Exposition of the Affairs related About Ibn Taymiyyah

Courtesy of takhreej produced by al-Mustaqeem.tripod.com ash-Shaykh, al-Imaam, al-Alaama, al-Haafidh, al-Mujtahid al-Asr, MuhiyuSunnah, al-Qudwaat, Shaykhul-Islam, Taqi-u-een Abul-Abbass Ahmad ibn Abdul-Haleem ibn Abdu-Saleem, ibn Majd, Ibn Taymiyyah Rahmatullahi alai In this section we have provided arguements to shed light about this man in the form of arguements that have been raised by his detractors and those who wish to defame him due to their staunchly following the people of desires and confusion and that what is listed below may be a clear proof and clarification about the reality of this man and his postion to the people of the sunnah and to Islam itself and Allah is al-Ghufoor ar-Raheem

1.If it is said to you the following arguements. 1.Ibn taymiyyah was never viewed or held the title of "Shaykhul-Islam" 2. He was a contraversial figure 3. he is not among the relied upon scholars then the reply to show the baselessness of these claims is what follows bi ithnillah Hafidh Ibn Abd al-Hadi al-Maqdisi al-Hanbali, the Imam and Shaykh of the Hanabilah, d.744/1345, the following about Taqi al-Din Ibn Taymiyyah: "Huwa al-Shaykh, al-Imam al-Rabbani, Imam al-A'immah, wa-Mufti alUmmah, wa-Bahr al-'Ulum, Sayyid al-Huffadh, wa-Faris al-Ma'ani wal-Alfaz, Farid al-'Asr, Wahid al-Dahr, Shaykh al-Islam, Barakat al-Anam, 'Allamat alZaman, wa-Tarjuman al-Qur'an, 'Ilm al-Zuhhad, wa-Awhad al-'Ibad, Qami' alMubtadi'in, wa-Akhir al-Mujtahidin, Taqi al-Din.." "..sahib al-tasanif allati lam yasbaq ila mithliha wa-la yalhaq fi shakliha Tawhidan aw Tafsiran wa-Ikhlasan wa-Fiqhan wa-Hadithan wa-Lughatan wa-Nahwan, wa-bi Jami' al-'Ulum kutubuhu tafiha bidhalik.." Taj al-Din Ibn Bardas al-Ba'albaki al-Hanbali says about his Shaykh al-Islam: ".. al-Shaykh al-Imam, al-'Allama, Shaykh al-Islam, Mufti al-Anam, Baqiyat al-Salaf al-Kiram, al-'Alim al-Rabbani, wa-Hibr al-Nurani, Matharu al-Athar al-Mursalin, waKashif al-Haqa'iq al-Din, Taqi al-Din.. Qaddasa Allahu ruhahu"

