al Asqalani on Ibn Taymiyah’s Fatwa of Traveling to visit the graves.

Following is just a sentence quoted by sufi Hanafi brailwis against the FATWA of Ibn Taymiyah.

Ibn Hajar mentioned:

“One of the ugly  (أبشع ) this reported from Ibn Taymiyah is his fatwa of not travelling to visit the grave of Prophet peace be upon him.” [Fath al Bari]

a) What was actually the Fatwa of Ibn Taymiyah which was misunderstood.
b) This is just a misquote as they don’t show the full quote.
c) The Hukm of Ibn Hajr al asqalani of the ahadith of traveling to visit the grave of Prophet peace be upon him specifically.
d) Mahmud Shukri al Alusi said their are ugly fatwas of 4 Imams as well and defended Ibn Tamiyah.
e) What happened When Ibn Hajar read al Radd al Wafir in defense of Ibn Taymiyah. These sufis will never tell you about this.
f) Why don’t they quote Ibn Hajar against Ibn Arabi the sufi?
g) This is exactly same if I quote Fatwa of Imam Ahmaad against Ahnaf.
h) How will the brailwis defend the fatwas mentioned in books of Shafiee and Hanafi fiqh?

  • a) What was actually the Fatwa of Ibn Taymiyah which was misunderstood.

Firstly, some Sunni scholars said Ibn Hajar was not informed about the actual fatwa of Ibn Taymiyah as his enemies were spreading false things about him. The Fatwa of Ibn Taymiyah was with Majority of the classical scholars which was the following:

Shaykh ul Islaam Imam Ibn Taymiyyah raihmahullah said
وإن كان المسافر إلى مسجده يزور قبره صلى الله عليه وسلم بل هذا من أفضل الأعمال الصالحة ولا في شيء من كلامي وكلام غيري نهي عن ذلك ولا نهي عن المشروع في زيارة قبور الأنبياء والصالحين ولا عن المشروع في زيارة سائر القبور ; بل قد ذكرت في غير موضع استحباب زيارة القبور
If a traveler goes to Masjid of Prophet then he should visit the grave of Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم rather it is from the best of actions. There is nothing in my saying or the saying of any other which prohibits this practice, Neither the prohibition of Mashr`oo visiting of the graves of the Prophets and Righteous, neither any prohibition of visiting all of the graves, Rather I have mentioned in many places that visiting graves is Mustahab. [Majmu’a Fatwaa Ibn Taymiyyah 27/330]

Imam al Ayni Hanafi who also benefited from Fath al Bari of Ibn Hajar said:
ولم يكن بحثه فيما صدر عنه في مسألة الزيارة والطلاق إلا عن اجتهاد سائغ بالاتفاق، والمجتهد في الحالين مأجور مثاب، وليس فيه شيء مما يلام أو يعاب، ولكن حملهم على ذلك حسدهم الظاهر، وكيدهم الباهر، وكفى للحاسد ذماً آخر سورة الفلق، في احتراقاته بالقلق،
Whatever he said regarding the issue of “Ziyarah” and “Talaq” is his Ijtihaad, which is allowed by the agreement. The Mujtahid get the thawab whether he is right or even when he is wrong. AND THEN THERE IS NOTHING IN HIS (THE FATAWA OF ZIYARAH AND TALAQ) WHICH SHOULD BE BLAMED AND CONDEMNED, envious tried to make his name bad by doing mischievous things. The last verse of Surah Falaq is enough in refutation of envious. he burns because he is anxious. [Taqreez of al Ayni on the book “Radd al Wafir”, Ghayat al Amani 2/157]

  • b) This is just a misquote as they don’t show the full quote.

Secondly, They just quote this specific quote but leave what Ibn Hajar al as qalani mentioned regarding other scholars under the commentary of same hadith.

