esa [rah] said the Hadith is Hasan Gharib

Sheikh Abdul Qadir al Jilani (ra) prescribed wearing Amulets

Ghuniya tut Talibeen states: To write an “AMULET (TAWEEZ)” for someone who has fever, and then hanging it around his neck.Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal (ra) said: Once I had fever, and an Amulet (Taweez) was written for me. [Al Ghuniya tut Talibeen, Page No. 51]

In the Musannaf of Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shayba, the permissibility of hanging a ta`wiz is reported from many of the Companions and early Muslims (Salaf), including:

Sa`id ibn al-Musayyib, `Ata’, Mujahid, Abd Allah ibn `Amr, Ibn Sirin, `Abayd Allah ibn Abd Allah ibn `Umar, and others (Allah be well pleased with them all). [Musannaf, 5.439]

As for that which is reported from some, including Ibn Mas`ud (Allah be pleased with him), that hanging ta`wizes is shirk, this is understood to mean those that resemble the one’s used in Jahiliyya, or if used thinking that it is the ta`wiz itself that cures or protects, not Allah, or if it contains impermissible invocations or one’s whose meaning is not known.

Allama Abu Sa`id al-Khadimi in his al-Bariqa al-Mahmudiyya Sharh al-Tariqa al-Muhammadiyya. [4.171-172]

حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ حُجْرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ عَيَّاشٍ، عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ إِسْحَاقَ، عَنْ عَمْرِو بْنِ شُعَيْبٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ جَدِّهِ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ” إِذَا فَزِعَ أَحَدُكُمْ فِي النَّوْمِ فَلْيَقُلْ أَعُوذُ بِكَلِمَاتِ اللَّهِ التَّامَّةِ مِنْ غَضَبِهِ وَعِقَابِهِ وَشَرِّ عِبَادِهِ وَمِنْ هَمَزَاتِ الشَّيَاطِينِ وَأَنْ يَحْضُرُونِ . فَإِنَّهَا لَنْ تَضُرَّهُ ” . قَالَ وَكَانَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ عَمْرٍو يُلَقِّنُهَا مَنْ بَلَغَ مِنْ وَلَدِهِ وَمَنْ لَمْ يَبْلُغْ مِنْهُمْ كَتَبَهَا فِي صَكٍّ ثُمَّ عَلَّقَهَا فِي عُنُقِهِ . قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ غَرِيبٌ

Amr bin Shu’aib narrated from his father, from his grandfather, that the Messenger of Allah said: “When one of you becomes frightened during sleep, then let him say: ‘I seek refuge in Allah’s Perfect Words from His anger, His punishment, and the evil of His creatures, from the whisperings of the Shayatin, and that they should come (A’udhu Bikalimatillahit-Tammati Min Ghadabihi Wa Iqabihi Wa Sharri Ibadih, Wa Min Hamzatish-Shayatini Wa An Yahdurun).’ For verily, they shall not harm him.’”He said: “So Abdullah bin Amr used to teach it to those of his children who attained maturity, and those of them who did not, he would write it and then hang it around his neck.”

Sunan Tirmizi # 3528 (Imam Tirmizi graded it Hasan)

Sunan Abi Dawud # 3893

Musnad Ahmed # 6895 (Shaykh Ahmed Shakir graded it “Sahih”)

Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayba # 3261

Mustadrak Hakim (1/548) [Imam Hakim said “Isnaadu Sahih” ]

Imam Bayhaqi,Kitab al Adab # 993

Imam Nasai , Amal al Yawm wa l Laylah, # 765

Imam Baghawi, Masabih al l Sunnah , (2/216)

Imam Tibrizi,Mishkaat al Masabih ,# 2477

Imam Mundhiri ,At Targheeb wa Tarheeb , # 2384

Imam Mundhiri again in Mukhtasar Sunan Abi Dawud , # 3744

Imam Razi,Tafsir Mafatih al Ghayb ,Surah Muminun,Ayat 97

Imam Nawawi ,Al Adhkar

Imam Alusi , Ruh ul Ma’ani, Under ,Surah Muminun,Ayat 97

Imam Ibn Kathir , Tafseer, ,Surah Muminun,Ayat 97

Imam Dhahabi , Al Tibb al Nabawi, Page :281

Ibn Qayyim , Zaad al Maad

Qadhi Shawkhani, Tafsir, Surah Muminun,Ayat 97

Nawab Siqqiq Hasan khan,Tafsir, Surah Muminun,Ayat 97

Al-Albani In SAHIH Sunan Tirmidhi, # 2793

Imam Ali al Qari writes about the hadith of Amr bin Shu’ayb (Hadith posted):

“This Hadith is the basis for hanging those Tawidh(amulets) which contain the names of Allah ,The glorified and exalted.”

[Mirqat al Mafatih , Volume:5, Page:384 , Dar al Kutub al Ilmiyyah , Beirut 1422 AH/2001CE ]

Imam Nawawi before hadith of Amr bin Shuayb :

وقد يستدل للإباحة بحديث عمرو بن شعيب عن

“One may adduce as evidence for their (amulets) permissibility from the hadith of Amr bin Shu’ayb” [ Imam Nawawi , al Majmu Sharh al Madhdhab, (2/88) , Dar al Fikr , Beirut ]

Abdul Rahman Mubarapuri writes under (sharah of) this hadith {Of Amr bin shuayb}:

قال الشيخ عبد الحق الدهلوي في اللمعات : هذا هو السند في ما يعلق في أعناق الصبيان من التعويذات وفيه كلام ، وأما تعليق الحرز والتمائم مما كان من رسوم الجاهلية فحرام بلا خلاف انتهى“Shaykh Abdul Haq Dehlvi has written in {Ashi’at al Lama’at} that this hadith has the evidence for hanging “Taweedhat” (amulets) in children’s neck. And it is haram by consensus to hang sea shella and stones as was the practice in pre Islamic days”

[ Tuhfatul Ahwadhi, Volume:04 , Page:473 , Dar ul Ihya ut Turath,Beirut,1419 ]

Imam Malik (RA)on Taweedh :

: قال مالك لا بأس بما يعلق على النساء الحيض ، والصبيان من القرآن إذا جعل في كن كقصبة حديد أو جلد يحرز عليه

Imam Malik said : “ There is no harm if something written from Quran is hanged onto menstruating women or children ,provided it is covered with iron or leather

[ Imam Nawawi , , al Majmu Sharh al Madhdhab, (2/88) , Dar al Fikr , Beirut ]

Imam Malik  :وقد قال مالك رحمه الله لا بأس بتعليق الكتب التي فيها أسماء الله عز وجل على أعناق المرضى على وجه التبرك بها إذا لم يرد معلقها بتعليقها مدافعة العين وهذا معناه قبل أن ينزل به شيء من العين ولو نزل به شيء من العين جاز الرقى عند مالك(التمهيد لما في الموطأ من المعاني والأسانيد,)(17/161)

Imam Malik said , there is no blame in hanging written Ruqyas ( i,e amulets) Which contains the names of Allah upon the necks of the sick , to drive the healing blessings contained therein , so long as he does not intend by that to prevent the effects of the evil eye before they fall. If some effects of the evil eye have already befallen one, then it is permissible to employ ruqyas according to Imam Malik, to hang written ones upon oneself. [Ibne abd al barr , At Tamhid, , (17/161),Morocco ]

Saeed bin Musayyib [The Tabayi ]

وسئل سعيد بن المسيب عن الصحف الصغار يكتب فيه القرآن ، فيعلق على النساء والصبيان ؟ فقال : لا بأس بذلك إذا جعل في كير من ورق ، أوحديد ، أو يخرز عليه[شرح السنة ـ للإمام البغوى]12/158-159المكتب الإسلامي – دمشق ـ بيروت ـ 1403هـ – 1983م

Saeed bin Musayyib (RA) was asked concerning putting of Tawidh (amulets) containing verses of Quran around the neck of women and young children.He replied that it is permissible if the Tawidh is contained in leather wrap or some metallic box.

[ Imam Baghawi ,Sharhus Sunnah. 12/158,159, Maktaba al Islami,Beirut 1403 A.H ]


” The view that amulets are not allowed even if they contain words from the Qur’aan is the view of our shaykhs”

Great Tabayeen have not only approved the use of Tawidh but have been using them

Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaibah , Kitab al Tibb , Volume :12 , Page : 74 (Dar Qurtuba,Beirut)

حدّثنا أبو بكر قال حدثنا عقبة بن خالد عن شعبة عن أبي عصمة قال: سألت سعيد بن المسيب عن التعويذ فقال: لا بأس إذا كان في أديم.

Abu Ismah said ,I asked Sa’id bin Musayb (one of the top ranking Tabi’i) about wearing Amulets, he said: “There is no harm in when it is covered with leather”

حدّثنا أبو بكر قال حدثنا يحيى بن آدم قال حدثنا حسن عن ليث عن عطاء قال : لا بأس أن يعلق القرءان

Imam al Ata (ra) [the Tabi’i Faqih of Makkah] said: “There is no harm in tying (ayahs of) Quran .”

Ata was asked about a menstruating woman who had a Tawidh on her.HE said ,”If it is on leather she should take it off and if it is in silver box,if she wishes she may put it on and if she wishes she need not put it on

Mujahid would write Tawidh for people and hang it on them.

Abu Ja’far was asked concerning writing something from Qur’an and hanging it or tying it , he did not see anything wrong in it.

Ibn Sirin did not see anything wrong in writing from the Qur’an and tying it.

Ayyub said that he saw Ubaydullah ibn Abdullah ibn Umar was tying a thread in his shoulder .

Abu Jafar was asked concerning hanging Tawidh in children’s neck and he allowed it.

Jubayr said there is no harm in hanging Tawidh written from Qur’an ,provided it is taken off before going to the toilet and before intercourse.


Dark/Black Magic


Rejection of Ibn Tayimyyah’s Creed


Part:1 HerePart:3 HerePart:4 Here

Shaykh al-Islam Imam Al-Ghazali (d.505 AH) says in “Iljaam Al-Awaam” that denying bodily characteristics for Aļļaah is a primary duty of all Muslims, scholars and commoners alike.

He makes it clear that believing that Allaah is a body (i.e. something that has size) is kufr and idolatry: I mean by “body” something with length, width and depth that prevents something else to exist where it exists….

So if it came to someone’s mind that Aļļaah is a body composed of limbs, then this person is an idol worshipper.

The reason is that all bodies are created, and to worship something created is kufr.

After all, idol worship is kufr because the idol is created, and the idol is created because it is a body.

Hence, the one who worships a body is a kaafir by the consensus of the Muslim Nation, both the salaf and those later.

Imam al-Ghazali also makes the same point about Ru’yah in a detailed section of his al-Iqtsad fil I’tiqad (his masterpiece on ‘Aqidah).

Please read his clear discussion (starting from فلنبحث عن الحقيقة ما هي؟) translated below:

“We should therefore discuss the reality (of Ru’yah) what is it? It has no reality but that it is a type of perception, which is a more complete and a greater disclosure in relation to imagination. For example, we see a friend and then shut our eyes, so the image of the friend is present in our brain in the sense of imagination and conceptualisation. But if we opened the eye, we would perceive a difference. That difference is not due to perceiving an image different to what was in the imagination. Rather, the image that was seen is in conformity to the one imagined without difference. So there is no distinction between them, except that this second state is like a completion for the state of imagination and is like an opening-up of it. So when opening the eye, an image of the friend is created in a way that is more clear, complete and perfect…Hence, imagination is a type of perception at a level, and beyond it is another level which is more complete than it in clarity and disclosure, and is like a completion of it. So we call this completion with respect to the imagination: Ru’yah and Ibsar.

“Similarly there are some things which we know but we cannot imagine, which is the essence of Allah and His attributes, and everything that doesn’t have a form, meaning no colour and no size, like power, knowledge, love, sight and imagination. These are things we know but do not imagine. Knowledge of them is a kind of perception. So we should contemplate: Does the intellect (‘aql) find it impossible that this perception can be more complete – its relation to it (meaning the more complete perception’s relation to knowledge) is like the relation of seeing to imagination? If that is possible, we refer to that disclosure and completion in relation to knowledge: Ru’yah, like we referred to it in relation to imagination: Ru’yah. It is known that the possibility of this completion in opening-up and disclosure is not impossible in known things that exist which are not imagined, like knowledge, power etc. and likewise, in the essence and attributes of Allah (Most High)…So we say that is not impossible, as there is nothing making it impossible, but ‘aql is proof of its possibility…However, this completion in disclosure is not expended in this world, while the soul is in the occupation of the body and the impurity of its attributes, so because of it, it (complete disclosure) is hidden to him. Just as it is not farfetched that the eyelid or a screen or a stain in the eye is a cause – according to the normal course of nature – of the impossibility of viewing imagined things, so it is not farfetched that the impurity of the self and the overloading of the veils of occupations – according to the normal course of nature – prevents viewing (ibsar) of known things. So when what is in the graves are scattered…and the hearts are purified by pure drink…it is not impossible that because of it, it becomes ready for greater completion and perception of the essence of Allah (Most High). Since in all known things, the elevation of its level from the recognised type of knowledge is like the elevation of the level of sight from imagination, this is expressed as meeting Allah (Most High), witnessing Him, seeing Him, and observing Him, or whatever expression you please, as there is no tenacity in that after the meanings are made clear.

“When that is possible, when this reality is created in the eye, the term Ru’yah in terms of the applicability of language to it is even more true. Creating it in the eye is not impossible, just as creating it in the heart is not impossible. Once it is understood what the people of truth intend by Ru’yah, it is known that the intellect does not find it impossible, but necessary as the Shari’ah attests to it, so there is no room for disagreement except by obstinacy or tenacity in using the term Ru’yah or deficiency in understanding these subtle meanings we described. We should limit ourself to this quantity in this summary.”

Alhamdulillah, his discussion beautifully explains what I had in my mind and what I tried to convey above. Towards the end of his discussion on Ru’yah,

Imam al-Ghazali says (from: ولينظر المنصف كيف افترقت الفرق)

“Let the fair person consider how the splinter groups divided, and parted into the extremist and the negligent: As for the Hashawiyyah, they were not able to understand something that exists which is not in a direction, so they affirmed direction, so by necessity, corporealism, measurement, and having the qualities of temporality became necessary for them. As for the Mu’tazilah, they negated direction, and they were not able to affirm Ru’yah without it, and because of it they opposed the absolute decrees of Shari’ah, and they believed that in affirming it (Ru’yah) there is affirmation of direction

“These (Mu’tazilah) became immersed in tanzih trying to avoid tashbih, so they were negligent. And the Hashawiyyah affirmed direction, trying to avoid ta’til so they made (Allah) similar [to creation].

So Allah guided the Ahlus Sunnah to establish the truth. So they acquired the middle path, and they knew that direction is negated, because it is a complement and completion of corporealism, and that Ru’yah is established, because it is a passenger of knowledge and its close relative, and it (Ru’yah) is a completion of it (knowledge). Hence, negation of corporealism necessitated the negation of direction which is from its necessites. And the establishment of knowledge necessitated the establishment of Ru’yah which is from its follow-ups and completors and shares with it in its quality which is that it does not necessitate any change in the essence of the object that is seen, but pertains to it as it is, like knowledge. It is not hidden to the intelligent person that this is moderation in belief [Iqtisad fil I’tiqad].”

Imam al-Ghazali on seeking intercession through the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam:

ثم يقول ” اللهم إنك قد قلت وقولك الحق { ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا أنفسهم جاءوك فاستغفروا الله واستغفر لهم الرسول لوجدوا الله تواباً رحيماً } اللهم إنا قد سمعنا قولك وأطعنا أمرك وقصدنا نبيك متشفعين به إليك في ذنوبنا وما أثقل ظهورنا من أوزارنا تائبين من زللنا معترفين بخطايانا وتقصيرنا فتب اللهم علينا وشفع نبيك هذا فينا وارفعنا بمنزلته عندك وحقه عليك

“Then he (i.e. the person who is visiting the grave of the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) should say:

O Allah, You spoke and your saying is the truth: { If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, come unto thee and asked Allah’s forgiveness, and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah indeed Oft-returning, Most Merciful } [4:64]. O Allah, we’ve indeed heard your statement and followed your command and came to your Prophet seeking intercession through him unto You for our sins and burdens that weigh [heavily] on our backs, repenting from our faults and confessing our errors and shortcomings. So grant us forgiveness, o Allah, and let this your Prophet intercede for us, and elevate us by virtue of his rank and right with You.” Source: “Ihya` ‘Ulum al-Din”

Shaykh Abul-Wafa’ ‘Ali Ibn ‘Aqil al-Baghdadiyy (d. 513 AH), the head of the Hanbali School at the time, was quoted in a book called ‘Al-Baz al-Ashhab’: “Allah is clear of having the attribute of occupying places, for this is exactly the blasphemous belief of tajsim (attributing Allah with bodily concepts)”.

Ibn `Aqil al-Hanbali  One of the great early authorities of the Hanbali school  said:  “Exalted is Allah above having an attribute which occupies space — this is anthropomorphism itself! Nor is Allah divisible and in need of parts with which to do something. Does not His order and His fashioning act upon the fire? How then would He need the help of any part of Himself, or apply Himself to the fire with one of His attributes, while He is the one Who says to it: “Be coolness and peace” (21:69)? What idiotic belief is this, and how far remote it is from the Fashioner of the dominions and the firmaments! Allah gave them the lie in His book when He said: “If these had been gods, they would never have gone down to it” (21:99): how then can they think that the Creator goes down to it? Exalted is Allah above the ignorant pretenses of the mujassima!”” [Ibn al-Jawzi, Daf` shubah al-tashbih p. 172-174. ]

Imam Abu Nasr ibn al-Qushayri (d.514 AH) described the method that the anthropomorphists use to lead people to adopt wrong beliefs. He mentioned this in his book at-Tadhkirat ash-Sharqiyyat. Imam Murtada az-Zabidi quotes an excerpt of this book in volume 2 of his own book Ithaf Sadat al-Muttaqin pages 176-177 (last paragraph of page 176, first paragraph  of page 177), where Ibn al-Qushayri says :

A group of people has appeared, and if it were not for the fact that they approach laymen by what is close to their way of thinking and what is imagined in their illusions, I would have honoured this book by avoiding to [even] mention them.

They say: ‘We follow the apparent meaning, and the verses which suggest resemblance [between Allaah and His creations], for example the narrations which suggest a limit and a member [to Allaah], we give them the apparent meaning, and it is not permissible to interpret in another meaning, for any of those issues.‘

They pretend to be following the saying of Allaah ta’aala وما يعلم تأويله إلا الله (wa ma ya’lamu ta’weelahu ‘illallaah) which means “And only Allaah knows its ta’weel”, and these people, by Allaah, are more harmful to Islam than the Jews, the Christians, the fire-worshippers and the idol-worshippers. Indeed, the deviations of the non-Muslims are obvious, and the Muslims steer clear away from them, whereas these people have launched an attack on the religion and on the laymen in a way which can fool the weakest among them.

They have suggested these bad innovations to their followers, and they have introduced in their hearts the fact of attributing to the one who is worshipped subhaanah:members, senses, ascending, descending, lying down, sitting, as well as moving into the different directions.

Therefore, the one who goes by the apparent meaning, he will start to imagine, with his illusions, things which are perceptible by our senses, and he will then have as a belief unacceptable things, and the tide will take him away without him even realising.

He also says, page 179:

The truth of the matter is that the very people who prohibit others to make interpretations [actually] believe in assimilation, tashbih [i.e. making Allah resemble His creations] but they try to hide it by saying “Allah is attributed with a Yad which is not like other yads, and Allah is attributed with a Qadam but not like other qadams, and Allah is attributed with al-Istiwa’ by Himself, but not like the istiwa’ we can perceive.”

Let the person who is among the people of the truth and who has been granted [proper] understanding say to them: ‘These statements need further clarification. For you to say ‘We take the text according to its apparent meaning, but we cannot understand its meaning’, is contradictory.

If you take the literal meaning of the ayah يوم يكشف عن ساق    ‘Yawma yukshafu ‘an saaq,’ which means: ‘A day when a saq is uncovered” then the literal meaning of  ‘saq’ is the organ which is composed of skin, flesh, nerves, bone and marrow. And if you take this literalmeaning, and make it binding upon yourself to accept these otherorgans, it is therefore blasphemy. And if  it is not possible for you to take this literal meaning, then where is your rule  of taking the apparent meaning (i.e.  how is it that you claim to adhere to the literal meanings?).  Wouldn’t you [actually] leave out the apparent meaning and acknowledge that the Lord ta’aala is free from what is suggested by the apparent meaning? And if the enemy says “These literal interpretations (adh-dhawaahir) do not have a meaning in the first place” then it is as if he is saying that these ayahs are invalid and that there is no benefit in these verses, and this is impossible.

Imam Abu Nasr ibn al-Qushayri is the son of the renowned Imam Abu l-Qasim al-Qushayri (d.465 AH) Imam Murtada az-Zabidi, who quotes this statement, is also a great scholar who died in (d.1205 AH) and who wrote Taj al-Arus min Jawahir al-Qamus which is an Arabic dictionary  in twenty volumes and the absolute reference in its genre. The book from which this statement by al-Qushayri is taken is from another one of his famous books entitled Ithaf Sadat al-Muttaqin  and it is a commentary of the book Ihya’u ‘Ulum ad-Din by Imam al-Ghazali (d.505 AH).

Look at how contemporary his sentences sound! He says: ‘these people, by Allaah, are more harmful to Islam than the Jews, the Christians, the fire-worshippers and the idol-worshippers. Indeed, the deviations of the non-Muslims are obvious, and the Muslims steer clear away from them, whereas these people have launched an attack on the religion and on the laymen in a way which can fool the weakest among them.’

Also pay attention to  ‘Therefore, the one who goes by the apparent meaning, he will start to imagine, with his illusions, things which are perceptible by our senses, and he will then have as a belief unacceptable things, and the tide will take him away without him even realising.’

And finally:  ‘The truth of the matter is that the very people who prohibit others to make interpretations [actually] believe in assimilation, tashbih [i.e. makingAllah resemble His creations] but they try to hide it by saying “Allah is attributed with a Yad which is not like other yads, and Allah is attributed with a Qadam but not like other qadams, and Allah is attributed with al-Istiwa’  by Himself, but not like the istiwa’ we can perceive.’

It is obvious that the arguments he was refuting at the time are those still in use nowadays by some people. Instead of only saying “We recite the revelation in Arabic and do not add anything to it (which would have been correct), they say: “We take the verses according to their apparent meaning, but we do not know how“, which Imam Ibn al-Qushayri rigorously exposed  as a nonsensical statement.

Malik Ibn Anas’ al-Qadi (The Judge) Abu Bakr Ibn al-‘Arabi (d. 543AH), a great Maliki scholar from Andalusia (presently known as Spain) In his book ‘al-Qabas fi sharh Muwatta’ said:“Allah, Who is ‘Al-Bari’ (The Creator) is clear from the limitation of the six directions or the envelopment of places”.

Abu Bakr ibn al-`Arabi al-Maliki (d.543AH)

“Those who believe that Allah عزوجل is in a direction “followers of Pharaoh”. Your conclusion shows that you are indeed the followers of Pharaoh, who believed that the Creator lies in a certain direction, and so he desired to climb up to Him on a ladder. He congratulates you for being among his followers, and he is your imam!”

[Imam Abu Bakr ibn al-`Arabi al-Maliki al-Ash’ari in Aridat al-Ahwadhi]

Imam Muhammad al-Shahrastani (d. 548 AH)

For post-classical Sunni theologians, tafwid and ta’wil were the two ways of warding off the literalist interpretations that they attributed to heretical corporealist (mujassima) groups such as the Karramiyya and Hashwiyya.

Ibn Taymiyya rejected both options, and it is thus not surprising that a scholar such as Ibn Hajar al-Haytami should have castigated him for having the same heretical views.

Already the theologian and heresiographer al-Shahrastani  had expressed the view that the origin of all shades of heretical anthropomorphism (tashbih) lay in the insistence on going beyond the tafwid of the salaf:

A group of later people added to what the salaf have said. They said: It is imperative to keep to the literal sense and to understand it as it appears, without presuming to reinterpret or suspend judgement as regards the literal meaning (la budda min ijra’iha ‘ala dhahiriha wa-al-qawl bi-tafsiriha kama waradat min ghayr ta’arrud li-al-ta’wil wa la tawaqquf fi al-zahir). Hence they fell into pure anthropomorphism (tashbih). This is contrary to what the salaf believed. [Muhammad al-Shahrastani, Kitab al-milal wa-al-nihal, ed. by W. Cureton (Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz, 1923 [reprint of 1846 edition], 64.]

Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdil-Karim ash-Shahrastaniyy, a great Shafi’i scholar (d.548 AH) In his book: ‘Nihayat al-‘Iqdam’,  said: “The creed of the People of Truth is that Allah, the Exalted, does not resemble any of the creations, and none of them resembles Him in any sort of similarity or equivalence. Verse 11 of Surat ash-Shura means: [There is absolutely nothing that resembles Allah, and He is attributed with Hearing and Sight]. Hence Allah is not a constituent part of an object, a mass, a bodily characteristic, nor is He located in any place or subject to time”.