Ibn al-Muhibb al-Samit, the Hafidh and 'Abid who died in 788 H, said in his Tarjama of the Shaykh al-Islam on Hadith-transmitters: "Shaykhuna al-Imam, al-Rabbani, Shaykh al-Islam, Imam al-A'immat al-A'lam, Bahr al-'Ulum wal-Ma'arif.." Imam Taqi al-Din Ibn Rafi' ash-Shafi'ee, d.774, a student of Ibn al-Qayyim and al-Mizzi, said about Taqi al-Din Ibn Taymiyyah: "al-Shaykh, al-Imam, al-'Alim, al-Awhad, al-Hibr al-Kabir, Shaykh al-'Ulama, Barakat al-Anam, Kanz al-Mustafidin, al-Qudwat, al-'Umdat, al-Hafidh Taqi al-Din.." Imam and Shaykh al-Biqa'i, Shihab al-Din al-Shafi'i, who said: "..Shaykh al-Islam, Mufti al-Anam, ahad al-A'immah al-A'lam, Farid al-Dahr, waMujtahid al-'Asr, Baqiyat al-Salaf, wa-Qudwat al-Khalaf.." al-Imam Ibn al-Muhandis, the Muhaddith and Faqih of the Hanafiyyah, d.733/1332: "..Shaykhuna al-Imam, al-'Allama, al-Hujjah, al-Hafidh, al-Qudwat al-Zahid al-Wara', Shaykh al-Islam, Qudwat al-Anam, Mufti al-Sham, Awhad al-'Asr, Farid al-Dahr, Taqi al-Din.." Also the wellknown Qadi of the Hanafiyyah, and their Imam in their time, and questioner of Taqi al-Din Ibn Taymiyyah in his trial on his I'tiqad, but who afterwards made clearly known that he was with the Shaykh al-Islam, and not against him, the Shaykh al-Imam Safi al-Din Abu Abdallah Ibn al-Hariri, d.728/1328, who said: "in lam yakun Ibn Taymiyyah Shaykh al-Islam fa-man?" and another time he was asked, "a-tahabb al-Shaykh Taqi al-Din?" on which he anwsered: "Yes! wa-Allahi laqad ahbabtu" Imam Ibn al-Sayrafi, Nasir al-Din Abu'l-Ma'ali, d.737, the following unique words in praising and making Ta'dil and Tafdil of the Shaykh al-Islam: "..Sayyidna, al-Shaykh, al-Imam, al-'Allama, al-Sadr al-Kabir al-Kamil, al-Qudwat, al-Hafidh, al-Zahid, al-'Abid al-Wara', Shaykh al-Islam, Mufti al-Farq, Hujjat alMadhab, Muqtada al-Tawa'if, Lisan al-Shari'ah, Mujtahid al-'Asr, Wahid al-Dahr, Imam al-A'immah, Taqi al-Din.. a'ada Allah 'alayna min Barakatahu" The same and similar praises can be found from al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr, Haafidh Ibn Rajb, al-Haafidh al-Mizzi, al-Haafidh al-Iraaqi, al-Haafidh Ibnul-Mulaqin, al-Haafidh Ibn Katheer, Shamsu-deen adh-Dhahabee, Shaykhul-Islam Ibnul-Qayyim, Haafidh Ibnu-Wazeer, al-Imaam Shaykhul-Islam as-Suyootee, Haafidh as-Sakhawee, alImaam al-Muhadith Mulla Ali al-Qari and over 100 other mashaikh of Islam during and after his time shortly after his death, and the rest of the hundreds of Imaams who said similar about him. al-Haafidh al-Imaam Ibn Abdul-Barr as-Subkee says "By Allah no one hates Ibn Taymiyyah except for an ignoramous or the possessor of desires which have diverted him from the truth after he has come to know it."

As for the reality of Taqi-u-Deen, A real relied upon Alim al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr alASQALAANI says "The acclaim of Taqi-u-Deen is more renown than that of the Sun and titling him Shaykhul-slam of his era remains until our time upon the virtuous tongues. It (his being Shaykhul-Islam) will continue tomorrow just as it was yesterday. No one refutes this but a person who is ignorant of his prestige or one who turns away from justice" Haafidh al-Mizzee says "I have not seen the likes of him and his own eye has not seen the likes of himself. I have not seen one who was more knowledgeable than he of the book of ALlah and theSunnah of His messenger, nor one who followed them more closely" al-Imaam Alamaat al-Haafidh Ibn Rajab says He is al-Imaam, al-Faqeeh, alMujtaid, al-Muhadith, al-Haafidh, al-Muffasser, azZaahid, Taqi-u-Deen Abu Abbass, Shaykhul-Islam, the most knowledgeable of the knowledgeable. It is not possible to exxagerate his renown when he is mentioned and his fame does not require us to write a lengthy tract on him. He was unique in his time with respect to understadning he Quraan and knowledge of the realities of faith" al-Haafidh as-Suyootee says Shaykhul-Islam, al-Haafidh, al-Faqeeh, al-Mujtahid, the distinguished Mufasser, the rarity of his time, the Alim of the Ascetics This is the reality of him and these are the ulema who did not allow themselevs to get poisoned by the want of fame for he acheived that while not asking, and there are numerous matters concerning the ulema who fall into this rejection of their brothers due to the level of knowledge tey achieve that they themselves have not nor can they reach and a level of taqwa and zuhd that they do not reach by the qadr of Allah. That is why al-Haafidh al-Baazzar said "You would not see a scholar opposing him, dissuading him, filled with hatred for him, except that he was the most greedy of them in gathering worldy goods, the most cunning of them in aquiring them, the most ostentatious of them, the most desirous of reputation, and the most prolific of them in having lies on his tongue" 2. If the following is what is brought to your attention "..Hanafi scholar `Ala' al-Din al-Bukhari issued a fatwa whereby anyone who called Ibn Taymiyya Shaykh al-Islam commited disbelief." Then the reply to this and the most befitting ruling concerning Ibn Taymiyyah against the creation just as Haafidh al-Bazzar described is what came from the Imaam of al-Ahnaaf

