In the name of Allāh, Most Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy.
REQUEST: I have made this book freely available ― I request that you donate (if you are able) the amount of just £2 as a Sadaqah to the Salafi Bookstore and Islamic Centre so they can print and distribute free leaflets and booklets to aid the da’wah of Ahlus-Sunnah and Hadīth across the world. If you are not able to donate, then please make du’ā to Allah that He continues to aid and strengthen this blessed da’wah.
All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of all creation; may Allah extol the mention of our noble Prophet Muhammad in the highest company of Angels, bless him and give him peace and security―and his family, his Companions and all those who follow him correctly until the establishment of the Hour.
Introduction: Ibn Taymiyyah on those who first negated the Attributes of Allah ― the story of Jaʿd Ibn Dirham and Jahm Ibn Safwān.
Shaikh Al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullāh) said,
“The origin of the speech in the negation of the Attributes of Allah was taken from the students of the Jews, the Mushriks and the misguided Sābi’īn. The first person who is known to have spoken with this speech is Jaʿd Ibn Dirham, and then Jahm Ibn Safwān took it from him and made it open and apparent among the people, and the beliefs of the Jahmiyyah were ascribed to him. It is said that Jaʿd learned his belief from Abān Ibn Sam’ān, and Abān learned it from Tāloot the son of the sister of Labeed Ibn Al-A’sam, and Tāloot learned it from Labeed Ibn Al-A’sam the magician who performed magic on the Prophet (salallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam).”1Sharh Al-Fatāwā Al-Hamawiyyah Al-Kubrā of Ibn Taymiyyah, vol. 1, pp. 156, by Shaikh Muhammad Amān Ibn ʿAlī Al-Jāmī (rahimahullāh), first edition. Many of the explanatory notes in this article are taken from this explanation.
Explanation:
Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullāh) clarifies for us the chain of transmission of ʿIlm Al-Kalām (Theological Rhetoric), i.e. to clarify the origin of the speech in the negation of the Attributes (Sifāt) of Allah, whether it is those who completely negate the Names and Attributes as is the madhhab of Jahm Ibn Safwān, or those who negate the Attributes while claiming to affirm the Names of Allah as is the madhhab of the Muʿtazilah, or those who misinterpret and distort the meanings of some of the Attributes and affirm others, and those which they affirm, they do so using the proofs of reason and not the Revelation (Quran and Sunnah) – and they are the Ashāʿirah and the Māturīdiyyah. All of this is negation (taʿteel) of the Sifāt in the end because it negates from Allah what He has affirmed for Himself. Indeed, the term Jahmiyyah was applied by the Pious Predecessors2In Arabic: As-Salaf As-Sālih. of this Ummah, in the age of the people of desires to refer to every person of taʿteel3A Muʿattil is a person who performs taʿteel. A negator, denier or distorter of any one or more of the Attributes of Allah (the Most High). “Mu’attilah” is an umbrella term for all of the sects that fall into this deviation., even if he wasn’t an outright follower of Jahm Ibn Safwān, i.e. they would apply the term to a Muʿtazilī or and Ashʿarī. That is because the Ashʿarī makes false interpretations for the Attributes of Allah, deviating the apparent meanings of the Attributes without proof.
The Muʿattilah are those who deny anything from the Names of Allah and His Attributes or that they distort the Revealed texts from their clear and apparent meanings and wordings. The latter are also referred to as the Mu’awwilah (those who make false interpretations). So we refute them and rebut them with established principles. We say regarding their speech:
- It opposes the apparent meanings and wordings of the texts of the Qurān and Sunnah, so they discard the actual meanings and replace them with concocting meanings, e.g. Allah’s descending to the nearest heavens means, ‘His Mercy descends’, that ‘Allāh’s two Hands are His two bounties or two powers’, etc.
- It opposes the path of the early Salaf (who would understand the texts upon their apparent meanings).
- There is no authentic proof (in the Qurān and Sunnah) that allows for these distortions, metaphors and figurative interpretations or metaphors. So whoever speaks concerning the Self of Allah (His Dhāt), His Names and Attributes must do with clear textual proofs, and not made-up interpretations because we know Allah through revelation and not by philosophical meanderings of the mind or theological speculations (kalām).