Imam Shahrastani relates that Imam Ash`ari said:

The vision of Allah does not entail direction, place, or form, or face to face encounter either by impingement of rays or by impression, all of which are impossible [Shahrastani, al-Milal wa al-nihal as translated by A.K. Kazi and J.G. Flynn, Muslim Sects and Divisions (London: Kegan Paul International, 1984) p. 85.]

Imam ash-Shahrastani, in his book al-Milal wa n-Nihal (about the various sects claiming to be Islamic groups), said about Muslim scholars, on page 105:

“Some were so careful that they did not translate the terms ‘yad’, ‘wajh’ and ‘istiwa’’ [1] in Farsi [Persian] as well as for any similar narration.  If they needed a phrase to mention [them], they would quote them [i.e. the revealed expressions] to the letter. Indeed, this is the safe way and it is not assimilating [2] Allâh with His creation in anyway”.

[1] The basic meaning of ‘yad’ is ‘hand’ but it also means ‘power’, etc. It is used in many figurative expressions.

The basic meaning of ‘wajh’ is face but it too has many other meanings such as ‘kind’, ‘aspect’, ‘reality’, etc.

The verb ‘istawà’ has many meanings too, among which: to be equal, to become of age, to be cooked, to sit, to show one’s power, to conquer, etc.

[2] I.e. it is not kufr by tashbih /assimilating Allah to His creations.

Muhiyudeen Shaikh Abd Al Qadir Al Jilani al Hanabali (d.561AH)

in his Kitab sirr al Asrar wa Mazhar al Anwar said:

” Our Master the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wassallam) said, ‘ The hearts of the children of Adam are between the two fingers of the All-Merciful. He turns them whichever way He wills.’

The two fingers of Allah are His attributes of the irresistible power of punishment and the loving and delicate beauty of the beneficence. ”

(chapter 14, interpreted/translated by Shaykh Tosun Bayrak al-Jerrahi al-Halveti)

From his book:  al-Ghunya li-Talibi Tariq al-Haqq

Concerning the doctrine of the Anthropomorphists [al-Mushabbiha], we have three sub-sects to consider: The Hishamiyya, the Muqatiliyya and the Wasimiyya.

The point on which all three of these sub-sects are in unanimous agreement is that Allah (Exalted is He) is a physical body [jism], and that it is impossible to conceive of that which exists [al-mawjud] in anything other than strictly physical terms. They were persuaded to adopt the anthropomorphic doctrine [tashbih] under the influence of the sects known as the Rawafid and the Karramiyya.

The author who compiled their text books was a certain Hisham ibn al-Hakam, whose works include a book on the proof of the reality of the physical body [fi ithbat al-jism].

The Mushabbiha

  1. The Hishamiyya trace their name and origin to Hisham ibn al-Hakam, who maintained that Allah (Exalted is He) is a physical body with the dimensions of length, breadth and depth [jism tawil ‘arid ‘amiq]; a brilliant light [nur sati’]; having a definite, measurable quantity [qadr mina’l-aqdar], like a pure ingot; capable of moving and of being at rest, of standing up and of sitting down.

According to a story that has been told about him, he once said: “The best of all measurements would be seven spans.”

When someone asked him: “Is your Lord Supreme [A’zam], or One [Ahad]?” he replied: “My Lord is Supreme.”

  1. The Muqatiliyya trace their name and origin to Muqatil ibn Sulaiman. He is reported as having said that Allah (Exalted is He) is a physical substance; that He is a body [juththa] in the form of a human being-flesh and blood; that He has limbs and organs, such as a head, a tongue and a neck; and yet in all of the above He does not bear any resemblance to things [la yushbihu’l-ashya’], nor do they resemble him. [ al-Ghunya li-Talibi Tariq al-Haqq]

Imam Ibn Asakir (d.571AH) in his book: Tabyin Kadhib al-Muftari fima nusiba ila l-imam al-Ash’ari

Page,150: Also, the ‘Najjariyyah’ say that the Creator, may He be exalted, is in all places without being diffused and without a direction, whereas the ‘Hashawiyyah’ and the ‘Mujassimah’ say that He is present on the Throne, that the Throne is His place, and that He is sitting on it. As for him [i.e. al-Ash’ari], he chose a middle way between the two, and he said that Allah existed and there was no place, then He created the Throne and the Kursi’, He does not need a place, and He is, after having created the places, as He has always been before He created them. He explains here that the belief of Imam al-Ash’ari is that Allah does not need places.

Abul-Qasim ‘Ali Ibn al-Husayn Ibn Hibatillah known as Ibn ‘Asakir ad-Dimashqiyy (d.571 AH) In his book ‘Tabyin kadhib al-Muftari’ on the subject of the Attributes of Allah, the Exalted, said: “He (Allah) is eternally existent and eternally place did not exist, He created the ^Arsh and Kursiyy without the need for place. He still exists, after place was brought into existence, as He was before creating the place (i.e. without a place)”.

Imam Ibn ‘Asakir (d. 571 AH) has mentioned in his “Tabyin Kadhib al-Muftari” that Imam Ibn Abi Zayd wrote a letter against someone from the Mu’tazilah and he also quoted some passages from that letter:

وقد قرأت بخط علي بن بقاء الوارق المحدث المصري ، رسالة كتب بها أَبُو مُحَمَّدٍ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أَبِي زيد القيرواني الفقيه المالكي ، وكان مقدم أصحاب مالك رحمه اللَّه بالمغرب في زمانه إلى علي بن أَحْمَدَ بْنِ إِسْمَاعِيلَ البغدادي المعتزلي جوابا ، عن رسالة كتب بها إلى المالكيين من أهل القيروان يظهر نصيحتهم بما يدخلهم به في أقاويل أهل الاعتزال ، فذكر الرسالة بطولها في جزء وهي معروفة فمن جملة جواب ابْن أَبِي زيد له ، أن قَالَ ونسبت ابْن كلاب إلى البدعة ، ثم لم تحك عنه قولا ، يعرف أنه بدعة ، فيوسم بهذا الاسم ، وما علمنَا مَنْ نسبَ إلى ابْن كلاب البدعة ، والذي بلغنَا : أنه يتقلد السنة ، ويتولى الرد على الجهمية ، وغيرهم من أهل البدع يعني عَبْد اللَّهِ بن سعيد بن كلاب وذكرتَ الأشعري ، فنسبته إلى الكفر ، وقلتَ إنه كان مشهورا بالكفر ، وهذا ما علمنَا أن أحدا رماه بالكفر غيرك ، ولم تذكر الذي كفر به وكيف يكون مشهورا بالكفر من لم ينسب هذا إليه أحد علمنَاه في عصره ، ولا بعد عصره ؟ وقلتَ إنه قدم بغداد ولم يقرب أحدا من المالكيين ، ولا من آل حماد بن زيد لعلمه أنهم يعتقدون أنه كافر ، ولم تذكر ما الذي كفروه به ؟ ثم ذكر ابْن أَبِي زيد تشنيع علي بن أَحْمَدَ البغدادي على الأشعري في مسألة اللفظ ، ثم قَالَ ابْن أَبِي زيد في الرد على البغدادي : والقارئ إِذَا تلا كتاب اللَّه لو جاز أن يقال إن كلام هذا القارئ ، كلام اللَّه على الحقيقة لفسد هذا ، لأن كلام القارئ محدث ، ويفني كلامه ويزول ، وكلام اللَّه ليس بمحدث ولا يفني ، وهو صفة من صفاته ، وصفته لا تكون صفة لغيره ، وهذا قول مُحَمَّد بن إِسْمَاعِيلَ البخاري ، وداود الأصبهاني ، وغيرهم ممن تكلم في هذا ، وكلام مُحَمَّد بن سحنون إمام المغرب ، وكلام سعيد بن مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الحداد ، وكان من المتكلمين من أهل السنة ، وممن يرد على الجهمية

Source: الكتب – تبيين كذب المفتري فيما نسب إلى الأشعري – باب ما ذكر في ذم الأشعري وأصحابه

As you see he defends and praises Imam Ibn Kullab (d. 240 AH) and alsoImam al-Ash’ari (d. 324 AH) and even defends his position regarding the Kalam of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala.

Shaykh Ahmad Ar-Rifa’i ash-Shafi’i (d. 578 AH) In his book ‘Al-Burhan al-Mu’ayyad’ (The Substantiated Proof), the prominent Shaykh and Imam of true sufis, said: “Clear your beliefs from interpreting the Arabic term ‘Istiwa’’, when in reference to Allah, as physical establishment in a way similar to the ‘istiwa’’ ofbodies upon other bodies which dictates the act of occupation because Allah is clear of that. And do not sanction attributing to Allah a directional above or below, a location, a physical hand or an eye or interpreting the word ‘Nuzul’ as physically descendingor moving”.

Imam Abu Faraj ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Jawzi, (d.597 AH)

Ibn al-Jawzi’s book against the so-called Hanbali anthropomorphists has received many editions and is widely available. The title is: ‘Daf` shubah al-tashbih bi akuffi al-tanzih‘, “The Repelling With the Hands of Purification of the Sophistries of Anthroporphism”, also known as ‘al-Baz al-ashabb al-munqadd `ala mukhalifi al-madhhab al- hanbali’, “The Flaming Falcon Swooping Down on the Dissenters of the Hanbali Madhhab”! Editions: Damascus, 1926; Cairo, 1977?; Beirut, 1987; Amman, 1991; and recently, a new edition by Imam Abu Zahra]

Ibn al-Jawzi: “You have made this madhhab such a shameful disgrace that when it is said, “Humbali,” it is understood that he is someone who likens GOD to His creation.

You have then made your way to be that of bigotry and intolerance, showing fanatical support for Yazid ibn Muawiyyah, when you well know that the founder of the madhab permitted cursing him”. (Ibn al Jawzi rejected and repudiated Yazid for his behavior) And, Abu Muhammed Tamimi used to say about one of your imams that:

“[he] has disgraced the madhhab in a terrible way and it will not be cleansed until the day of resurrection.” [Daf` Shubah al-Tashbih bi Akuff al-Tanzih]More Info:Here

Ibn al-Jawzi said: “After they imagined a huge image on the Throne, they took to interpreting away all that contradicts its being located on the Throne.

So I ask you where is Allah?…They also said that the statement of Allah should come unto them in the shadows of the clouds (2:210) must be understood literally to mean the coming of His very Essence. So they declare it permissible one year and they declare it forbidden another.

They said: ‘We affirm this according to its external sense!’

Then they placated the commonality by adding: ‘But we do not affirm limbs.’

It is as if they said: ‘So-and-so is standing but he is not standing.’

Those are less intelligent than Juha… CAUTIONING AGAINST SUCH PEOPLE IS WORSHIP.”

[Ibn al-Jawzi, Sayd al-Khatir (p. 91-95).]

600 AH

Imam Fakhrud-Din ar-Raziyy (d.606 AH), In his book authored on interpreting the Qur’an known as ‘at-Tafsir al-Kabir’ (The Great Interpretation) said: “Regarding the Ayah { وهوالعلي العظيم } it is impossible for the meaning of the word ‘Aliyy’, when attributed to Allah, to refer to aboveness in terms of an upward direction or place, as evidence confirms the fallacy therein. Hence, this mandates that the meaning of the word ‘Aliyy’ is that Allah is clear of resembling all intellectual possibilities and of any similarity to the creation”.

Shaykh Al-Islam Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d.606AH/1209CE)

As for the saying of the Most High, ‘What prevented you from prostrating to the one that I created with My Two Hands [yaday]?’

we reply: Imam al-Razi’s Interpretation of ‘Two Hands’

الدليل دل على أن من قال إن الإله جسم فهو منكر للإله تعالى، وذلك لأن إله العالم موجود ليس بجسم ولا حال في الجسم، فإذا أنكر المجسم هذا الموجود فقد أنكر ذات الإله تعالى، فالخلاف بين المجسم والموحد ليس في الصفة، بل في الذات، فصح في المجسم أنه لا يؤمن بالله أما المسائل التي حكيتموها فهي اختلافات في الصفة، فظهر الفرق. وأما إلزام مذهب الحلولية والحروفية، فنحن نكفرهم قطعاً، فإنه تعالى كفر النصارى بسبب أنهم اعتقدوا حلول كلمة { ٱللَّهِ } في عيسى وهؤلاء اعتقدوا حلول كلمة { ٱللَّهِ } في ألسنة جميع من قرأ القرآن، وفي جميع الأجسام التي كتب فيها القرآن، فإذا كان القول بالحلول في حق الذات الواحدة يوجب التكفير، فلأن يكون القول بالحلول في حق جميع الأشخاص والأجسام موجباً للقول بالتكفير كان أولى.

Imam al-Razi:

Proofs tell us that the who says that God is a body is a disbeliever in God (who is greatly above and clear of flaws). The reason is that the God of the World exists, and He is not a body, or stationed in a body. So if the one who believes that God is a body denies this non-bodily existence, then he has disbelieved in God Himself. This means that the disagreement between the one that believes that God is a body, and the monotheist (i.e. in the Islamic sense, namely that God does not have a partner, part or a like in His self of attributes), is not based on a disagreement regarding attributes, but regarding the self (i.e. the identity of the one attributed with godhood.) It is sound to say then, that the one who believes that God is a body does not believe in Allah….

As for the Hululiyyah (those who believe that Allah settles in created things, such as the sky or a human body) and Hurufiyyah(those who believe that Allah’s attribute of Kalam/Speech consists of letters and sounds) sects, we say that they are unequivocally disbelievers. This is because Allah declared the Christians blasphemers for believing that Allah’s speech entered into Jesus, whereas the Hurufiyyah believe that it settles in the tongue of all those who recite Quran, and in all physical things that the Quran was written on. Accordingly, if the belief in its settlement in one single body (Jesus) is blasphemy, then it is even more blasphemous to believe that it settles in all shapes and bodies [Fakhruddin Al Razi. Mafatiĥ Al-Għayb.] (Info: Al Tafsir Al Kabeer in Arabic)

Imam Ibn ‘Abd al-Salam (d.660 AH) said, in his statement of doctrine:

He was before He brought place and time into existence, and He is now as He ever was. [ Ibn ‘Abd al-Salam, al-Mulha fi I`tiqad Ahl al-Haqq in his Rasa’il al-Tawhid (p. 11).]

The position of Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Ash’ari is similarly summed up by Abu al-Qasim ibn ‘Asakir: The Najjariyya said: ‘The Creator is in every place without indwelling (hulû) nor direction (jiha).’ The Hashwiyya and mushabbiha said: ‘The Creator took His place (hâ llun) on the Throne, the Throne is His location (makâ n), and He is sitting on top of it.’ Imam Al-Ash’ari took a middle ground and said: ‘Allah existed when there was no place; then He created the Throne and the Footstool (al-‘arsh wa al-kursî ) without ever being in need of place, and He is, after creating place, exactly as He was before creating it.’ (In Tabyin Kadhib al-Muftari (Saqqa ed. p. 150). This is the position of al-Ash’ari also as given byIbn Jahbal al-Kilabi (d. 733AH): “The words of the Shaykh[Abu al-Hasan al-Ash’ari] concerning direction are: ‘Allah was when there was no place, then He created the Throne and the Footstool, without ever needing place, and He is, after creating place, exactly as He was before creating it.'”  (In Tabaqat al-Shafi`iyya al-Kubra (9:79).

Imam al-Izz ibn Abd al-Salam  was asked in his Fatawa: “What do you say about Abu Zayd al-Qayrawani al-Maliki’s(d. 386) saying: “Allah is above His exalted Throne in person (bi dhatihi), and He is in every place with His knowledge”: Does such an affirmation attribute a direction to Allah or not? And is the one who holds such belief declared a disbeliever (kafir) or not?”

He replied: “The apparent meaning of what Ibn Abi Zayd said attributes direction for Allah, because he has made a difference between Allah’s being on the Throne and His being with His creation. As for the second question: the more correct position is that the one who holds belief in Allah’s direction is not declared a disbeliever, because the scholars of Islam did not bring such as these out of Islam, rather, they adjudicated inheritance from Muslims for them, burial in Muslim grounds, sanctity of their blood and property, and the obligation to pray over their remains. The same is true of all the upholders of innovations: People never ceased to apply to them the rulings that apply to Muslims. Pay no attention to what the common people claim about their disbelief.”

Imam Ibn ‘Abd al-Salam said: “Allah is not a body and thus Has no form, He is not an entity and thus Has no measured limits. He does not resemble anything and nothing resembles Him. The six directions do not surround Him, nor do the earths and skies enclose Him. He is eternally existent before creating the creations. He created time, and He still exists as He eternally was (i.e. without a place)”.‘Mulhat al-I’tiqad’


Note: Ibn Tayimyyah was born (661 AH)


Imam Al-Qurţubi (d.671 AH)

Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Ahmad al-‘Ansariyy al-Qurtubi a well-known Maliki scholar and explainer of the Holy Qur’an

Imam Al-Qurtubi states:

I say accordingly that Aļļaah’s aboveness and His highness refers to His highness of glory and attributes and greatness. That is, nothing is above Him when it comes to the meanings of greatness that are necessarily ascribed to Him, and there is nothing that shares His aboveness with Him. Rather He is the most High in the absolute sense, subĥaanah. (Tafsiir Al-Qurţubi, 7 / 220)

Note that because aboveness in location is relative, unlike the absolute aboveneness that

Al-Qurţubiyy affirms, those who believe in it are bound to attribute flaw to Aļļaah.

In Al-Asnaa Al-Qurţubiy says this explicitly:

It is said to them [the anthropomorphists who believe Aļļaah is in a place or direction, etc.]: “If Allaah was specified by a specification, formed by a form, limited by a limit and end, existing in a specific direction, [or] changing by emergent [previously non existing] attributes in Himself, then He would have been emergent and specified by whatever He was specified with in terms of quantity and form, and [thus] requiring a specifier [for the quantity and form], and if He required a specifier, then He would have been in need and emergent. And if this is invalid, then it is true that He is without a limit or an end, and that He is Self-existent in the sense that He does not need a place to confine Him or a body to be in, or something to hold Him, or another that He gets help from. His attributes of His self do not change by His actions or leaving them. (Al-Asnaa, 2/21)

In short, Al-Qurţubiyy says that believing Allaah’s aboveness is one of direction/ location necessitates believing He has a flaw.This is because it necessitates likening Him to things that need a creator to specify it.

It also necessitates another flaw. This additional flaw is that they will either have to say that Aļļaah can create a body above Himself, and thereby become below, or that He cannot, and have thereby attributed to Him lack of power to create bodies anywhere He chooses.

They have also made Him, according to their belief, dependent on creating something below Himself, in order to achieve aboveness.No wonder then, that Ibn Taymiyyah said Aļļaah must create something or another. According to him, the Creator would lose His aboveness if He did not! Such is the dilemma of the relative aboveness doctrine ofwahabism.

Al-Qurtubi said in his book al-Asnaa, page,193:

It is a duty for every accountable person to know that Allaah is attributed with absolute greatness [of status], and there is nothing greater than Him [in status]. Further, He is clear of any attribute that is bodily or related to having size, as He cleared Himself of that by His saying: الكبير المتعال

[which may be interpreted to mean : Allaah is the One attributed with absolute greatness and being above non-befitting attributes such as having a shape or size. –Ed.]

By this He informed us that He is Al-Kabiir, and the definitive particle “Al” indicates absoluteness. Then Allaah said “Al-Mutaˆaal” and by that He declared Himself clear of what makes bodies and bulky things great. [For] who believes that [Allaah has bodily greatness, i.e. in terms of shape or size] is likening Allaah to a body, and is an idolater.

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

Imam al-Qurtubi did not say: “the salaf believed Allah was in a direction”

Shaykh ul-Islam Imam An-Nawawi (d.676 AH)

Imam An-Nawawi said in his commentary on Muslim’s ĥaditħ collection:

المنهاج شرح صحيح مسلم بن الحجاج , النووي , دار إحياء التراث العربي , 1392 – (3 / 19): اِعْلَمْ أَنَّلِأَهْلِ الْعِلْم فِي أَحَادِيث الصِّفَات وَآيَات الصِّفَات قَوْلَيْنِ : أَحَدهمَا : وَهُوَ مَذْهَب مُعْظَم السَّلَف أَوْ كُلّهمْ أَنَّهُ لا يُتَكَلَّم فِيمَعْنَاهَا ، بَلْ يَقُولُونَ : يَجِب عَلَيْنَا أَنْ نُؤْمِن بِهَا وَنَعْتَقِد لَهَا مَعْنًى يَلِيق بِجَلَالِ اللَّه تَعَالَى وَعَظَمَته مَعَ اِعْتِقَادنَا الْجَازِمأَنَّ اللَّه تَعَالَى لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْء وَأَنَّهُ مُنَزَّه عَنْ التَّجَسُّم وَالِانْتِقَال وَالتَّحَيُّز فِي جِهَة وَعَنْ سَائِر صِفَات الْمَخْلُوق ، وَهَذَاالْقَوْل هُوَ مَذْهَب جَمَاعَة مِنْ الْمُتَكَلِّمِينَ ، وَاخْتَارَهُ جَمَاعَة مِنْ مُحَقِّقِيهِمْ وَهُوَ أَسْلَم . وَالْقَوْل الثَّانِي : وَهُوَ مَذْهَبمُعْظَم الْمُتَكَلِّمِينَ أَنَّهَا تُتَأَوَّل عَلَى مَا يَلِيق بِهَا عَلَى حَسَب مَوَاقِعهَا ، وَإِنَّمَا يَسُوغ تَأْوِيلهَا لِمَنْ كَانَ مِنْ أَهْله بِأَنْ يَكُونَعَارِفًا بِلِسَانِ الْعَرَب وَقَوَاعِد الْأُصُول وَالْفُرُوع ، ذَا رِيَاضَة فِي الْعِلْم

Know that the scholars, with regard to the ĥadiths and ayahs that mention attributes, have two sayings:

One of them, and it is the saying of most of the Salaf, or all of them, is that one does not speak about their meaning. Instead they say, “we must believe in them and be sure that they have a meaning that befits the greatness and glory of Aļļaah, with the firm belief that Aļļaah does not resemble anything, and that He is clear of having a size, movement, a location in a direction, and all other attributes of creation. This saying is the saying of a number of the Kalaam scholars, and it is the chosen saying of a number of scholarly authenticators and verifiers, and it is the safest path. The second saying, and it is the choice of most kalaam scholars, is that they are interpreted according what befits the context. This interpretation, however, is only acceptable from someone that is qualified by being an expert in the Arabic language (i.e. as used and understood by the companions) as well as the rules and principles of the religion, both in fundamentals and details, and this (work of interpretation) is a kind of exercise of (one’s) knowledge (i.e. for those qualified).  [Al-Nawawiy, Sharĥ Saĥiiĥ Muslim Li-l-Nawawiy (Beirut, Lebanon: Dar Ihyaa’ Al-Turath Al-Arabi, 1392), 3/19.]

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

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

His commentary in his Sharh of Sahih Muslim regarding the narration of “descent/an-Nuzul”:

هذا الحديث من أحاديث الصفات، وفيه مذهبان مشهوران للعلماء: أحدهما وهو مذهب السلف وبعضالمتكلمين أنه يؤمن بأنها حق على ما يليق بالله تعالى وأن ظاهرها المتعارف في حقنا غير مراد، ولايتكلم في تأويلها مع اعتقاد تنزيه الله تعالى عن صفات المخلوق وعن الانتقال والحركات وسائر سماتالخلق، والثاني مذهب أكثر المتكلمين وجماعات من السلف وهو محكي هنا عن مالك والأوزاعي علىأنها تتأول على ما يليق بها بحسب مواطنها، فعلى هذا تأولوا هذا الحديث تأويلين أحدهما: تأويل مالكبن أنس وغيره، معناه تنزل رحمته وأمره وملائكته، كما يقال فعل السلطان كذا إذا فعله أتباعه بأمره،والثاني: أنه على الاستعارة ومعناه الإقبال على الداعين بالإجابة واللطف.

This hadith is from the hadith of the Sifat (of Allah), and regarding it there are two well known madhdhabs: the first, and it is the madhhab of the salaf and some of the Mutakallimin (scholars of kalam) that it is believe in their [i.e. the attributs] reality according to what befits Allāh ta’ala, and that the literal meaning that we commonly apply to ourselves is not what is meant, and that one does not speak regarding its interpretation while holding the belief that Allah ta’alā is free from the attributes of the created, and from translocation, and movement, and the rest of the attributes of created beings. The second is the madhdhab of the majority of the Mutakallimīn, and a group from amongst the Salaf, and it is what is reported from Mālik and al-Awzā’ī that they are interpreted figuratively but only according to their appropriate contextual meanings. On this basis there are two interpretations (ta’wils). The first is the ta’wil of Imam Malik ibn Anas and other than he, that its meaning is the descent of His mercy and decree and His angels. [as is said regarding the Sultan …] and the Second interpretation is that it is an Isti’arah (metaphor) to signifiy turning to (iqbal) to those who supplicate to Him with fulfillment by answering [the du’aa] and showing lutf (kindness, generosity) [to those beseeching Him].[Sharh Sahih Muslim; Kitab Salat al-Musafirin]

Imam an-Nawawi denies the literal meaning, the creed of Ibn Tayimyyah, for Allah’s descent, and says the way of the salaf and the Mutakallimin is both tafwid and ta’wil.

