14 interesting debates.
A) When al Subki had a debate with the brother of Ibn Taymiyah.
B) The debate between Ibn Makhloof Maliki with the brother of Ibn Taymiyah on Arsh and Nuzool.
C) The debate between Mahmud Shukri al Alusi grandson of al Alusi Kabeer and follower of Rifaai tareeqa on Omniprecence of Ahmad Kabeer Rifaai.
D) The discussion on aqaid between The Syrian Azhari scholar Sayyid Badr ud din al Halabi (1298 h to 1362 h) and Indian sufi on knowledge of unseen.
E) al-Ālūsī al-Baghdādī (d 1270 h) vs the one asking help from dead.
F) Debate between the teacher of an-Nasaee and Abu Dawud vs an innovator.
G) Ibn Kathir and Mur’i bin yusuf on the debate between Qaadi Imam ud din and Ibn Taymiyah regarding Aqeedah al Hamawiya.
H) The debate between Ibn Taymiyyah and Safi ud din al Hindi and remarks of Ibn Kathir, Ibn Rajab, Kamal ud din al Zamalkani about the debate.
I) The debate of Ibn Taymiyyah with Kamal ud din bin Zamalkani (The student of Safi ud din al Hindi).
J) Debate between al Shawkani and Siddique bin Ali al Zabeedi al Hanafi on some issues of Hanafi fiqh.
K) When a Rafidhi started debate with القاضي المحاملي teacher of Daraqutni and tried to prove Ali radhiAllahanho better than Abu Bakr radhiAllahanho.
L) The debate of Ibn Tamiyah and the followers of Sufi Tariqa Ahmadiya.
M) Written debate between Ibn Taymiyyah and Ahmad bin Ibraheem Al Hanafi commentator of al Hidayah.
N) The debate of Abdul Ghani al Maqdasi on the aqeeda of Nuzool, and al Uluw in the eyes of Ibn Kathir.
A) When al Subki had a debate with the brother of Ibn Taymiyah.
Ibn Abdul Hadi said:
وقد سمعت أخا شيخ الإسلام يذكر هذا النقص الذي حكاه القاضي إسماعيل في المبسوط عن مالك لهذا المعترض بحضرة بعض ولاة الأمر، فغضب المعترض غضبا شديدا، ولم يجبه بأكثر من قوله: هذا كذب على مالك. فانظر إلى جراءة هذا المعترض وإقدامه على تكذيب ما لم يحط بعلمه بغير برهان ولا حجة بمجرد الهوى والتخرص، وليس هذا ببدع منه، فإنه قد عرف منه مثل ذلك في غير موضع،
And I heard the brother of Shaykh ul Islam mentioning the clear text which is mentioned by Qadhi Ismaeel in (his book) “al Mabsoot” on the authority of (Imam) Maalik in front of some people in authority against the objector (as-Subki). He (as-Subki) flew into rage, He did not reply more than saying “This is a lie upon Maalik”.
Look at his (Subki`s) audacity, How he dared to falsify without knowing it, and (he rejected) without giving any evidence and arguments but only by following whims. This is not surprising from him because his mistakes like this are known in other places.[as-Saarim al Munki fe radd al-Subki page 341]
B) The debate between of Ibn Makhloof Maliki with the brother of Ibn Taymiyah on Arsh and Nuzool.
Ibn Kathir said:
وفي هذا الشهر يوم الخميس السابع والعشرين منه طلب أخوا الشيخ تقي الدين شرف الدين وزين الدين من الحبس إلى مجلس نائب السلطان سلار، وحضر ابن مخلوف المالكي وطال بينهم كلام كثير فظهر شرف الدين بالحجة على القاضي المالكي بالنقل والدليل والمعرفة، وخطأه في مواضع ادّعى فيها دعاوى باطلة، وكان الكلام في مسألة العرش ومسألة الكلام، وفي مسألة النزول.
On thursday 27th of this Month both of the brothers of Ibn Taymiyyah i.e. Sharf ud din and Zain ud din were brought to the sitting held by deputy of Sultan Salaar. Ibn Makhloof al Maliki also came and they argued. Sharf ud din was dominant on Qadhi Maaliki in naql, knowledge and evidence. And made his many of the claims false. The debate was on the Mas`ala of Arsh, Kalaam and Nuzool [Al Bidaya wal Nihaya 14/59]
C) The debate between Mahmud Shukri al Alusi grandson of al Alusi Kabeer and follower of Rifaai tareeqa on Omniprecence of Ahmad Kabeer Rifaai.