Ibn Hajar al asqalani accepted that this opinion of traveling to visit the graves is prohibited was the opinion of the great Maaliki Imam Qaadi Iyaad, he also adds Qadhi Husayn and OTHER SCHOLARS in this group, as he said:
واختلف في شد الرحال إلى غيرها ، كالذهاب إلى زيارة الصالحين أحياء وأمواتا ، وإلى المواضع الفاضلة لقصد التبرك بها والصلاة فيها ، فقال الشيخ أبو محمد الجويني : يحرم شد الرحال إلى غيرها عملا بظاهر هذا الحديث ، وأشار القاضي حسين إلى اختياره ، وبه قال عياض وطائفة ، ويدل عليه ما رواه أصحاب السنن من إنكار بصرة الغفاري على أبي هريرة خروجه إلى الطور ، وقال له : ” لو أدركتك قبل أن تخرج ما خرجت ”
واستدل بهذا الحديث فدل على أنه يرى حمل الحديث على عمومه ووافقه أبو هريرة
There is difference of opinion regarding traveling to visit other than these (mosques) like visiting the righteous whether alive or dead, or going to places of virtues to seek blessings and praying there. Shaikh Abu Muhammad Al-Jwiani said: It is prohibited to travel other then these (masajid) according to the apparent meaning of this hadeeth, This is what Al-Qadi Husayn pointed out and accepted and this was also said by Qadi Iyaad and A GROUP. Their evidence is the hadith narrated by the authors of Sunan which Basrah al Ghifaari said to Abu Huraira when he went to “Tur”: ‘If I had met you before you left, you would not have gone there!. They take evidence from this hadith and take the general meaning of this hadith and that Abu Huraira agreed with him [Fath ul Bari 3/65]

Then he went on and said:
والصحيح عند إمام الحرمين وغيره من الشافعية أنه لا يحرم
True according to Imam al Haramayn and Shafiees is that this is not prohibited. [Ibid]

He went against this group of scholars, including Ibn Taymiyyah. This type of refuting should not make opponents of Ibn Taymiyyah happy because Ibn Hajar asqalani considered him Shaykh al Islam. And he knew Ibn Taymiyah was not alone in this opinion as he mentioned other scholars and their evidence. It is like Shaykh Abbad refuting Shaykh Muhammad Ashqar or Shaykh Zubair Ali Zai going against some gradings of ahadith by Shaykh al-Albani.

  • c) The Hukm of Ibn Hajr al asqalani of the ahadith of traveling to visit the grave of Prophet peace be upon him specifically.

Thirdly, Those who are happy on the verdicts of Ibn Hajr on this issue should also see his praises for Ibn Taymiyah and hukm on the narrations of visiting graves.

Ibn Hajr al Asqalani said regarding the narration of SPECIFICALLY visiting the grave of Prophet peace be upon him.
طرق هذا الحديث كلها ضعيفة
All of the routs of this hadeeth are weak, [Talkhees al Hubayr 2/267]

Ibn Hajr al asqalani said after saying its weak by all of its routs:
لكن صححه من حديث ابن عمر أبو علي بن السكن في إيراده إياه في أثناء السنن الصحاح له ، وعبد الحق في الأحكام في سكوته عنه ، والشيخ تقي الدين السبكي من المتأخرين باعتبار مجموع الطرق ، وأصح ما ورد في ذلك ما رواه أحمد وأبو داود من طريق أبي صخر حميد بن زياد ، عن يزيد بن عبد الله بن قسيط ، عن أبي هريرة مرفوعا : { ما من أحد يسلم علي إلا رد الله علي روحي حتى أرد عليه السلام }. وبهذا الحديث صدر البيهقي الباب .
But the narration of Ibn Umar is authenticated by Abu Ali bin al-Sakn in “Eeradah fe Ithna al Sunan al Sahaah lahu”, Abdul Haq remained silent after quoting in “al Ahkam”, Shaykh Taqi al-din as-Subki from the Mutakhireen (authenticated) by combining all of its routs. The most authentic narration in this issue is narrated by Ahmad and Abu Dawud from the rout of Abi Skhar Hameed bin Ziad from Yazeed bin Abdullah bin Qaseet from Abu Huraira from Prophet peace be upon him which states : “If any one of you greets me, Allah returns my soul to me and I respond to the greeting.” [Talkhees al Hubayr 2/267]

  1. So, some of the mutakhireen authenticated it by combining all of its routs but Ibn Hajar went with the opinion of Ibn Khuzaima, al Uqaylee and Ibn Taymiyah on the authenticity of these narrations.d) Mahmud Shukri al Alusi said their are ugly fatwas of 4 Imams as well and defended Ibn Tamiyah.