Imam An-Nawawi also quoted Imam Malik elsewhere in hisSharh of Sahih Muslim regarding this issue of the “descent” of Allah,

فقد سئل الإمام مالك رحمه الله عن نزول الرب عزّ وجلّ، فقال “ينزل أمره تعالى كل سَحَر، فأما هوعزّوجلّ فإنه دائم لا يزول ولا ينتقل سبحانه لا إله إلى هو

Imam Malik was asked about the “descent” of Allah and he said, “His, the majestic’s, command descends every night, and as for Allah ‘azza wa jall, then he is eternal, he does not move or displace, glorified be He, and there is no god but He!”[6/37]

He says regarding the hadith of the “slave girl”:

هذا الحديث من أحاديث الصِّفات، وفيها مذهبان تقدَّم ذكرهما مرَّات في كتاب الإيمان: أحدهما:الإيمانبه من غير خوض في معناه، مع اعتقاد أنَّ الله ليس كمثله شيء،وتنزيهه عن سماتالمخلوقات.والثَّاني:تأويله بما يليق به. فمن قال بهذا – أي التأويل – قال: كان المراد امتحانها هل هيموحِّدة تقرُّ بأنَّ الخالق المدبِّر الفعَّال هو الله وحده، وهو الَّذي إذا دعاه الدَّاعي استقبل السَّماء،كماإذاصلَّى المصلِّي استقبل الكعبة،وليس ذلك لأنَّه منحصر في السَّماء، كما أنَّه ليس منحصراً في جهةالكعبة، بل ذلك لأنَّ السَّماء قبلة الدَّاعين، كما أنَّ الكعبة قبلة المصلِّين.أو هي من عبدة الأوثان العابدينللأوثان الَّتي بين أيديهم، فلمَّا قالت: في السَّماء علم أنَّها موحِّدة وليست عابدة للأوثان

“This hadith is from the narrations of the attributes of Allah, and there are two madhdhabs regarding this, and I have mentioned them both in the chapter of Iman. The first is to believe in it without delving into its meaning, while believing that Allah has no similitude to Him at all, and negating for him the attributes of created beings. And the second school is that it is interpreted in a manner that befits Him.” […then he gives the interpretations…]

When Muslims lift their hands and face towards the sky when performing du^aa (supplicating to Allàh for something beneficial), it does not mean that Allàh exists in the skies.

Imam Al-Nawawi  said:

في شَرْحِ صَحِيح مُسْلِم يَقولُ الإِمَامُ النَّوَوِيُّ : السَّمَاءُ قِبْلَةُ الدُّعَاء.

Means: The skies are the direction for the du^aa (i.e. supplication). Muslims lift their hands and face towards the skies, because it is the direction for the du^aa, just as the Ka^ba (Mecca) is the direction for all Muslims around the world to face towards when praying to Allàh. It is from the skies that the mercies and blessings from Allah descend. The Mushabbihah say that the skies are the direction to perform du^aa to use it as their so-called proof that Allàh occupies the skies. The Prophet made du^aa when his forehead was facing the ground while in prayer.

The Messenger of Allàh, Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon him) said:

مَا في السَّمَاءِ مَوْضِعُ أَرْ بَعِ أَصَابِعَ إلا وَفِيهِ مَلَكٌ قَائِمٌ أَوْ رَاكِعٌ أَوْسَاجِدٌ يَذْكُرُ اللَّهَ تَعَالى. رَوَاهُ الترمذي عنأبي ذر الغفاري.

Means: There is no space in the sky equal to the width of four fingers, except one would find an Angel worshipping and glorifying Allàh, either in standing, bowing or prostrating position. The Angels stay as such until the Day of Judgement, worshipping Allàh their Creator. This saying of the Messenger of Allàh is another proof that Allàh does not exist in the skies. This is because those whoever claim that Allàh exists in the upper skies, are claiming that Allàh is in between the Angels and His size is the width of four fingers? This is impossible, because the Creator is not a body, object, size, form or shape.

Imam an-Nawawi makes no mention of the madhdhab of the literalists who delve into the literal meaning and affirm it for Allah!

He also says in his  Sharh of Sahih Muslim:

إن الله تعالى ليس كمثله شيء وإنه منزّه عن التجسيم والانتقال والتحيز في الجهة وعن سائر صفاتالمخلوق

“Verily there is nothing like Allah ta’ala, and he is free from tajsim (corporeality), and displacement, and being within direction, and from the rest of the attributes of the created beings.” [3/19]

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

Such stupidity only shows the ignorance of Ibn Taymiyyah in issues of creed! “The Book” does say He is not a body when He says “There is nothing like unto Him, and He is As-Sami’ al-Basir!” This is a verse of denial of everything in similitude with creation! For jism (corporeality/body) is an attribute of the created, and is thus tamthil.

Allah never ascribes himself with a body (jism), yet Ibn Taymiyyah is more than happy to do so for Him, exalted is He above what this deviant ascribed to Him!

Imam An-Nawawi disagreed with Ibn Taymiyyah, and this is a clear refutation of the claim of “Ijma’” by Ibn Taymiyyah  As Allah says in the Qur’an,

فَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ افْتَرَىٰ عَلَى اللَّهِ كَذِبًا أَوْ كَذَّبَ بِآيَاتِهِ

“And who is more unjust than one who invents about Allah a lie or denies His verses?” [7:37]

So the Qur’an does say He is not a body. But a question to ask the proponents of Tajsim (and this is what it is): Where does Allah ascribe to Himself a “body”? What proof do you have? Or is it that you do take the literal meaning of hand, shin, waist, foot, eyes, and with your sensual perception imagine Allah as the pagan Christians do as a body (jism), unlike other bodies – in other words with a bigger hand than humans. These folk have invented a lie upon Allah by saying about Him what He has denied about Himself!

Imam An-Nawawi is the complete opposite in creed of Ibn Taymiyyah. In fact, Imam An-Nawawi does not even recognize the school of Ibn Taymiyyah as being from Ahlus Sunnah, as you can see from his commentary in Sahih Muslim, rejecting the “literal” meanings as what is intended.

Imam An-Nawawi also said in his Sharh of Sahih Muslim:

من العلماء من يمسك عن تأويلها ويقول نؤمن بأنها حق وأن ظاهرها غير مراد ولها معنى يليق بهاوهذا مذهب جمهور السلف وهو أحوط وأسلم والثاني أنها تتأول على حسب ما يليق بتنزيه الله تعالىوإنه ليس كمثله شيء

“And from the scholars are those who refrain from interpretating [the narratives of attributes]. They say we believe that they are real and that the literal meanings of the texts are not what are intended, and the meaning is what befits His majesty and this is the madhhab of the majority of the Salaf, and it is most upright, and safest. The second school is one of interpretation of the texts in a manner which befits His Majesty, while denying any imperfections from Allah ta’ala, as there is nothing like unto Him!” [16/166]

Also Imam An-Nawawi quotes Imam Al-Mazari, the Maliki Asha’ri, in refutation of Ibn Qutaybah regarding his belief thatAllah has an “image unlike other images” regarding the hadith “Allah created Adam in His image…”.

Imam al-Nawawi  has also stated in his Sharh of Saheeh Muslim;

وهذا أشهر المذهبين للمتكلمين: وقال آخرون لا تتأول بل يمسك عن الكلام في معناها ويوكل علمها إلى اللهتعالى ويعتقد مع ذلك تنزيه الله تعالى وانتفاء صفات الحادث عنه: فيقال مثلا نؤمن بأن الرحمن على العرشاستوى ولا نعلم حقيقة معنى ذلك والمراد به مع أنا نعتقد أن الله تعالى (ليس كمثله ش&#1574 وانهمنزه عن الحلول وسمات الحدوث وهذه طريقة السلف أو جماهيرهم وهي أسلم إذ لا يطالب الانسان بالخوضفي ذلك فإذا اعتقد التنزيه فلا حاجة إلى الخوض في ذلك والمخاطرة فيما لا ضرورة بل لا حاجة إليه فاندعت الحاجة إلى التأويل لرد مبتدع ونحوه تأولوا حينئذ: وعلى هذا يحمل ما جاء عن العلماء في هذا واللهأعلم

“If there is a need for interpretation (ta’wil) in order to refute innovators and their like, then they (the Salaf) went ahead and applied interpretation. This is the correct understanding of what has reached us from the scholars concerning this subject, and Allah knows best.”

An-Nawawi and Al-Qadi Iyad said they are not Muslims:

قوله صلى الله عليه و سلم ( فليكن أول ما تدعوهم إليه عبادة الله فإذا عرفوا الله فأخبرهم إلى آخره ) قال القاضيعياض رحمه الله هذا يدل على أنهم ليسوا بعارفين الله تعالى وهو مذهب حذاق المتكلمين في اليهود والنصارىأنهم غير عارفين الله تعالى وان كانوا يعبدونه ويظهرون معرفته لدلالة السمع عندهم على هذا وان كان العقل لايمنع أن يعرف الله تعالى من كذب رسولا قال القاضي عياض رحمه الله ما عرف الله تعالى من شبهه وجسمه مناليهود أو اجاز عليه البداء أو أضاف إليه الولد منهم أو أضاف إليه الصاحبة والولد وأجاز الحلول عليه والانتقالوالامتزاج من النصارى أو وصفه مما لا يليق به أو أضاف إليه الشريك والمعاند في خلقه من المجوس والثنويةفمعبودهم الذى عبدوه ليس هو الله وان سموه به اذ ليس موصوفا بصفات الاله الواجبة له فاذن ما عرفوا اللهسبحانه فتحقق هذه النكتة واعتمد عليها وقد رأيت معناها لمتقدمى أشياخنا وبها قطع الكلام ابوعمران الفارسى بينعامة اهل القيروان عند تنازعهم في هذه المسألة هذا آخر كلام القاضي رحمه الله تعالى. (المنهاج شرح صحيحمسلم بن الحجاج , النووي , دار إحياء التراث العربي , 1392, 1 / 199-200)

The saying of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) “let the first you call them to be the worship of Aļļaah, then when they know Aļļaah tell them…” etc.

Al-Qadi ˆIyad (رحمه الله) said: “This (i.e. the foregoing statement of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم)) indicates that they (the Christians)do not know Aļļaah, and this is the saying of the brilliant kalaam scholars regarding the jews and the Christians; that they do not know Aļļaah (تعالى) even if they worship Him (i.e. call what they worship by His name) and making it appear as if they know Him, based on what they narrate amongst themselves, even though it is not impossible in the mind’s eye that someone who disbelieves in a messenger does know Aļļaah.”

Al-Qadi Iyad (رحمه الله) said: The one that likened Aļļaah to His creation, or believed Him to be bodily among the jews and Christians, or believed that He gains knowledge over time, or claimed He has a child, or a female companion and a child, or saidhe could exist in created things, or move from one place to another, or be mixed with creation, among the Christians orattributed to Him what is not befitting, or associated with Him a partner or opponent in creating among the Magians an dualists; what they worship is not Aļļaah, even if they called it that. This is because it is not attributed with the attributes that are necessarily His. Accordingly, they do not know Aļļaah (سبحانه), so realize this point well, and depend on it, and I have seen this point made by our predecessor shaykhs.”

Al Imâm Al Hafidh Abu Zakariyya Muhyi d-Din Yahya Ibn Sharaf An-Nawawiyy  in his very famous explanation of Sahih Muslim about Hadith al Jariyah, said:

“This hadith is among the hadith of attributes, and there are two methods in explaining it… One is to believe in it without delving into its meaning, confirming:

{(ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصير)}

and that He is clear of the attributes of the creations. The second (method) is to make ta’wil in a way that befits Him. So whoever takes by that (second method) says that what is meant is to subject her to a test: Is she a monotheist who confesses that the Creator, Manager, and Doer (of whatever He willed) is indeed Allâh alone, the one whom if the invoker supplicates to Him he directs himself to the sky, just as the one who prays directs himself towards the Ka^bah – and that is not because He is limited to the sky, nor is He limited to the direction of the Ka^bah, rather the sky is the Qiblah of those who supplicate, just as the Kabah is the Qiblah of those who pray – or is she an idol worshipper, among the pagans who worship the idols that are in their presence? So when she said: في اُلسّماء

which literally means “in the sky”; he knew that she was a monotheist, and not an idol worshipper.

Al-Qadi Iyad said, “There is no difference between the Muslims altogether; the scholar of fiqh, the scholar of hadith, the scholar of belief, the skillful debater, and the common Muslim, that the outward meanings of what is narrated in mentioning Allâh the exalted being in the sky, like His saying:

{( أَأَمِنتُم مَن فِي السَّماءِ أَن يَخسِفَ بِكُمُ الأَرضَ)}

and texts like it, are not by their literal meanings, rather they are all given ta’wil according to all of the Muslims.”

This clearly indicates that Imâm an-Nawawiyy did not attribute a body or a place to Allâh Subhanahu wa Ta^ala and at the same time he related to us the consensus of the Muslims that was transmitted by Qadi Iyad.

NOTE: Ibn Taymiyyah (b.661AH) was 15 years old when the great Imâm an-Nawawi passed away.

He lived in the era of such a great scholar who passed on the consensus of Qadi Iyad which clearly states that the literal meanings of certain texts cannot be taken and that ta’wil must be made for these texts.

Ibn Taymiyyah contradicted this consensus and he contradicted the scholars of his time as well as those who came before him.

al-Imam ‘Abdullah bin Mahmud bin Mawdud al-Mawsili (d. 683 AH) major Hanafi scholar

[it’s in the context of the Ziyarah], who’s buried near to Imam Abu Hanifah (d. 150 AH):

وقد قال الله تعالى : ( ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا أنفسهم جاءوك فاستغفروا الله واستغفر لهم الرسول لوجدوا الله توابا رحيما ) وقد جئناك ظالمين لأنفسنا ، مستغفرين لذنوبنا ، فاشفع لنا إلى ربك ، وأسأله أن يميتنا على سنتك ، وأن يحشرنا في زمرتك ، وأن يوردنا حوضك ، وأن يسقينا كأسك غير خزايا ولا نادمين ، الشفاعة الشفاعة يا رسول الله ، يقولها ثلاثا : ( ربنا اغفر لنا ولإخواننا الذين سبقونا بالإيمان ) الآية .ويبلغه سلام من أوصاه فيقول : السلام عليك يا رسول الله من فلان بن فلان ، يستشفع بك إلى ربك فاشفع له ولجميع المسلمين

“Allah ta’ala says: { If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, come unto thee and asked Allah’s forgiveness, and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah indeed Oft-returning, Most Merciful } [4:64].

So we’ve come to you, having wronged ourselves and asking [Allah] for forgiveness regarding our sins, so intercede for us to your Lord and ask Him that He lets us die upon your Sunnah, and that He gathers us [on the day of reckoning] among your group, and allows us to get to your Hawdh and drink from your bowl without disgrace or regret.

Intercession intercession, O Messenger of Allah (al-Shafa’ah al-Shafa’ah, Ya Rasulallah) – he (the visitor) should say this thrice -, { “Our Lord, forgive us and those of our brothers who preceded us in faith” } [59:10] [till the end of] the Ayah.

[Then] he should deliver the greeting of those who have told him to do so by saying: ‘Peace be upon you, o Messenger of Allah, from Fulan bin Fulan, he seeks intercession through you unto your Lord, so intercede for him and for all believers’.”

Source: “al-Ikhtiyar li Ta’lil al-Mukhtar”

Shaykh Ahmad Ibn Idris al-Qarafiyy (d.684 AH), an Egyptian Malikiyy scholar, In his book ‘Al-Ajwibah al-Fakhirah’  said: “And He (Allah) is not in any direction, and when we are admitted to Paradise Allah will grant us the honour of seeing Him without Him being in any direction”.


Note: Ibn Taymiyyah’s first clash with the scholars occurred in (698 AH) in Damascus when he was barred from teaching after he issued his Fatwâ Hamawiyya in which he unambiguously attributes literal upward direction to Allâh.


700 AH

Ibn Taymiyyah then returned to his activities until he was summoned by the authorities again in (705AH) to answer for his`Aqîda Wâsitiyya.

He spent the few following years in and out of jail or defending himself from various “abhorrent charges” according to Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalânî.

They witnessed over him that he had repented of his own free will from all that contravened the above. This took place on the 25th of Rabî` al-Awwal707AH and it was witnessed by a huge array of scholars and others.”

Ibn ‘Ata’ Allah al-Sakandari (d. 709AH) cites it as one of his Hikam (#34):

The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم)  said:

“Allah was when there was nothing else than Him, and His Throne was upon the water, and He wrote in the Reminder (al-dhikr) all things, and He created the heavens and the earth.”

[ Narrated from ‘Imran ibn Husayn by al-Bukhari, Sahih, book of the Beginning of Creation.]

Ibn `Ata’ Allah al-Iskandari – Debate with Ibn Taymiyya

Imam An-Nasafi (d.710 AH) states in his Tafsir:

إنه تعالى كان ولا مكان فهو على ما كان قبل خلق المكان، لم يتغير عما كان.

“Verily He, the exalted, was without place, and He is as He was before creating (the entity of) ‘place’, not changing as He was [Tafsīr An-Nisfi ,Surah Taha, Volume: 2]

Imam al-Nasafi states;  “ He (Allah) is not a body (jism), nor an atom (jawhar), nor is He something formed (musawwar), nor a thing limited (mahdud), nor a thing numbered (ma’dud), nor a thing portioned or divided, nor a thing compounded (mutarakkab), nor does He come to end in Himself. He is not described by quiddity (al-ma’hiya), or by quality (al-kayfiyya), nor is He placed in space (al-makan), and time (al-zaman) does not affect Him. Nothing resembles Him, that is to say, nothing is like Him.” (See: Sa’d al-Din al-Taftazani & Najm al-Din al-Nasafi, Sharh al-Aqa’id al- Nasafiyya, 92-97).

Imam Abu l-Barakat Abdullah ibn Ahmad an-Nasafi, wrote on page 164, volume: 2 of his Tafsir of the  Qur’an : [About the following verse :

وَلِلّهِ الأَسْمَاء الْحُسْنَى فَادْعُوهُ بِهَا وَذَرُواْ الَّذِينَ يُلْحِدُونَ فِي أَسْمَائه

Walillaahi l-asmaa’u l-husna fa-d’uhu bihaa wa dharu l-ladheena yulhiduna fi asmaa-ihi

which means : “And ALLAAH has the perfect names, therefore invoke Him by these names, and stay away from those who are guilty of ilhaad [atheism] towards these names”. Surate al-A’raf verse 180].

‘It is atheism (ilhaad) to call ALLAAH a ‘body’ (jism)  or an ‘elementary particle’  (jawhar)

or  a ‘mind/reason’ (‘aql)  or a ’cause’  (‘illah)’

Imam Abu l-Barakat Abdullah ibn Ahmad an-Nasafi was a  great exegete, i.e. a scholar specialised in the interpretation of the Qur’an. His Tafsir is famous. He is not to be confused with other great Hanafi scholars also named an-Nasafi, such as Najm ad-Din Abu Hafs an-Nasafi (d..537 AH)  who wrote the book al-Aqaid, which has been commented by at-Taftazaani, and which a reference in terms of books of belief, or Maymun ibn Muhammad an-Nasafi, the theologian who wrote the book Tabsirat al-Adillah (d.508AH).

To explain what ‘ilhaad’ means in this verse, Imam an-Nasafi says that it is a type of atheism to call ALLAAH ‘jism’ or ‘illah’, i.e. ‘body’ or ’cause’ . Indeed, these two names are not among the names of Allaah narrated in the religious texts, and on top of that their meaning does not comply with Islamic teachings. ALLAAH is not a body, He is not composed of parts. And He is not a ’cause’ because this would equal saying that He does not have a will, and that is the reason why imam an-Nasafi has considered this naming as an act of blasphemy.

Imam Shams al-Din al-Jazari (d. 711 AH) refuting Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) on seeking aid with the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam

Imam Najm al-Din al-Tufi al-Hanbali (d. 716 AH) mentioned what Imam al-Jazari said and added some comments to it: “‘So the one of his own caste seeked assistance against the one who was of his enemies’ [quoting the verse from chapter al-Qasas, aya 15 of the Qur’an];

The Shaykh Shams ud-Deen al Jazari, the commentator of the Minhaj in Usul al Fiqh (the science of foundation of Legal Jurisprudence) used it [i.e. this verse] as evidence against Shaykh Taqi udDeen Ibn Taymiyyah and his reported statement:

“The assistance of the Messenger of Allah, May Allah send his peace and blessings upon him, is not sought as seeking assistance of Allah, the Exalted and Mighty, is from His specific characteristics and rights so it is not for other than Him just like (acts of) worship.’ ”

The aforementioned refutation is as follows:

He said, “It is necessary that one considers the true nature of seeking assistance.

What is it and what is meant by seeking help and calling for help?

We find this man from the tribe of Israel sought the assistance of Musa [may the peace and blessings be upon him and the Seal of Prophets], and sought and called for his help as is explicitly stated in the text of this verse. This is the seeking assistance of a created being from another created being and Musa affirmed the man from the tribe of Israel in it and Allah, the exalted and Mighty affirmed Musa doing so. Furthermore Muhammad, May Allah send His peace and blessing upon him, did not find fault in it when these verses were revealed. In other words, this was affirmation from Allah, the Exalted and Mighty, and His Messenger for the seeking assistance of one created being from another created being and as seeking the assistance of Musa is permissible then it even more so of Muhammad as he is by consensus superior.

He also uses as evidence the narration of Hajar, the mother of Ismail, when she sought water for her son and did not find it. She heard a sound at the bottom of the valley and said, “[Oh whoever you may be,] you have made me hear your voice, [help us] if you can offer any help.” This statement conveys the meaning of her seeking the assistance of (the angel) Jibreel and the Prophet, May God send his peace and blessings upon him, affirmed her in this and did not disapprove of her.

Certainty in the oneness of God is one of the conditions of Islam. So when we find a Muslim seeking the assistance of a created being we know, without doubt, that he is not associating that created being with God, the Exalted and Mighty. Such an action is only his seeking help or turning to Allah by the blessing of that created being. People at the station of reckoning (on the Day of Judgement) will call for the help of the prophets seeking their intercession in bringing ease for themselves, hence it is permissable to call upon the prophets in other situations. Shaykh Abu Abdillah anNu’maan has written a book that he titled, “The lamp in darkness of those seeking assistance by the best of mankind.” This book has become famous and the people of his time have agreed upon this book in consensus. The consensus of the people of every age is considered a proof such that the one who disapproves is considered to be acting against the consensus.

If it is said that the aforementioned verse is regarding the story of Musa and the man from the tribe of Israel and it is not relevant to the point in contention for two main objections.

The first being that Musa was alive at that time and we only decline to accept the seeking assistance of a dead being.

The second is that the companion of Musa sought his assistance in a matter that Musa was able to undertake and that was his help with an opponent and that is a natural matter.

Yet we only contend with the seeking assistance of a created being in matters that are specific to God, the Exalted and Majestic, such as divine mercy, forgiveness, sustenance, giving life and so on.

So one must not say, “Oh Muhammad forgive me or have mercy upon me or sustain me or answer me (and in another manuscript of the same text ‘give me life’ was mentioned) or give me money and a child” as all of that is associating a partner to God by consensus.

A response to the first objection is that if seeking of assistance of the living is allowed then so should it be allowed for the dead, if not even more so, as he they are closer than the living to God, the Exalted and Mighty for many reasons.

The first of which is that he is in the abode of Generosity and Recompense and the living is in the abode of legal responsibility.

The second is that the dead person, unlike the living, has broken free from the natural world that cuts of from reaching the other world.

The third reason is that the martyrs in their lives are veiled and after their death are alive with their Lord being sustained (alluding to Surah 2 V 154).

In response to the second objection it can be said that what you have mentioned is an agreed upon matter known to the youngest of Muslim let alone the eldest, i.e. that with regards to Divine Omnipotence another created being is not to be sought under any circumstance and that neither should be attributed to it. We have seen rabbles of people and their common-folk and the furthest of them from knowledge and divine certainty (gnosis) seeking refuge at the room of the Prophet (i.e. his resting place), may God send his peace and blessings upon him, and they do not go beyond asking for intercession and his being a medium, “Oh Prophet, intercede on behalf of us. Oh God, by the blessing of your Prophet, forgive us.” Hence such discussion about the matter becomes presumptuous and no one from amongst the Muslims is in need of it. If it is inevitable that by announcing this ruling it is feared that someone may fall into it then putting it another way do not delude yourself in finding fault in the Prophet, May God’s peace and blessings be upon him, or defect in his rank such as saying that which God has taken upon himself by Divine ability should not be sought from a created being at all and do not oppose the Prophet by stripping seeking assistance from Him unrestrictedly or restrictedly and do not mention him except by sending peace and blessings upon him and narrating from from and so forth.