Sayyid Shukri al Alusi said:
وقد تكلمت يوما مع أحد غلاة الرفاعية الزنادقة ومشركيهم ـ اذ استغاث بالرفاعي قبل الشروع في ذكرهم
فقلت له: هل يسمع الآن نداءك الرفاعي وهو في قبره في «أم عبيدة» ويمدك؟
قال: نعم .
قلت: فإذا اتفق مثلك في بلاد كثيرة ومواضع متعددة ألوف مؤلفة وان كانوا في أقطار شاسعة، هل يسمعهم أحمد الرفاعي ويمدهم ويغيثهم ؟
قال: نعم.
قلت: هذا هو الغلو الذي نهى الله عنه في كتابه الكريم.
قال: ليس هذا من الغلو، بل هو مقتضى الدين؛ ألم تسمع حديث الأولياء؟: وهو قوله صلى الله عليه وسلم الذي رواه البخاري : « وما زال عَبْدِي يَتَقَرَّبُ إِلَىَّ بِالنَّوَافِلِ حَتَّى أُحِبَّهُ، فَإِذَا أَحْبَبْتُهُ كُنْتُ سَمْعَهُ الَّذِي يَسْمَعُ بِهِ، وَبَصَرَهُ الَّذِي يُبْصِرُ بِهِ، وَيَدَهُ الَّتِي يَبْطُشُ بِهَا وَرِجْلَهُ الَّتِي يَمْشِي بِهَا» الحديث.
I had a discourse one day with one of the extremists, heretics, who are virtually polytheists (follower of) Rifaaiyah (Tariqah).
I asked him: Do you think that al Rifai hears your voice at this moment when he is reposing in his grave at Umm Ubaid and that he is still able to help you?
He said yes.
I said: Do you still believe that he hears everyone like you (who call upon him) from all over the world in many different countries and different places and Ahmad al Rifai helps them, hears them and comes to their aid (i.e. at the same time).
He said: Yes
I said: This is only an exaggeration which Allah has strictly forbidden as mentioned in Noble Book (Quran).
He said: This is not exaggeration. It is rather one of the order of religion. Did you not hear the hadith regarding auliyah? as it is narrated in al Bukhari the saying of Prophet peace be upon him that (Allah says):
“My slave keeps on coming closer to Me through performing Nawafil (praying or doing extra deeds besides what is obligatory) till I love him, so I become his sense of hearing with which he hears, and his sense of sight with which he sees, and his hand with which he grips, and his leg with which he walks..” (end quote)
Then al Alusi mentioned that the meaning taken by these heretics is wrong and responded by the commentary by Ibn Hajar al asqalani on the hadith provided by that sufi.
He said: Ibn Hajar said in commentary of this hadith
1. This has been mentioned only by way of allegory meaning that I become his ear and eye on account of his preferring me, and complying with my commands. He loves to obey me and prefers to serve me as all these limbs love (to obey and serve).
2. The idea is that the whole body of servant is absorbed in me. Therefore he does not hear with his own ear except anything that I am pleased with, nor does he see anything with his own eyes except anything that I ask him or allow him to look at.
3. I fix for him objectives, which he achieves by means of his ears and eyes etc.
4. I became his aid like ears, eyes, hands, feet, in helping him to overcome his enemy,
5. al Faakihani and one of his predecessors Ibn Hubaira said: Apparently the Mudaf is suppressed in this text. Supplying the missing word , it would be: I become the guardian of his ears with which he hears, therefore he has nothing with him but that which I allow him to do, I am the guardian of his eyes with which he sees.
6. al Faakihani further says: It carries another meaning, which seems to be more suitable than the previous one. The idea is that Sam means Masmu (i.e. the infinitive is used in the sense of the nomina patients , e.g., amali ( : my wish or wishing) means that the thing i wish to achieve. In other words he does not hear anything but My mention. He does not relish anything but the recitation of my word. He does not indulge in anything except my Munajat ( : whispering in conversation with me). He does not look at anything other than the wonders of my realm. He does not extend his hand or his feet but only with a desire to please me and so on and so forth. (end quote from fath Al bari)
[Ghayat al Amani 1/345-347]
D) The discussion on aqaid between The Syrian Azhari scholar Sayyid Badr ud din al Halabi (1298 h to 1362 h) and Indian sufi on knowledge of unseen.