Mahmud Shukri Al Alusi responded the statement of Hafidh Ibn Hajar saying not a single Imam was saved from mistakes

He said:

إن مسألة التزوج بالبنت من الزنا من أبشع المسائل المنقولة عن الشافعي، وأن مسألة تزوج المغربي بالمشرقي أو بالعكس ثم ولدت الزوجة ولداً يلحق بالأب وإن لم يجتمع الزوجان قط من أبشع المسائل المنقولة عن أبي حنيفة، وإن جواز التيمم بالثلج من أبشع المسائل المنقولة عن الإمام مالك،

Marrying the daughter of zina is the most ugly thing reported from Imam ash-Shafiee

The most Ugly thing reported from Abu Hanifa is that if an eastern marries a western or western marries an eastern and then the woman gives birth to child, then it is a child of her husband, even if  the husband and wife did not meet for once.

Tayammum on the snow is the most ugly thing reported from Imam Maalik [Ghayat al Amani 1/453]

Then al Alusi said this mas’alah of travelling to visit the graves is not Ibn Taymiyah’s odd fatwa, rather it has evidences from ahadeeth and those Imams who are followed had this opinion. Rather it is the opinion of majority of classical scholars as Imam Sahsawani said:
“And the people of tahqiq opined for prohibition of traveling to visit the graves. Like Imam of Dar al Hijrah Maalik bin Anas, Qaadi Iyaad, Abu Muhammad Juwaini, Qadhi Husayn, Ibn Battah, Ibn Taymiya, Ibn al Qayyim, Ibn Aqil, Shams ud din bin Abdul Hadi, Majority of the Maalikis, classical Shafiees and Hanbalees rather this is the saying of majority of the scholars. And not even from one of the three (Abu Hanifa, Shafiee, Ahmad) Imams said against this. [Ittemaam al Hujjah page 297]

Not to forget even Shah Wali ullah have this opinion and majority scholars at the time of Ibn Taymiyah defended him.

  • e) What happened When Ibn Hajar read al Radd al Wafir in defense of Ibn Taymiyah. These sufis will never tell you about this.
When al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allaah have mercy on him) read the book – al-Radd al-Waafir – which is in defense of Ibn Tamiyah, he wrote something which burns ahlul bidah, He wrote an introduction to it, in which he said:

الحمد لله ، وسلام على عباده الذين اصطفى .
وقفتُ على هذا التأليف النافع ، والمجموع الذي هو للمقاصد التي جمع لأجلها جامع ، فتحققت سعة اطلاع الإمام الذي صنفه ، وتضلعه من العلوم النافعة بما عظمه بين العلماء وشرَّفه ، وشهرة إمامة الشيخ تقي الدين أشهر من الشمس ، وتلقيبه بـ ” شيخ الإسلام ” في عصره باق إلى الآن على الألسنة الزكية ، ويستمر غداً كما كان بالأمس ، ولا ينكر ذلك إلا من جهل مقداره ، أو تجنب الإنصاف ، فما أغلط من تعاطى ذلك وأكثر عثاره ، فالله تعالى هو المسؤول أن يقينا شرور أنفسنا ، وحصائد ألسنتنا بمنِّه وفضله ، ولو لم يكن من الدليل على إمامة هذا الرجل إلا ما نبَّه عليه الحافظ الشهير علم الدين البرزالي في ” تاريخه ” : أنه لم يوجد في الإسلام من اجتمع في جنازته لما مات ما اجتمع في جنازة الشيخ تقي الدين ، وأشار إلى أن جنازة الإمام أحمد كانت حافلة جدّاً شهدها مئات ألوف ، ولكن لو كان بدمشق من الخلائق نظير من كان ببغداد أو أضعاف ذلك : لما تأخر أحد منهم عن شهود جنازته ، وأيضاً فجميع من كان ببغداد إلا الأقل كانوا يعتقدون إمامة الإمام أحمد ، وكان أمير بغداد وخليفة ذلك الوقت إذا ذاك في غاية المحبة له والتعظيم ، بخلاف ابن تيمية فكان أمير البلد حين مات غائباً ، وكان أكثر مَن بالبلد مِن الفقهاء قد تعصبوا عليه حتى مات محبوساً بالقلعة ، ومع هذا فلم يتخلف منهم عن حضور جنازته والترحم عليه والتأسف عليه إلا ثلاثة أنفس ، تأخروا خشية على أنفسهم من العامة .
ومع حضور هذا الجمع العظيم : فلم يكن لذلك باعث إلا اعتقاد إمامته وبركته ، لا بجمع سلطان ، ولا غيره ، وقد صح عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال : ( أنتم شهداء الله في الأرض ) – رواه البخاري ومسلم – .
ولقد قام على الشيخ تقي الدين جماعة من العلماء مراراً ، بسبب أشياء أنكروها عليه من الأصول والفروع ، وعقدت له بسبب ذلك عدة مجالس بالقاهرة ، وبدمشق ، ولا يحفظ عن أحد منهم أنه أفتى بزندقته ، ولا حكم بسفك دمه مع شدة المتعصبين عليه حينئذ من أهل الدولة ، حتى حبس بالقاهرة ، ثم بالإسكندرية ، ومع ذلك فكلهم معترف بسعة علمه ، وكثرة ورعه ، وزهده ، ووصفه بالسخاء ، والشجاعة ، وغير ذلك من قيامه في نصر الإسلام ، والدعوة إلى الله تعالى في السر والعلانية ، فكيف لا يُنكر على مَن أطلق ” أنه كافر ” ، بل من أطلق على من سماه شيخ الإسلام : الكفر ، وليس في تسميته بذلك ما يقتضي ذلك ؛ فإنه شيخ في الإسلام بلا ريب ، والمسائل التي أنكرت عليه ما كان يقولها بالتشهي ، ولا يصر على القول بها بعد قيام الدليل عليه عناداً ، وهذه تصانيفه طافحة بالرد على من يقول بالتجسيم ، والتبري منه ، ومع ذلك فهو بشر يخطئ ويصيب ، فالذي أصاب فيه – وهو الأكثر – يستفاد منه ، ويترحم عليه بسببه ، والذي أخطأ فيه لا يقلد فيه ، بل هو معذور ؛ لأن أئمة عصره شهدوا له بأن أدوات الاجتهاد اجتمعت فيه ، حتى كان أشد المتعصبين عليه ، والقائمين في إيصال الشر إليه ، وهو الشيخ كمال الدين الزملكاني ، يشهد له بذلك ، وكذلك الشيخ صدر الدين بن الوكيل ، الذي لم يثبت لمناظرته غيره .
ومن أعجب العجب أن هذا الرجل كان أعظم الناس قياماً على أهل البدع من الروافض ، والحلولية ، والاتحادية ، وتصانيفه في ذلك كثيرة شهيرة ، وفتاويه فيهم لا تدخل تحت الحصر ، فيا قرة أعينهم إذا سمعوا بكفره ، ويا سرورهم إذا رأوا من يكفر من لا يكفره ، فالواجب على من تلبّس بالعلم وكان له عقل أن يتأمل كلام الرجل من تصانيفه المشتهرة ، أو من ألسنة من يوثق به من أهل النقل ، فيفرد من ذلك ما يُنكر ، فيحذِّر منه على قصد النصح ، ويثني عليه بفضائله فيما أصاب من ذلك ، كدأب غيره من العلماء ، ولو لم يكن للشيخ تقي الدين من المناقب إلا تلميذه الشهير الشيخ شمس الدين بن قيم الجوزية صاحب التصانيف النافعة السائرة التي انتفع بها الموافق والمخالف : لكان غاية في الدلالة على عظم منزلته ، فكيف وقد شهد له بالتقدم في العلوم ، والتميز في المنطوق والمفهوم أئمة عصره من الشافعية وغيرهم ، فضلاً عن الحنابلة ، فالذي يطلق عليه مع هذه الأشياء الكفر ، أو على من سمَّاه ” شيخ الإسلام ” : لا يلتفت إليه ، ولا يعوَّل في هذا المقام عليه ، بل يجب ردعه عن ذلك إلى أن يراجع الحق ، ويذعن للصواب ، والله يقول الحق ، وهو يهدي السبيل ، وحسبنا الله ، ونعم الوكيل .
صفة خطه أدام الله بقاءه.
The fame and position of Shaykh Taqiy al-Deen as an imam is brighter than the sun, and his title as the Shaykh al-Islam of his own era has lasted until today and will continue tomorrow. Nobody rejects that except one who is ignorant of his position, or is unfair. How wrong is the one who thinks that way and how mistaken he is. Allaah is the One Whom we ask to protect us from the evil of our own souls and of our tongues by His blessing and grace. If there were not other evidence of the greatness of this man apart from that which was pointed out by al-Haafiz al-Shaheer ‘Ilm al-Deen al-Barzaali in his Tareekh, (where he says): There was no one in the history of Islam for whose funeral people gathered as they did for the funeral of Shaykh Taqiy al-Deen. He pointed out that the funeral of Imam Ahmad was attended by hundreds of thousands, but if the population of Damascus was like that of Baghdad, or many times greater, no one would have stayed away from his funeral. Moreover, all of those who were in Baghdad, except a very few, believed in the leadership of Imam Ahmad. The ruler and caliph of Baghdad at that time had a great deal of love and respect for him. This is unlike the case of Ibn Taymiyah, for the ruler of the city when he died was absent, and most of the fuqaha’ in the city had ganged up against him, and he died imprisoned in the citadel. But despite that none of them stayed away from his funeral or failed to pray for mercy for him and mourn for him, except three individuals, who stayed away for fear of the anger of the masses.