This is that which concerns this matter and I have relayed it in a question and answer format with additional points from myself.” Source: “al-Isharat al-Ilahiyyah ila al-Mabahith al-Usuliyyah” 3/89-93 and translation taken from Here

Fatwa (726AH) by The Four Orthodox Sunni Judges:

Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Jama’ah, ash-Shafi’i,

Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn al-Hariri, al-`Ansari, al-Hanafi,

Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr, al-Maliki, and

Qadi [Judge] Ahmad Ibn `Umar, al-Maqdisi, al-Hanbali.

Ibn Taymiyah was imprisoned by a fatwa (religious edict) signed by four orthodox Sunni judges in the year (726 AH) for his deviant and unorthodox positions.

Note that each of the four judges represents the four schools of Islamic jurisprudence that Sunni Muslims belong to today. This illustrates that Ibn Taymiyah did not adhere to the authentic teachings of orthodox Sunni Islam as represented by the four schools of Sunni jurisprudence. There is no evidence to indicate that there was a “conspiracy” against Ibn Taymiyyah to condemn him, as Wahhabis and other Salafis purport in his defense.


Note: Ibn Tayimyyah died in (728AH)

Also amid with charges of kufr for declaring that one who travels to visit the Prophet(s) commits a prohibition (Harâm), a sin (ma`siya), and an innovation (bid`a).


In the final five months of his last two-year period in jail Ibn Taymiyya was prevented from writing, at which time he turned to prayer and the intensive recitation of the Qur’ân and repented from having spent time writing doctrinal refutations instead of focussing on the commentary of the Qur’ân.

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

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

Al-Nabahânî said in Shawâhid al-Haqq: “He refuted the Christians, the Shî`îs, the logicians, then the Ash`arîs and Ahl al-Sunna, in short, sparing no one whether Muslim or non-Muslim, Sunni or otherwise.”

Al-Tawfiq al-Rabani written by a group of Sunni scholars, page 32:

علمه أكثر من عقله فأداه اجتهاده إلى خرق الاجماع في مسائل كثيرة قيل انها تبلغ ستين مسألة فأخذته الألسنة بسبب ذلك وتطرق إليه اللوم وامتحن بهذا السبب وأسرع علماء عصره في الرد عليه وتخطئته وتبديعه ومات مسجونا بسبب ذلك.

Sheikh Iraqi regarding ibn Tayimyyah,  said “… his knowledge exceeded the capabilities of his brain, and he therefore contradicted the ‘Ijma’ of Muslims on many issues. They said on around 60 matters. They therefore criticized and blamed him, and he has been examined due to that. The scholars of his time refuted him, presented his mistakes, and deemed him a heretic. He was also imprisoned due to that.”

Note: Ibn Tayimyyah  was refuted by his contemporary:

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

Ibn Jahbal wrote: “How can you say that Allâh is literally (haqîqatan) in (fî) the heaven, and literally above (fawq) the heaven, and literally in (fî) the Throne, and literally on (`alâ) the Throne?!”

Ibn Jahbal also says in his Refutation of Ibn Taymiyya: 22. We say: Our doctrine is that Allah is pre-eternal and pre-existent (qadî azalî ). He does not resemble anything nor does anything resemble Him. He has no direction nor place. He is not subject to time nor duration. Neither “where” (ayn) nor “at” (hayth) applies to Him. He shall be seen, but not as part of an encounter, nor in the sense of an encounter (yurâ lâ’an muqâ bala wa lâ ‘alâ muqâ ‘ala). He was when there was no place, He created place and time, and He is now as He ever was. This is the madhhab of Ahl al-Sunna and the doctrine of the shaykhs of the [Sufi] Path – may Allah be well-pleased with them. (Tabaqat al-Shafi`iyya al-Kubra(9:41).

Ibn Jahbal refuted such kufristic insinuations in his refutation of Ibn Taymiyyah that has been translated and published:

The Refutation of Him (Ibn Taymiyyah) Who Attributes Direction to Allah by Ibn Jahbal

We say to him: What do you say concerning the mention of “several eyes” (a‘yun), the mention of the “flank” (janb), the mention of the single “shin” (saq), and the mention of the “several hands” (aydi)?

If we take these literally then we must affirm a being that has one face with many eyes, a single side, many hands, and a single shin! What being on earth is possibly uglier?

And if you take the liberty of interpreting this and that to be dual or singular, then why does Allah not mention it, nor the Prophet(s), nor the Salaf of the Community? (Chapter 7: The Absurdity of His Literalism, pp. 221-223)

Ibn Jahbal al-Kilabi al-Halabi (d.733 AH) wrote:

”Whenever Hasan al-Basri (d.110AH) spoke on the science of al-Tawhid, he would begin by taking out of his gathering all those that were not fit to hear. May Allah have mercy on the Salaf! They did not speak about doctrine except with the Ahlus Sunnah among them – for the Sunnah is the basis of the verifying authorities – and they withheld any such discourse from newcomers.

They said; “Newcomers see things for the first time and are barely starting on their way. They have no prior experience and no firm foothold in these matters – even if they are seventy years old.

Sahl ibn `AbdAllah al-Tustari (d.283AH) said; “Do not acquaint newcomers with the secrets before they become firmly settled in their belief that the Allah عزوجل is One and that the subject of monotheism is Unique, Everlasting, and transcends modality and place. Thoughts cannot encompass Him nor can hearts conceive of Him in terms of `How”. [Shaykh Ibn Jahbal al-Kilabi al-Halabi ash-Shaf’i’ al-Ash’ari . al-Radd `ala Man Qala bi al-Jiha (Refutation of Ibn Taymiyya) Point 12]

Ibn Juzayy al-Kalbi al-Gharnaouti (d.741AH), in his commentary work on the Quran “Tasheel li Ulum al-Tanzeel”, comments on the verse:

And your god is one God. There is no god except Him, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful. [2:163]

{ وَإِلَـٰهُكُمْ إِلَـٰهٌ وَٰحِدٌ } الواحد له ثلاثة معان كلها صحيحة في حق الله تعالى: أحدها: أنه لا ثاني له فهو نفي للعدد، والآخر: أنه لا شريك له، والثالث: أنه لا يتبعض ولا ينقسم، وقد فسر المراد به هنا في قوله؛ لا إلٰه إلاّ هو.

واعلم أن توحيد الخلق لله تعالى على ثلاث درجات الأولى: توحيد عامة المسلمين وهو الذي يعصم النفس من الهلك في الدنيا، وينجي من الخلود في النار في الآخرة، وهو نفي الشركاء والأنداد، والصاحبة والأولاد، والأشباه والأضداد.

الدرجة الثانية: توحيد الخاصة، وهو أن يرى الأفعال كلها صادرة من الله وحده ويشاهد ذلك بطريق المكاشفة لا بطريق الاستدلال الحاصل لكل مؤمن، وإنما مقام الخاص في التوحيد يغني في القلب بعلم ضروري لا يحتاج إلى دليل، وثمرة هذا العلم الانقطاع إلى الله والتوكل عليه وحده واطراح جميع الخلق، فلا يرجو إلا الله، ولا يخاف أحداً سواه إذ ليس يرى فاعلاً إلاّ إياه ويرى جميع الخلق في قبضة القهر ليس بيدهم شيء من الأمر، فيطرح الأسباب وينبذ الأرباب،

والدرجة الثالثة: ألا يرى في الوجود إلا الله وحده فيغيب عن النظر إلى المخلوقات، حتى كأنها عنده معدومة. وهذا الذي تسميه الصوفية مقام الفناء بمعنى الغيبة عن الخلق حتى أنه قد يفنى عن نفسه، وعن توحيده: أي يغيب عن ذلك باستغراقه في مشاهدة الله. Source

Rough Translation:

{And your god is one God}  Wahid (i.e., “one”), has three meanings all of which are correct in right of Allah Almighty:

First: That He is not a second, He denied the number;

Second: That He does not have a partner; and

Third: That He is not distributed nor divided, (which is) the interpretation intended here by the saying {There is no god except Him}.

And know that Tawhid has three stations,

First: Tawhid of the generality of Muslims, it will protect him in this created world, and save him from eternity in the Hell fire in the next life. He denies Him a partner or an equal, an associate or a child, likeness or an opposite.

The second station: Tawhid of the special/distinguished, He believes that all his actions are issued from Allah alone and witness it by way of disclosure and not by way of reasoning (as done) by all believers,  but rather this special station of Tawhid enriches the heart with the necessary knowledge without the need for proof. The fruit of this knowledge is the dedication to Allah and trust in Him alone and discarding all of creation, having no hopes or requests but from Allah, and fearing none else (but Him), he would see that nothing can cause effect but by Him, and sees all of creation in the grip of the Subduer, not in his (own) hands is any command over matters, he discards the (correlative natural) causes and discards (false) lords.

The third station: He does not see anything in existence but Allah alone, the creation is hidden from his sight until like non-existent. This is what the Sufis call the station of Fana, meaning he stays away (hides) from creation until he annihilates his self, and (hence) tawhid: to be concealed by immersing himself in the Sight of God.

Imam Abu Zayd ibn al-Imam Tilimsani (d.742 AH) Successfully Disputed with ibn Taymiyya in Egypt

Changing Views of ibn Taymiyya by Khaled el-Rouayheb:

Ibn Taymiyya had also gained notoriety for his literal interpretation of the hadith al-nuzul to which Sanusi alluded, i.e. the tradition stating that Allah descends to the lowest heaven during the last third of the night (or according to a variant, on the night of mid-sha’ban).

The later North African scholar Baba al-Tunbukti (d. 1624; 1036AH), author of a popular biographical dictionary of Maliki scholars, referred precisely to Ibn Taymiyya’s literal interpretation of this Hadith. Al-Tunbukti noted that the scholar Abu Zayd ibn al-Imam Tilimsani (d. 742AH) had gone toEgypt and while there had disputed successfully with Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiyya.

He added that: The mentioned Taqi al-Din had some repugnant claims, such as taking literally the Hadith al-nuzul, saying: “like I descend now”…. May Allah protect us from this claim! And someone said that the attribution of this to him is not certain, and Allah knows best. [Ahmad Baba al-Tunbukti, Nayl al-ibtihaj bi-tatriz al-Dibaj. Printed on the margins of Ibn Farhun, al-Dibaj al-mudhahhab fi ma’rifat a’yan al-madhhab (Cairo: Matba’at al-Sa’ada, 1329AH), 166.]

Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi (d.745 AH) stated that he had seen this work Kitab al-‘arsh, of  Ibn Taymiyya who had written there that God is literally seated on the throne, and had left a place on it for the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) to sit next to him.[ Ibid., 2:1438]

Muhammad Ibn Yusuf known as Abu Hayan al-Andalusiyy (d.745AH) In his book ‘al-Bahr al-Muhit’ explaining verse 19 of Suratal-Anbiya’ the great linguist and interpreter and reciter of the Holy Qur’an, said: “The word ‘inda’ in this Ayah does not have the function of an adverb of place because Allah is clear of occupying places. Rather, it is used in the context of honourable status and high standing.”

Abu Hayyan al-Andalouci denounces kufr of Ibn Taymiyya.

Indeed, Abu Hayyan al-Andalouci questioned Ibn Taymiyya whereas before he was just doing his praise, and he could not conceive that we can not love Ibn Taymiyya. But after I visited Al-Andalouci walked away disappointed having seen the arrogance of Ibn Taymiyya. But mostly he began to curse him after seeing the book Kitabou l-‘Arsh of Ibn Taymiyya his word that Allah would sit on the Koursiyy and He would have left room to seat His Prophet.

Abu Hayyan al-Andalouci said: “I saw it in his book, his own book and I know his handwriting. ”

He mentioned this in his Tafsir, exegesis of his Qour-year Nahrou called An-l-Madd mina l-Bahr.

Imam al-Dhahabi (d.748 AH) mentions that ibn Taymiyya’s followers weakened, and that he was forbidden from issuing fatawa due to his views on talaq, yet he remained stubborn on his views:

“His followers weakened and he involved himself in weighty questions that neither the intellects of his contemporaries nor their learning could bear, such as: the question of the expiation of the oath of repudiation (talaq), the opinion that repudiation (talaq) uttered three times is valid only once, and the opinion that repudiation (talaq) during menstruation is not valid. He composed writings about these topics in the order of some forty quires. Because of this, he was forbidden to issue legal opinions (fatawa). He controlled himself in a strange way and held firm to his own opinion.”

[al-Dhahabi, Nubdha in Bori, “A New Source“, 336, (Arabic Text) – 342 (English Translation)]

Imam al- Dhahabi said about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah:

مع أني مخالف له في مسائل أصلية وفرعية

“However I disagree with him in creedal and legal issues.”

on page,329: of Dhayl Tareekh Al Islam:

al- Dhahabi’s biography of Ibn Taymiyyah included in the compilation called, “From the Legacy of Shaikhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah”, found :  on page, 244:

وله حدة قوية تعتريه في البحث حتى كأنه ليث حرب. أهـــ

“He had an acute harshness that would overcome him during debate, making him like a lion of war.”

وفيه قلة مداراة وعدم تؤدة غالبًا , والله يغفر له. أهـــ

“He often lacked congeniality and prudence. May Allah forgive him.”

وَقَدْ يُعَظِّمُ جليسه مرة ويهينه في المحاورة مرات. أهـــ

“He may honor his company once, yet disrespect them during debate repeatedly.”

al- Dhahabi said: Regarding ibn Taymiyya’s conduct with his opponents during debate, on page 326 and 327 of his book Dhaylu Tareekhil Islam:

مع اننى لا اعتقد فيه العصمة كلا فانه مع سعة علمه و فرط شجاعته و سيلان ذهنه و تعظيمه لحرماتالدين بشر من البشر تعتريه حدة فى البحث و غضب وشظف للخصم يزرع له عداوة فى النفوس ونفورا عنه وإلا والله لو لاطف الخصوم و رفق بهم ولزم المجاملة و حسن المكالمة لكان كلمة اجماع

“…although I do not believe him to be infallible (ma’soom). Most definitely not! Because despite his vast knowledge, extreme courage, overflowing intellect, and reverence for the sanctities of the religion, he was but a man. During debates he would be overcome with harshness, hot temper, and toughness with his opponents which would plant in the souls the seeds of enmity, aversion, and dislike for him. Otherwise, had he been polite and kind with his opponents and observed etiquette and a graceful mode of speech, he would have been a word of consensus.”

al- Dhahabi describes the position of Ibn Taymiyyah’s closest companions and “fans” from the unique opinions that he has:

ولا ريب انه لا اعتبار بمدح خواصه والغلاة فيه فان الحب يحملهم على تغطية هناته بل قد يعدونهامحاسن. أهـــ

“And without doubt, no consideration should be given to the praise of his closest companions or those who are extreme in their admiration for him. Their love for him will make them cover his mistakes, nay they may even count them to be from his good deeds.”Dhayl Tareekhil Islam pg. 328 – 329 :

al-Dhahabi said on page 327 and 328 of his book Dhailu Tareekhil Islam:

وإن أنت عذرت كبار الائمة فى معضلاتهم ولم تعذر ابن تيمية فى مفرداته فقد أقررت على نفسك بالهوىو عدم الانصاف. أهـــ

“If you were to excuse the eminent Scholars for their problematic verdicts yet not excuse Ibn Taymiyyah for his unique fatawas, you would be acknowledging that you yourself have leanings and unfairness.”

al-Dhahabi said in Dhuyool Al ‘Ibar fee Khabari man Ghabar, page 84:

وله مسائل غريبة نيل من عرضه لأجلها

“And he has strange (rulings on) issues, due to which his repute was under fire”

al-Dhahabi said in Al Mu’jam Al Mukhtass bil Muhadditheen, on page 25 (pg 45 in the PDF reader), bio #22:

وانفرد بمسائل فنيل من عرضه لأجلها, وهو بشر له ذنوب وخطأ ومع هذا فوالله ما مقلت عينِي مثله ولارأى هو مثله نفسه. أهــ

“And he went alone on issues that, because of them his repute was under fire. And he is a man. He has sins and mistakes. Yet despite this, by Allah, my eyes have never seen the likes of him, nor has he seen the likes of himself.”

al- Dhahabi in his book, Tadhkiratul Huffaadh on page 1497, mentions about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah:

وقد انفرد بفتاوى نيل من عرضه لأجلها وهي مغمورة في بحر علمه, فالله تعالى يسامحه ويرضى عنهفما رأيت مثله. وكل واحد من الأمة فيؤخذ من قوله ويترك فكان ماذا؟ أهـــ

“And he went alone to make unique fatawas, due to which his repute came under fire. Yet they are submerged in the ocean of his knowledge. So may Allah forgive him and be pleased with him, for I have never seen anyone like him. And since the case with everyone in the Muslim Ummah is that some of their statements may be accepted and others may be rejected, what is the problem?”

al- Dhahabi said about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah:

ولقد نصر السنة المحضة، والطريقة السلفية، واحتج لها ببراهين ومقدمات، وأمور لم يسبق إليها،وأطلق عبارات أحجم عنها الأولون والآخرون وهابوا، وجسر هو عليها، حتى قام عليه خلق من علماءمصر والشام قياماً لا مزيد عليه. أهـــ

“And he supported the pure Sunnah, and the Salafi methodology. And he argued using proofs, premises and matters that he was not preceded to. And he made statements that the earlier and later people refrained from saying and were afraid to utter. Yet he boldly said those things, until a huge group of Scholars from Egypt and Syria confronted him most sternly.”

See pg. 243:

al- Dhahabi on page 38 of the book, Zaghlul ‘Ilm , said about his teacher Ibn Taymiyyah:

وقد تعبت في وزنه وفتشته حتى مللت في سنين متطاولة ، فما وجدت قد أخره بين أهل مصر والشامومقتته نفوسهم وازدروا به وكذبوه وكفروه إلا الكبر والعجب ، وفرط الغرام في رياسة المشيخةوالازدراء بالكبار ، فانظر كيف وبال الدعاوي ومحبة الظهور ، نسأل الله تعالى المسامحة ، فقد قام عليهأناس ليسوا بأورع منه ولا أعلم منه ولا أزهد منه ، بل يتجاوزون عن ذنوب أصحابهم وآثام أصدقائهم ،وما سلطهم الله عليه بتقواهم وجلالتهم بل بذنوبه ، وما دفعه الله عنه وعن أتباعه أكثر ، وما جرى عليهمإلا بعض ما يستحقون ، فلا تكن فى ريب من ذلك. أهـــ

“And I have tired myself from weighing him and examining him, until over the long years I became exausted. At last, what I found to be holding him back among the scholars of Egypt and Syria (Shaam), caused their souls to loathe him, and them to disdain him, and call him a liar and accuse him of disbelief was nothing else but arrogance (kibr), self admiration (‘ujb), the ardent desire to be the “head shaikh”, and belittling the eminent (figures in Islam)! So look at the outcome of false claims and love of fame! We ask Allah, the Exalted, for pardon. For indeed, the people who confronted him were not more pious than he, or more knowledgeble or more ascetic. On the other hand, they would overlook the sins of their companions and the misdeeds of their friends. Allah did not afflict him with them due to their piety (taqwa) and their nobility, but because of his sins. And what Allah deflected from him and his followers was even greater. And nothing befell them except for some of what they deserved, so do not be in doubt concerning this.” See page, 38:

al- Dhahabi  said in his book called Zaghlul ‘Ilm:

فما أظنك فى ذلك تبلغ رتبة ابن تيمية ولا والله تقربها وقد رأيت ما اَل أمره إليه من الحط عليه والهجروالتضليل والتكفير والتكذيب بحق و بباطل فقد كان قبل أن يدخل فى هذة الصناعة منوراً مضيئاً علىمحياه سيما السلف ثم صار مظلماً مكسوفاً عليه قتمة عند خلائق من الناس ودجالاً أفاكاً كافرا عند أعدائهومبتدعاً فاضلاً محققا بارعا عند طوائف من عقلاء الفضلاء وحامل راية الإسلام وحامى حوزة الدينومحي السنة عند عوام أصحابه هو ما أقول لك. أهـــ

“…I still don’t believe you would reach the level of Ibn Taymiyyah nor, by Allah, would you even come close to it. And I have witnessed what his affair led to, with people putting him down, abandoning him, declaring him to be a deviant, declaring him to be a disbeliever, and accusing him oflying, rightfully and wrongfully. But before he got into this field he was radiant, shining, and bearing the appearance of the Salaf on his face…” [page 42 and 43]

al-Nasiha al-Dhahabiyya to Ibn Taymiyya

al-Nasihah al-Dhahabia li ibn Taymiyya (Sincere Advice to Ibn Taymiyya, Maktab al-Misria 18863)


Note: Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (b.691 AH – d.751 AH) Ibn Tayimyyah’s Disciple!

Ibn al- Qayyim followed the same path as his teacher in his infamous poem entitled:

al-Qasida al-Nuniyya. More Info: Here also not to forget: Here


al-Imam al-Mufassir Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi (d.754AH)on ibn Taymiyya’s Belief that: “Allah Most High is sitting (yajlisu) on the Kursi but has left a place of it unoccupied, in which to seat the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace)”

Excerpt from the article – ‘Reforming Classical Texts’ by Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller:

…the two-volume Qur’anic exegesis of Abu Hayyan al-Nahwi (d. 754/1353), Tafsir al-nahr al-madd [The exegesis of the far-stretching river] condensed mainly from his own previous eight-volume exegesis al-Bahr al-muhit [The encompassing sea], arguably the finest tafsir ever written based primarily on Arabic grammar. Abu Hayyan, of Andalusion origin, settled in Damascus, knew Ibn Taymiya personally, and held him in great esteem, until the day that Barinbari (d. 717/1317) brought him a work by Ibn Taymiya called Kitab al-‘arsh [The book of the Throne]. There they found, in Ibn Taymiya’s own handwriting (which was familiar to Abu Hayyan),anthropomorphic suggestions about the Deity that made Abu Hayyan curse Ibn Taymiya until the day he died. This was mentioned by the hadith master (hafiz) Taqi al-Din Subki in his al-Sayf al-saqil (85). Abu Hayyan, in his own Qur’anic exegesis of Ayat al-Kursi (Qur’an 2:258) in surat al-Baqara, recorded something of what so completely changed his mind:

I have read in the book of Ahmad ibn Taymiya, this individual whom we are the contemporary of, and the book is in his own handwriting, and he has named it Kitab al-‘arsh [The book of the Throne], that “Allah Most High is sitting (yajlisu) on the Kursi but has left a place of it unoccupied, in which to seat the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace)” [italics mine]. Al-Taj Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Abd al-Haqq Barinbari fooled him [Ibn Taymiya] by pretending to be a supporter of his so that he could get it from him, and this is what we read in it (al-Nahwi, Tafsir al-nahr al-madd, 1.254).


Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki (d.756 AH)


Al-Dura al-Mudhia, page 5:

أحدث ابن تيمية ما أحدث في أصول العقائد ونقض من دعائم الإسلام الأركان والمعاقد بعد أن كانمستترا بتبعية الكتاب والسنة مظهرا أنه داع إلى الحق هاد إلى الجنة فخرج عن الاتباع إلى الابتداعوشذ عن جماعة المسلمين بمخالفة الاجماع

“When Ibn Taimiyah caused what he caused in ideology and abolished the pillars of Islam after which he pretended to be an adherent of the Book and Sunnah, and pretended that he was an advocate for truth and guiding others to heaven, he went astray and (went) towards originating a heresy, and became odd by contradicting the Ijma of Muslims.”

Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki on ibn Taymiyya and his followers being from the deviant Hashwiyya sect, and that they were a minority fringe group who would teach their beliefs in secret

“As for the Hashwiyya, they are a despicable and ignorant lot who claim to belong to the school of (Imam) Ahmad (ibn Hanbal)… They have corrupted the creed of a few isolated Shafi’is, especially some of the Hadith scholars among them who are lacking in reason… They were held in utmost contempt, and then towards the end of the seventh century (AH) a man appeared who was diligent, intelligent and well-read and did not find a Shaykh to guide him, and he is of their creed and is brazen and dedicated to teaching his ideas… He said that non-eternal attributes can subsist in Allah, and that Allah is ever-acting, and that an infinite chain of events is not impossible either in the past or the future. He split the ranks and cast doubts on the creed of the Muslims and incited dissension amongst them. He did not confine himself to creedal matters of theology, but transgressed the bounds and said that travelling to visit the tomb of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) is a sin… The scholars agreed to imprison him for a long time, and the Sultan imprisoned him… and he died in prison. Then some of his followers started to promulgate his ideas and teach them to people in secret while keeping quiet in public, and great harm came from this.”