As for Jaʿd Ibn Dirham, then he is the founder of the creed of negation of the Attributes (and Names) of Allah, i.e. the madhhab of taʿteel. He was the first to say, “Allah did not speak to Mūsā (ʿalaihis-salām) directly, that He did not take Ibrāheem (‘alaihis-salām) as a Khaleel (close friend).” He was executed by Khālid Al-Qasrī on the day of ʿEid Al-Adhā in the year 124H. He said, “O people, sacrifice! May Allah accept your sacrifices. Indeed I will take Jaʿd ibn Dirham as my sacrifice!” Then Al-Qasri descended and executed Jaʿd at the foot of the mimbar. The most notable of his students was Jahm Ibn Safwān, and the madhhab of taʿteel (negating Allah’s Attributes) was ascribed to him, i.e. the Jaymiyyah. 4See Siyar Al-A’lām (5/433), Al-Bidāyah wan-Nihāyah (9/350), Al-Kāmil fit-Tāreekh (4/466), An-Nooniyyah with the Sharh of Ibn ‘Īsā (1/50-51).
So this is the chain of transmission that connects Jahm Ibn Safwān to his shaikh, Jaʿd back to Labeed Ibn Al-A’sam the Jewish magician who performed magic on the Messenger (salallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam). 5This was affirmed by Ibn Katheer in Al-Bidāyah wan-Nihāyah (10/19), As-Safdī in Al-Wāfī bil-Wafayāt (11/68), As-Subkī in Tabaqāt ash-Shāfiʿiyyah al-Kubrā (9/72). See the biographies of the people in the chain of transmission: At-Tabaqāt Al-Kubrā (2/197), Al-Wāfī bil-Wafayāt (10/205), and Lisān Al-Mizān (2/69).
So the doctrine of the negation of the Attributes of Allah (through taʿteel or ta’weel), that Allah is not truly over His Throne (Al-ʿArsh), then that is the belief of the Kullābiyyah of today, the followers of Abdullah Ibn Kullāb, who refer to themselves as Ashʿarīs. They claim that the Ascending of Allah (Istiwā) over His Throne means that He conquered (istawlā) His Throne! That He did not ascend over it, rather conquered and overpowered it! So, this is to negate the Attribute of Ascension for Allah, and it is to misinterpret and distort the Words of Allah and their meanings.
So the first to speak with the negation of Allah’s Attributes was Jaʿd Ibn Dirham, and the scholars and rulers were quick to quell his evil. Nevertheless, his foremost student Jahm Ibn Safwān managed to take this ideology and make it widespread. He escaped the authorities and travelled from place to place, and town to town spreading these false doctrines. In the end, he was captured and executed in 128 AH. It is because of his efforts in spreading this false creed that the sect is known as the Jahmiyyah and not as the Jaʿdiyyah. And the chain of transmission of this corrupt and wicked doctrine known as ʿIlmul-Kalām ends at the Jew who performed magic upon Allah’s Messenger (salallāhu ʿalaihi wasallam). How can the soul of a person who believes in Allah and the Last Day be at ease with a doctrine whose creed leads back to this source? And we seek the aid of Allah.
Ibn Taymiyyah on the influences of philosophy and theological rhetoric upon the Muslims that led to deviation in the Attributes of Allah and the Islamic Creed.