al-Imaamul-Hanafiyyah Badru-Deen al-Aiynee who said "Whosoever says Ibn Taymiyyah is a kaafir, then he himself in reality is a kaafir, and the one who accuses him of of heresy is himself a heretic. How is this possible when his works are widely available and there is no hint of deviation of dissension contained therin" Raddul-Waafir (245) 3. If it is said to you or brought to your attention that he (Ibn Taymiyyah) has been found to be heretical and has repented with witnesses and they bring you what Ibn Hajar says in his al-Durar al-Kamina then the reply is this It is Ibn Wakil who testified to this lie as any historian after the Mihan-events of Ibn Taymiyyah knows, and as is AUTHENTICALLY REPORTED: -The CONTEMPORARY Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Abd al-Hadi (d.744/1343), reported this in his Uqud al-Durriyyah p.204 (see ed. Beirut 1938, by Muhammad Hamid alFiqi); -And refer also to Majmu Fatawa ed. Beirut 1977, in which is stated by a reliable chain through Sharaf al-Din Ibn Taymiyyah, the brother of Shaykh al-Islam, said that Sadr al-Din Ibn al-Wakil (d.716) spread the lie that Ibn Taymiyyah recanted and claimed that the Shaykh al-Islam became 'a Shafi'i in theology', i.e. an Ash'ari! Propagating this in the lifetime of Ibn Taymiyyah, the latter knowing this, said: "I know that people have recently invented lies against me, as they have spread lies about me before on more than one occasion", refer to Ibn Abd al-Hadi's Uqud and Ibn Taymiyyah's own memoirs! Ibn Wakil claimed this by way of using Ibn Taymiyyah's ambiguous (!?!) saying, "No doubt, people dispute among themselves, this one saying, 'I am a Hanbali,'that one, 'I am an Ash'ari,'and then there runs among them division, strife and dissension over matters the truth of which they do not understand"!!!! Using this statement and other words as evidence for claiming that he said "I'm an Ash'ari"?!

al-Haafidh, Shams al-Din al-Dhahabi said about 'Aqeedatu-Wasitiyyah, written by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah: "They came in agreement that this (i.e. al-Wasitiyyah) is the belief of the Salaf and is right" [See Majmu' Rasa'il al-Kubra p.407-413, the Munazarah al-Wasitiyyah in the Riwayah of al-Hafidh al-Birzali] And the same has been reported from al-hafidh al-Dhahabi by the erudite Shaykh of the Hanbalis, al-Karmi, in his Kawakib al-Duriyyah p. 173 about al-'Aqidah alHamawiyyah. See also what he says about Shaykh al-Islam's 'Aqidah in p. 230 [in al-Nasiha].