[al-Zabidi, Ithaf al-Sada al-Muttaqin, 2:11. al-Zabidi is quoting from al-Subki’s al-Sayf al-Saqil fi al-Radd ‘ala ibn Zafil, see al-Rasa-il al-Subkiyya, 84-85]

Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki on ibn Taymiyya’s view on Tawassul as cited by Imam ‘Abd al-Ra’uf al-Munawi (d. 1031AH):

“It is proper to entreat and ask for the help and intercession of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) with Allah. No one from amongst the salaf and the khalaf denied this, until ibn Taymiyya came along and disapproved of this, and deviated from the straight path, and invented a position that no scholar has said before, and he became a deterrent example for Muslims” [al-Munawi, Faydh al-Qadir, 2:170]

This was also mentioned by Imam Muhammad Amin ibn ‘Abidin al-Shami al-Hanafi (d. 1252AH) via Imam al-Munawi as follows:

نَعَمْ ذَكَرَ الْعَلَّامَةُ الْمُنَاوِيُّ فِي حَدِيثِ «اللَّهُمَّ إنِّي أَسْأَلُك وَأَتَوَجَّهُ إلَيْك بِنَبِيِّك نَبِيِّ الرَّحْمَةِ» عَنْ الْعِزِّ بْنِ عَبْدِ السَّلَامِ أَنَّهُ يَنْبَغِي كَوْنُهُ مَقْصُورًا عَلَى النَّبِيِّ – صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ – وَأَنْ لَا يُقْسِمَ عَلَى اللَّهِ بِغَيْرِهِ وَأَنْ يَكُونَ مِنْ خَصَائِصِهِ قَالَ وَقَالَ السُّبْكِيُّ: يَحْسُنُ التَّوَسُّلُ بِالنَّبِيِّ إلَى رَبِّهِ وَلَمْ يُنْكِرْهُ أَحَدٌ مِنْ السَّلَفِ وَلَا الْخَلَفِ إلَّا ابْنَ تَيْمِيَّةَ فَابْتَدَعَ مَا لَمْ يَقُلْهُ عَالِمٌ قَبْلَهُ اهـ

[Radd al-Muhtar ‘ala al-Durr al-Mukhtar Hashiya ibn ‘Abidin, vol. 6, pg. 397, Dar al-Fikr, Beirut ed.]

Imam Mustafa ibn Ahmad al-Shatti al-Hanbali (d. 1348AH) also mentioned this from Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki as follows:

“It is good to make intercession with the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) to his Lord. No one from the first generations (salaf), or those who followed (khalaf), repudiated this until Ibn Taymiyyah arrived. He repudiated intercession, went out from the straight path and innovated what no scholar before him had said, and became known for that among the people of Islam.”

[al-Shatti, al-Nuqul al-Shar’iyya fi al-Radd ‘ala al-Wahhabiyya, translated into English by al-Hajj Abu Ja’far al-Hanbali as The Divine Texts, pg. 57]

Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki on ibn Taymiyya’s book on hell being non-eternal:

[(al-Hut, Kamal Yusuf, ed.) al-Rasa’il al-Subkiyya fi radd ‘ala ibn Taymiya wa tilmidhihi ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, 196-208 (documents, letters, and passages by Taqi al-Din al-Subki and others edited and commentated upon by al-Hut). Beirut: ‘Alam al-Kutub]

Imam al-Dhahabi praised  Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki denouncing Ibn Taymiyya.

Ibn Taymiyya was challenged by someone who had more knowledge and piety that we, ie Hafidh Taqiyyou d-Din As-Subki, and Adh-Dhahabi greatly praised in two verses of Arabic poetry:

Minbar of the Umayyad be proud when the wise ocean science, taqiyy the climbs.

Whoever remembers the most of all the Shaykh of his era,

The most eloquent of them, who control most of the laws of science ‘Ali.

This is ‘Ali, Ibn’ Abdi Kafi l-As-Subki, aptly known as the Al-Hafidh Taqiyyou d-Din As-Subki.

Shaykh al-Islam al-Subki was a contemporary of Ibn Taymiyya and he repeatedly denounced, for example, in his book Ad-l-Dourratou Moudiyyah, as the Hafidh Abu Sa’id Al-‘Ala-iwhich also denounced Ibn Taymiyyah in his time.

Shaykh al-Islâm al-Subkî’s Rejection of Ibn Tayimyyahs Fatwa

This most notorious of all fatwas was refuted by his contemporary the hadîth Master and Shaykh al-Islâm Taqî al-Dîn al-Subkî in his landmark book Shifâ’ al-Siqâm fî Ziyârati Khayri al-Anam (“The Healing of Sickness Concerning the Visitation to the Best of Creatures”) , also titled Shann al-Ghâra `alâ man Ankara al-Safar li al-Ziyâra (“The Raid Against Him Who Denied the Lawfulness of Travel for the Purpose of Visitation”).

Shaykh al-Islâm adduced the hadîth “Whoever visits my grave, my intercession will be guaranteed for him” as proof against Ibn Taymiyya’s claim that “all the hadîths that concern the merit of visitation are weak or rather forged” and denounced Ibn Taymiyya’s unprecedented fatwâ as a flagrant innovation.

As-Subki calls them idol worshipers: As-Subkiyy in his Tabaqaatu-sħ-Sħaafiˆiyyatu-l-Kubraa says regarding scripture texts that appear to be referring to bodily attributes:

طبقات الشافعية الكبرى : إنما المصيبة الكبرى والداهية الدهياء الإمرار على الظاهر والاعتقاد أنهالمراد وأنه لا يستحيل على الباري فذلك قول المجسمة عباد الوثن الذين في قلوبهم زيغ يحملهم الزيغعلى اتباع المتشابه ابتغاء الفتنة عليهم لعائن الله تترى واحدة بعد أخرى ما أجرأهم على الكذب وأقلفهمهم للحقائق طبقات الشافعية الكبرى ج 5 ص 192

“the saying of the mujassimah (anthropomorphists), worshipers of the idol, makes them always focus onambiguous aayahs.”

Al Imam As Safadi (d.764 AH) (Direct student of ibn Tayimyyah)

As Safadi said in his explanation of the poem called “Laamiyyatul ‘Ajam”

:شرح لامية العجم

يقال إن الخليل بن أحمد اجتمع يوما هو وعبد الله بن المقفع فتحادثا إلى الغداة. فلما تفرقا قيل للخليل كيفرأيته قال رأيت رجلا علمه أكثر من عقله. وقيل لابن المقفع كيف رأيت الخليل قال رأيت رجلا عقلهأكثر من علمه. وكذا كان فإن ابن المقفع قتله قلة عقله وكثرة كلامه شر قتلة وشر ميتة. قلت: وكذا كانالشيخ الإمام العلامة تقي الدين أحمد بن تيمية علمه متسع جدا إلى الغاية وعقله ناقص يورطه فيالمهالك ويوقعه في المضايق. أهـــ

“It’s been said that one day Al Khaleel bin Ahmad met Abdullah bin Al Muqaffa’, and they talked until the morning. When they dispersed, Al Khaleel was asked, what do you think about him? He answered, he’s a man whose knowledge exceeds his intellect. And Ibn Al Muqaffa’ was asked about Al Khaleel. He answered, “His intellect exceeds his knowledge.” And thus it was. For the lacking intellect and excessive speech of Ibn Al Muqaffa’ led him to a most terrible slaughter and horrible death.

I’ll say (As Safadi) thus was the Shaikh, the Imam, the ‘Allaamah Taqiyyud Deen Ahmad bin Taymiyyah. His knowledge was extremely vast, yet his intellect was lacking. It would lead him to destruction and make him fall into tight spaces.”

Imam Salahud Deen As Safadi : the student of ibn Taymiyya, said in his biography of Ibn Taymiyyah in his book, “Al Waafi bil Wafayaat”:

:وقال الصفدي أثناء ترجمة ابن تيمية في الوافي بالوفيات

وحكى لي عنه الشيخ شمس الدين ابن قيم الجوزية قال: كان صغيرا عند بني المنجا فبحث معهم فادعواشيئا أنكره فأحضروا النقل فلما وقف عليه ألقى المجلد من يده غيظا، فقالوا له: ما أنت إلا جريء ترميالمجلد من يدك وهو كتاب علم، فقال سريعا: أيما خير أنا أو موسى? فقالوا موسى، فقال: أيما خير هذاالكتاب أو ألواح الجوهر التي كان فيها العشر كلمات? قالوا: الألواح، فقال: إن موسى لما غضب ألقىالألواح من يده، أو كما قال. أهـــ

“Ash Shaikh Shamsud Deen Ibnu Qayyim Al Jawziyyah told me about him saying: When he was young he was in the company of (the Hanbali family of Scholars) Banu Al Munajja, so he debated with them. So they claimed something he denied. Then they brought the quote. When he saw it, he threw the book down in anger. They said to him, “You sure are bold to throw down the book when it is a book of Religious Knowledge!” Whereupon he immediately said, “Who is better, me or Musa?” So they said, “Musa”. Then he said, “Which is better, this book or the Tablets containing the Ten Commandments?” They said, “The Tablets.” So Ibn Taymiyyah said, “Well, when Musa became angry he threw the Tablets down!” – or something to this effect”

This quote can also be found translated into English on page 110 and 111 of “Al Albani Unveiled”, a book definitely worth owning.



Imam Ibn Kathir (b.701AH – d. 774 AH) is a scholar of Ahl al-Sunna who was of the Shafi‘i school (according to the first volume of his main work, Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘Azim, 1.2)

Whatever length of time Ibn Kathir studied with Ibn Taymiya, he was in his twenties when the latter died, and his long and fruitful career extended over the next 46 forty-six years.

Ibn Taymiyyah born: 661AH

First clash with Ahle Sunnh wal Jamaah scholars: 698AH- at age 37 year old


(al- Dhahabi- 25 years old )

(ibn al Qayyim -7 years old)

(ibn Kathir was not even born- he was born 701AH)

Summoned again in 705AH- age 44 years old

Ibn Taymiyyah Repented in 707AH – age 46 years old


(al-Dhahabi -34 years old)

(ibn al Qayyim- 16 years old)

(ibn Kathir -6 years old)

Final imprisonment (726AH) : age 65 years old – Fatwa by  Four Sunni Orthodox Judges

Ibn Taymiyyah died: 728AH at the age of 67 year old


(Ibn kathir -27 years old)

Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani  is reporting in ad-durar al-kamina chapter 1,page 65 a short discussion between Ibn Kathir and the son of Ibn Al-Qayyim Al-Jawziyya.

Ibn Kathir said to him: “You do not like me because I am an Ash’ ari”.

The son of Ibn Al-Qayyim replied: “Even if you had hair from head to feet, people would not believe that you are Ash’ ari as your sheikh is Ibn Taymiyyah!!”

Imam al-Subki  mentions in “Tabaqat ash-shafi’ iyya” volume: 10 page, 398 that:

“A condition to teach at the house of hadith “Al-Ashrafiyya” was to be Ash’ari in ‘Aqida and that apparently Imam Ibn Kathir occupied the post of professor at this house of Hadith in the month of Muharam in the year (772 AH).

He (ibn Tayimyyah) says, “Every word in the Book of Allah and His messenger is conditioned by that which clarifies its meaning, in none of which is there any figurative expression (majaz); rather, all of it is literal (haqiqa)” (ibid., 78).

Compare this with what Ibn Kathir says about the verse “Then He ‘was established’ (istawa) upon the Throne” (Qur’an 7:54), (istawa here rendered as “was established” not by way of definitive interpretation, but rather out of need to answer the question):

People have many positions on this matter, and this is not the place to present them at length. On this point, we follow the position of the early Muslims (salaf)—Malik, Awza‘i, Thawri, Layth ibn Sa‘d, Shafi‘i, Ahmad, Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, as well as others among the Imams of the Muslims, ancient and modern—namely, to let the verse pass as it has come, without saying how it is meant (bi la takyif), without any resemblance to created things (wa la tashbih), and without nullifying it (wa la ta‘til): the literal outward meaning (dhahir) that comes to the minds ofanthropomorphists (al-mushabbihin) is negated of Allah [italics mine], for nothing created has any resemblance to Him: “There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him, and He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing”

[ (Qur’an 42:11) (Ibn Kathir: Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘Azim, 2.220).]

Arabic passage of what Imam al Hafidh Ibn Kathir said:

قال الإمام ابن كثير في التفسير القران العظيم

: تفسير:{ثُمَّ ٱسْتَوَىٰ عَلَى ٱلْعَرْشِۚ} فللناس في هذا المقام مقالات كثيرة جداً ليس هذا موضع بسطها وإنما نسلك في هذا المقام مذهب السلف الصالح مالك والأوزاعي والثوري والليث بن سعد والشافعي وأحمد بن حنبل وإسحاق بن راهويه وغيرهم من أئمة المسلمين قديماً وحديثاً وهو إمرارها كما جاءت من غير تكييف ولا تشبيه ولا تعطيل والظاهر المتبادر إلى أذهان المشبهين منفي عن الله لا يشبهه شيء من خلقه و{لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِۦ شَىْءٌۖ وَهُوَ ٱلسَّمِيعُ ٱلْبَصِيرُ

Original Translation:

{Then He did Istawa (As it befits His Majesty) upon the Throne”} People have “TOO MANY POSITIONS ON THIS MATTER AND THIS IS NOT THE PLACE TO PRESENT THEM AT LENGTH” [فللناس في هذا المقام مقالات كثيرة جداً ليس هذا موضع بسطها] On this point, we follow the position of the righteous early Muslims (Salaf) i.e. Imam Malik, Imam al-Awza‘i, Imam Sufyan ath-Thawri, Imam Layth ibn Sa‘d, Imam ash-Shaf’i, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Imam Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, as well as others among the Imams of the Muslims, past and present—(namely) ” TO LET IT PASS AS IT HAS COME WITHOUT SAYING HOW IT IS MEANT “[، وهوإمرارها كما جاءت من غير تكييف], without any resemblance (to created things), and without nullifying it (wa la ta‘til): “THE OUTWARD (LITERAL)” meaning that comes to the minds of anthropomorphists is negated of Allah[والظاهر المتبادر إلى أذهانالمشبهين منفي عن الله] for nothing created has any resemblance to Him: {“There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him, and He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing” (Qur’an 42:11)} [Tafsir Ibn Kathir Under 7:54]


Now:  Wahhabi/Salafi Fabrication:

Please note at the blue highlighted parts above and the red highlighted parts below in Wahhabi/Salafi translation:

Fabrication: (and then He rose over (Istawa) the Throne) the people had several conflicting opinions over its meaning. However, we follow the way that our righteous predecessors took in this regard, such as Malik, Al-Awza`i, Ath-Thawri, Al-Layth bin Sa`d, Ash-Shafi`i, Ahmad, Ishaq bin Rahwayh and the rest of the scholars of Islam, in past and present times. Surely, we accept the apparent meaning of, Al-Istawa, without discussing its true essence, equating it (with the attributes of the creation), or altering or denying it (in any way or form). We also believe thatthe meaning that comes to those who equate Allah with the creation is to be rejected, for nothing is similar to Allah. [Taken from which has been down now so you can check in hard copy of Tafsir Ibn Kathir published by Dar us Salaam, Najd (Riyadh), Saudi Arabia] Here -Also read: Tafsir of Ayat-ul-Kursi


Ibn Rajab Al Hanbali (d. 795 AH)

Acknowledges that Ibn Taymiyyah had unique rulings when he said in his update of Al Qaadi Abu Ya’la’s son’s book on biographies of the Hanbalis called Dhaylu Tabaqaatil Hanaabilah vol. 4 pg. 505 (507 on the PDF reader) Here

ولكن كان هو وجماعة من خواص أصحابه ربما أنكروا من الشيخ كلامه في بعض الأئمة الأكابرالأعيان، أو في أهل التخلي والانقطاع ونحو ذلك.

وكان الشيخ رحمه اللّه لا يقصد بذلك إلا الخير، والانتصار للحق إن شاء الله تعالى.

وطوائف من أئمة أهل الحديث وحفاظهم وفقهائهم: كانوا يحبون الشيخ ويعظمونه، ولم يكونوا يحبون لهالتوغل مع أهل الكلام ولا الفلاسفة، كما هو طريق أئمة أهل الحديث المتقدمين، كالشافعي وأحمدوإسحاق وأبي عبيد ونحوهم، وكذلك كثير هن العلماء من الفقهاء والمحدثين والصالحين كرهوا لهالتفرد ببعض شذوذ المسائل التي أنكرها السلف على من شذ بها، حتى إن بعض قضاة العدل منأصحابنا منعه من الإفتاء ببعض ذلك. أهـــ

“However he (‘Imaad Ad Deen Al Waasiti) and a group of Ibn Taymiyyah’s closest companions disapproved of the Shaikh’s statements about some of the eminent and high-standing Imams, or the likes of those people who would disconnect themselves from the world to be alone with their Lord (the Sufis). And the Shaikh may Allah have mercy on him did not intend anything by that but good, and defense of the truth Inshaa Allahu ta’aala. And various circles of the people of Hadeeth; including Imams, Huffaadh (memorizers of more than 100,000 hadeeths) and Fuqahaa (Jurists) used to love the Shaikh (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah) and hold him in high regard. But they did not like for him to go into in-depth issues with the theologians and philosophers – as was the methodology of the Imams of Ahlul Hadeeth like Ash Shaafi’ee, Ahmad, Ishaaq, Abu ‘Ubaid and others like them. Additionally, many ‘Ulamaa, Fuqahaa, Muhadditheen, and Saaliheen (Righteous people) disliked that he go on his own with some of his unique rulings that the Salaf disapproved of whoever went alone with. Until one of the just judges from our colleages prevented him from making those fatawas.”

Imam al-Hafidh ibn Rajab al-Hanbali  The student of ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (who in turn was the student of ibn Taymiyya)

عبد الرحمن بن أحمد بن رجب البغدادي ثم الدمشقي الحنبلي، الحافظ زين الدين بن رجب. وُلد ببغداد سنة ستٍ وثلاثين وسبعمائة، وسمع بمصر من الميدومي وبالقاهرة من ابن الملوك وبدمشق من ابن الخباز وجمع جمٍّ، ورافق شيخنا زين الدين العراقي في السماع كثيرًا، ومهر في فنون الحديث أَسماءً ورجالًا وعِللًا وطرقا واطلاعًا على معانيه.

صنَّف “شرح الترمذي” فأَجاد فيه في نحو عشرين مجلدة، وشرح قطعة كبيرة من “البخاري” وشرح “الأَربعين للنووي” في مجلدة، وعمل “وظائف الأَيام” سمَّاه “اللطائف” وعمل “طبقات الحنابلة” ذيلًا على “طبقات أبي يعلى”.

وكان صاحبَ عبادَةٍ وتهجد، ونُقِم عليه إِفتاؤه بمقالات ابن تيمية ثم أَظهر الرجوع عن ذلك فنافره التيميون فلم يكن مع هؤلاءِ ولا مع هؤلاءِ، وكان قد ترك الإِفتاءَ بآخره.

قال ابن حجي: “أَتْقَنَ الفنَّ وصار أَعرف أَهل عصره بالعلل وتتبُّع الطرق، وكان لا يخالط أَحدًا ولا يتردد إِلى أَحد”. مات في رمضان رحمه اللّٰه، [و]تخرج به غالب أَصحابنا الحنابلة بدمشق.

– ابن حجر العسقلاني في كتابه “إنباء الغمر بأنباء العمر”، المجلس الأعلى للشئون الإسلامية ١٩٩٨:١٩٦٩، الجزء الاول، ص. ٤٦٠-٤٦١

Imam al-Hafidh ibn Rajab al-Hanbali Stopped Issuing Fatawa in accordance to the views of ibn Taymiyya and was loathed by the Taymiyyun because of it:

al-Hafidh Zayn al-Din ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Ahmad ibn Rajab al-Hanbali al-Baghdadi – then al-Dimashqi.

The son of Rajab, born inBaghdad in the year 736 (AH).

In Egypt he heard from al-Maydumi, in Cairo from ibn al-Muluk, in Damascus from ibn al-Khubbaz, as well as the addition of numerous others. He kept the company of our Shaykh, Zayn al-Din al-‘Iraqi in hearing (from him) a great deal. He was proficient in the disciplines of hadith – the names (asma’), the narrators (rijal), hidden defects (‘ilal), the different routes/chains (turuq), and insight in explaining (itla’) their meanings.

He authored “Sharh al-Tirmidhi” in around twenty volumes, regarding which he achieved excellent results, (he also authored) a commentary of a major portion of (Sahih) “al-Bukhari”, as well as a commentary of “al-Arba’in li al-Nawawi” (Imam al-Nawawi’s collection of fourty ahadith) in one volume. He worked on “Wadha’if al-Ayyam” (the recommended actions of each specific day) which he named “al-Lata’if”, and also worked on “Tabaqat al-Hanabila” (the ranks of the Hanbali scholars) as a follow up of “Tabaqat Abi Ya’la”.

He was a man devoted to worship and tahajjud. He was resented because of his deliverance of religious legal edicts (ifta’) based on the sayings of ibn Taymiyya. He then proclaimed retraction from that and the Taymiyyun loathed him, so he was neither (aligned) with this group, not that group. In the end, he abandoned issuing religious legal edicts (ifta’).

Ibn Hajji said: “He mastered the science (of hadith and it’s branches) and became the most recognised of the people of his time in the field of hidden defects (‘ilal) and the pursuit of the different chains of transmission (tatabbu’ al-turuq). He would not intermingle with anyone and would also rarely visit anyone.”

He passed away during the month of Ramadhan, may Allah have mercy upon him. Most of our Hanbali companions were trained/educated by him in Damascus.

[ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Inba al-Ghumr bi Anba al-‘Umr, ed. al-Majlis al-A’la li al-Shu’un al-Islamiyya 1969:1998, pt. 1, pg. 460-461]

Imam Zayn al-Din ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (d.795AH) mentions the following regarding Allah’s Nuzul within his Fath al-Bari* – his Commentary upon Sahih al-Bukhari:

“What is meant by it is that His Nuzul (lit. descent) is not (in terms of) spatial movement from (one) place to (another) place, like the descent (Nuzul) of created things.”

[Fath al-Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari of ibn Rajab al-Hanbali, chapter on facing towards the direction of the Qibla]

*Not to be confused with the Fath al-Bari of Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani (d.825AH) – also a commentary on Sahih al-Bukhari. Incidentally, Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali’s commentary is only partial as he did not have the opportunity to complete it during his lifetime.

Imam Taqi al-Din al-Hisni al-Shafi’i (d.829AH) mentions some points regarding Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (d.795AH) and some of his negative views concerning ibn Taymiyya:

al-Shaykh Zayn al-Din ibn Rajab al-Hanbali was from among those who firmly believed in ibn Taymiyya’s kufr (disbelief), and had (authored) refutations against him. He would say at the top of his voice during some gatherings: “al-Subki is excused – meaning in regards to his takfir“.

[al-Hisni, Daf’ Shubah man Shabbaha wa Tamarrad, ed. Dar al-Mustafa, pg. 535]

وكان الشيخ زين الدين بن رجب الحنبلي ممن يعتقد كفر ابن تيمية وله عليه الرد. وكان يقول بأعلى صوته في بعض المجالس: معذور (173/أ) السبكي – يعني في تكفيره ([1]).


([1]) في ب: معذور السبكي في تكفيره


دفع شبه من شبه وتمرد، دار المصطفى، ص. ٥٣٥


Advice for the Muslim

Brief passages from the reputed books of ahl as-sunnat scholars are quoted for refuting corrupt Wahhabi and la-madhhabiyya beliefs.



Translated, for the most part, from Ayyûb Sabri Pasha’s Turkish work Mir’ât al-Haramain; 5 volumes, Matba’a-i Bahriye, Istanbul, 1301-1306 A.H.




1 Mutasawwifs’ books do not contain polytheism (Maktûbât by al-Imâm ar-Rabbânî)[1] ….9


A man named Muhammad ibn’Abd-ul-Wahhâb wrote a booklet entitled:

Kitâb at-tawhîd.

Although his grandson Sulaimân ibn ’Abdullâh had started expounding this booklet, he

died when Ibrâhîm Pasha went to Dar’iyya and punished them in 1233 A.H. (1817).

His second grandson, ’Abd ar-Rahmân ibn Hasan, expounded it in a book entitled

Fat’h al-majîd. Later on he prepared a second book, Qurrat al-’uyûn, abridging his former commentary.

In the seventh edition of the commentary published with additions by a Wahhâbî named Muhammad Hâmid in 1377 A.H. (1957), the âyats which descended about kâfirs and many

hadîths were written to delude Muslims, and wrong, distorted meanings were extracted from them to attack Ahl as-Sunna, the true Muslims, and to call those pure Muslims “kâfirs.”