Although these huge numbers attended his funeral, there was no motive for that except their belief that he was a great imam and their desire to seek blessing from attending his funeral. They did not gather on the orders of the authorities or for any other reason. It is narrated in a saheeh report that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “You are the witnesses of Allaah on earth” – narrated by al-Bukhaari and Muslim.

A number of scholars opposed Shaykh Taqiy al-Deen many times, because of reasons for which they criticized him that had to do with fundamental and minor issues. Many hearings were held against him in Cairo and Damascus, but there is no report that any of them said he was a heretic and there was no ruling that he should be executed, even though there were many people in government at that time who were strongly opposed to him, and he was imprisoned in Cairo, then in Alexandria. Despite that, they all recognized his vast knowledge and his deep piety and asceticism, and they described him as generous and courageous, as well as supporting Islam and calling people to Allaah in secret and openly. Why shouldn’t we denounce the one who says that he was a kaafir or that the one who calls him Shaykh al-Islam is a kaafir, when there is nothing to imply kufr in calling him that? He was undoubtedly a Shaykh of Islam, and the issues for which he was opposed were not things that he said on the basis of whims and desires, and he did not persist in saying them after proof was established against him out of stubbornness. His books are filled with refutations of those who promoted anthropomorphism and his disavowal thereof. But nevertheless he was a human being who made mistakes and got things right. That in which he was correct – which was most of it – may be benefited from, and we may pray for mercy for him because of that, and that which he got wrong should not be followed, but he may be excused for it, because the imams of his era bore witness that he was fully qualified to engage in ijtihaad; even the one who was most strongly opposed to him and strove to harm him, namely Shaykh Kamaal al-Deen al-Zamalkaani, bore witness to that, as did Shaykh Sadr al-Deen ibn al-Wakeel, who was the only one who was able to hold a debate with Ibn Taymiyah.

It is most amazing that this man was the staunchest opponent of the innovators such as the Raafidis, Huloolis and Ittihaadis, whose writings on that are many and well known, whose fatwas concerning them are too numerous to count. How happy they would be to realize that there are people who accuse him of kufr and say that the one who does not regard him as a kaafir is a kaafir. The one who claims to have knowledge, if he has any reason or sense, should ponder the man’s words in his famous books, or hear them from honest and trustworthy narrators, so that he will put aside what he finds objectionable and warn others by way of sincerity, and praise him for the matters he got right, as the attitude of other scholars should be. If there was no good quality in him except the fact that his student was Shaykh Shams al-Deen ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, the author of so many beneficial books, from which everyone has benefited, both those who agree with him and those who oppose him, that would be sufficient indication of his great status, so how about when his prominence in various fields of knowledge and his distinction in the study of the texts was affirmed by the prominent Shaafa’is of his time and others, in addition to the Hanbalis? No attention should be paid to the one who calls him a kaafir despite all these achievements, or who describes the one who calls him “Shaykh al-Islam” as a kaafir, and he should be ignored with regard to this matter; indeed he should be rebuked for saying that, until he comes back to the truth. Allaah speaks the truth and He guides to the right way; Allaah is sufficient for us and He is the best disposer of affairs.(end)

[Al-Radd al-Waafir by Imam Ibn Naasir al-Deen al-Dimashqi (p. 145, 146), al-Haafiz al-Sakhaawi – the student of Ibn Hajar – quoted the words of his Shaykh in his book al-Jawaahir wa’l-Durar (2/734-736).]

al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar wrote a lengthy biography of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on them both) in his book al-Durar al-Kaaminah, at the beginning of which he said:

