|
False Allegations, Trials and Imprisonment:
|
Ibn Taymiyyah's popularity caused him to be a target of envy
from various jurist and scholars who could not reach his level in knowledge, nor
could they equal the love and respect that Ibn Taymiyyah enjoyed with the common
masses. In addition to this, his bold stances against various innovative and
heretical practices put him in direct conflict with many innovators, who
repeatedly devised plots against him. The enviers and deviants found common
cause in spreading lies or misinterpreting the writings of Ibn Taymiyyah.
Ibn Katheer writes, 'A group of the theologians was jealous of Shaikh Taqi ud-Din
Ibn Taymiyyah because of his position in the court of the governor and also for
his acting as a public censor who had taken upon himself the responsibility of
enforcing what was lawful and preventing what was prohibited. They were envious
of his growing popularity and of the love and respect accorded to him as well as
of his learning and zeal for religion.' [Ibn Katheer, p. 37]
Al-Hafidh al-Bazzaar said depicting the opponents of Ibn Taymiyyah, 'You would
not see a scholar opposing him (Ibn Taymiyyah), dissuading from him, filled with
hatred for him, except that he was the most greedy of them in gathering the
worldly goods, the most cunning of them in acquiring them, the most ostentatious
of them, the most desirous for reputation…and the most prolific of them in
having lies on his tongue.' [Al-A`laam al-Uliyyah (pg. 82)]
Some false beliefs that were attributed to Ibn Taymiyyah were those that he,
himself refuted in his books. His fatawa and Ijtihads were misinterpreted and
given conclusions that were far away from the truth. Ibn Taymiyyah's enemies
also succeeded occasionally in inciting the rulers against him, leading to his
imprisonment several times between 693H-728H and he passed away while in prison
in the year 728H.
Ibn Taymiyyah was first arrested after he took a stance against a Christian who
cursed the Prophet (salallahu alaihe wa-sallam) and violated his honor. Ibn Taymiyyah's enemies accused him
with disturbing the peace, and complained to the sultan. This incident shows the
extent of their aversion for Ibn Taymiyyah, that they gave priority to harming
him over defending the right and honor of Allah's Messenger. It was in response
to this incident that Ibn Taymiyyah wrote his book, 'Al-Saarim al-Maslool 'ala
Shaatim al-Rasool' [see. Al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah 14/335] Among the other
charges fabricated or exaggerated against Ibn Taymiyyah were the following;
Accusation 1: Tajseem/Tashbih: The allegation that Ibn Taymiyyah's
writings approved of Allah having a body with parts. In truth, Ibn Taymiyyah's
writings show the contrary, as he says, ‘Indeed the term al-Jism (body), al-Arad
(organs), al-Mutahayyiz (extent) are newly invented terminologies. We have
mentioned many a time before that the Salaf and the Imaams have not spoken about
such things - neither by way of negation, nor by way of affirmation. Rather they
declared those who spoke about such matter to be innovators, and went to great
lengths to censure them.’ [See, Sharh Hadeeth an-Nuzool (pg. 69-76), Majmoo
al-Fatawa Shaikhul-Islam (3/306-310, 13/304-305), Minhaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah
(2/134-135, 192, 198-200, 527)]
In 'Sharh Hadeeth an-Nuzool', Shaikhul-Islam said that ascribing Allah with the
term jism (meaning body) is, ‘an innovation in the Sharee'ah, a corruption of
the language, and a contradiction to the [sound] intellect. Rather, it is
repudiated by the Sharee'ah, the language and the [sound] intellect.’
Shaikhul-Islam's belief concerning the Names and Attributes of Allah is the same
as that of the Salafus-Saleh as he writes in Al-Aqeedatil-Waastiyyah, p. 3,
'From Eeman in Allah is Eeman in what He has described Himself with and what His
Messenger Muhammad (salallahu alaihe wa-sallam) has described Him with without alteration/distortions (in
words/meaning) and denial, and without description and comparison…’
It is an obligation to believe in the Names and Attributes of Allah according to
their literal meaning and to affirm their reality for Allah in a manner that
suits Him, and that is for two reasons:
(i) Changing its literal meaning would be in contradiction to the way of the
Prophet Muhammad (salallahu alaihe wa-sallam) and his companions.
(ii) Changing it to a figurative meaning would be speaking about Allah without
knowledge and that is prohibited. [Notes on Aqeedah al-Wasitiyah by Allamah Ibn
Uthaimeen (eng. trans. pg.63)]
For example, Allah says in the Qur'aan, '(Allah) said, 'O Iblees! What prevents
you from prostrating yourself to one whom I have created with both My Hands? Are
you too proud (to fall prostrate to Adam) or are you one of the highly exalted?'
[Soorah Saad (38): 75]
This verse mentions the 'Hands of Allah', so we must believe in and affirm
'Hands' for Allah without describing them or comparing them with the Hands of
the creation or doing Taweel (i.e. giving them a meaning other than their
apparent meaning like saying that the 'Hands' mean 'Power'). Affirming Hands for
Allah does not amount to Tashbeeh (resembling Allah to His creation).