 On many pages of this book, he spits fire, calling the Shî’ites “damned polytheists.” He takes most of this commentary from Ibn Taimiyya and his student Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya and his grandsonAhmad ibn ’Abd al-Halîm, for whom he says “Radî- Allâhu ’Anh.” “’allâma” and “Shaykh al-Islâm, Abu ’l-’Abbâs.” respectively.

We came by a small Wahhâbite book entitled Jewâb-i Nu’mân in Turkish while preparing this book. It was reprinted for the second time in Damascus in 1385 A.H. (1965) and was being distributed free of charge, deluding the Turkish pilgrims to mislead them away from the path of Ahl as-Sunna. By Allâhu ta’âlâ’s benevolence and favour, it fell to our lot to write documented correct answers to the heretical and false statements in that book, too.

The book Advice for the Muslim consists of two parts.

 In the first part, statements from the books Fat’h al-majîd and Jewâb-I Nu’mân are quoted and answers from the books of Islamic scholars (rahimahum-Allâhu ta’âlâ) are given in thirty-five articles.

The second part deals with how the Wahhâbîs came forth, how they spread out, how those ignorant and brutal people who infiltrated into the Wahhâbîs to obtain wealth and power

massacred Muslims and destroyed their possessions, how they brutally attacked Muslim countries, how they were punished by the Ottoman State, and how they established a new state after the First World War.

1 – On page 75 of the Wahhâbite book Fat’h al-majîd, it is written:

Abd al-Wahhâb ash-Sha’rânî’s books and ’Abd al-’Azîz Dabbâgh’s book Ibrîz and Ahmad at-Tijânî’s books are full of shirk [polytheism] that Abu Jahl and the like could not have conceived.”

Ahmat at-Tijânî (rahmat-Allâhi ta’âlâ ’alaih, may Allâhu ta’âlâ bless him), who was born in Algeria in 1150 A.H. (1737) and died in Morrocco in 1230 (1815), was the rehber (guide, leader) of the Tijâniyya way, which was a branch of Khalwatiyya. The book Jawâhir al-ma’ânî fî faid-i Shaykh Tijânî written about this way is famous.

The Wahhâbî, too, writes that the superior ones among men, that is, the prophets (salawât-Allâhi ta’âlâ wa taslîmâtuhu ’Alaihim ajma’în) are higher than the superior angels and believes in angels’ power and effect, but does not believe that Allâhu ta’âlâ has given the power of disposition and effectiveness to His awliyâ’ (rahimahum-Allâhu ta’âlâ) as a karâma, and calls the people who believe so “mushriks” (polytheists).

 The scholars of Ahl as-Sunna (rahimahum-Allâhu ta’âlâ), as a karâma, realizing even then, refuted them years beforehand.

Muhyiddîn ibn al-’Arabî,

Sadr ad-dîn al-Qonawî,

Jalâl ad-dîn Rûmî and Sayyid Ahmad al-Badawî and the aforementioned awliyâ (rahimahum-Allâhu ta’âlâ) were the leading ones who, as a karâma, foretold these things.

This is the reason why the Wahhâbîs do not like these awliyâ’.




36- The origins of Wahhâbism……………………………………p,276

37 -The first Wahhâbite mission…………………………………p,286

38- The massacre and looting of the Muslims of Tâ’if….p,289

39- The Wahhâbite persecutions in Mecca………………….p,293

40- The Wahhâbîs in Medina……………………………………..p,300

41- The Ottomans clear the blessed cities of the

Wahhâbite bandits ………………………………………………………p,305

42- Invaluable works done in Mecca and Medina

after the clearance…………………………………………………………p,327

page 276:

36 – During the time when the Ottoman reign was dominant in the Arabian Peninsula, each state was governed by an official selected from the state. Later on, every region except the Hijaz came into the possession of whomever could usurp it and was governed as shaikhdoms. The tenets of Wahhâbism disseminated by Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb changed into a political form in a short time in 1150 A.H. (1737) and spread all over Arabia. Later, by the order of the Caliph in Istanbul, Muhammad ’Alî Pasha, the Governor of Egypt, liberated Arabia from them with the armed forces of Egypt.

’Abd al-’Azîz ibn Muhammad, who believed in the Wahhabîs, declared war for the first time in 1205 A.H. (1791) against the amîr of Mecca, Sharîf Ghâlib Effendi. They had disseminated Wahhâbism secretly till then. They had killed and tortured many Muslims, enslaved their women and children and usurped their possessions.

Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb belonged to the Banî Tamîm tribe. He was born in Uyaina village near the town of Huraimila in the Najd Desert in 1111 A.H. (1699) and died in 1206 (1792). Formerly, with the idea of trading, he went to Basra, Baghdad, Iran, India and Damascus, where he won the name “Shaikh an- Najdî” due to his clever and aggressive attitude. He saw and learnt a great deal at these places and set his heart on the idea of becoming a chief. In 1125 (1713 A.D.), he met Hempher, a British spy, in Basra, who understood that this inexperienced young person (ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhâb) has a desire to be a chief by way of revolution, established a long-term friendship with him. He inspired him the tricks and lies that he had learned from the British Ministry of the Commonwealth. Seeing that Muhammad enjoys these inspirations, he proposed him to establish a new religion. So, the spy and Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab got what they were looking for. He had thought it proper to found a new tarîqa to reach his goal, and, in preparation for this goal, attended the lectures of the Hanbalî ’ulamâ’ in the blessed city of Medina and later in Damascus for some time. When he went back to the Najd, he wrote pamphlets on religious subjects for villagers.

He wrote what he learned from the British spy and mixed corruptin formation from the Mu’tazila and other groups of bid’a. Many ignorant villagers, particularly the inhabitants of Dar’iyya and their ignorant chief, Muhammad ibn Sa’ûd, followed him.

The Arabs esteemed ancestral distinctions very highly, and because he did not belong to a well known family, he used Muhammad ibn Sa’ûd as a tool to disseminate his tarîqa, which he named Wahhâbism. He introduced himself as the Qâdî (Head of the Religious Affairs) and Muhammad ibn Sa’ûd as the Hâkim (Ruler). He had it passed in their constitution that both would be succeeded only by their children.

In 1306 (1888) when the book Mir’ât al-Haramain was written, the amîr of the Najd was ’Abdullâh ibn Faysal, a descendant of Muhammad ibn Sa’ûd, and the qâdî was a descendant of Muhammad ibn ’abd al-Wahhâb. Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb’s father, ’Abd al-Wahhâb, who was a pious, pure ’âlim in Medina, his brother Sulaimân ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb and his teachers had apprehended from his statements, behaviour and ideas, which he frequently had put forward as questions to them when he was a student in Medina, that he would become a heretic who would harm Islam from the inside in the future.

They advised him to correct his ideas and advised the Muslims to avoid him. But they soon encountered the very thing they were afraid of, and he started disseminating his heretical ideas openly under the name of Wahhâbism.

To deceive ignorant and stupid people, he came forward with reforms and innovations incompatible with the books of the ’ulamâ’ of Islam. He dared to be so impetuous as to deem the true Muslims of Ahl as-Sunnat wa ’l-Jamâ’a as disbelievers. He regarded it as polytheism to ask Allâhu ta’âlâ for something through the mediation of our Prophet (sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam) or other prophets or awliyâ’, or to visit their graves.

According to what Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb learned from the British spy, he who talks to the dead while praying near a grave becomes a polytheist. He asserted that Muslims who said that someone or something beside Allah did something, for example, saying “such-and-such medicine cured” or “I obtained what I asked through our master Rasûlullâh” or “such-and-such walî” were polytheists.

Although the documents Ibn ’Abd al- Wahhâb made up to support such statements were nothing but lies and slanders, the ignorant people who could not distinguish right from wrong, the unemployed, raiders, ignoramuses, opportunists and the hard-hearted soon assented to his ideas and took their part on his side and regarded the pious Muslims of the right path as disbelievers.

When Ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb applied to the rulers of Dar’iyya with the view of disseminating his heresies easily through them, they willingly cooperated with him with the hope of extending their territories and increasing their power. They strove with all their might do disseminate his ideas everywhere. They declared war against those who refused and opposed them.

The bestial people and pillagers of the desert competed with one another in

joining the army of Muhammad ibn Sa’ûd when it was said that it was halâl to plunder and kill Muslims. In 1143 (1730), Muhammad ibn Sa’ûd and Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb

hand in hand arrived at the conclusion that those who would not accept Wahhâbism were disbelievers and polytheists, and that it was halâl to kill them and confiscate their possessions, and publicly announced their declaration seven years later.

 Then, Ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb started fabricating ijtihâd when he was thirty-two years old and announced his false ijtihâds at the age of forty.

As-Sayyid Ahmad ibn Zainî Dahlân (rahmat-Allâhi ’alaihi), Muftî of the blessed city of Mecca, described under the topic “Alfitnat al-Wahhâbiyya” the tenets of Wahhâbism and the tortures the Wahhâbis inflicted upon Muslims? [1] [ Al-futûhât al-Islâmiyya, second volume, page 228, Cairo, 1387

(1968); photo-offset reproduction of a comparable part, Istanbul, 1395 (1975).]

He wrote: “To deceive the ’ulamâ’ of Ahl as-Sunna in Mecca and Medina, they sent their men to these cities, but these men could not answer the questions of the Muslim ’ulamâ’. It became evident that they were ignorant heretics. A verdict declaring them disbelievers was written and distributed everywhere. Sharîf Mas’ûd ibn Sa’îd, Amîr of Mecca, ordered that the Wahhâbîs should be imprisoned. Some Wahhâbîs fled to Dar’iyya and recounted what had happened to them.”[2]

[page 278]

The ’ulamâ’ of the Hijaz belonging to all the four madhhabs, including Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb’s brother Sulaimân and also his teachers who had trained him, studied Muhammad’s books, prepared answers to his disunionist writings, which were destructive to Islam, and wrote, to call to the attention of Muslims, well-documented books in refutation to his heretical writings.[1]

[See below, page. 23], for the passage translated from Hadrat Sulaimân ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb’s work As-sawâ’iq al-ilâhiyya fî ’r-raddi ’ala ’lwahhâbiyya; first published in 1306; second edition (reproduced by

photo-offset) in Istanbul in 1395 (1975).]

These books did not help much but rather increased the Wahhâbîs’ resentment against Muslims and excited Muhammad ibn Sa’ûd to attack Muslims and augment the bloodshed.

He belonged to the Banî Hanîfa tribe, so was a descendant of a stupid race that believed in the prophethood of Musailamat al- Kadhdhâb.

 Muhammad ibn Sa’ûd died in 1178 (1765), and his son ’Abd al-’Azîz succeeded him.

’Abd al-’Azîz was assasinated, stabbed in the abdomen by a Shî’ite, in the Dar’iyya Mosque in 1217 (1830). Then, his son Sa’ûd ibn ’Abd al-’Azîz became the chief of the Wahhâbîs.

All three strove very hard, as if competing with one another, to shed Muslim blood in order to deceive the Arabs and to disseminate Wahhâbism.

[Page 279]


[Page 23]:

The profound scholar Sulaimân ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb an-Najdî(rahimah-Allâhu ta’âlâ), the author of As-sawâ’iq al-ilâhiyya fî ’rraddi ’ala ’l-Wahhâbiyya [1], was the brother of Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb, the founder of Wahhâbism. He proved with documents that the path opened in the name of Wahhâbism by his brother was heretical.

He wrote on page 44 of his book:

“One of the documents showing that your path is heretical is the hadîth ash-sharîf written in Sahîhain, the two genuine hadith books, one by al-Bukhârî and the other by Muslim. ’Uqba ibn Âmir (radî-Allâhu ’anh), the relater of the hadîth ash-sharîf, said, ‘Rasûlullâh (sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam), ascended the minbar. It was the last time I saw him on the minbar. He declared: “I do not fear whether you will become polytheists after I die. I fear that you, because of worldly interests, will kill one another and thus be destroyed like ancient tribes.” ’

Rasûlullâh (sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam) foretold all that would happen to his umma till the Resurrection. This sahih hadîth states that his umma will never worship idols, that he was assured of it. This hadîth sharîf demolishes Wahhâbism by the roots, for the Wahhâbite book claims that the Ummat al- Muhammadiyya worship idols, that Muslim countries are full of idols, that tombs are idol-houses. It says that one also becomes a disbeliever by not believing that he who expects help or intercession at shrines is a disbeliever. However, Muslims have visited graves and asked the mediation and intercession of awliyâ’ for centuries.

No Islamic scholars have called such Muslims polytheists; they regarded them as Muslims.]

[1] [First published by Nukhbat al-Akhbâr press in Baghdad in 1306 A.H. Second edition was produced by photo-offset in Istanbul, 1395 (1975).]






1 Mutasawwifs’ books do not contain polytheism (Maktûbât by al-Imâm ar-Rabbânî)[1] ….9

2 Îmân does not include ’ibâdât (Qasîdat al-Amâlî and Alhadîqa)….13

3 To ask help of prophets and pious Muslims …19

4 Do Muslims worship awliyâ’? (Al-usûl al-arba’a)….20

5 Do Muslims worship tombs? (As-sawâ’iq al-ilâhiyya) …22

6 To receive blessings from someone other than the Prophet ….25

7 The origin of tasawwuf (Maktûbât by Muhammad Ma’sûm)….26

8 The dead; the souls of awliyâ’ ….39

9 To praise and to ask help of the Prophet (Mir’ât al- Madîna) ….40

10 The dead’s intercession ….54

11 Has Ahmad al-Badawî been deified? …..55

12 The Prophet and the Sahâbât al-kirâm…56

13 On Qasîdat al-Burda (Maktûbât by Muhammad Ma’sûm)….57

14 Shall tombs be demolished (Zawâjir by Ibn Hajar al- Hîtamî) ….60

15 To enter the Prophet’s masjid, but not visit his shrine? (Mir’ât al-Madîna) ….62

16 The salawât said for the Prophet …..77

17 Awliyâ’ do help (Al-hadîth al-arba’în by ’Allâma Ahmad S. ibn Kamal)….77

18 Karâmât of awliyâ’ (Maktûbât by al-Imâm ar-Rabbânî and Al-mawâhib by al-Imâm al-Kastalânî)…82

19 A walî does not make a show of karâmât (Maktûbât by Muhammad Ma’sûm)….95

20 The âyat “Allah and the Believers are sufficient for you.” (Berîqa) …102

21 To follow the imâms of the madhhabs; taqlîd …..104

22 To expect something from somebody (Al-hadîqa)…..122

23 The Ahl as-Sunna and Qasîdat al-Burda…. 131

24 The dead and the absentee (Al-minhat al-wahbiyya) ….131

25 The Wahhâbîs’ ijtihâds are false…..185

26 Visiting shrines (Râbita-i sharîfa)…..187

27 The Prophet hears the salawât…..194

28 The superiority of the as-Sahâbat al-kirâm and theTâbi’ûn….194

29 Help from living people and the dead (Marâq alfalâh and Zawâjir) …195

30 To vow, to slaughter an animal for the dead (Ashad al-jihâd in Al-minhat al-wahbiyya) ….198

31 Fatwâ on the heresy of Wahhâbism (Arabic original appended to Al-minhat al-wahbiyya) …..210

32 The Wahhâbite book Cewâb-i Nu’mân (Maktûbat by Muhammad Ma’sûm); the lawfullness of reading the Mawlid and Dala’il al-khairât….215

33 Tasawwuf and tarîqas are not invented, but commanded in Islam (Irshâd at-tâlibîn) …..237

34 To disbelievers of tasawwuf and karâmât (Al-hadîqa)……257

35 In the next world, one will be with whom one loves (Al-hadîqa) ……267


Advice To Muslim Youth.jpg

(Edited by ADHM)




In authentic narrations, it is mentioned that during the practice of Hajj the idolators used to say in their Talbiyah: “You have no partner except the partner that You have, You own Him and whatever he owns”. The followers of Muhammed Ibn Abdul Wahab cite this saying of the polytheists to argue that polytheists believed in the oneness of Allah’s Lordship or oneness in His Ownership.

In this saying “You have no partner except the partner that You have, You own Him and whatever he owns” we see on the one hand the polytheist explicitly ascribing a partner to Allah, yet they are claiming the partner to be under Allah’s ownership. The Wahhabiyya take the latter statement in isolation as a proof for their argument that polytheists recognized the oneness of Allah’s Lordship. But the reality of its meaning can be understood by noting the following Quranic parable against the belief of polytheists:

{He gives you this example, drawn from your own lives: do you make your slaves full partners with an equal share in what We have given you? Do you fear them as you fear each other? This is how We make Our messages clear to those who use their reason.} [30:28]

This above verse was revealed as a response to this talbiyah of Mushriks, as mentioned by Ibn Kathir in his tafsir:

At-Tabarani recorded that Ibn `Abbas said, “The people of Shirk used to say in their Talbiyah, `At Your service, You have no partner except the partner that You have, You own Him and whatever he owns.’ Then Allah revealed the words: {Do you have partners among those whom your right hands possess to share as equals in the wealth We have bestowed on you, whom you fear as you fear each other}”

From this verse we see that Allah analogized their belief with that of a master who took his slave as an equal partner. This belief is self contradictory. This is because; if the slave was made into an equal partner of the master then the slave would no longer remain a slave. So it is impossible that he could be a slave and partner at the same time. If he was a slave then he would no longer be an equal partner, and if he was a partner then he would not be a slave. It was such inconsistent or rationally absurd creed the polytheists ascribed to Allah. It is such self contradicting belief contained in the saying of idolators “You have no partner except the partner that You have, You own Him and whatever he owns”, because a partner of Allah cannot be under His Ownership. This is similar to the self contradiction of the Christians who say God is one as well as three.

Moreover we also clearly see from this parable in the Quran that the Mushriks believed these partners have an equal share in the ownership over creation and that they believed Allah feared these partners.  This is all blatant shirk in Allah’s Lordship.

To add to all of this, we see in another verse,

{And say, “Praise to Allah , who has not taken a son and has had no partner in [His] dominion and has no [need of a] protector out of weakness; and glorify Him with [great] glorification.”} [Quran 17:111]

In this verse, Allah rejects belief that Allah has son, a partner in his dominion or that he needs a protector, which are all shirk in Ruboobiyah.

Ibn Kathir in commentary to this verse says,

Ibn Jarir recorded that Al-Qurazi used to say about this Ayah,
{And say: “All the praises and thanks be to Allah, Who has not begotten a son…”} that the Jews and Christians said that Allah has taken a son; the Arabs said, “At Your service, You have no partner except the partner You have, and You possess him and whatever he owns;” and the Sabians and Magians said, “If it were not for the supporters of Allah, He would be weak.” Then Allah revealed this Ayah : {And say: “All the praises and thanks be to Allah, Who has not begotten a son, and Who has no partner in (His) dominion, nor is He low to have a supporter. And magnify Him with all magnificence.”}

We see that this verse was revealed against those Arabs who said the same “You have no partner except the partner that You have, You own Him and whatever he owns”. And yet notice the verse here shows that the Arab polytheists believed Allah has partner in His “Mulk (dominion)” thereby refuting therefore the argument given by the Salafiyya that the talbiyah proved the Mushriks did not associate such a partner.

Imam al-Qurtubi says in commentary to the above verse:

قوله تعالى: { وَقُلِ ٱلْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ ٱلَّذِي لَمْ يَتَّخِذْ وَلَداً } هذه الآية رادة على اليهود والنصارى والعرب في قولهم أفذاذاً: عزير وعيسى والملائكة ذرية الله سبحانه؛ تعالى الله عن أقوالهم! { وَلَم يَكُنْ لَّهُ شَرِيكٌ فِي ٱلْمُلْكِ } لأنه واحد لا شريك له في ملكه ولا في عبادته.

Rough translation: “{Praise to Allah , who has not taken a son} This ayah is a refutation of the Jews, Christians and Arabs in their saying: Uzair, Isa and the angels are offspring of Allah…{and has had no partner in [His] dominion} because (He is) one and has no partner in His dominion and in worship”

Imam Ibn Adil al Hanbali (d. 880H) in commentary to this verse says:

وهذه الآية ردٌّ على اليهود في قولهم
{ عُزَيْرٌ ٱبْنُ ٱللَّهِ }
[التوبة: 30]، وردٌّ على النصارى في قولهم
{ ٱلْمَسِيحُ ٱبْنُ ٱللَّهِ }
[التوبة: 31] وعلى مشركي العرب في قولهم: ” المَلائِكةُ بنَاتُ الله “.

والنوع الثاني من الصفات السلبية قوله: { وَلَمْ يَكُن لَّهُ شَرِيكٌ فِي ٱلْمُلْكِ }.

والسَّببُ في اعتبار هذه الصفة: أنَّه لو كان له شريكٌ، فلا يعرف كونه مستحقًّا للحمد والشُّكر.

Rough translation:

“This verse is a refutation of the Jews who said {Uzair is the son of Allah} , and refutation of the Christians in their saying {the Messiah is the son of Allah} and the Arab Mushriks in their saying “angels are daughters of Allah” …………. {and He has no partner in [His] dominion} the reason for mentioning this attribute is that: If he had a partner, then he is not in truth worthy of praise and thanking.”

From all this we see that from among the beliefs of the Arab Mushriks who use to say the talbiyah was that the angels were daughters of Allah which is shirk in Lordship by itself and that they  were made as equal partners to Allah in His Dominion and that Allah was in fear of them and in need of them, which are beliefs that constitute shirk in Lordship. And it is because of such plethora of beliefs that the Mushriks denied Allah alone was worthy of worship.

Da’wah from Horn of Satan

Da’wah from Horn of Satan


Always use Three categories of Tawhid:

Tawhid-ul-Rububiyyah, Tawhid-ul-Uluhiyyah, and Tawhid-ul-Asma’ wal-Sifat.

Make sure to get this concept across:

The Pagans of Makkah had Tawhid Ar-Rububiyyah, but NOT Uluhiyyah – meaning, the Pagans believed in the Oneness of Allah in Lordship but worshipped the idols ONLY to get closer to Him.

For example: the practice of going to the graves and asking the pious for Help/Dua.

You can say those that do this, are similar to the Pagans of Makkah.

Ask them:

Did Abu Bakr ask a dead saint for help?

Did Umar ask a dead saint for help?

Did Uthmaan ask a dead saint for help?

Did Ali  ask a dead saint for help?

Wasila,Tawassual and Istighatha

WITH THIS you have to make sure to apply the verses revealed for the Mushrikeen who worshipped idols upon the Muslims of today, who go the graves of the pious and ask for Help/ Du’a.

Quote this verse all the time:

“Do not call onto any beings other than Allah. These are capable of neither benefit nor harm” [Al-Qur’an 10:106]”

Use the word  “Shirk” and “Bidah” constantly in your conversations!


Make them believe:  Sufis are Mushrik grave worshippers.

Read the translations of Hadith books that have only been authenticated and verified by Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Abdul Wahhab  and sheikh al-Albani, Ibn Baz, and Uthaimeen.

Note: ONLY use these classical scholars: al-Nawawi,al-Ghazali and ibn Hajar al-Asqalani when they refute you be very careful when quoting them.

Mawlid is Bidah regardless of the evidence presented by them

Always say:  ”If the Prophet(s) and the Sahaba (ra) didn’t do it, why are you?”

Or say: “did the Sahaba or the first three generations celebrate the birth of the Prophet(s)?

Use the phrase ”Quran & Sunnah” all the time and when they try to refute you

Say to them: “are you better than the best of creation prophet(s)?

Biddah Hasanah

Say: bidah is any new innovation in religion that didn’t exist in the times of the Prophet, Sahaba, Tabieen, etc.

If they call you Wahhabi

Say: “There’s no such thing as Wahhabi”

Tell them:  we are Salafi (Athari Aqeedah and Hanbali Fiqh) we only follow Quran and Sunnah Direct(Ahlehadith).


Tell them that Mu-hammed Ibn Abdul Wahhab Najdi came to revive the religion.

Warning! Do not mention  our following books or talk about the events that took place in history.

our books such as:

Mufid al-Mustafid, al-Rasa`il al-Shakhsiyyah and al-Durar al-Saniyyah

History books:

Tarikh Najd by Ibn Ghannam (d.1225 AH) and

Inwan al-Majd fi Tarikh Najd by Ibn Bishr (d.1288 AH)

After making them comfortable, introduce them to  ”Kitab at-Tawhid” only

And do not forget to say: “Najd is in Iraq”

That’s it you have done your job leave the rest to me.

  1. At-Tauhid (The Oneness of Allah)
  2. The superiority of Tauhid and what it removes of sin
  3. Who purified Tauhid will enter Paradise without giving an Account
  4. Fear of Shirk (Polytheism)
  5. The Call to Testification of La ilaha ilia-Allah
  6. Explanation of Tauhid and the Testimony
  7. What about to wear a Ring, Twine, etc
  8. Ruqa (incantation), Talismans and Amulets.
  9. Seeking Blessing through a Tree, or a Stone, etc
  10. Slaughtering for other than Allah
  11. No animal Sacrifice for Allah in a place where Sacrifice is made for other than Allah
  12. To vow to other than Allah is an act of Shirk
  13. To seek Refuge in other than Allah is a part of Shirik
  14. To seek help in other than Allah is an act of Shirk

[Horn of Satan, Kitab At-Tawhid, Vol: 1, page, 01]

Attributes of Allah


Existence (al-Wujud): it is obligatory to believe in the Existence of Allah. Allah exists without a beginning, without an ending and without a place.