” .. وتحول به أبوه من حران سنة 67 ، فسمع من ابن عبد الدائم والقاسم الأربلي والمسلم ابن علان وابن أبي عمر والفخر في آخرين ، وقرأ بنفسه ونسخ سنن أبي داود وحصل الأجزاء ونظر في الرجال والعلل ، وتفقه وتمهر ، وتميز وتقدم ، وصنف ودرس وأفتى ، وفاق الأقران ، وصار عجباً في سرعة الاستحضار وقوة الجنان والتوسع في المنقول والمعقول والإطالة على مذاهب السلف والخلف .. ”

His father took him with him from Harraan in 667 AH, and he learned from Ibn ‘Abd al-Daa’im, al-Qaasim al-Arbili, Muslim ibn ‘Allaan, Ibn Abi ‘Umar and al-Fakhr, among others. He read by himself and copied Sunan Abi Dawood, and he studied al-rijaal (narrators of hadeeth) and al-‘ilal (faults in hadeeth). He acquired deep knowledge, and he distinguished himself and went ahead of others. He wrote books, taught and issued fatwas, and he surpassed his peers. He had an amazing ability to recollect quickly; he was courageous; he had a deep knowledge of textual and rational matters; and he was able to discuss matters in detail on the basis of the views of earlier and later scholars. [Al-Durar al-Kaaminah fi A’yaan al-Mi’ah al-Thaaminah (1/168).]

Hafidh Ibn Hajar Quotes

” وقرأت بخط الحافظ صلاح الدين العلائي ، في ثبت شيخ شيوخنا الحافظ بهاء الدين عبد الله بن محمد بن خليل ، ما نصه : وسمع بهاء الدين المذكور على الشيخين شيخنا وسيدنا وإمامنا فيما بيننا وبين الله تعالى ، شيخ التحقيق ، السالك بمن اتبعه أحسن طريق ، ذي الفضائل المتكاثرة ، والحجج القاهرة ، التي أقرت الأمم كافة أن هممها عن حصرها قاصرة ، ومتعنا الله بعلومه الفاخرة ونفعنا به في الدنيا والآخرة ، وهو الشيخ الإمام العالم الرباني والحبر البحر القطب النوراني ، إمام الأئمة ، بركة الأمة ، علامة العلماء ، وارث الأنبياء ، آخر المجتهدين ، أوحد علماء الدين ، شيخ الإسلام ، حجة الأعلام ، قدوة الأنام ، برهان المتعلمين ، قامع المبتدعين ، سيف المناظرين ، بحر العلوم ، كنز المستفيدين ، ترجمان القرآن ، أعجوبة الزمان ، فريد العصر والأوان ، تقي الدين ، إمام المسلمين ، حجة الله على العالمين ، اللاحق بالصالحين ، والمشبه بالماضين ، مفتي الفرق ، ناصر الحق ، علامة الهدى ، عمدة الحفاظ ، فارس المعاني والألفاظ ، ركن الشريعة ، ذو الفنون البديعة ، أبو العباس ابن تيمية !! ”

I read in the handwriting of al-Haafiz Salaah al-Deen al-‘Alaa’i, when he wrote the biography of the Shaykh of our shaykhs, al-Haafiz Baha’ al-Deen ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Muhammad ibn Khaleel, the following: This Baha’ al-Deen learned from the two Shaykhs, our Shaykh, master and leader in the way of Allaah, the prominent Shaykh, the one who leads his followers to the best way, the one who has numerous virtues and the strongest evidence, which all the nations affirm that they are unable to list all this evidence; may Allaah enable us to learn from his great knowledge and benefit us by means of his knowledge in this world and in the Hereafter. He is the Shaykh, imam, scholar, teacher and bright star, the imam of imams, the blessing of the ummah, the leader of scholars, the example for people to follow, the light for the learners, the suppressor of innovators, the sea of knowledge, the treasure of those who seek benefit, the interpreter of the Qur’aan, the wonder of our age, the unrivalled one of our era, Taqiy al-Deen, the imam of the Muslims, the proof of Allaah against the world, the one who will join the righteous, the follower of the predecessors, the supporter of the truth, the sign of guidance, the prominent hafiz, the most eloquent of speech, the pillar of sharee’ah, the possessor of brilliant knowledge, Abu’l-‘Abbaas Ibn Taymiyah. [Al-Durar al-Kaaminah (186-187).]