Shaikh Al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullāh) said:
“It is said that Jaʿd was from the city of Harrān. And Harrān was populated with large numbers of Sābi’ah (Sabeans) and Philosophers, remnants from those who followed the religion of Namrood (Nimrod) and the Kanʿāniyyeen (Canaanites) ― and some of the later authors wrote concerning their sorcery and magic. Namrood was the king of the Sabean Canaanites6Sābi’ah Al-Kanʿāniyyeen. polytheists, just as Kisrā (Chosroes) was the king of the Persians and the Majoos (Magians), and Pharaoh was the king of the Coptic unbelievers, and Najāshī (Negus) was the king of the Abyssinian Christians. So the term is a generic title for the kings and not the name of a person. The Sābi’ah, except for a few among them, were upon polytheism and their scholars were philosophers, even though As-Sābi’ (the founder) himself was not a polytheist, instead, he was a believer in Allah and Last Day, just Allah stated:
إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ وَٱلَّذِينَ هَادُوا۟ وَٱلنَّصَـٰرَىٰ وَٱلصَّـٰبِـِٔينَ مَنْ ءَامَنَ بِٱللَّهِ وَٱلْيَوْمِ ٱلْـَٔاخِرِ وَعَمِلَ صَـٰلِحًا فَلَهُمْ أَجْرُهُمْ عِند رَبِّهِمْ وَلَا خَوْفٌ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا هُمْ يَحْزَنُونَ
“Verily, those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and the Sābi’een (Sabians), whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.” (Al-Baqarah: 62)
إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ وَٱلَّذِينَ هَادُوا۟ وَٱلصَّـٰبِـُٔونَ وَٱلنَّصَـٰرَىٰ مَنْ ءَامَنَ بِٱللَّهِ وَٱلْيَوْمِ ٱلْـَٔاخِرِ وَعَمِلَ صَـٰلِحًا فَلَا خَوْفٌ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا هُمْ يَحْزَنُونَ
“Surely, those who believe, and those who are the Jews and the Sabians and the Christians – whosoever believed in Allah and the Last Day, and worked righteousness, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.” (Al-Mā’idah: 69)
However, many from among the Sabeans or most of them were unbelievers or polytheists. Just as the Jews and Christians changed and distorted the Religion and became unbelievers or polytheists, then the Sabeans (Sābi’een) did the same. They were unbelievers, polytheists who would worship the stars and make temples for that purpose.”7Sharh Al-Fatāwā Al-Hamawiyyah Al-Kubrā of Ibn Taymiyyah, vol. 1, pp. 159.
Explanation:
Harrān was an ancient city in Upper Mesopotamia whose site is in the modern village of Harrān, Southern Turkey.
Namrood (or Nimrod) was the king of Bābil (Babylon), the son of Kanʿān son of Kūsh son of Sām son of the Prophet Nūh, as stated by Mujāhid (d. 104H). Or it is said by some others that he was: Nimrod son of Fālih son of ʿĀbir son of Sālih son of Arfakhshadh son Sām son Nūh (the Messenger of Allāh). Namrood was one of the tyrannical kings of the world of his age. It is said his kingship lasted for 400 years ― and he was one of the greatest tyrannical oppressors of the world, going beyond bounds in evil. The Prophet Ibrāheem (ʿalaihis-salām) invited him to the worship of Allah alone, without associating partners with Him, but he was overtaken by his own ignorance, arrogance and misguidance in rejecting the Creator. Ibrāheem (ʿalaihis-salām) debated with him regarding the Creator, and Namrood ascribed to himself lordship, and the ability to give and death as Allah stated in Al-Baqarah, āyah 258. Some of the mufassirūn (or explainers) of the Quran mentioned that he died due to a mosquito that Allah caused to enter the nasal passage that brought him to his humiliating end. It remained in his nose for a long while causing him great torment and suffering to the point that he would pound his own head with an iron rod (or hammer) until he killed himself. 8See Tārīkh At-Tabarī (1/142), Al-Maʿārif of Ibn Qutaybah (p. 31), Al-Bidāyah wan-Nihāyah (1/148), Tārīkh Al-Umam wal-Mulūk (1/278-292), Tafseer Ibn Katheer (1/462-463).