Allah exists without a place or shape (al-Wujud). Surat Ibraheem, ayah 10:

 أَفِي اللّهِ شَكٌّ

“The existence of Allah is indubitable.” Mental Proof-Allah exists and is not similar to the other created things. To resemble the creation is to be susceptible to the same weaknesses as that creation. Allah existed before He created place, and His existence does not change.

Oneness (al-Wahdaniyyah): It is obligatory to believe Allah is One without a partner. Allah is One in His Self, Attributes and Creating-hence Allah has no equal.

 Allah is One (al-Wahdaniyya).

لَوْ كَانَ فِيهِمَا آلِهَةٌ إِلَّا اللَّهُ لَفَسَدَتا

 “Had there been other Gods for the heaven and Earth other than Allah, they (heaven and Earth) would not have existed.” Mental Proof-Allah is one, not in terms of numbers, but terms of Oneness in His Godhood.

Allah has no beginning (al-Qidam) i.e. al-Azaliyyah). Surat al-Hadid, ayah 3:

 هُوَ الْأَوَّلُ وَالْآخِرُ

 “Allah is the One whose existence is without a beginning and without an end.” Mental Proof-The Creator has no beginning. The creation has a beginning. The one with a beginning must have a Creator to create it.

*(al-Qidam): It is obligatory to believe Allah has no beginning to His existence. His attributes also have no beginning. Everything other than Allah has a beginning. Allah is the only one without a beginning.

Allah has no end (al-Baqa’). Surat al-Hadid, ayah 3:

 هُوَ الْأَوَّلُ وَالْآخِرُ

 “Allah is the One whose existence is without a beginning and without an end.” Mental Proof-The Creator has no end. The creation has an end. The one with an end must have a Creator to Will that end.

Everlastingness (al-Baqa‘): It is obligatory to believe Allah is Everlasting i.e., His Existence does not end.

Non-Resemblance to the Creations
(al-Mukhalafatu lil-hawadith): Allah does not resemble any of His creations–neither in His Self nor in His Attributes nor in His Creating.

Allah does not resemble any of His creations (al-Mukhalafatu lil-Hawadith).

Surat ash-Shura, ayah 11:

  لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ البَصِيرُ

“Nothing resembles Allah in any way whatsoever.” Mental Proof-Allah is greatly clear of the attributes of the creations, because the attributes of the creations indicate that the creatures are in need of a Creator. Had Allah been attributed with any of these created attributes, He would have been in need of one who created Him, and Allah is clear of that.

Sight (al-Basar): It is obligatory to believe Allah is attributed with Sight. The sight of Allah has no beginning and no end. Allah sees all what is seeable without a pupil, instrument or any other means.

Allah has the attribute of Sight (al-Basar). Surat ash-Shura, ayah 11:

لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ البَصِيرُ

“Nothing resembles Allah in any way whatsoever, and Allah is attributed with Hearing and Sight. Mental Proof-Allah sees all the seeable things, without the need of an eye or light. Allah’s attribute of Sight is not like the sight of the creation. Our sight depends on organs (eyes) and light.

Hearing (as-Sam^): It is obligatory to believe Allah is attributed with Hearing. This is an attribute of Allah which also has no beginning and is everlasting. Allah hears all the hear-able things. He hears without an ear, without means, and without instruments.

Allah has the attribute of Hearing (as-Sam^). Surat ash-Shura, ayah 11:

لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ البَصِيرُ

 “Nothing resembles Allah in any way whatsoever, and Allah is attributed with Hearing and Sight. Mental Proof-Allah hears all of the hearable things without the need of an ear or any other instrument. Allah’s attribute of Hearing is not like the hearing of the creation. Our hearing depends on an organ (ear) and sound resonation.

Speech (al-Kalam) : It is obligatory to believe Allah is attributed with Speech (Kalam). The Kalam of Allah has no beginning and is an everlasting attribute with which Allah orders, forbids, and informs. It is not a letter nor a sound nor a language. The Qur’an and the other revealed Books are expressions of the eternal Kalam of the Self of Allah.

Allah has the attribute of Speech (al-Kalam). Surat an-Nisa’, ayah 164:

 وَكَلَّمَ اللّهُ مُوسَى تَكْلِيمًا

 “Allah spoke to Musa with His Speech (Kalam).”  Mental Proof-The Speech of Allah is not like the speech of the creations. The Speech of Allah is not a sound or a letter or a language. It does not depend on organs (lips, teeth and tongue) and it does not resonate in the ear. The Speech of Allah does not start and stop. Like all of the Attributes of Allah, it has no beginning and no end.

Life (al-Hayah): It is obligatory to believe Allah is attributed with Life. The Life of Allah also has no beginning and no end. The Life of Allah is not like our life. Our life is a combination of body and soul; however, the Life of Allah is not.

Allah has the Attribute of Life (al-Hayah). Suratul-Baqarah, ayah 255:

اللّهُ لاَ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ الْحَيُّ الْقَيُّومُ

 “No one is God except Allah, the One who is attributed with Life and is not in need of anything.” Mental Proof-Allah has the attribute of Life, but His life is not like the life of the creations. The creations are alive with flesh, blood and souls. The creations occupy the six directions, exist in places, and need sustenance. Allah is greatly clear from the attributes of the creations. The one who possesses the attributes of the creations is susceptible to the same weaknesses that the creations are susceptible to. This weakness does not befit Allah, ta^ala.

Knowledge (al-^Ilm): It is obligatory to believe Allah is attributed with Knowledge. The knowledge of Allah has no beginning and no end. This is an attribute of His Self that does not increase, decrease or develop. Allah knows eternally about His Self, attributes, and what He creates. Nothing is absent from His Knowledge.

Allah has the attribute of Knowledge (al-^Ilm). Surat al-‘Anfal, ayah 75:

إِنَّ اللّهَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ

 “Allah has the perfect knowledge of everything.” Mental proof-Allah has the attribute of knowledge, but His knowledge is not like the knowledge of the creations. The Knowledge of Allah does not increase or decrease. If we say that there is something that Allah does not know about yet, this is attributing ignorance to Allah, and ignorance does not befit Allah. Allah’s Knowledge is perfect, without a beginning or an end.

Will (al-‘Iradah): It is obligatory to believe Allah is attributed with Will. The Will of Allah has no beginning and no end, by His will Allah specifies that which is intellectually possible with certain attributes rather than others.

Allah has the attribute of Will (al-Iradah). Suratat-Takwir, ayah 29:

وَمَا تَشَاؤُونَ إِلَّا أَن يَشَاء اللَّهُ رَبُّ الْعَالَمِينَ

“You do not will anything except by the Will of Allah, the Lord of the Worlds.” Mental Proof-Everything that Allah Willed in eternity for it to exist must come into existence at the time which Allah Willed for it to exist. Nothing will exist unless Allah willed for it to exist.

Power (al-Qudrah):  It is obligatory to believe Allah is attributed with Power.

Allah’s Power has no beginning and no end, by His Power Allah brings into existence that which is intellectually possible to exist or annihilates it after its existence.

Allah has the attribute of Power (al-Qudrah). Suratal-Baqarah, ayah 109:

إِنَّ اللّهَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ

 “Allah has the perfect Power over all things.” Mental Proof-Allah has power over all things. He is not powerless over anything. To be powerless against a creation would mean that Allah had a weakness, and weakness does not befit Allah.

Allah does not need anything 
(al-Qiyamubin-Nafs). Surat al-^Imran, ayah 97:

فَإِنَّ الله غَنِيٌّ عَنِ الْعَالَمِينَ

 “Allah does not need any of the worlds.” Mental Proof-Allah does not need anything, and everything needs Him. Weakness and need are attributes of the creations, and not an attribute of the creator.

Non-neediness of others (al-Qiyamu bin-Nafs): Allah does not need anything.


*al-Qadim as a Name of Allah

In his famous treatise on the Sunni creed, Imam al-Tahawi (d.321AH)uses the word ‘al-Qadim’ to refer to Allah, meaning pre-existing or without beginning. This has attracted criticism by some contemporaries who deem such wording as baseless, with some even calling it a bid’a.Such a rash claim against as great a figure as al-Tahawi is harsh, considering the following:

In al-Hakim’s al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn we find al-Qadim listed as one of the Names of Allah (volume 1, page 239, hadith #42 in the 2014 Dar al-Ta’sil edition).
Now then, all the narrators in this chain are used by al-Bukhari and Muslim, except for ‘Abd al-‘Aziz b. Husayn al-Turjuman, who is considered weak by al-Bukhari, Muslim, Yahya b. Ma’in, and Ibn ‘Adi.

Another narration is found in Sunan Abi Dawud (hadith #466 in Shu’ayb al-Arna’ut’s edition) whereby Allah’s Authoratative Power(Sultanih) is described as al-Qadim. Bear in mind that Allah’s Attributes are inseperable from His Essence.


In summary, condemning al-Tahawi, one of the great hadith scholars, for using a word to describe Allah that was in currency among hadith narrators, in light of the above, long before theologians exerted their influence on the sciences, is a harsh stance to take. Rather than deeming it a baseless innovation, the best stance would be that it is at least based on a weak hadith and can be used to describe one of Allah’s attributes

al-Aqidah al-Sanusiyya


Hearing Seeing Hand:Here




Al-Hafiz Abdal Ghani Al-Maqdisi (d.600AH) Attained Healing by Touching Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbel’s(ra) Grave

Al-Hafiz Abdal Ghani Al-Maqdisi (d.600AH)

Attained Healing by Touching

Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbel’s (ra) Grave

Abu Muhammad `Abdul-Ghani al-Maqdisi (b.541AH/d.600AH)

He is the Shaikh, the Imam, the `Alim, the Zahid, the Hafidh, Taqi ud-Din Abu Muhammad `Abdul Ghani ibn `Abdul-Wahid ibn `Ali ibn Surur Al-Hanbali Al-Maqdisi.

He was a renowned theologian and one of the greatest Hanbali scholars of his age. He was also a direct descent of `Umar Al-Faruq, the second khalifah of the Muslims.

Imam `Abdul Ghani Al-Maqdisi was born in the city of Jama`il (in today’s Palestine) in the year 541 AH (1146 AD), on the outskirts of Jerusalem.

The Scholar and His Students

Scholars from the four corners of the Earth flocked to see him, hanging on his every word and taking copious notes in the lectures that he gave some three times a week.

His students include many, but perhaps the most important of them was Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudamah, who transmitted many of his documents as well as chains of transmission in the six hadith collections.

Later Life and Death

Thus in addition to being a towering figure in Hanbali fiqh, beginning to advanced theology, Imam `Abdul Ghani was an accomplished master and commentator on ahadith and their sub-sciences.

He would later die in the year 600 AH (AD 1203), having lived a rich and beneficial life that produced books and students that today the entire Ummah of the Muslims still benefits from in manifold ways. May Allah bless this Imam and give him admittance into the highest palisades of the Paradise.

Quote Wahhabi/Salafi:

Al-Haafidh Abdul-Ghaniyy al-Maqdisi (d. 600H)

He is: al-Imaam al-Haafidh Abu Muhammad Abdul-Ghaniyy bin Abdul-Waahid bin Alee bin Suroor Ibn Raafi’ bin Hussain bin Ja’far al-Maqdisi al-Jammaa’eelee, then ad-Dimashqi, and he has also been given the appellation “Taqiyy ud-Deen”. […]

His creed

The creed of al-Haafidh Abdul-Ghaniyya is Sunni, Salafi, Athari, and he was upon the way of the Salaf of affirming the Names and Attributes whilst negating tashbeeh and takyeef from them – and this is what subjected him to trial at the hands of the innovators.

He died on Monday, 23rd of Rabee al-Awwal in the year 600H, and was buried in al-Quraafah in Egypt, the next day, and he left as a legacy to his son, Abu Moosaa which was: “To safeguard the knowledge of the science of hadeeth in which he tired himself in compiling and supporting, and the taqwaa of Allaah, the Most High, and safeguarding the obedience to Him”.

Refer to “al-Iqtisaad fil-I’tiqaad”, pp. 9-56, tahqeeq Ahmad bin Atiyyah al-Ghaamidee, 1st edition, 1993, Maktabah al-Uloom wal-Hikam, Madinah, KSA.”








…continue reading here:


For more info/scans read Pdf: The Blazing Star in Defence of a Narration from Malik al-Dar

Download link: Here (safe to download)

Al-Hafiz Abdal Ghani al-Maqdisi and how he attained healing by touching the grave of Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal page, 372- (above scans from page:380-385) Here

Imam Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi and his advice on performing Tawassul page, 389 Here

Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal and his use of the blessed Prophetic hair during his inquisition for tabarruk page, 394 Here


Imam Shafii seeks to gain Barkat (Blessing) from Imam Ahmed’sblessed Shirt (Tabarruk)


Imam Shafi’s Tawasul through Grave of Imam Abu Hanifah


Narration of Malik al-Dar – Response to Objections Here

(Edited by ADHM)


The Creator is Clear from Anthropomorphism – Part3 (800AH to 900AH)

The Creator is Clear

from Anthropomorphism

Aqidah of the Pious Predecessors
500AH – 700AH
 1000AH – 1400AH



Imam al-Iraqi (d.826 AH)
Muhaddith Waliyyud-Din Abu Zur’ah Ahmad Ibn ‘Abdir-Rahim al-‘Iraqiyy
In his book ‘Tarh at-Tathrib fi Sharh at-Taqrib’ when explaining the saying of the Prophet sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam: in reference to the Book positioned above the Throne which has the following words: ‘Inna Rahmati sabaqat Ghadabi’,which means that the matters Allah approves of, far exceed in number those He does not, said: “Allah is clear from the acts of sitting, occupying space and directionality. Therefore, the word “inda” in the aforementioned context does not infer place, rather, it infers honourable status. Consequently, the true meaning of the Prophet’s saying is that this book is positioned in a place Allah awarded high status and honour”.

The Hafidh Wali al-Din Abu Zur’ah al-‘Iraqi (d.826) said:
وَلِلشَّيْخِ تَقِيِّ الدِّينِ ابْنِ تَيْمِيَّةَ هُنَا كَلامٌ بَشِعٌ عَجِيبٌ ، يَتَضَمَّنُ مَنْعَ شَدِّ الرَّحْلِ لِلزِّيَارَةِ ، وَأَنَّهُ لَيْسَ مِنَ الْقُرْبِ بَلْ بِضِدِّ ذَلِكَ , وَرَدَّ عَلَيْهِ الشَّيْخُ تَقِيُّ الدِّينِ السُّبْكِيُّ فِي شِفَاءِ السَّقَامِ فَشَفَى صُدُورَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ
“The Shaykh Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiyya has an abominable statement regarding this issue to the effect that travelling to visit [the grave of the Prophet – sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam -] is prohibited and that it is not a pious deed but rather the contrary. Shaykh Taqi al-Din al-Subki replied to him in [his book] “Shifa` al-Saqam” and healed the breasts of the believers [by it].”Source: “Tarh al-Tathrib

Imam Taqi al-Din al-Hisni al-Shafi’i (d.829AH) mentions some points regarding Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (d.795AH) and some of his negative views concerning ibn Taymiyya:

al-Shaykh Zayn al-Din ibn Rajab al-Hanbali was from among those who firmly believed in ibn Taymiyya’s kufr (disbelief), and had (authored) refutations against him. He would say at the top of his voice during some gatherings:

“al-Subki is excused – meaning in regards to his takfir“.

[al-Hisni, Daf’ Shubah man Shabbaha wa Tamarrad, ed. Dar al-Mustafa, pg. 535]

وكان الشيخ زين الدين بن رجب الحنبلي ممن يعتقد كفر ابن تيمية وله عليه الرد. وكان يقول بأعلىصوته في بعض المجالس: معذور (173/أ) السبكي – يعني في تكفيره ([1]).

([1]) في ب: معذور السبكي في تكفيره
دفع شبه من شبه وتمرد، دار المصطفى، ص. ٥٣٥

Imam Taqi al-Din al-Hisni  on ibn Taymiyya’s anti-Ash’ari followers being a fringe minority group who had to keep their beliefs hidden due to fear of facing severe punishment:

“Discretionary punishment and floggings and imprisonment and beheadings have not ceased to be their lot, despite their concealing what they believe and their utmost secrecy in not expressing their foul beliefs except in hidden places after taking care, and locking the doors, and speaking softly, saying that the walls have ears.”

[Taqi al-Din al-Hisni, Daf’ Shubah man Shabbaha wa Tamarrada, 236-7]

Daf Shubah min Shabah, page 123:
وكان الشيخ زين الدين ابن رجب الحنبلي ممن يعتقد كفر ابن تيمية
“Sheikh Zainuddin ibn Rajab al-Hanbali was amongst those that believed that Ibn Taimiyah is a kafir”
On page 90 we read:
وكان الإمام العلامة شيخ الإسلام في زمانه أبو الحسن علي بن إسماعيل القونوي يصرح بأنه منالجهلة بحيث لا يعقل ما يقول. ويخبر أنه أخذ مسألة التفرقة عن شيخه الذي تلقاها عن أفراخ السامرةواليهود الذين أظهروا التشرف بالإسلام.“The Imam, the Allamah Sheikh al-Islam of his time Abu al-Hassan Ali bin Ismail al-Qunuwi declared that he was ignorant and didn’t realize what he said. He (Sheikh Qunuwi) stated that he (Ibn Taimiyah) took the belief of ‘Tafriqa’ from his Sheikh who took it from Samirites and Jews, those who pretend to be Muslims.”
On page 125 we read:قاله بعض الأئمة عنه من أنه زنديق مطلق
“Some scholars deemed him to be an absolute atheist (Zindeeq)”On page 189 we read:
فنسأل الله تعالى العافية مما يرتكبه هذا الزائغ الفاجر الكذاب.
“We ask Allah to preserve us of what this abhorrent, immoral, liar performs.”
We also read:ولقد أسفرت هذه القضية عن زندقته بتجرئه على الإفك على العلماء وعلى أنه لا يعتقد حرمة الكذب
“The result of the case was the atheism of him (Ibn Taimiyah) because he dares to attribute lies to the scholars and did not ascribe to any prohibition on telling lies.”


Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani (d.852AH) 


Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, while explaining one of the versions of the hadith of the Prophet Muhammad sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, sometimes referred to as hadith an-Nuzul (and which would give the impression that God descends on Earth every night, in his book Fath al-Bari, volume 3, page 23 (you would find pages 22 and 24 scanned (Here) only so that you can read the full context if needed, but the passage translated below is contained in page 23):

“As for his saying ‘Yanzilu Rabbuna ‘ila s-Samaa’i d-Dunya“, those who confirm a direction to Allah, have relied on this text and saidthat it is the direction of ‘above’ (al-uluww), and this has been refuted by the scholars (al-jumhur), because talking like that equals limiting Allaah, who is exempted from that.  Thereafter people have diverged about the meaning of an-nuzul: some took it according to its literal meaning and verily, these are the anthropomorphists (al-mushabbihah) , and Allaah is absolutely free (exempted) from what they say. Others have resorted to deny the truthfulness of all the hadiths which have been narrated in that regard: those are the Khawaarij and theMu’tazilah, and these are really astonishing because on the one hand they interpret what has reached [us] in the Qur’an which is similar to this, and on the other hand they deny what has come from hadith, either due to ignorance, or to stubbornness. Others have read those texts as they were revealed, believing in them in general, while freeing Allaah from the manner[kayfiyyah] of the anthropomorphists, and these are the majority of the Salaf.   [On top of that], al-Bayhaqi and others have narrated from the four imams, from the two Sufyan, the two Hammad, al-Awza’i, from al-Layth and others, that they DID interpret this text according to what befits Allaah, and what is in use in the language of the Arabs. Some other ones went so far in their interpretation that it ended up being a  type of distortion. Others [still] made a difference between what is a ‘close’ interpretation’, i.e. in use in the language of the Arabs, and what would be a ‘far-fetched’ one, and as a result they have interpreted in some cases and  made tafweed [i.e. leaving the meaning to Allaah]  in some cases, and this has been narrated from imam Malik. It has been confirmed by Ibn Daqiq al-Id that al-Bayhaqi said that the safest [of all these methods] is to believe in those texts without a how (bila kayf) and to not speak about what is intended.”

Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani , in volume 13, page 414, of his book Fath l-Bari, (see scan: Here)

while explaining a hadith relating the Mi’raj (ascension to the skies) of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said:

Al-Khattabi said that in this version there is another term narrated by Sharik which makes it different from the other [versions] and which has not been narrated by anyone else. It is [where it is said] : “fi’lan bihi, i.e. from Jibril to Allaah (al-Jabbaar) and  [Sharik] said : “wa huwa makaanuhu” [i.e. literally it would mean ‘and it is his place’], and [later on] the Prophet said  “O My Lord alleviate for us [the number of prayers]. He [i.e. al-Khattabi] said : a place cannot be attributed to Allaah, therefore here it is the place of the Prophet which is meant, i.e. that he returned where he was standing before leaving.’

In his book Fath al-Bari, Amir al-Mu’minin fi l-hadith (literally the Commander of the believers as far as hadith is concerned), al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar said, in volume 13 page 358 (page 328:scan), while explaining a version of the hadith which means that there is a book above the Throne with an inscription:

“As for his saying ” ‘indahu“, Ibn Battal said that the term “ ‘inda” in the language applies to places, when Allah is free from being incarnated in a place, because being incarnated implies having an end and having been created, and having been created is not suitable for Allah. Therefore, it has been said that the meaning [of this hadith] is that His knowledge has preceded the confirmation of who will [in the end] act in obedience to Allah, and of who will be punished for having committed sins, and this [interpretation] is reinforced  by the hadith which comes next, and which says “ana ‘inda dhann ‘indi“, and it is not at all related to a place.

In this extract he explains the hadith in which there is a statement which could potentially be misunderstood.  It is mentioned in that hadith that a book is “‘indahu” which, if taken literally, would mean that this book is “next to God”, wa l-iyaadhu billaah. Ibn Hajar quotes other Muslim scholars to establish the different meanings of ‘‘inda‘  to explain that here ”indahu’ does not refer to the place at all, and he takes the opportunity to repeat the Muslims’ belief that Allah  exists without a place.  (More Info: Here)

Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibiting of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):

Al-Kirmani (d. 786AH) has said: On this issue there has been much discussion in our Syrian lands, and many treatises have been written by both parties. I say: He is referring to Shaykh Taqi al-Din al-Subki and others’ responses to Shaykh Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiyya… and the crux of the matter is that they have pointed out that his position implies that it is prohibited to travel to visit the tomb of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam)… This is one of the ugliest positions that has been reported of ibn Taymiyya. One of the things he has adduced to deny the claim that there is a consensus on the matter is the report that (Imam) Malik disliked people saying: I have visited the tomb of the Prophet. The discerning scholars of the (Maliki) school have replied that he disliked the phrase out of politeness, and not the visiting itself, for it is one of the best actions and the noblest of pious deeds with which one draws near to Allah the Majestic, and it’s legitimacy is a matter of consensus without any doubt, and Allah is the One who leads to truth.” [ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari (Cairo: Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi, 1959), 3:308]

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani has recorded in Lisan al-Mizan (6/319, Hyderabad edn.):

وكم من مبالغة لتوهين كلام الرافضي ادته أحيانا إلى تنقيص علي رضى الله عنه

“How much did he (Ibn Taymiyya) exaggerate in order to weaken the words of the Rafidi (al-Hilli), which at times led him to diminish Ali (radiallahu ‘anh).”[ Read more Here Here]

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Al-Durar al-Kamina,Volume 1 page 46:وعاد القاضي الشافعي إلى ولايته ونودي بدمشق من اعتقد عقيدة ابن تيمية حل دمه
“The Shafiyye judge returned back to his position and declared in Damascus that whoever ascribed to Ibn Taimiyah’s beliefs should have his blood shed”

Al-Durar al-Kamina, Volume 1 page 49:

Ibn Tayimiyyah was released in Shaam. The people had different views of him. Some of them deemed him as one that considered the likeness of Allah to His creature, due to what he said in ‘Aqeeda al-Hamawiya’ and ‘Wasitiya’ and other (books), such as the hand, foot, leg and face are real attributes of Allah, and He is sitting on the throne by Himself. Then it was said to him (Ibn Taimiyah) that the necessities of these beliefs constitute ascribing to the limitation and partition (of Allah), he (Ibn Taimiyah) replied: ‘I don’t believe that limitation and partition is an attribute of a body.’