He said:
وقد سُئِلْتُ عن هذه المسألة وأنا بالهند سنة تسع عشر وثلاثمائة بعد الألف، وكان قصد السائل تعرف عقيدتي بما أعرف من الحق الذي لا مرية فيه، وهو أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أطلعه الله تعالى على كثير من المغيبات لمصالح يقتضيها التشريع، ولم يطلعه على كل ما كان ويكون، وبينت له أن هذا لا يحط من عليِّ مرتبته عليه السلام، بل من الأدب مع الله ومعه أن لا نصفه بما لم يصف نفسه به، ولا أن نثبت له ما لم يخبر هو بثبوته لنفسه.
فأنكر علينا ذلك، وتحركت نفسه للمحاجّة، فقلنا له: أترى أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم كان يعلم عدد الشعرات التي في لحيتك؟ فقال: لا. فقلنا: أفترى أن لحيتك ليست من المكونات؟ فانقطع في ميدان المناظرة قبل أن ينقل فيه قدماً.
In 1319 h I was in India (Note that was the time when dawah of Ahmad raza brailwi was at its peak who was 47 years of age at that time), I was asked a question (regarding knowledge of unseen), he didn’t ask to understand religion, He wanted to know about my aqeeda, which is truth according to me without a doubt. That is Allah informed the Prophet peace be upon him many of the unseen as it was shar`ee requirement, He was not informed all the information of the past and the present. I cleared that this does not affect on the status of Prophet peace be upon him, rather it is adab of Allah and his Rasool that we should not attribute those things to him (peace be upon him) which he didn’t attributed to himself. And we do not say anything regarding him which he didn’t say for himself.
He (the molvi) denied my answer, became emotional and argued with me. I said: Tell me if your aqeeda is that the Prophet peace be upon him even knew the number of hair on your beard? He replied no. I said: Isn’t your beard the part of creation? He left the place of debate without stepping further.
[atTaleem wal Irshad by Burhan ud din Halabi under the chapter “مقالات الأمم”, quoted by Mahmud Shukri al Alusi in Ghayat al Amani 1/68-69]
He said regarding omnipresence of Prophet peace be upon him, he said:
وهذه المقالة الشنيعة لم نرها لأحد من المتكلمين المتقدمين منهم والمتأخرين، ولا رأيناها في كتب العقائد، ولا كنا نظن أحداً يقول هذه المقالة الشنيعة
This ugly saying is not said by any of the past and present scholar, neither I have seen this in any of the book on aqaid, This is beyond our imagination that someone could say this ugly thing. [Ibid]
E) al-Ālūsī al-Baghdādī (d 1270 h) vs the one asking help from dead.
Sayyid al Alusi Kabeer said:
، وقد قلت يوما لرجل يستغيث في شدة ببعض الأموات وينادي يا فلان أغثني فقلت له : قل يا الله فقد قال سبحانه : وإذا سألك عبادي عني فإني قريب أجيب دعوة الداع إذا دعان [البقرة : 186] فغضب وبلغني أنه قال : فلان منكر على الأولياء
A person who was asking help from dead by saying: “O So and so help me” I said to him: Say “O Allah help” as Allah says in al Quran:
“And when My servants ask you, [O Muhammad], concerning Me – indeed I am near. I respond to the invocation of the supplicant when he calls upon Me.”[2″186] He became angry and It has reached me that he says “so and so” is munkir of auliyah. [Ruh al Mani under surah az-Zumar verse 45]
This is exactly what brailwis do with ahlus sunnah, they became happy when fabricated storied are mentioned of Shaykh Abdul Qadir, but when this verse is mentioned, their faces are blackened.
F) Debate between the teacher of an-Nasaee and Abu Dawud vs an innovator.
His name is Imam Abu Abdur Rahman Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Ishaq alAdrami once a man innovated creed that Quran is created and started preaching that creed.
Imam Khateeb Baghdadi narrated:
أن طاهر بن خلف، قال: سمعت محمد بن الواثق، الذي يقال له المهتدي بالله، يقول: كان أبي إذا أراد أن يقتل رجلاً أحضرنا ذلك المجلس، فأتى بشيخ مقيد، فقال أبي: ائذنوا لأبي عبد الله وأصحابه. يعني ابن أبي داود.
قال: فأدخل الشيخ، فقال: السلام عليك يا أمير المؤمنين.
فقال: لا سلم الله عليك.