The Canaanites (Kanʿāniyyeen). This is an ascription to Canaan (Kanʿān) son of Sām son of Nūh. The Canaanites settled in the coastal areas of the Levant (Shām) and Jerusalem. Ibrāheem (ʿalaihis-salām) travelled to them at the early on in his journey, with his wife, Sārah. The Canaanites worshipped the seven stars, and the Greeks named them Phoenicians. 9Al-Bidāyah wan-Nihāyah (1/140), Lisān Al-‘Arab (8/316), Mu’jam Al-Buldān (4/483-484), Dā’irah Ma’ārif Al-Qarn Ar-Rābi’ ‘Ashr (8/316) of Muhammad Farwīd Wajdī (second edition, 1343 AH)
Theological Rhetoric (ʿIlmul-Kalām) is the innovated practice of using argumentation, debate, and intellectual reasoning as proofs to establish the Islamic Creed thus making reason dominant over the Revealed Texts. ʿIlmul-Kalām appeared at the end of the era of the Sahābah — its ideas and notions were refuted by Ibn ʿUmar, Jābir ibn ʿAbdillāh, Abu Hurairah, Ibn ʿAbbās, Anas ibn Mālik and others. The Companions would instruct the people not to give salām (salutations) to the Qadariyyah (i.e. the deniers of the pre-decree), nor to pray janāzah over them and not to visit their sick. 10See Al-Farq baynal-Firaq of ʿAbdul-Qādir Al-Baghdādī (d. 429 AH), pp. 39-40. The sects of Kalām include, among others, the Qadariyyah, Muʿtazilah, Jahmiyyah, Ashāʿirah and the Māturīdiyyah.
Philosophy: Its meaning linguistically is, “the love of wisdom”. It is a Greek word: “Philo” meaning love and “sophy” (or Sophos) meaning wisdom. Thales (died 548 BCE), Pythagoras (died 495 BCE) and Socrates (executed in 399 BCE by forced suicide with poison) were from the earliest philosophers – then followed Socrates’ student Plato (died 348 BCE), the founder of the Platonic Academy, and then his student Aristotle (died 322 BCE), and many, many others. Much later came the age of medieval philosophy, between the 6th and 15th centuries CE in Western Europe following the decline and fall of the Western Roman Empire. In this period “problems such as the existence and nature of God, the nature of faith and reason, metaphysics, the problem of evil were discussed.” 11Quote from, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy#Historical_overview ― accessed Wed. 26 Jan. 2022.
As for the meaning of philosophy, Anthony Meridith Quinton stated, “Philosophy is rationally critical thinking, of a more or less systematic kind about the general nature of the world (metaphysics or theory of existence), the justification of belief (epistemology or theory of knowledge), and the conduct of life (ethics or theory of value). Each of the three elements in this list has a non-philosophical counterpart, from which it is distinguished by its explicitly rational and critical way of proceeding and by its systematic nature. Everyone has some general conception of the nature of the world in which they live and of their place in it. Metaphysics replaces the unargued assumptions embodied in such a conception with a rational and organized body of beliefs about the world as a whole.”12Honderich, T. A. (1995). The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Greece: Oxford University Press, p. 666.
Muslim philosophical thought, discussions and writings were driven by huge efforts in translation that saw the writings of the Greeks becoming widespread in the Arab language during the reign of the Abbassids between the second and fourth centuries after the hijrah and continued to be promulgated and further developed until the sixth century after Hijrah (between the 8th and 12th centuries CE). A body of Muslims learned the arguments of the ancient Greeks, their theories and principles 13Based on Aristotelianism and Neoplatonism. and applied them to the Beliefs and Laws found in the Islamic texts. Philosophy taught them, “Everyone has occasion to doubt and question beliefs, their own or those of others, with more or less success and without any theory of what they are doing. Epistemology 14“Epistemology is the study of knowledge. Epistemologists concern themselves with a number of tasks, which we might sort into two categories: First, we must determine the nature of knowledge; that is, what does it mean to say that someone knows, or fails to know, something?… Second, we must determine the extent of human knowledge; that is, how much do we, or can we, know? How can we use our reason, our senses, the testimony of others, and other resources to acquire knowledge? Are there limits to what we can know? For instance, are some things unknowable? Is it possible that we do not know nearly as much as we think we do? Should we have a legitimate worry about scepticism, the view that we do not or cannot know anything at all?” (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://iep.utm.edu/epistemo/ ― accessed 27 Jan. 2022). seeks by argument to make explicit the rules of correct belief formation. Everyone governs their conduct by directing it to desired or valued ends. Ethics, or moral philosophy, in its most inclusive sense, seeks to articulate, in rationally systematic form, the rules or principles involved.”15Honderich, T. A. (1995). The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Greece: Oxford University Press, p. 666.