Others deemed him as one that concealed unbelief due to his saying that the Prophet is not to be sought for help (laa yustaghaathu bihi) and the fact that this amounted to diminishing and impeding the establishing of the greatness of the Prophet.Amongst the most rigid people against him was al-Noor al-Bakri, and he established a council due to that. Some of the members said: ‘We shall pardon him (Ibn Taimiya)’. He (al-Bakri) replied: ‘There is no meaning in that statement. If he was diminishing he must be killed. If he wasn’t diminishing he will not be pardoned’.

Others considered him a hypocrite because of what he said about Ali:… that he had been forsaken (makhdhoolan) everywhere he went, had repeatedly tried to acquire the Caliphate and never attained it, fought out of lust for power rather than religion, and said that “he loved authority while Uthman loved money.” He would say that Abu Bakr had declared Islam in his old age, fully aware of what he said, while Ali had declared Islam as a boy, and that a boy’s Islam is not considered sound upon his mere words.
And due to his statement about the story of his proposing to thedaughter of Abu Jahl and what he attributed the praises to…Also the story of Abi al-Aas bin al-Rabee and what can be concluded from its concept.

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

Hafidh Abu Sa‘id Al-‘Ala’i, who is the scholarof the scholars of Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar Al-‘Asqalani, said that Ibn Taymiyah said of Allah, “He has the same volume as the Arsh, neither smaller nor larger.”

(Dhakha’ir Al-Qasr, pp. 32-33)

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani has reported an incident in al-Durar al-Kamīna (vol. 1, pp. 164): where again Ibn Taymiyyah descended the steps of the Minbar in order to illustrate his understanding of how Allah descends (nuzūl) as early as the year 705H/1305CE (some 21 years before Ibn Battuta’saccount).

Hāfidh Ibn Ĥajar’s source for this incident was one of Ibn Taymiyyah’s own disciples by the name: Sulaymân Najm al-Dīn al-Tufi al-Ĥanbalī (d. 716/1316).

Note: Also Taqī al-Dīn mentioned it! who lived before the Ĥāfidh Ibn Ĥajar al-Asqalânī.

Ibn Taymiyya’s conception of Allah’s bodily descent is also stated in his own writings, as shown from the following excerpt from his al-Ta’sis fi al-radd `ala asas al-taqdis, written as a refutation of Imam al-Razi who was a fierce enemy of theKarramiyya and other Anthropomorphists:

The Creator, Glorified and Exalted is He, is above the world and His being above is literal, not in the sense of dignity or rank. It may be said of the precedence of a certain object over another that it is with respect to dignity or rank, or that it is with respect to location. For example, respectively: the precedence of the learned over the ignorant and the precedence of the imam over the one praying behind him. Allah’s precedence over the world is not like that, rather, it is a literal precedence (i.e. in time). Similarly the elevation above the world could be said to be with respect to dignity or rank, as for example when it said that the learned is above the ignorant. But Allah’s elevation over the world is not like that, rather He is elevated over it literally (i.e. in space). And this is the known elevation and the known precedence [al-Ta’sis al-radd `ala asas al-Taqdis, vol. 1, pp. 111]

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani In his book ‘Fath al-Bari’ said: “Not because it is impossible for the upward and downward directions to apply to Allah does it entail that He cannot be attributed with “Al-‘Uluww” (Aboveness in a metaphorical sense).

This is so because attributing Him with “Al-‘Uluww” (Aboveness) is from the point of status,which is impossibly applicable in a physical sense when in reference to Allah. Hence, it has been related that among the names of Allah are Al-‘Ali, Al-‘Aliyy, and Al-Muta’ali”.

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani Rejects the innovated saying that Allah is above the throne‘bi dhatihi’

Regarding the hadith that says:  “God is between you and your qibla”  (إِنَّ رَبَّهُ بَيْنَهُ وَبَيْنَ الْقِبْلَةِ)

Ibn Hajar says that in this is a refutation on those who claim that God is upon the throne bi dhatihi (with His Essence) (فِيهِ الرَّدّ عَلَى مَنْ زَعَمَ أَنَّهُ عَلَى الْعَرْش بِذَاتِهِ). source: Here

Imam Al-Asqalaani said they are not Muslims:

قال حذاق المتكلمين ما عرف الله من شبهه بخلقه أو أضاف إليه اليد أو أضاف إليه الولد فمعبودهم الذيعبدوه ليس هو الله وإن سموه به (فتح الباري, ابن حجر العسقلاني, دار المعرفة – بيروت ، 1379, 3 / 359)

The brilliant kalaam scholars said: “The one that likened Aļļaah to His creation, or ascribed a hand to Him (i.e. in the sense of a part or limb) or a child; what he worships is not Aļļaah, even if he called it Aļļaah.

Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani says that in this is a refutation on those who claim that God is above the throne bi dhatihi (with His Essence).

(فِيهِ الرَّدّ عَلَى مَنْ زَعَمَ أَنَّهُ عَلَى الْعَرْش بِذَاتِهِ) Link to Arabic Quote


Imam Ibn Nasir al-Din Al-Dimashqi (d.846AH)

The Wahhabi/Salafis love to quote Al-Dimashqi and his book al-Radd al-Wafir in defence of their Imam, ibn Taymiyya.

However, the following is a clear cut example of how many of those who defended him weren’t truly aware of all the deviant positions held by him on various issues.

Imam ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi falls into this category as is evident from the following, where he declares anyone who rejects the Hadiths in relation to the reward and virtue of visiting the grave of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) a deviant.

It is well known that ibn Taymiyya is the foremost proponent of the view that travelling out to visit the blessed grave of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) is a reprehensible innovation – a view which he based on the rejection of the aforementioned narrations. Imam ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi mentions:

“Visiting the grave of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) is a Sunnah of the Muslims, it is unanimously accepted as an act of reward and it is an act of virtue that is encouraged. The Hadiths on this topic have been accepted and practised upon, even though a few of these Hadiths have weakness. Only a deviant will reject them totally.”(Jami’ al-Athar, vol.8 pg.141)

In addition, it is worth noting that Imam ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi has written extensively on this and has approved several Hadiths on this issue in the book of his which has been quoted from above (Jami’ a-Athar) – see [vol.8 pgs. 129-141.]


Imam al-Sakhawi (d. 902AH) on ibn Taymiyya:

وكذا ممن حصل من بعض الناس منهم نفره وتحامى عن الانتفاع بعلمهم مع جلالتهم علماً وورعاً وزهداًلإطلاق لسانهم وعدم مداراتهم بحيث يتكلمون ويجرحون بما فيه مبالغة كابن حزم وابن تيمية

“There are also those scholars of great learning, austerity, and asceticism whom people avoided and whose knowledge they were careful not to utilise, because of their loose tongue and lack of tact, which caused them to talk and criticise excessively. Such men were ibn Hazm and ibn Taymiyya.” [al-Sakhawi, I’lan bi al-Tawbikh (pg. 163), (English translation in ‘A history of Muslim Historiography‘, pg. 284, by F. Rosenthal)]

Imam Jamal al-Din Yusuf ibn ‘Abd al-Hadi ibn al-Mibrad al-Hanbali (d.909AH) mentions Imam Zayn al-Din ibn Rajab al-Hanbali’s (d.795AH) book in refutation of three talaqs (in a single sitting) being equal to one – which was a view ibn Taymiyya held and was stubborn upon:

“…ibn Rajab said in the book Mushkil al-Ahadith al-Warida fi ann al-Talaq al-Thalath Wahida (The problematic nature of the narrations in regards to three talaqs being equivalent to one)…” [ibn al-Mibrad al-Hanbali, al-Sayr al-Hath ila ‘Ilm al-Talaq al-Thalath, ed. Dar al-Basha’ir al-Islamiyya 1997, pg. 27]

Note: Imam ibn al-Mibrad al-Hanbali then goes on to quote multiple passages from the above-mentioned book of Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali. This shows that although this book of Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali may not have survived to this day, it was known and available to those Imams who came just after his time.

قال ابن رجب في كتاب “مشكل الأحاديث الواردة في أن الطلاق الثلاث واحدة”

– السير الحاث الى علم الطلاق الثلاث للإمام جمال الدين يوسف ابن عبد الهادي ابن المبرد الحنبلي

– دار البشائر الإسلامية، ١٩٩٧

– ص. ٢٧


Shaykh al-Islam Imam Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (d.911 AH) on ibn Taymiyya:


“ibn Taymiyya was arrogant. He was self-conceited. It was his habit to represent himself as superior to everybody, to slight the person whom he talked to, and to make fun of great Muslims” [al-Suyuti, Kam’ al-Mu’arid]

Shaykh al-Islam Imam Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti In his book‘Al-‘Iklil fis-tinbat at-Tanzil’ , said: “The Ayah: {ليس كمثله شيء}holds within it a refutation to the creed of the Mushabbihah (those who liken Allah to the creation) and a confirmation that He (Allah) is not a mass, a body, a colour, a taste, and that He does not occupy a space or conform to time”.

Imam Jalal al-Din al-Dawani (d. 918AH) on ibn Taymiyya the Corporealist

Changing Views of ibn Taymiyya by Khaled el-Rouayheb:

In the Sharh al-‘Aqa’id al-‘Adudiyya of Jalal al-Din al-Dawani it is stated that the corporealists are of two kinds. The first are blatantly corporealist and should be regarded as unbelievers. The latter, who are wayward but not unbelievers, “hide behind the caveat bi-la kayfa“, saying that Allah had a body “unlike any other body (la ka-al-ajsam), and position unlike any position, and a relation to this spatial position that was unlike any other relation to a spatial position.” He apparently classified Ibn Taymiyya as belonging to the latter group:

Most of the corporealists are the literalists who follow the literal meaning of the Book and Sunna, and most of them are people of Hadith. Ibn Taymiyya Abu al-Abbas Ahmad and his followers strongly incline to affirm that He is in a direction, and go to extremes in attacking those who deny this. I have seen in one of his books that according to reason there is no difference to saying “He does not exist” and saying “I looked for Him everywhere and I could not find Him”, and he accused those who disagreed on this point of denying the divine attributes (ta’til). And this despite his proficiency in the rational and traditional sciences, as can be seen by anyone who reads his works.

[Jalal al-Din al-Dawani, Sharh al-‘Aqa’id al-‘Adudiyya (Islanbul: ‘Arif Effendi, 1316AH), 43.]


Imam Ahmad al-Qastallani (d. 923 AH) expressing his outrage on ibn Taymiyya’s


prohibition of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):

“The Shaykh Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiyya has abominable and odd statements on this issue to the effect that travelling to visit the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) is prohibited and is not a pious deed but the contraryShaykh Taqi al-Din al-Subki has replied to him in Shifa al-Saqam and has gratified the hearts of the believers.” [Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Baqi al-Zurqani, Sharh al-Mawahib al-Laduniyya (Cairo1291AH), 8:343]

Shaykh Abul-‘Abbas Shihabud-Din Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-Qastalaniyy al-Misri (d. 923 AH) In his book ‘Irshad as-Sari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhariyy’,  said: “The Self of Allah is clear from the notions of place and direction”.

Imam al-Qastallani on Tawassul, Tashaffu’ and Istighathah:
While speaking about the Mu’jizat (miracles) of our Prophet – sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam – he mentions that also many of these miracles happen after his death and he also mentions Istighathah in this context and says that this will be discussed in the chapter regarding visiting the noble grave of the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam:
وأما القسم الثانى ما وقع بعد وفاته- ص:وهو ما وقع بعد وفاته- صلى الله عليه وسلم- فكثير جدّا، إذ فى كل حين يقع لخواص أمته من خوارق العادات بسببه مما يدل على تعظيم قدره الكريم ما لا يحصى كالاستغاثة به وغير ذلك مما يأتى فى المقصد الأخير، فى أثناء الكلام على زيارة قبره الشريف المنير
Source: “al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah” and the next page

And this is the relevant passage which he refered to above:وينبغى للزائر أن يكثر من الدعاد والتضرع والاستغاثة والتشفع والتوسل به- صلى الله عليه وسلم-، فجدير بمن استشفع به أن يشفعه الله تعالى فيه.واعلم أن الاستغاثة هى طلب الغوث، فالمستغيث يطلب من المستغاث به أن يحصل له الغوث منه، فلا فرق بين أن يعبر بلفظ: الاستغاثة أو التوسل أو التشفع أو التجوّه أو التوجه، لأنهما من الجاه والوجاهة ومعناه: علو القدر والمنزلة.وقد يتوسل بصاحب الجاه إلى من هو أعلى منه، ثم إن كلا من الاستغاثة والتوسل والتشفع والتوجه بالنبى- صلى الله عليه وسلم- كما ذكره فى «تحقيق النصرة» و «مصباح الظلام» – واقع فى كل حال، قبل خلقه وبعد خلقه، فى مدة حياته فى الدنيا وبعد موته فى مدة البرزخ، وبعد البعث فى عرصات القيامة

“The visitor (Za`ir) should supplicate and beseech [Allah] much and [he should] perform Istighathah (seeking aid), Tashaffu’ (seeking intercession) and Tawassul through him (the Prophet) – sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam -, so that he becomes worthy of Allah ta’ala letting the one whose intercession he sought to intercede for him.
Know that Istighathah is seeking aid, and the person who is seeking aid is asking from one by whom aid is sought in order to obtain aid from [other than] him (i.e. the person seeking aid with the Prophet – sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam – is doing this in order to obtain aid from Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala). And that is why there is no difference whether one expresses this by using the wording of Istighathah, Tawassul, Tashaffu’, Tajawwuh or Tawajjuh, because all of this goes back to [asking by the] Jah and Wajahah and its meaning is [to ask by the] high worth and status. Tawassul can be sought from a possessor of rank (Jah) unto one who possesses a higher rank than him.

Add to this: Istighathah, Tawassul, Tashaffu’ and Tawajjuh with the Prophet – sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam – is something that takes place [in reality] – as it’s mentioned in “Tahqiq al-Nusrah [bi Talkhis Ma’alim Dar al-Hijrah]” [by Abu Bakr bin al-Husayn bin ‘Umar al-Maraghi (d. 816 AH)] and “Misbah al-Dhalam [fil Mustaghithin bi Khayr al-Anam]”* [by Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad bin Musa bin al-Nu’man al-Marakashi (d. 683 AH)] – in every situation, before his creation and after it, in the time of his life in this world, as well as after his death in the period of the Barzakh, and after the resurrection on the day of reckoning.”Source: “Al-Muwahib al-Ladunniyyah” and the next page

After the above qoute he mentions proofs for the permissibility of performing Tawassul with the Prophet – sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam – in the different situations.

Imam Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad bin Musa bin al-Nu’man al-Marakashi (d. 683 AH) wrote in his book: “Misbah al-Dhalam fil Mustaghithin bi Khayr al-Anam”  and it’s filled with Ahadith and Athar containing Tawassul, Tashaffu’ and Istighathah in every situation (i.e. also after the death of the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam)

The author was born in Tilimsan in the year (b.606/607 AH) and lived prior to Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH) and Imam Taqi al-Din al-Subki (d. 756 AH) and many leading scholars of the Ahl al-Sunnah after him have referred to his book and reported from it without any objection.

The Shaykh Salah al-Din al-Safadi (d. 764) mentioned that he was a Maliki Faqih, a Zahid, a ‘Abid and a ‘Arif and he also mentioned his book “Misbah al-Dhalam”:
مُحَمَّد بن مُوسَى بن النُّعْمَان الشَّيْخ أَبُو عبد الله المزالي التلمساني … وَكَانَ فَقِيها مالكياً زاهداً عابداً عَارِفًا … وَله تصانيف مِنْهَا كتاب مِصْبَاح الظلام فِي المستغيثين بِخَير الْأَنَام فِي الْيَقَظَة والمنام  Source: “al-Wafi bil Wafiyyat


Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami (d. 974 AH)


On ibn Taymiyya’s view of impermissibility on travelling to visit the grave of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):

“If you say: How can you relate that there is a consensus on the permissible and commendable status of visiting and travelling to it (the Prophet’s grave [sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam]) when ibn Taymiyya among the later Hanbalis deems all of this inappropriate?

I say: Who is ibn Taymiyya so that one takes his words into consideration or relies on them in any religious matter? Is he anything but – in the words of the leading scholars who have followed his rotten statements and unsalable arguments… – a servant whom Allah has forsaken and led astray and clothed in the garments of ignominy… The Shaykh al-Islam, the scholar of the world, concerning whose status, ijtihad, rectitude and prominence there is a consensus, Taqi al-Din al-Subki – may Allah sanctify his soul and cast light on his grave – has dedicated himself to answering him in a separate work (shifa al-saqam fi ziyarat khayr al-anam) in which he has done a great service and shown with dazzling arguments the correct path.” [ibn Hajar al-Haytami, al-Jawhar al-Munazzam fi Ziyarat al-Qabr al-Sharif al-Nabawi al-Mukarram, M. Zaynhum ed. (Cairo: Maktabat Madbuli, 2000), 29-30.]

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami has recorded in a formal legal opinion in his al-Fatawa al-Hadithiyya (1/183-84) the following:

ابْن تَيْمِية عبد خذله الله وأضلَّه وأعماه وأصمه وأذلَّه، وَبِذَلِك صرح الْأَئِمَّة الَّذين بينوا فَسَاد أَحْوَالهوَكذب أَقْوَاله، وَمن أَرَادَ ذَلِك فَعَلَيهِ بمطالعة كَلَام الإِمَام الْمُجْتَهد الْمُتَّفق على إِمَامَته وجلالته وبلوغهمرتبَة الِاجْتِهَاد أبي الْحسن السُّبْكِيّ وَولده التَّاج وَالشَّيْخ الإِمَام الْعِزّ بن جمَاعَة وَأهل عصرهم، وَغَيرهممن الشَّافِعِيَّة والمالكية وَالْحَنَفِيَّة، وَلم يقصر اعتراضه على متأخري الصُّوفِيَّة بل اعْترض على مثلعمر بن الْخطاب وَعلي بن أبي طَالب رَضِي الله عَنْهُمَا كَمَا يَأْتِي. وَالْحَاصِل أنْ لَا يُقَام لكَلَامه وزن بليَرْمِي فِي كلّ وَعْر وحَزَن، ويعتقد فِيهِ أَنه مُبْتَدع ضالّ ومُضِّلّ جَاهِل غال عَامله الله بعدله، وأجازنا منمثل طَرِيقَته وعقيدته وَفعله آمين

“Ibn Taymiyya was a servant whom Allah abandoned, misguided, blinded, deafened, and humiliated. This has been frankly expressed by the Imams who explained the corruptness of how he was, and the mendacity of what he said. Whoever wants to check this should read the words of the Mujtahid Imam, whose Imamate, greatness, and having reached the rank of Ijtihad are universally acknowledged, Abul Hasan (Taqi al-Din) al-Subki; together with his son Taj (al-Din as-Subki), the Shaykh and Imam al-‘Izz Ibn Jama’a, the scholars of their time, and other Shafi’i, Maliki and Hanafi scholars. Nor did he confine his criticism to later Sufi’s; but censured the likes of Umar ibn al-Khattab and Ali (may Allah be pleased with them), the outcome of which is that his words are devoid of any worth or consideration, to be scattered across the wilds and wastelands, while the man himself is considered an initiator of bid’ah (reprehensible innovations), misled, misleading, ignorant and spiteful. May Allah give him what he deserves, may Allah preserve us from the likes of his way and his beliefs and works, Ameen.”

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami , Al-Fatawa al-Hadithya, page 114:ابن تيمية عبد خذله الله وأضله وأعماه وأصمه وأذله ، وبذلك صرح الأئمة الذين بينوا فساد أحوالهوكذب أقواله.

“Ibn Taimiyah, Allah (swt) let him down, misguided him, made him blind, deaf and disgraced him, and by that the Imams both declared and exposed his false beliefs and lies.”

Due to being one of ibn Taymiyya’s major critics, some modern-day followers of ibn Taymiyya do not hold much love for Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami.

They would like to believe that the Imam was not of great standing or knowledge, and that his beliefs were ‘deviant’. However, as a harsh reality check, Imam ‘Uthman ibn Sanad al-Basri (d. 1242AH) had the following to say in praise of Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami:  

“He who looks at his works will be dazzled and say: Praise Allah who has allowed the minds of man to reach it’s subtle depths! He is the Shafi’i who mediated between the finer points of law and the subtleties of the discipline of tradition. He did not treat discipline without reaching depths that his contemporaries never hoped to reach. No one disputed with him without finding him an abounding sea of knowledge. He was firm in matters of religion while being high minded, composed and intelligent… Those who came after him have depended on what he has chosen, and thus his works are the standard reference for fatawa, and no Shafi’i will give a fatwa that is not in accordance with what he has considered. The prominent scholars esteem his works, and give it the foremost rating.” [Basri, Matali’ al-Su’ud, 113]

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami  on ibn Taymiyya in his own time and the reality of his followers:

“The scholars of his age rose against him (ibn Taymiyya) and impelled the Sultan to either kill or imprison him, so he imprisoned him until he died and his innovations died out and his darkness disappeared. Then he was supported by followers whose heads Allah has not raised, nor has He granted them power or strength; rather they were afflicted with humiliation and remained under Allah’s wrath, due to their disobedience and their beliefs.” [ibn Hajar al-Haytami, al-Jawhar al-Munazzam, 31]

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami  on ibn Taymiyya’s Suggestion that the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) Let Down Part of his Turban to Mark the Spot Between his Shoulders that Allah Touched with His ‘Hand’

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami  on ibn Taymiyya’s suggestion (via ibn Qayyim) that the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) had let down part of his turban to mark the spot between his shoulders that Allah had touched with His ‘hand’:

“This is among their repulsive opinions and their waywardness, since it is based on their claim, which they argued for at length and castigated Sunnis for rejecting, that Allah is in a direction and is a body, may He be exalted above what the unjust and stubborn say! They have in this regard abominations and heresies to which the ear cannot listen, and one cannot but adjudge them a falsity, a slander and a lie. May Allah shame them and those who say that. The Imam Ahmad (ibn Hanbal) and the distinguished among his school are innocent of this ugly stain. How could it be otherwise, and it is unbelief according to many?” [ibn Hajar al-Haytami, Ashraf al-Wasa-il ila Fahm al-Shama-il, Ahmad al-Mazidi ed. (Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, Beirut, 1998), 172-173]

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami  on ibn Taymiyya and his student ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya and those who follow them: “Make sure you do not listen to what is in the books of ibn Taymiyya and his student ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya and other such people who have taken their own whim as their God, and who have been led astray by Allah, and whose hearts and ears have been sealed, and whose eyes have been covered by Him. And who will help them if not Allah? How these heretics (mulhidun) have crossed the lines and broken the fences of the Shari’a and the Haqiqa, thinking that they are on the right path, and they are not! Rather they are in the worst of errors, the foulest of qualities, the most odious loss, and the utmost falsity. May Allah forsake the one who follows them, and purify the earth of their likes.” [ibn Hajar al-Haytami, al-fatawa al-Hadithiyya, 110-113]

And how true were the words of Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami (d. 974 AH) when he said:
فإن قلت : كيف تحكي الإجماع السابق على مشروعية الزيارة والسفر إليها وطلبها وابن تيمية من متأخري الحنابلة منكر لمشروعية ذلك كله … قلت : من هو ابن تيمية حتى ينظر إليه أو يعول في شئ من أمور الدين عليه ؟ ! وهل هو إلا كما قال جماعة من الأئمة الذين تعقبوا كلماته الفاسدة ، وحججه الكاسدة … عبد أضله الله تعالى وأغواه ، وألبسه رداء الخزي … ولقد تصدى شيخ الإسلام ، وعالم الأنام ، المجمع على جلالته ، واجتهاده وصلاحه وإمامته ، التقي السبكي ، قدس الله روحه ، ونور ضريحه ، للرد عليه في تصنيف مستقل أفاد فيه وأجاد وأصاب وأوضح بباهر حججه طريق الصواب

If you say: How can you relate that there is a consensus on the permissible and commendable status of visiting and travelling to it (the Prophet’s grave [sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam]) when ibn Taymiyya among the later Hanbalis deems all of this inappropriate?

I say: Who is ibn Taymiyya so that one takes his words into consideration or relies on them in any religious matter?

Is he anything but – in the words of the leading scholars who have followed his rotten statements and unsalable arguments… – a servant whom Allah has forsaken and led astray and clothed in the garments of ignominy…

The Shaykh al-Islam, the scholar of the world, concerning whose status, ijtihad, rectitude and prominence there is a consensus, Taqi al-Din al-Subki – may Allah sanctify his soul and cast light on his grave – has dedicated himself to answering him in a separate work (shifa al-saqam fi ziyarat khayr al-anam) in which he has done a great service and shown with dazzling arguments the correct path.”

Source: “Al-Jawhar al-Munadhdham“; translation taken from: Here

The Creator is Clear from Anthropomorphism(Part4 :1000AH – 1400AH )

Guru of Anthropomorphism



You do not have permission to add comments.



Up ↑