فقال: يا أمير المؤمنين، بئس ما أدبك به مؤدبك، قال الله تعالى: (وَإذَا حُيِّيتُمْ بِتَحِيَّةٍ فَحَيُّوا بأحْسَنَ مِنْهَا أوْ رُدُّوهَا)، والله ما حييتني بها، ولا بأحسن منها.
فقال ابن أبي دواد: يا أمير المؤمنين، هذا رجل متكلم.
فقال له: كلمه.
فقال: يا شيخ، ما تقول في القرآن؟ قال الشيخ: لم تنصفني المسألة، أنا أسألك قبل.
فقال له: سل.
فقال الشيخ: ما تقول في القرآن؟ فقال: مخلوق.
فقال الشيخ: هذا شيءٌ علمه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، وأبو بكر، وعمر، وعثمان، وعلي، والخلفاء الراشدون، أم شيٌ لم يعلموه؟ فقال: شيءٌ لم يعلموه.
فقال: سبحان الله، شيءٌ لم يعلمه النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، ولا أبو بكر، ولا عمر، ولا عثمان، ولا عليٌ، ولا الخلفاء الراشدون، علمته أنت! قال: فخجل ابن أبي داود.
وقال: أقلني.
قال: والمسألة بحالها؟ قال: والمسألة بحالها؟ قال: نعم.
قال: ما تقول في القرآن؟ فقال: مخلوق.
فقال: هذا شيء علمه النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، وأبو بكر، وعمر، وعثمان، وعليٌ، والخلفاء الراشدون، أم لم يعلموه؟ فقال: علموه، ولم يدعوا الناس إليه.
قال: أفلا وَسعك ما وسعهم!! قال: ثم قام أبي، فدخل مجلس الخلوة، واستلقى على قفاه، ووضع إحدى رجليه على الأخرى، وقو يقول: هذا شيءٌ لم يعلمه النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، ولا أبو بكر، ولا عمر، ولا عثمان، ولا علي، ولا الخلفاء الراشدون، علمته أنت، سبحان الله، هذا شيء علمه النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، وأبو بكر، وعمر، وعثمان، وعلي، والخلفاء الراشدون، ولم يدعوا الناس إليه، أفلا وسعك ما وسعهم.
ثم دعا الحاجب، وأمره أن يرفع عن الشيخ قيوده، ويعطيه أربعمائة دينار، ويأذن له في الرجوع، وسقط من عينه ابن أبي دواد، ولم يمتحن بعد ذلك أحداً
In short:
He (Imam Al Adrami) asked: Did Messenger of Allah(Peace be upon him) Abu-Bakr(R.A) or Umar(r.a) or uthman(r.a) or Ali(r.a) were aware of this innovation?
He (Innovator) replied: No.
Imam Al Adrami said:The matter which they (prophet & his companions) were unaware of how would you come to know about it?
He (Innovator) changed his previous statements and said they were aware of that.
Imam Adarmi asked: Being aware of that matter why then they(Prophet & his companions) didn’t preach that? Do you think it was not permissible to preach this creed?
He (innovator) replied: Yes,it was permissible for them to do so.
Imam Al Adrami said: They were aware of the matter according to you but they didn’t preached. Then how come you propagate it?
The innovator was unable to answer and the ruler was also witnessing the debate, He said: If those things which were enough for Rasool Allah peace be upon him and Khulafa alRashideen, are not enough for any other person then Allah may not give him any kind of expansion.
[Rough and very short translation,Tareekh Bughdad 10/5, Ibn Jawzi mentioned in Manaqib Imam Ahmad page 231, Ibn Qudamah in atTawwabeen page 92, adDahabee in Seyar ailaam anNubala 11/313, Ibn Katheer in alBidaya wal Nihaya 10/335, Ajuree in ash-Shariyah page 95]
Now a days Innovators are even more brave. They even after agreeing that Sahaba never celebrated Mawlid (as Tahir ul Qadri said in his book of Mawlid) do not remain silent like the innovator of that time (100s of years ago), now they come up with several different answers, they should learn something from Imams of Ahlus Sunnah. May Allah guide us all ameen.
G) Ibn Kathir and Mur’i bin yusuf on the debate between Qaadi Imam ud din and Ibn Taymiyah regarding Aqeedah al Hamawiya.
