Ali Nar (1938-2015) on Ibn Taymiyya:
Ibn Taymiyya fell into extremes. He heavily criticized the
jurisprudential schools and the people of Sufism. He even adhered to the belief
of tashbih [likening Allah to creatures or objects]... In short, the scholars
of his time and those who came after concluded that he had deviated in many
respects with his knowledge. (Imam-Hatip High Schools Theology Lessons [in
Turkish], Selâm Publications, Istanbul, 1984, p. 57)
Molla Sadreddin Yüksel (1920-2004):
“In Turkey, especially in Istanbul, a new group has emerged
that is utterly ignorant and completely uneducated. This group, calling itself
Salafi, proudly claims to follow Ibn Taymiyya and his successors, who went so
far as to—Allah forbid—attribute a body and place to Allah. They reject the
madhhabs [Islamic jurisprudential schools] and the mujtahids." (Articles
[in Turkish], Madve Publications: 11, October 1985; p. 7)
Shaykh Hüseyin Avni Kansızoğlu says:
"With a style born and developed within the framework of his temperament and character, he displayed an excessive boldness beyond what was necessary or possible, a condescending attitude that should never have existed, an unimaginable aggression toward many great figures far beyond his stature, tiresome repetitions stemming from haste, sophistry, and similar reasons, and unbearable contradictions. If his contradictions and repetitions were to be removed, hardly a quarter of his writings would remain. Anyone who reads his books not with the air of an infatuated dreamer but with the seriousness of a scholar will see this truth. His works such as Iqtida, Qa‘ida Jalila, Furqan, Ubudiyya, his books on creed, and the creed-related sections of his Fatawa are of the kind composed of statements that are slightly altered in one book compared to another, and sometimes repeated verbatim without any change." (Inkishaf Journal [in Turkish, İnkişaf Dergisi], Issue: 7)
"Ibn Taymiyya, during his time, sowed discord between
two Muslim states, and subsequently, his ideas pushed the Islamic world into
terrible divisions and fragmentations. The Wahhabi movement, which caused the
greatest harm within the Ottoman Empire, was influenced by him. While the
Wahhabis struck and weakened the Ottoman Empire, the protector and disseminator
of Ahl al-Sunnah, they acted in alignment with the British." (Türkiye
Newspaper, May 6, 2022)
"It is clearly understood that Ibn Taymiyya adopted and
defended, in a manner that leaves no room for interpretation, the view that the
punishment in Hell for disbelievers and polytheists will not be eternal, and
that even if they remain in torment for a very long time, there will surely
come a day when they will be released from it." (Inkishaf Journal, Issue:
7) "The eternity of life in Paradise and Hell is among the indisputable
essentials of faith, established by the Qur'an, Sunnah, and scholarly
consensus. The verses and hadiths related to this matter are too numerous to be
listed here. The Muslim community, from the early generations to the later
ones, has unanimously upheld this belief. Ibn Hazm, in Maratib al-Ijma, states
that there is consensus on the eternity of Paradise and Hell, and that there is
also consensus on the disbelief of those who oppose this consensus." (Milli
Gazete [Turkish daily newpaper], July 24, 2004)
"The minds of some of the Muslim populace are utterly
confused. Truly, we are in a very distressing, exasperating, and
thought-provoking state. False mujtahids and innovators are muddling people's
minds with deviant ideas and opinions. Shazz means 'that which is outside the
norm, an exception, differing from the general view.' One of these deviant
ideas and opinions is Ibn Taymiyya's claim that 'Hell is not eternal.' This
claim contradicts the clear verses of the Qur'an, the Sunnah, the consensus of
the Muslim community, and the view of the scholars. Ibn Taymiyya's
contrary opinion on this matter is not an exercise of ijtihad but merely a
delusion." (Milli Gazete [daily newspaper in Turkish], October 30, 2009)
"Indeed, Ibn Taymiyya opposed the great mujtahids and
even the Companions on certain matters of belief and practice, and it has been
established through the criticisms of many scholars that he failed to attain
the truth in these matters. According to some scholars, Ibn Taymiyya was a
mujassima [one who attributes a physical form to Allah]. That is, he believed
that Allah exists in a particular direction, that the Supreme Throne is eternal
in its essence, he opposed visiting graves, and held that a woman divorced with
three pronouncements in one sitting is divorced only once... Initially, many
scholars such as Jalal Kaznawi, Konawi, and Jariri greatly praised Ibn Taymiyya
and almost formed a faction around him. However, in the face of his unequivocal
statements, they gradually turned away from him one by one. Even Dhahabi
advised him and for a time tried to reconcile him with his opponents, but in
the end, he too significantly distanced himself from him." (Quoted from
Ahmed Davudoğlu: See Those Who Destroy Religion in the Name of Reforming It [in
Turkish], 5th Edition, Huzur Publishing, Istanbul 1989, p. 47.)