Those who engrossed themselves in the writings of the Greeks (and other philosophies) began to speak with heretical doctrines that caused them to doubt the Islamic ʿAqeedah, belief in Allah and the Unseen. They invented terminologies that became a part of Muslim discourse ― they embellished their arguments with verses from the Qurān, leading many Muslims to adopt the heresies of ʿilm al-kalām (speculative theology or theological rhetoric) and Falsafah (philosophy) causing them to abandon the original and earliest teachings of Islam found in the Qurān, Sunnah and the sayings of the Sahābah.
What followed were centuries of conflict between the scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamā’ah (the Salaf and Ahlul-Hadeeth) and the figureheads of Ahlul-Kalām (and the philosophers). The great scholars of Sunnah and Hadeeth in every age refuted and overcame these interlopers, heretics and innovators, and all praise is for Allah. Those refutations and writings are preserved to this day.
From this early foraging into the philosophies of the unbelievers came the doctrines of the Ahlul-Kalām: the Muʿtazilah, Jahmiyyah, Qadariyyah and later those who sought a middle-ground between the ʿaqeedah of the Salaf and the Muʿtazilah, such as the Kullābiyyah, Ashʿariyyah and Māturīdiyyah. All of these attempts to compromise and contradict the ʿaqeedah of the Salaf (that which the Companions and Tābiʿeen were upon) were met with resistance and refutation by the Imāms of the Salaf.
Shaikhul-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullāh) narrated the regret of some of those who delved into theological rhetoric and philosophy among the Muslims and were misguided through it, such as Fakhr Ad-Deen Ar-Rāzī (died 606 AH), who propounded self-sufficiency of the intellect and giving reason and “rational thought” precedence over the Revealed Texts. In the end, Ar-Rāzī said with no small amount of regret, “I have looked into and reflected over the paths of kalām (speculative theology) and the philosophical methodologies ― and I did not see in any of it a cure for the afflicted, nor a quenching of the thirst of those who were desperately thirsty. I found (in the end) that the nearest of paths was the path of the Qurān. So, read in affirmation of the Attributes, ‘The Most Merciful has ascended over the Throne.’ (Tāhā: 10) and, ‘To Him ascend good words.’ (Fātir: 10) And read concerning negation of resemblance to Him, ‘There is nothing like unto Him.’ (Ash-Shūrā: 11) and, ‘And they cannot encompass Him with their knowledge.’ (Tāhā: 11) The one who experiences what I experienced and went through what I went through will come to realise what I now realise.” Commenting on this, Shaikh Muhammad Amān Al-Jāmī (rahimhullāh) stated, “Speculative theology (ʿIlmul-Kalām) is based on philosophy, whether it be the philosophy of the Greeks or the philosophies of those who ascribe themselves to Islam.” He continued, “Perhaps Allah made the final affair of Ar-Rāzī upon this (i.e. following the path of the Qurān), so if that is the case, then it means that he repented.” 16See Sharh Al-Fatāwā Al-Hamawiyyah Al-Kubrā of Ibn Taymiyyah (1/67, 76).
Kisrā (Chosroes) is the title given to the emperors or kings of ancient Persia. Kisrā is an Arabisation of the Persian term, Khosrow, which means the ruler of a vast kingdom. 17See Lisān Al-Arab (5/142), Tahdheeb Al-Asmā wal-Lughāt (2/65-66), Fathul-Bārī (6/625)
The Copts (Al-Qibt, the plural term for a Qibtī) is a reference to an ancient people of Egypt. And it is ascribed to Al-Qibt the son of Hām the son of Nūh (Noah).18Lisān Al-‘Arab (7/373), Tāj Al-ʿAroos (20/5)
Returning to Jaʿd Ibn Dirham, then he was the shaikh of Jahm Ibn Safwān. Jaʿd took his philosophical ideas, speculative theology and rhetoric from the people of shirk and kufr in Harrān (a town in Southern Turkey), and from them were the Sabians. Allah stated:
إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ وَٱلَّذِينَ هَادُوا۟ وَٱلصَّـٰبِـُٔونَ وَٱلنَّصَـٰرَىٰ مَنْ ءَامَنَ بِٱللَّهِ وَٱلْيَوْمِ ٱلْـَٔاخِرِ وَعَمِلَ صَـٰلِحًا فَلَا خَوْفٌ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا هُمْ يَحْزَنُونَ
“Surely, those who believe, and those who are the Jews and the Sabians and the Christians ― whosoever believed in Allah and the Last Day, and worked righteousness, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.” (Al-Mā’idah: 69)
So Allah affirmed Islam and Imān for some of the Sabians, just as He (the Most High) affirmed it for some of the Jews and Christians. However, many from among the Sabians or most of them were unbelievers or polytheists, just as the Jews and Christians changed and distorted the Religion and became unbelievers or polytheists. So Shaikh Al-Islam is making clear in this paragraph that ʿilm al-kalām (theological rhetoric or speculative theology) emanated from these groups and infiltrated into the Muslim ummah through the Jahmiyyah, Muʿtizalah and their offshoots such as the Kullābiyyah-Ashāʿirah and Māturīdiyyah. And it is from these sects that the deviations in the Names and Attributes (and other affairs) emanated.