So what so ever is found in these two Creeds, then the Hafidh al-Dhahabi did not reject it - rather he endorsed this by the saying of the people who assembled at the Munazarah about 'Aqidat al-Wasitiyyah, such as the Shaykhs, Qadis and others of the different Madhahib.

and all of this that Ibn Hajr reported is only due to the miscontruence of In Taymiyya's statement when he said this "I will make clear that what I have stated is the position of the Salaf and the leading scholars among the followers of al-Shafi'i. I will cite the doctrine of al-Ash'ari and the leading scholars among his disciples, which will refute the position of these opponents. Every Shafi'i will gain a victory; and so will everyone who advocates that position of al-Ash'ari which is in agreement with the doctrine of the Salaf," (authentically reported by two asanid, by way of Sharaf al-Din and Ibn Abd al-Hadi (see their biographies in Ibn Rajab, Dhayl). 4. If you come across or are bombarded with the accusations that Ibn Taymiyyah was convicted of heresy, then oh my brothers from ahlu-sunnah, reply with this Yes, the ulema who had fell into the deviated tendencies of asharism and even the mutassawifa had qurelled with Ibn Taymiyyah and tried to convict him with heresey, yet to much a surprise for them the reality was to their disadvantage. When these asharis revolved and gathered around In Taymiyyah's Fatwa al-Hamawiyyah and the creed laid in this risalah, they took it to the shariah courts. Yet, by historical precedent none of the ulema in the shariah courts ever commented that it (his risala) had any hint or points of heresy (of tasbeeh and tajseem as these were the charges made against him made by asharis) and that these ulema agreed that what was said in his Hamawiyyah was the actual creed of the salaf. So much to the dismay of the asharis, this was a victory for Allah's religion against His distorters and the asharis were left being forsook by ALlah in their vein attempt to accuse him of heresy. Yet again they did the same when Ibn Taymiyyah wrote a creed that a man from Wasit wanted him to compile for him which came to be commonly known as "Aqeedatu-Waasitiyyah" by which the asharis again made charges against him for this and brought it to the shariah courts. And yet again the Ulema of the courts and officials did not see any point of deviation nor could they convict him with what the asharis charged him and agreed that what was contained therein was the creed of the salaf of this nation. So the asharis left in dismay once again 5. If it is brought to you by such people the words statements of both Shaykhul-Islam Taqi-u-Deen as-Subki and his son Tajj-u-Deen as-Subki then the reply is this The mubtadiah have always greatly accepted both Subkis, may Allah preserve them and forgive them As for Taqi-u-Deen as-Subki, Shaykhul-Islam, al-Haafidh adh-Dhahabee wrote to him censoring him for what he has written and his false claims. Taqi-u-Deen

as-Subki replied to him saying "As for what you say with regard to the Shaykh, Taqi-u-Deen (Ibn Taymiyyah), then I am convinced of the great scope , the ocean like vastness of his knowledge of the transmitted and intellectual sciences, his extreme intellegience, his ijtihaad and his achievments in that which surpasses description. I have always held this opinion. Personally,his status in my eye is greater and more esteemed for his asceticism, piety, religiosity, his aiding of the truth and remaining firm upon it for the sake fo Allah, alone, his adherence to the path of the salaf amd his great dependence upon and use of it, and his strangeness of his time , in fact anytime" reported in ad-Durar al-Kaaminah of Ibn Hajr under the biography of Ibn Taymiyyah and also in Dhail Tabaqaat al-Hanaabilah of Ibn Rajb. As for Taaju-Deen as-Subki, rahmatullahi alai, then he was an extremists and highly sectarian and this is not from me Al-Haafidh as-Sakhawee says commenting on Tajj-u-Deens statement "Did any of the Hanbalis raise their heads (meaning become well known)". He (Sakhawee) said "This is from the strangest of affairs and the most sectarian of attitudes and this is why the Qaadee of our time, and Shaykh of the Madhaab, al-Izz al-Kanaanee wrote under this statement, "And Likewise, Allah did not raise the heads of the mu'attilah, and then he said about Taaju-Deen as-Subki "He is a man having few manners, lack of scholarly integrity and ignorant of ahlu-sunnah and their ranks" (as-Sakhawee's "Al-I'laan Bi Tawbeekh Limaan Dhamma at-Tareekh) 6. If it is stated to you that "Oh but Ibn Taymiyyah was such a contraversial figure, probably the most" then the reply is So was Imaam al-Bukharee, who near the end of his life, was convicted by a majority of the ulema that he was a jahmee and some even made takfeer, all of which was lead by the Imam of Jarh wa T'adeel of his time Muhamamd Bi Yahya adh-Dhuhlee. And the mihna that happened with Bukharee was greater and much more severe and was far more spread throughout the Islamic world than that of Ibn Taymiyyah for his fitnah was in the mere city of Damascus whereas that of Bukharee reached through the many provinces o the Islamic world. And if it is said to you after this that "Bukharees matter was not proved in court and Ibn Taymiyyah's was" then the reply back is that Ahmad ibn Hanbal's mihna was even greater and was also in court and the caliph of Islam himself was against him. The muslim world was divided between his camp and that of the jahmiyyah, the fathers of modern day ashaa'irah. And this mihna was Islamically worldwide as opposed to being in the vicinity of a region. 7. If it is said to you that "Ibn Taymiyyah was a qadiri sufi" then the reply is Yes, he does have an ijaaza extending from Shaykh Abdul-Qadir al-Jilaanee and then to Ibnul-Qudamaah al-Maqdisee and then through someone else and then Ibn Taymiyyah himself. This ijazah has no relation at all nor does it hint to a connection of tassawuf that is in the minds of the mutassawifa (sufis). He is not a qubooree (grave worshipper) like most, if not, all qadiris and most other tariqas are upon. 8. If it is brought to your attention that Imaam adh-Dhahabee afterwards in his life warned against or showed opposition to Ibn Taymiyyah then the following is relevent to know