Note: Although the texts that we have quoted or referred to, which contain the words of al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allaah have mercy on him) or which were quoted by al-Haafiz from others, speak of respect for Shaykh al-Islam and highlight his status in the field of religious knowledge, that does not mean that al-Haafiz did not differ with Shaykh al-Islam at all in some fields of knowledge, or that he never criticized him, because it usually happens that scholars refute one another, without that necessarily meaning that the one who refutes another does not respect or appreciate the status of the latter, let alone accuse him of innovation or misguidance. Long ago, Imam Maalik (may Allaah have mercy on him) spoke his famous words: “Anyone’s opinion may be accepted or rejected, except the occupant of this grave” or words to that effect – meaning the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

In short,

When Ibn Hajr read the book in defense of Ibn Taymiyyah he ONLY Praised him and did not mention anything against him in the Taqreez.

  • f) Why don’t they quote Ibn Hajar against Ibn Arabi the sufi?

Ibn Hajar did Takfeer of Ibn Arabi to whom these sufis follow and take his invented aqeeda of Wahdatul wajood.

See, Aqeedah Ibn ‘Arabi wa Hayaatuhu by Taqiy al-Deen al-Faasi, p. 75,76, Tanbeeh ul ghabi of Muhaddith Burhan ul din al baaqiee page 136 and 137 and Hafidh Sakhawee in the Tarjuma of Hafidh ibn e Hajar Asqalani, Lisan al Meezan Vol 4 page 318 no: 902 This has been mentioned in details in the article of The Creed of Ibn Hajar Asqalani VS extreme Soofiyah.

  • g) This is exactly same if I quote Fatwa of Imam Ahmaad against Ahnaf.

Imam Ahmad was asked:
يؤجر الرجل على بغض أصحاب أبي حنيفة؟
قال: إي والله.
Will a person get reward of having Bughz from Ashaab of Abu Hanifa?

He (Ahmad) said: By Allah yes. [Masail Imam Ahmad wal Ishaq ba Riwayah al Kawsaj no. 3441]

I have answered this elsewhere but I really need to see the answer of brail

  • h) How will the brailwis defend the fatwas mentioned in books of Shafiee and Hanafi fiqh?

I am just quoting  two as an example.

1. as-Suyutu said:

قوله تعالى: {ولَا يَطَئُونَ مَوْطِئًا}

الآية استدل بها أبو حنيفة على جواز الزنا بنساء أهل الحرب في دار الحرب، وقم على أن وظء ديارهم إذا جعل بمثابة النيل منهم وأخذ أموالهم فإن الفارس يستحق سهم الفرس بدخول أرض الحرب لا بالحيازة لأن وطء ديارهم يدخل عليهم الذل.

Allah says:

(nor they take any step to raise the anger of disbelievers)

Abu Hanifa deduced from this verse on doing fornication with women of ahlul Harb in Dar ul Harb… [end quote]

It is also mentioned in many Hanafi books of fiqh like Durr al Mukhtar etc.

2. The Imam who is preferred for Imamah should have big head and small private part.

It is mentioned in  الدر المختار (1/601) regarding who should lead the prayer, If all of them are on the same level then:

ثم الاحسن زوجة، ثم الاكثر مالا، ثم الاكثر جاها، ثم الانظف ثوبا، ثم الاكبر رأسا والاصغر عضوا،

He should lead the prayer whose wife is beautiful… then the one whose head is big and small private part. [end quote]

Radd al Muhtar explained it rather than refuting it.

( قوله ثم الأحسن زوجة ) لأنه غالبا يكون أحب لها وأعف لعدم تعلقه بغيرها . وهذا مما يعلم بين الأصحاب أو الأرحام أو الجيران ، إذ ليس المراد أن يذكر كل منهم أوصاف زوجته حتى يعلم من هو أحسن زوجة… ( قوله ثم الأكبر رأسا إلخ ) لأنه يدل على كبر العقل يعني مع مناسبة الأعضاء له ، وإلا فلو فحش الرأس كبرا والأعضاء صغرا كان دلالة على اختلال تركيب مزاجه المستلزم لعدم اعتدال عقله ا هـ ح . وفي حاشية أبي السعود ; وقد نقل عن بعضهم في هذا المقام ما لا يليق أن يذكر فضلا عن أن يكتب ا هـ وكأنه يشير إلى ما قيل أن المراد بالعضو الذكر

These are quoted just as secondary responses.