Ibn Kathir mentioned discussion between Ibn Taymiyyah and Qadhi Imam ud din on Aqeedah al Hamwiyah, He said:
فلما كان يوم الجمعة، عمل الشيخ تقي الدين الميعاد بالجامع على عادته، وفسر في قوله تعالى: {وَإِنَّكَ لَعَلى خُلُقٍ عَظِيمٍ} ، ثم اجتمع بالقاضي إمام الدين يوم السبت واجتمع عنده جماعة من الفضلاء وبحثوا في الحموية، وناقشوه في أماكن فيها، فأجاب عنها بما أسكتهم بعد كلام كثير
ثم ذهب الشيخ تقي الدين وقد تمهدت الامور، وسكنت الاحوال، وكان القاضي إمام الدين معتقده حسنا ومقصده صالحا.
When friday came, As usual Shaykh Taqi ud din did Tafsir of “And indeed, you are of a great moral character” in Jamia (Amawi), Then on Saturday He met Qadhi Imam ud din and other scholars and they argued about Al Hamawiyah and they talked about many issues. He replied and silenced them after a long discussion. Then Shaykh Taqi ud din returned and everything was peaceful. Qadhi Imam ud din had good belief and had good intentions. [Al Bidaya wal Nihaya 14/17]
Some Sufis claim Ibn Kathir was biased which is totally wrong, but let us see what the other scholars said regarding this debate.
Imam Mur’i bin Yusaf (d 1033) said:
والقاضي يقول: كل من تكلم في الشيخ فأنا خصمه.
وقال أخوه جلال الدين بعد هذا الميعاد: كل من تكلم في الشيخ نعزره، وخرج الناس ينتظرون ما يسمعون من طيب أخباره، فوصل إلى داره في ملأ كثير من الناس، وعندهم استبشار وسرور به، وكان سعيهم في حقه أتم السعي، وتكلموا في حقه بأنواع الأذى وبأمور يستحي الإنسان من الله تعالى أن يحكيها فضلاً عن أن يختلقها ويلفقها، فلا حول ولا قوة إلا بالله، ورأى جماعة من الصالحين في هذه الواقعة وعقيبها مرائي حسنة جليلة لو ضبطت لكانت مجلداً تاماً.
Qadhi (Imam ud din ash-Shafiee) said (after the debate): whoever oppose him (Ibn Taymiyyah) or say things against him, I will see him by myself. His (Imam ud din’s) brother Jalal al-din said: whoever oppose or say things against the shaykh, we will punish him. People were waiting to listen good news about shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah and he reached his home in crowd of people. But his opponents accused him with those things which a man who have intellect will feel shy to mention them… after this incident the righteous people saw the best outcome of it. If we write about that it will make a volume. [al Qawl al Jalli fi Tarjuma Shaykh al Islam Ibn Taymiyah page 357-358, also quoted by Shukri al Alusi from his book in Ghayat al Amani 2/231]
Open for more appropriate translations.
H) The debate between Ibn Taymiyyah and Safi ud din al Hindi and remarks of Ibn Kathir, Ibn Rajab, Kamal ud din al Zamalkani about the debate.
Ibn Kathir said:
وفي يوم الاثنين ثامن رجب حضر القضاة والعلماء وفيهم الشيخ تقي الدين بن تيمية عندنائب السلطنة بالقصر وقرئت عقيدة الشيخ تقي الدين الواسطية وحصل بحث في أماكن منها وأخرت مواضع إلى المجلس الثاني فاجتمعوا يوم الجمعة بعد الصلاة ثاني عشر الشهر المذكور وحضر الشيخ صفي الدين الهندي وتكلم مع الشيخ تقي الدين كلاما كثيرا ولكن ساقيته لاطمت بحرا ثم اصطلحوا على ان يكون الشيخ كمال الدين بن الزملكاني هو الذي يحاققه من غير مسامحة
On Monday 8th of Rajab Judges and Scholars came and Ibn Taymiyyah was also present in the palace with Deputy Empire. The Aqeedah al Wasatiyah of Shaykh Taqi ud din was read and its many of the parts were discussed and others were left for next sitting. They gathered on 12th of same month. Shaykh Safi ud din al Hindi also came and argued with Shaykh Taqi ud din about many things but his small stream pushed a vast Ocean (Ibn Taymiyyah).Then, they agreed that Kamaal Al-Deen ibn Az-Zamalkaani would debate the Shaykh (Ibn Taymiyyah) unbiasedly. [Al Bidaya wal Nihaya 14/52]
Note: Safi ud din al Hindi was from India Dehli and then went to Damishq in 685 h, He was Mutakallim, but was a pious person.[Al Bidaya wal Nihaya 14/93]
Kamal ud din bin Zamalkani Who himself debated Ibn Taymiyah said regarding the debates of Ibn Taymiyyah:
ولا يعرف أنه ناظر أحداً فانقطع معه، ولا تكلم في علم من العلوم – سواءً كان من علوم الشرع أو غيرها – إلا فاق فيه أهله والمنسوبين إليه،
It is not known that he debated any point and was put to shame. Whatever be the subject matter about which he spoke, whether religious or discursive, he surpassed the authorities on that particular subject.