Ibn Taymiyyah on those who studied the Greek, Roman, Sabean and Indian philosophies ― and the response of the early Muslim scholars (the Salaf)
Shaikh Al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullāh) continued, “And the creed of the negators (an-nufāt) from among the Sabians was that the Lord does not have except negated attributes (sifāt salbiyyah), or an attribute negated relative to another (sifāt idāfiyyah), or that which is a combination of negated attributes and relative attributes. And the Prophet Ibrāhim, the Friend of Allah (ʿalaihis-salām) was sent to them. And Jaʿd Ibn Dirham learnt his ideology from the Sabian Philosophers.
And likewise, Abu Nasr Al-Fārābī (died 339 AH) entered Harrān and studied under the Sabian Philosophers thus completing his philosophy. And Jahm (died 128 AH) also learned it, as mentioned by Imām Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (died 241 AH) and others, when he debated with the Sumaniyyah who were some of the philosophers of India ― and the Sumaniyyah rejected all the sciences except for the [five] senses. So these are the chains of narration (asānīd) of Jahm that lead back to the Jews, Sabeans, Mushriks and the misguided philosophers, either among the Sabeans or among the other polytheists.
Thereafter, when the books of the Greeks and Romans were translated into Arabic at the end of the second century, then the tribulation increased alongside that which the Shaytān had thrown into the hearts of the misguided ones in the beginning ― the same as what he threw in the hearts of those who resembled them.
So towards the end of the second century, these ideas became widespread which the scholars of the Salaf referred to as the sayings of the Jahmiyyah – and they became widespread due to the efforts of Bishr Ibn Ghiyāth Al-Mareesī (d. 218 AH) and those of his era [and inclination]. The sayings of the scholars and īmāms such as Mālik (d. 179 AH), Sufyān Ibn ʿUyainah (d. 198 AH), Ibn Al-Mubārak (d. 181 AH), Abu Yoosuf (d. 182 AH), Ash-Shāfiʿī (d. 204 AH), Ahmad (d. 241 AH), Ishāq (d. 238 AH), Al-Fudayl Ibn ʿIyād (d. 187 AH), Bishr Al-Hāfī (d. 227 AH) and others were plentiful in censoring, refuting and declaring the followers of this ideology to be astray…” 19Al-Fatāwā Al-Hamawiyyah Al-Kubrā of Ibn Taymiyyah, vol. 1, pp. 156-170, from the Sharh of Shaikh Muhammad Amān Ibn ‘Alī Al-Jāmī, first edition 1440/2019.
Imām Adh-Dhahabī said, “Bishr Ibn Ghiyāth Al-Mirīsī: A misguided innovator. It is not permitted to narrate from him, and he is given no respect. He learned under Abu Yūsuf and then left him, and became proficient in theological rhetoric (ʿilmul-kalām). He was famous for saying that the Qurān was created, and debating that point. He did not reach the era Jahm Ibn Safwān [who came before him], but he took his sayings, and used them as proofs and called to them.” 20See Mizān Al-Iʿtidāl fi Naqdir-Rijāl (2/35). A group of Scholars declared him to be an unbeliever for his heresies.
We will explain these statements of Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimhullāh) in the next article, inshā’-Allāh.
