However, a scholar from among them would do justice to him... with knowledge,
and the route of intelligence (in this matter) is to remain quiet about what
occurrs between rivals, may Allaah have mercy upon them all. And I am the very
least of those whose words speak of his greatness or whose pen makes his (mental
and characteristic) composition clear. His associates and also his enemies
humble themselves in front of his sciences, acknowledge the swiftness of his
understanding, that he is a river which has no banks (i.e. no end), a treasure
for which there is no equal, that he had determined generosity and that his
braveness had no end. However, they would seek vengeance against him and those
who were fair in just in that will be rewarded, those who took the middle course
(i.e. were not excessive) will be excused, those who were oppressive will be
subdued and overcome, but most of them are in fact deceived, to Allaah do all
affairs return and every man can have his saying accepted or rejected.
Perfection lies only in the Messengers and decisive proof is only in concensus.
So may Allaah show mercy to a man who spoke about the scholars upon knowledge
and who assiduously scrutinized their problematic pronouncements out of
consideration and good understanding, who then sought forgiveness for them and
spoke of excuses for them. And if this is not (the adopted path of an
individual) then he is someone who does not know and who doesn't know that he
doesn't know. If you pardon the most senior of scholars for their errances and
you do not pardon Ibn Taymiyyah for his limited mistakes then you have affirmed
for your own soul (the following of) desires and the lack of justice. And if you
were to say, 'I do not pardon him because he is a disbeliever, the enemy of
Allaah and His Messenger' then a portion from the people of knowledge and deen
say to you, 'By Allaah, we do not know of him except that he is a believer who
guards his prayers, ablutions, fasting in Ramadaan and who venerates the
Sharee'ah both inwardly and outwardly. He would not approach (any matter) with a
faulty and evil understanding, rather he had excessive intelligence. And nor
would he approach any matter with lack of knowledge, for he was an overflowing
ocean, having firm knowledge and insight of the Book and the Sunnah, withouth
there being any equal to him in that. And nor was he one who played with the
religion. For if he had been like that then he would have deceived his
antagonists straight away, (pretending to) agree with them and he would have
abandoned contradicting them. And he would not hold unique stances in certain
matters due to personal desires and nor would he give a fatwa based upon
something that was agreed upon[11], rather he would bring proof from the
Qur'aan, the hadeeth or qiyaas (analogy) for all of his unique stances and he
would prove them and argue in their favour. He would also narrate all the
different opinions held in the issue and would lengthen his investigation of it,
following in the footsteps of the imaams before him. If he erred then he has the
reward of the one who strives to arrive at the truth amongst the scholars, and
if he was correct then he acquires two rewards.
Imaam adh-Dhahabi on Ibn Taymiyyah : Removing the Misconceptions