(Uqood ad-Durriyah by Ibn Abdul Hadee, Al-Kawakib-ud-Durriyah fe Manaqib al Mujtahid Ibn Taymiyyah by Imam Muree bin Yusaf al Karmee p. 60, Imam ad-Dahabi quoted this from his teacher Kamal ud din bin Zamalkani in his seperate book الدرة اليتيمية في السيرة التيمية )
I) The debate of Ibn Taymiyyah with Kamal ud din bin Zamalkani (The student of Safi ud din al Hindi)
Ibn Kathir mentioned:
فتناظرا في ذلك وشكر الناس من فضائل الشيخ كمال الدين بن الزملكاني وجودة ذهنه وحسن بحثه حيث قاوم ابن تيمية في البحث وتكلم معه ثم انفصل الحال على قبول العقيدة وعاد الشيخ إلى منزله معظما مكرما
Then they (Ibn Taymiyyah and Kamal ud din bin Zamalkani) engaged in a debate and people commended the merits of Shaykh Kamaal Al-Deen ibn Az-Zamalkaani, his wittiness, and careful researching as he debated Ibn Taymiyyah and talked with him. Finally, he accepted Al-‘Aqeedah (Al-Waasitiyyah) and Ibn Taymiyyah went home honored and revered.” [Al Bidaya wal Nihaya 14/52]
Ibn Rajab mentioned that after the three majalis on the Aqeedah of Ibn Taymiyyah:
وقع الإتفاق بعد ذلك على أن هذه عقيدة سنية سلفية
They (all the scholars present in the majlis) agreed that this is the SUNNI and SALAFI Aqeedah. [dhaylh Tabqaat al Hanabilah of Ibn Rajab hanbalee 4/396]
Ibn Abdul Hadi said regarding this debate:
وقد أظهر الله من قيام الحجة ما أعز به أهل السنة
وانصرف الشيخ تقي الدين إلى منزله
Allah gave victory and honored Ahlus sunnah through the evidences, and Shaykh Taqi ud din departed to his home. [al Uqud ad-durriyah, Ghayat al Eemani 2/232]
J) Debate between al Shawkani and Siddique bin Ali al Zabeedi al Hanafi on some issues of Hanafi fiqh.
al Shawkani said in the biography of Siddique bin Ali al Zabeedi al Hanafi
صديق بن على المزجاجى الزبيدى الحنفى ولد تقريبا سنة 1150 خمسين وماية وألف وقرأ فى زبيد على الشيخ محمد بن علاء الدين صحيح البخاري وسنن أبى داود وغيرهما من الامهات وقرأ على السيد سليمان بن يحيى المتقدم الامهات كلها سماعا مكررا وله قراءة فى الالات وهو محقق فى فقه الحنفية وقد أجاز له شيخاه المذكوران اجازة عامة بجمبع ما يجوز لهما روايته وانتقل الى المخا للتدريس هنالك وبقى أياما ثم وصل الى صنعاء فى شهر القعدة سنة 1203.