On the book Naseehah adh-Dhahabiyyah: A book ascribed to adh-Dhahabee in which he launches a severe attack on ibn Taymiyyah, but in reality was not written by him, but falsely ascribed to him, this due to many reasons: - No one who is familiar with the works of adh-Dhahabee mentioned this as one of his works. - Adh-Dhahabee remained the student of ibn Taymiyyah until the latters death. - All of the sayings of adh-Dhahabee in the books that are affirmed to be from him, to do with ibn Taymiyyah, revolve around praise and respect of him. (A glimpse of these has preceded). - This letter is written in the handwriting of ibn Qaadee ash-Shuhba, an enemy of ibn Taymiyyah. We have not seen one who ascribes this book to adh-Dhahabee after Qaadee ashShuhba except for his contemporary, al-Haafidh as-Sakhaawee, may Allaah have mercy on him, who merely followed him. [From the book, at-Tawdeeh al-Jallee fee ar-Radd alaa Naseeha adh-Dhahabiyyah al-Manhula alaa al-Imaam adh-Dhahabee (pp85-86) by Shaykh Muhammad bin Ibraaheem ash-Shaybaanee, with summary]

9. If it is brought to your attention that Haafidh Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaanee had taken a view opposing In Taymiyyah then the reply is This is incorrect. why? It is pertinent to know that Ibn Hajr compiled both praises and criticisms of Ibn Taymiyya and he first began with the criticisms and then began to mention the praises of Ibn Taymiyyah. Here is a short investigation into this matter Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaanee also said, "I read in the handwriting of al-Haafidh Silaah adDeen al-Balaa`ee in endorsement of the shaykh of our shaykhs al-Haafidh Bahaa adDeen Abdullaah bin Muhammad bin Khaleel: Our shaykh and master and Imaam in matters that are between Allaah and us, the Shaykh of research (tahqeeq), traversing, with those that followed him, the best way. Possessor of many excellent qualities and radiant proofs that all the nations have acknowledged are beyond enumeration. May Allaah make us benefit from his outstanding knowledge, and make us benefit from him in this life and the hereafter. He is the Shaykh, the Imaam, the Aalim who understands the affairs, the deeply devoted, the ocean (of knowledge), the pole of light, the Imaam of Imaams, the blessing to the Muslim nation, the sign of the scholars, the inheritor of the Prophets, the last of the Mujtahids, unique amongst the scholars of the Religion - Shaykh al-Islaam, proof of the scholars, the example for the creatures, proof for the learned ones, effacer of the innovators, sword of the disputers, ocean of knowledge, beneficial treasure, the interpreter of the Qur`aan, the amazement of the times, unique in this age and others. Indeed Taqi ad-Deen (ibn Taymiyyah) is the Imaam of the Muslims, the proof of Allaah against the creation, the joiner of the righteous, the one who is like those who have preceded, the mufti of the sect, helper of the truth, the sign of guidance, the pillar of