Footnotes:
- 1Sharh Al-Fatāwā Al-Hamawiyyah Al-Kubrā of Ibn Taymiyyah, vol. 1, pp. 156, by Shaikh Muhammad Amān Ibn ʿAlī Al-Jāmī (rahimahullāh), first edition. Many of the explanatory notes in this article are taken from this explanation.
- 2In Arabic: As-Salaf As-Sālih.
- 3A Muʿattil is a person who performs taʿteel. A negator, denier or distorter of any one or more of the Attributes of Allah (the Most High). “Mu’attilah” is an umbrella term for all of the sects that fall into this deviation.
- 4See Siyar Al-A’lām (5/433), Al-Bidāyah wan-Nihāyah (9/350), Al-Kāmil fit-Tāreekh (4/466), An-Nooniyyah with the Sharh of Ibn ‘Īsā (1/50-51).
- 5This was affirmed by Ibn Katheer in Al-Bidāyah wan-Nihāyah (10/19), As-Safdī in Al-Wāfī bil-Wafayāt (11/68), As-Subkī in Tabaqāt ash-Shāfiʿiyyah al-Kubrā (9/72). See the biographies of the people in the chain of transmission: At-Tabaqāt Al-Kubrā (2/197), Al-Wāfī bil-Wafayāt (10/205), and Lisān Al-Mizān (2/69).
- 6Sābi’ah Al-Kanʿāniyyeen.
- 7Sharh Al-Fatāwā Al-Hamawiyyah Al-Kubrā of Ibn Taymiyyah, vol. 1, pp. 159.
- 8See Tārīkh At-Tabarī (1/142), Al-Maʿārif of Ibn Qutaybah (p. 31), Al-Bidāyah wan-Nihāyah (1/148), Tārīkh Al-Umam wal-Mulūk (1/278-292), Tafseer Ibn Katheer (1/462-463).
- 9Al-Bidāyah wan-Nihāyah (1/140), Lisān Al-‘Arab (8/316), Mu’jam Al-Buldān (4/483-484), Dā’irah Ma’ārif Al-Qarn Ar-Rābi’ ‘Ashr (8/316) of Muhammad Farwīd Wajdī (second edition, 1343 AH)
- 10See Al-Farq baynal-Firaq of ʿAbdul-Qādir Al-Baghdādī (d. 429 AH), pp. 39-40.
- 11Quote from, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy#Historical_overview ― accessed Wed. 26 Jan. 2022.
- 12Honderich, T. A. (1995). The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Greece: Oxford University Press, p. 666.
- 13Based on Aristotelianism and Neoplatonism.
- 14“Epistemology is the study of knowledge. Epistemologists concern themselves with a number of tasks, which we might sort into two categories: First, we must determine the nature of knowledge; that is, what does it mean to say that someone knows, or fails to know, something?… Second, we must determine the extent of human knowledge; that is, how much do we, or can we, know? How can we use our reason, our senses, the testimony of others, and other resources to acquire knowledge? Are there limits to what we can know? For instance, are some things unknowable? Is it possible that we do not know nearly as much as we think we do? Should we have a legitimate worry about scepticism, the view that we do not or cannot know anything at all?” (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://iep.utm.edu/epistemo/ ― accessed 27 Jan. 2022).
- 15Honderich, T. A. (1995). The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Greece: Oxford University Press, p. 666.
- 16See Sharh Al-Fatāwā Al-Hamawiyyah Al-Kubrā of Ibn Taymiyyah (1/67, 76).
- 17See Lisān Al-Arab (5/142), Tahdheeb Al-Asmā wal-Lughāt (2/65-66), Fathul-Bārī (6/625)
- 18Lisān Al-‘Arab (7/373), Tāj Al-ʿAroos (20/5)
- 19Al-Fatāwā Al-Hamawiyyah Al-Kubrā of Ibn Taymiyyah, vol. 1, pp. 156-170, from the Sharh of Shaikh Muhammad Amān Ibn ‘Alī Al-Jāmī, first edition 1440/2019.
- 20See Mizān Al-Iʿtidāl fi Naqdir-Rijāl (2/35).
Discover more from Abu Khadeejah أبو خديجة
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Be the first to comment