Those who levied the charge of anthropomorphism on Ibn Taymiyyah did so because
they found him opposed to their innovative way of Taweel in understanding the
Attributes of Allah.
Whereas, the soundness of Ibn Taymiyyah's views and their conformity with Ahlus-Sunnah
were well established even during his life-time. Ibn Katheer mentioned that when
the scholars of his time gathered for a sitting with Ibn Taymiyyah to discuss
his work 'Aqeedah al-Hamawiyyah' (in 698H) that his replies to their accusations
could not be rebutted. [Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah' (14/5)] The council concluded
that al-Hamawiyyah contained nothing contrary to the Qur’aan or the Sunnah and
therefore, vindicated him of any wrongdoing. [See. The Political Thought of Ibn
Taymiyyah by Qamar-ud-deen Khan, p.3-4]
Similarly Ibn Katheer mentioned that when the scholars sat to argue with him
with regards to his Aqeedah al-Wasitiyyah (in 705H) the argument ended with them
accepting all that was contained in the book. [Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah (vol. 14
under the heading 'Aqd al-Majaalis ath-Thalaatha)]
Yet, despite being vindicated, Ibn Taymiyyah was summoned again, but this time
by the authorities in Egypt. A council, headed by one of the fiercest opponents
of Ibn Taymiyyah, Qadhi Ibn Mukhluk Maliki, met him and Ibn Taymiyyah was not
allowed to defend himself. A decree issued by the council resulted in his
imprisonment (705H). Many pleaded incessantly for his release until, after a
year had passed and he was offered to be set free if he renounced his creed. The
offer was made to him as many as six times, but he always refused saying, 'The
prison is dearer to me than what I am asked to affirm.' [Ibn Katheer, (14/42)]
Accusation 2: Ibn Taymiyyah forbids visiting the Prophet's Grave. The
reality of this accusation is that Shaikhul-Islam held the view that one should
not travel specifically to visit a certain place or grave intending worship with
it. This opinion of Ibn Taymiyyah was based upon the Hadeeth of Allah's
Messenger, 'Do not travel except to three Masjids, al-Masjid al-Haraam (in
Mecca), the Prophet's (salallahu alaihe wa-sallam) Masjid and Masjid al-Aqsa.' [Saheeh al-Bukharee (Eng.
Trans.) vol.2, p.157, no.281, Saheeh Muslim (Eng. Trans.) vol.2, p.699,
no.3218), Sunan Abu Dawood (Eng. Trans.) vol.2, p.540, no.2028, Sunan
at-Tirmidhee, Sunan an-Nisaee and Sunan Ibn Majah]
Ibn Taymiyyah writes, 'Whoever travels to al-Masjid al-Haraam (in Makkah),
al-Masjid al-Aqsa (in Jerusalem), or the Messenger's masjid and at Masjid Qiba
(close to Medina) and visits grave in that vincity will be performing righteous
acts that conform to established the Prophetic Sunnah… As for whosoever travels
for the sole purpose of visiting the Prophet's grave, not for the purpose of
praying at his Masjid… so he visits the grave and then goes back home, then he
is a deviant Mubtadi (innovator) who stands in defiance of the Prophet's Sunnah
and the consensus of his companions and the scholars of this Ummah (Muslim
nation)… This action was rejected by Imam Malik and other Imams and it is not
recommended by any scholar… When the companions traveled to the Prophet's Masjid
(after his death), they used to pray in it and meet the Prophet's successors,
Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthmaan and then Ali. They recited the Salaam (Islamic greeting)
and the Salaat (invoking Allah to honor and bless his Prophet) on the Prophet in
the prayer (during the Tashahhud sitting) and upon entering and leaving the
Masjid (as the Sunnah legislates); but they did not go near his grave. This
practice is so widely reported from them that nothing to the contrary was
reported of any of them.' [Majmoo al-Fatawa, vol.27, pg. 343]
There is a difference between visiting a grave and journeying to them. The first
one is allowed, while the latter is prohibited. Ibn Taymiyyah's treatise
regarding the visiting of graves was misinterpreted and led to his imprisonment
in Shabaan 726H.
Accusation 3: Disrespect for the Prophets and the righteous. He was
accused as such because he did not agree with the views of those who allowed
tawassul by the person and status of the Prophets and the righteous. If a person
takes the dead righteous people as intercessors between him and Allah, calling
upon them to gain Allah's favor, then he has mimicked the way of Abu Jahl and
Abu Lahb and his action is major kufr (disbelief). If one calls upon Allah
directly and asks Allah 'by the right of so and so,' then this is an innovation.
[Refer to The Rulings and Manners of Visiting the Prophet's Mosque by Shaikh
Abdul-Aziz Ibn Baz (rahimahullah) published in As-Sunnah Issue no. 2 with
explanatory footnotes]
Accusation 4: Making one's own Ijtihad instead of adhering to one
particular Madhhab. In opposition to the general practice, Ibn Taymiyyah did not
show prejudice towards a particular Madhhab and believed in the permissibility
of Ijtihad when necessary. His Ijtihad on considering any number of divorce
pronounced in one sitting to be counted as one, put him at odds with the
position of all the four Madhhabs. He was imprisoned on account of this Ijtihad
towards the end of his life.