the Huffaadh, Knight of the meanings of words, cornerstone of the Sharee`ah, originator of new sciences Abu al-Abbaas ibn Taymiyyah." [note: From this book taken on its own it is very difficult to discern ibn Hajrs own opinion on ibn Taymiyyah was. For all he did was to gather all the material he could find on the Shaykh and then start off the account with all those scholars who wrote against him, and end with all those scholars who supported him. It would seem likely that ibn Hajrs own stance would be in line with those whom he finished off his biography with, due to their being his Shaykhs. This reasoning is supported with the next quote from ibn Hajr. wallahualim Ibn Hajr said, "those of his stances that were rejected from him were not said by him due to mere whims and desires and neither did he obstinately and deliberately persist in them after the evidence was established against him. Here are his works overflowing with refutations of those who held to tajseem yet despite this he is a man who makes mistakes and is also correct. So that which he is correct in and that is the majority is to benefited from and Allaahs Mercy should be sought for him due to it, and that which he is incorrect in should not be blindly followed. Indeed he is excused for his mistakes because he is one of the Imaams of his time and it has been witnessed that he fulfilled the conditions of ijtihaad From the astonishing qualities of this man was that he was the strongest amongst men against the People of Innovation, the Rawaafidah, and the Hululiyyah, and the Ittihaadiyyah, and his works on this are many and famous, and his fataawaa on them cannot be counted, so how the eyes of these innovators must have found joy when they heard those who declared him to be a kaafir! And how delighted they must have been when they saw those who did not declare him to be a kaafir in turn being labelled kaafir! It is obligatory upon the one who has donned the robe of knowledge and possesses intelligence that he consider the words of a man based upon his well-known books or from the tongues of those who are trusted to accurately convey his words then to isolate from all of this what is rejected and warn from them with the intention of giving sincere advice and to praise him for his excellent qualities and for what he was correct in as is the way of the scholars. If there were no virtues of Shaykh Taqi ad-Deen except for his famous student Shaykh Shams ad-Deen ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, writer of many works, from which both his opponents and supporters benefited from then this would be a sufficient indication of his (ibn Taymiyyahs) great position. And how could it be otherwise when the Shaafi`ee Imaams and others, not to speak of the Hanbalees, of his time testified to his prominence in the (Islamic) sciences" [From Ibn Hajrs endorsement of Radd al-Waafir contained at the end of the book.] These statements, particualrly the last, show both praise and a small portion of reality (criticism) of Ibn Taymiyyah and is the best of speech concerning him and is the position of ahlu-sunnah.

