Why was ibn taymiyyah imprisoned

He used to spend his night alone, imploring his Lord, continuously reciting the Quran and performing prayers, mentioning and invoking Allah, and observing the optional late night prayer. Ibn Taymiyyah wrote a large number of books; he wrote more than three hundred books. He had a vast knowledge and wrote many classificatory books and literary works. He used to write up to four notebooks a day.

He wrote it between the time of Thuhr and 'Asr prayers. He wrote all his books during the seven years he spent in prison, except the book of Al-Eemaan, The Faith which he wrote in Egypt. Ibn Taymiyyah was keen to do every kind of good deeds. Every week, he used to visit those who were ill especially those in the hospital. He was known for his asceticism and benevolence.

He loved to give whatever he had whether it was little or much. Even when he had very little, he gave it in charity. He used to donate whatever he had.

If he had nothing to give, he used to take off some of his clothes and give them to the poor. Despite his poverty, he never accepted any donation from a king or prince. Ibn Taymiyyah was famous for his courage, valour, and brave initiatives.

Whenever he went out for Jihad struggling in the Cause of Allah with the Muslims, he used to be in the front line, encouraging the warriors and arousing their determination and enthusiasm. He took part in conquest of 'Akkah and showed much bravery that proved his strong faith and love for participating in Jihad. In the remainder of this study, we examine in detail just how Ibn Taymiyya accomplishes his projected tour de force.

It is decidedly not sufficient, Ibn Taymiyya insists, for establishing in rational terms what is actually true and correct. The terms on which Ibn Taymiyya bids to resolve the conflict between reason and revelation in Islam are enormously ambitious.

While previous attempts to defuse this tension generally demanded that revelation yield to the deliverances of a rationality largely conceived along Greek lines and constructed, ultimately, on the backbone of Aristotelian logic a conception of rationality that had been taken for granted for centuries before him—even by the more textually conservative of theologians—as constitutive of reason per se , Ibn Taymiyya takes a distinctly different route.

For him, simply reinterpreting or suspending revelation is not merely too facile a solution to the problem; it is also a largely disingenuous one, for the basic consequence of the universal rule, as he sees it, is that ultimately reason alone is granted the right to arbitrate, even on matters that fall outside its proper domain.

Ibn Taymiyya seeks the solution elsewhere: namely, in the elaboration of a re integrated epistemology in which conflict between reason and revelation is not merely staved off by the terms of a truce in which each antagonist enjoys supremacy in a separate domain of exclusive magisterium, nor yet in which the historical tension between the two is artificially defused by subjugating one to what is deemed to be the terms of the other, nor even one in which the two merely coexist side by side in blissful harmony.

A mighty tall order indeed. Precisely how Ibn Taymiyya attempts this feat will command our attention for the remainder of this study. Al-Matroudi, , n. Laoust, Essai , 71— Taymiyya [hereafter MF ], — Michot also cites p. See p. Laoust, Essai , For more on these principles, see Hallaq, History , — Ibn Taymiyya is listed as having penned a separate treatise on this issue as well.

See Laoust, Contribution , Also Laoust, Essai , 77— When he had read it, he threw it down in fury. Laoust, however, cast doubt on the authenticity of this quotation. See Laoust, Essai , MF , — Also discussed at MF , — Discussed at MF , — Also at MF , — Perhaps MF , — though I have not been able to find any discrete treatise by this name.

For this theme in general, see MF , vol. Treatise not identified. See index of Arabic passages. In the following section p. Such reports of deathbed disavowals of wayward doctrine are a common trope and cannot be taken at face value without further corroboration.

I thank Robert Wisnovsky for pointing this out to me. The Radd is translated in Seale, Muslim Theology , 96— the translation of the passage cited here, however, is mine. Referring not to the Jews of seventh-century Arabia or eleventh-century Persia but to the original Hebrew tribes to whom Moses brought the Torah. Hoover speaks p. Ibn Taymiyya also wrote a separate treatise in refutation of Ibn Rushd. Reference Works. Primary source collections.

Open Access Content. Contact us. Sales contacts. Publishing contacts. Social Media Overview. Terms and Conditions. Privacy Statement. Login to my Brill account Create Brill Account. Author: Carl Sharif El-Tobgui. Download PDF. Returns to Cairo to teach privately and continue writing. Dirham and his student, Jahm b. Dirham, Jahm b. Save Cite Email this content Share link with colleague or librarian You can email a link to this page to a colleague or librarian:. Your current browser may not support copying via this button.

Texts and Studies , Volume: Middle East and Islamic Studies. Medieval Philosophy. Religious Studies. Theology and World Christianity. Philosophy of Religion. Table of Contents. Sign in to annotate. Delete Cancel Save. Cancel Save. View Expanded. View Table. Islamic scholar stated in unanimity that he was a heretic. Kutbud-Bardiri wrote this in detail in his commentary on Mukhtasar.

There were scholars who said that a person who addressed him as Sheikh-ul-Islam would become a disbeliever. Kashf-uz-Zunun In his book Al-Abudiyyat , he says that making dhikr of Allahu ta'ala's name is innovation and heresy, and he made vicious slanders on Sufi masters. Ibn Taymiyyah said, "The existence of the Arsh is beginningless [ qadim ]. He claimed that the torment of Hell would not be eternal.

However, there are many Qur'anic verses stating that disbelievers will remain in Hell eternally. Al-Baqara 81, Al-Ahzab 65, Fussilat 28, Az-Zukhruf 74 By saying "Umar made a lot of mistakes," he objected to the hadith-i sharif that says "Allahu ta'ala has put the true word on the tongue of Umar [He never makes a mistake]. It cannot be known whether a mujtahid erred in his ijtihad because an ijtihad does not invalidate another ijtihad. For this reason, those honorable people, who were mujtahids, should not be criticized.

Though the ijtihads of the four madhhabs are different from one other, their founders did not criticize one another on the basis of difference in their ijtihads. One must beware of reading his books in the same way as one bewares of predators. It was his habit to represent himself as superior to everybody, to look down on the person whom he talked to, and to make fun of great scholars.