ii. It is a clear contradiction of ibn Taymiyyahs
way concerning the Attributes of Allaah. Ibn Taymiyyah clearly states the
forbiddance of likening Allaah to His creation: "It is a must to affirm
that which Allaah affirms for Himself, whilst negating any likeness to Him with
His creation." (at-Tadmuriyyah, p.20, of ibn Taymiyyah).
iii. Ibn Taymiyyah has also said: "Whoever considers
the Attributes of Allaah to be like the attributes of the creation, such that
the Istawaa of Allaah is like the ascending of the creation, or His Descending
(Nuzool) is like the descending of the creation or other than that, then he is a
deviated innovator." (ibn Taymiyyah, Majmoo al-Fataawaa 5/262).
iv. Ibn Taymiyyah has a separate book concerning the
hadeeth of Allaahs Descending - Sharh Hadeeth an-Nuzool - and in it there
is no trace of the anthropomorphic beliefs which Kabbani and others have falsely
accused him of.
v. It is not possible that ibn Batootah witnessed ibn
Taymiyyah deliver this speech since ibn Batootah states in his Rihlah (1/102)
that he entered Damascus on the 9th of Ramadhan in the year 728H. However, ibn
Taymiyyah was in prison at this time as ibn Katheer states in al-Bidaayah
wan-Nihaayah (14/135) that he was imprisoned on 6th Shabaan 728H and
remained there until his death on 20th Dhul-Qadah 728H.
vi. Ibn Batootah did not write the book Rihlah with his
own hand, rather it was collected by Muhammad bin Jazee al-Kalbee who writes in
the introduction: "I have quoted the meaning of the words of Shaykh Abu
Abdullaah (ibn Batootah) with words that give the meaning of what he
The author of the infamous Al-Albani Unveiled deemed it
necessary to say (pp. 112-113):
"Even if one was to denounce Ibn Battutas
account as being a false and fabricated statement, one may wish to know that the
greatest scholar of Hadith in his time, Shaykh al-Islam al-Hafiz Ahmad ibn Hajar
al-Asqalani (Rahimahullah) has reported an incident in al-Durar al-kamina (1,
164) where again ibn Taymiyyah descended the steps of the minbar in order to
illustrate his understanding of how Allah descends (nuzul) as early as the year
705/1305 AH (some 21 years before Ibn Battutas account). Hafiz Ibn
Hajars source for this incident was one of Ibn Taymiyyas own
disciples by the name of Sulayman Najm al-Din al-Tufi al-Hanbali
These words of al-Tufi al-Hanbali are also repeated by
However, it is clear from what al-Tufi says (i.e.
"... they mentioned that he had cited the hadith of Allahs
descent...") that he is merely relaying what others have said, not that he
is necessarily agreeing with the correctness of the accusation.
Incidentally, the author of Al-Albani Unveiled believes
that the event referred to by al-Tufi took place 21 years before ibn
Batootahs account whereas Kabbani seems to think that it is a report of
one and the same event!
THE SCHOLARS AGREE ON THE CORRECTNESS OF IBN
After all this, it comes as no surprise that those who
argued with ibn Taymiyyah about the contents of his books found that indeed his
beliefs where exactly those held by the Salaf of this Ummah. Ibn Katheer writes
that when the scholars of his time gathered for a sitting with ibn Taymiyyah to
discuss his work al-Aqeedah al-Hamawiyyah that ibn Taymiyyahs replies to
their accusations were not able to be rebutted (al-Bidaayah wan Nihaayah, 14/5).
And likewise he mentioned that when the scholars sat to argue with him regarding
his Aqeedah al-Waasitiyyah the argument ended with them accepting all that was
contained in the book (Vol. 14 of al-Bidaayah under the heading 'Aqd al-Majaalis
KABBANIS UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS AGAINST IBN
Nevertheless, the allegations continue. Kabbani lists
(via al-Haytami / Taj al-Din al-Subki) eleven cases wherein ibn Taymiyyah has
supposedly violated scholarly consensus (pp. 101-103). The author of Al-Albani
Unveiled (again via as-Subki) mentions twenty-two examples (pp. 114-116). It is
not intended to look at the accuracy or otherwise of any of these assertions
(with the exception of one below), this will be dealt with elsewhere if Allaah
wills. However, it is fitting to mention what Kabbani quotes at the end of his
list of allegations:
"Some said: whoever looks at his (ibn
Taymiyyahs) books does not attribute to him most of these
positions..." and in Al-Albani Unveiled it reads: "Some scholars said
that most of the above quoted statements did not belong to ibn
This begs the question: If it is the case that there are
serious doubts as to whether ibn Taymiyyah even held such views then why bother
to mention them in the first place? Is it so that people will begin to have
doubts implanted in their hearts and minds about this exemplary scholar?