and Allah is al-Ghufoor ar-Raheem

Extraction of a Retrospect of the Trial of Ibn Taymiyyah in front of the Committee of Ulema of Damascus
ash-shaykh Alamud-deen mentioned that the shaykh (Ibn Taymiyyah) spoke in a gathering of the ruler who was al-Afram, when he was asked about his creed. So the shaykh presented his Waasitiyyah. He said 'I wrote this approximately seven years ago, before the arrival of the Tartars of Shaam. So I read it in the gathering' Then, Alamu-deen mentioned from the shaykh, that he said "The reason for writing it was that one of the judges of Waasit, from the people of goodness and religion complained to me about the condition of his people in his land, within the state of the Tartars. He complained about the overwhelming condition of ignorance and oppression and the obliteration of religion and knowledge. So he asked me to write for him a work on aqeedah. So I told him 'Indeed, people from among the Imaams of the sunnah have already written works on aqeedah', so he persisted in his request and said, 'I would not like, except an aqeedah that you have written', so I wrote this aqeedah for him after dhuhr till before the asr prayer came in (a book of 8 or 10 pages that takes 2 years to gain a good grasp of its fahm at a university level in our time) So the haakim (al-Afram) pointed to the author, so he read it to those who were present, word for word. So some of the people (ignorant asharis) objected to my statement in it which was "And from emaan in Allah is to have emaan in whatever Allah has described Himself with and in whatever His messenger has described Him with without tahreef (distortion), no t'ateel (negation) nor takyeef (asking how) nor tamtheel (likening)." [note: one questions why would anyone who is supposedly from ahlu-sunnah would reject these very basic usool that the salaf obligated. In reality such renegades were only opposed due to the fact that they had fallen into one of these traits] So the intended meaning of this was to negate "t'awil" which is to direct a word away from its apparent meaning, either by mandating it, or by merely making it permissible. So then Ibn taymiyyah goes along to discuss why he amended the term t'awil because he even says "I did not mention the word t'awil" because the term has a number of meanings, as I have explained in its proper place from al-qawaa'id. So the meaning of the term "t'awil" in the book of Allah is not the same meaning of t'awil employed in conventional usage by the late comers from amongst the people of usool and fiqh, likewise it is not the conventional usage by many of the people of tafseer and the salaf. and then he says "I mentioned the negation of tamtheel, but I did not mention tasbeeh, because tamtheel has been negated by Allah in the text of His book, where He said 'There is nothing like unto Him' So they (the kullabi juwaiynee asharis) took to mentioning the negation of tasbeeh

and tajseem, and they exxagerated greatly concerning this. So they raised objections with what some of the people have attribued to us from that No here is where the relevance matters "So while speaking about that (he mentioned the issues pertaining to takyeef and other innovated apsect that have been proven to be negated by Allah) I mentioned the speech of Khataabee, where he mentoned that this was them adhaab of the salaf. It is to pass along the ayaah pertaining to the sifaat and their ahadeeth upon their ala dhahira (apparent meaning), along with negating kaifiyyah and tasbeeh from them. So the speech concerning the Attributes is a branch of speech concerning the dhaat (His Essense). I mentioned this in following his (khatabee) exmaple and in conforming to his precedence. So since affirmation of the dhaat is affirmation of the wujood, not affirmation of takyeef, then likewise affirmation of the sifaat is affirmation of wujood, not affirmation of takyeef [basically saying that the countless majority of imaams among ahlu-sunnah, the salafis and every other sane upon the right path affirm "existence' (wujood) then making such affirmation is not takyeef (likening) as the ignorant kullabi ashari would have one think and likewise affirming sifaat is in actuality affirming His wujood, then such affirmation cannot be equated according to the world of logic and reason as "takyeef' or likening Allah to any part of His creation] So one of the elder opponents (an elder ashari scholar) said 'So at that point it becomes permissible to say that He is a jism, who is not like the ajsaam' So some of the nobles and I (Ibn taymiyyah) said to him; It can only be said that Allah is to be described with whatever He described Himself with and with whatever His messenger has described Him with, and there does not exist in the Book and SUnnah anything that indicate that Allah is jism, such that this could become obligated. And the first one to say Allah was jism was Hishaam Ibnul-Hakam arrafidhee. And as for our statement it is the moderate path among the sects of the ummah just as the ummah is the moderate path from among the differing religions. So they are the moderate ones between the people of t'atil (muatilah jahmiyyah and those upon their identical ideololigies) and tamtheel (mushabiha whom the aimah of this ummah abolished from existance even until our time making such a threat in reality not a threat anymore) So it was said to me "You have written the aqeedah of Imaam Ahamd. AND they wished to end the dispute with the excuse that this was the madhaab to be followed So i said 'I have not related anything except the aqeedah of the salafu-saalih, not just Imaam Ahmad specifically"