Ali Eren (columnist and author) says:
"Ibn Taymiyya introduced many issues that contradict
Ahl al-Sunnah, which no one had brought up for eight centuries after the Age of
Happiness (Asr-ı Saadet). With this aberrant stance, Ibn Taymiyya did not
merely target a single school of thought but opposed the entirety of Ahl
al-Sunnah. To say he opposed them is even an understatement, for he went beyond
opposition and deemed all Muslims adhering to the Ash’ari and Maturidi creeds
as belonging to the group of deviants. By labeling the issues unanimously accepted
by Muslims of Ahl al-Sunnah creed as deviance, he himself reached the utmost
degree of deviance. Ibn Taymiyya not only slandered the imams of creed but also
regarded himself as the supreme imam of the entire Muslim community from the
Age of Happiness to his own time, even going so far as to excommunicate
(takfir) the Sufis, ascetics, and saints who held a revered place in the minds
of the Ummah. While he saw no issue in disparaging Islamic scholars, he
considered himself the one who best understood the words of the Messenger of
Allah and the lifestyle of the righteous. The scholars Ibn Taymiyya most
vehemently opposed were those most advanced in knowledge and practice. The more
renowned, knowledgeable, and widely respected an imam was—acknowledged by the
majority of the Ummah for their thorough research and excellence—the more Ibn
Taymiyya became their enemy, attacked them, and subjected them to his harshest
criticism. Yet, as there is a buyer for everything, there have indeed been
those who followed such a disposition." (Guraba Magazine, Issue: 9,
December 2008)
Dr. Ekrem Buğra Ekinci (professor of Islamic Law at Marmara University) wrote:
"Despite Ibn Taymiyya’s vast knowledge in outward (zahiri) sciences, he was a person full of contradictions because he did not purify and perfect his soul under the guidance of a true spiritual master (murshid). For this reason, he could not attain certainty and stability even in his outward knowledge. One should not assume Ibn Taymiyya was a consistent man. None of his ideas are stable. He says one thing in one place and the opposite elsewhere. Consequently, people either judge him based on a single statement or claim he repented from his erroneous views. He praises the Mawlid in one instance but attacks it in another. He says one thing here, another there. He is not a decisive person. He praises Sufism at times and becomes its enemy at others. He is a highly inconsistent, unbalanced, and unfortunate individual. In his time, because he was a Hanbali, some considered him a follower of Ahl al-Sunnah, a Hanbali, or even a mujtahid in the school. However, there can be no ijtihad contrary to the consensus (ijma). For instance, his views—such as considering three divorces (talaq) as one or that an oath of divorce does not result in actual divorce—are against the consensus. He has some beneficial books, and if some early scholars mentioned him favorably, it was either due to their courtesy or because they did not have access to all his works and thus could not fully know him." (translated from the original article at https://www.ekrembugraekinci.com/question/?ID=60393 in Turkish)
Compiled and translated by: Murat Yazıcı