ووصل الى ولم أكن قد عرفته قبل ذلك ولا عرفنى وجرت بينى وبينه مذاكرات فى عدة فنون ثم خطر ببالى ان أطلب منه الاجازة فعند ذلك الخاطر طلب منى هو الاجازة فكان ذلك من المكاشفة فأجزت له وأجاز لى وكان سنه
إذ ذاك فوق خمسين سنة وعمرى دون الثلاثين ثم ما زال يتردد الى وفى بعض المواقف بمحضر جماعة وقعت بينى وبينه مراجعة فى مسائل وأكثرت الاعتراض على مسائل من فقه الحنفية واوردت الدليل وما زال يتطلب المحامل لما تقوله الحنفية فلما خلوت به قلت له اصدقنى هل ماتبدية في المراجعة تعتقده اعتقادا جازما فان مثلك في علمك بالسنة لا يظن به انه يؤثر مذهبه الذي هو محض الرأي فى بعض المسائل على ما يعلمه صحيحا ثابتا عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم فقال لا أعتقد صحة ما يخالف الدليل وان قال به من قال ولا ادين الله بما يقوله أبو حنيفة واصحابه إذا خالف الحديث الصحيح ولكن المرء يدافع عن مذهبه فى الظاهر ثم وفد الى صنعاء مدة أخرى بعد سنة 1209
In short
We both have taken ijazah from each other and we discuss various issues with each other. Once we had a friendly discussion on some issues in front of a group of scholars. I (al Shawkani) quoted evidences against some issues in hanafi madhab, after the discussion I asked him while he was alone. Tell me the truth, do you firmly believe in those issues which you were defending? I am asking this because I have a firm belief on your knowledge. I don’t think that even after seeing the authentic sunnah you remain on the madhab of raaye. He replied its true that I don’t want to take anyone’s opinion against the authentic hadith even the opinion of Imam Abu Hanifa and his companions but we have to defend our madhab apparently.
البدر الطالع 1/277-278 no. 206
This is not the exact translation just a gist of what is mentioned.
K) When a Rafidhi started debate with القاضي المحاملي teacher of Daraqutni and tried to prove Ali radhiAllahanho better than Abu Bakr radhiAllahanho.
Ibn Kathir said:
وقد تناظر هو و بعض الشيعة بحضرة بعض الأكابر فجعل الشيعي يذكر مواقف علي يوم بدر وأحد والخندق وخيبر وحنين وشجاعته.
ثم قال للمحاملي: أتعرفها؟
قال: نعم، ولكن أتعرف أنت أين كان الصديق يوم بدر؟
كان مع رسول الله ﷺ في العريش بمنزلة الرئيس الذي يحامي عنه، وعلي رضي الله عنه في المبارزة، ولو فرض أنه انهزم أو قتل لم يخزل الجيش بسببه.
فأفحم الشيعي
وقال المحاملي: وقد قدمه الذين رووا لنا الصلاة والزكاة والوضوء بعد رسول الله ﷺ فقدموه عليه حيث لا مال له ولا عبيد ولا عشيرة، وقد كان أبو بكر يمنع عن رسول الله ﷺ ويجاحف عنه، وإنما قدموه لعلمهم أنه خيرهم.
فأفحمه أيضا.
Some of the Shiites debated in the presence of great scholars, The Shiite started mentioning the position and the courage of Ali on the day of Badr, Uhud, Al-Khandaq, Khaybar, Hunayn.
Then he said to Al Mahamali: Are you aware of it?
He replied: Yes, but do you know where was Abu Bakr in the battle of Badr? He was with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him in a cottage like a chief protecting him (peace be upon him). and Ali may Allah be pleased with him was in battlefield. If for example he was defeated or killed, the army would not be let down because of that. (Because Prophet peace be upon him would be still alive, usually the armies lose the battle when their chief or king dies.)
The Shiite couldn’t answer.
al Bidaya wal Nihaya under the year 330 h
L) The debate of Ibn Tamiyah and the followers of Sufi Tariqa Ahmadiya
Ibn Kathir said:
وفي يوم السبت تاسع جمادى الأولى حضر جماعة كثيرة من الفقراء الأحمدية إلى نائب السلطنة بالقصر الأبلق، وحضر الشيخ تقي الدين بن تيمية فسألوا من نائب السلطنة بحضرة الأمراء، أن يكف الشيخ تقي الدين إمارته عنهم، وأن يسلم لهم حالهم، فقال لهم الشيخ: هذا ما يمكن، ولا بد لكل أحد أن يدخل تحت الكتاب والسنة قولا وفعلا، ومن خرج عنهما وجب الإنكار عليه.
فأرادوا أن يفعلوا شيئا من أحوالهم الشيطانية التي يتعاطونها في سماعاتهم، فقال الشيخ: تلك أحوال شيطانية باطلة، وأكثر أحوالهم من باب الحيل والبهتان، ومن أراد منهم أن يدخل النار فليدخل أولا إلى الحمام وليغسل جسده غسلا جيدا، ويدلكه بالخل والأشنان، ثم يدخل بعد ذلك إلى النار إن كان صادقا، ولو فرض أن أحدا من أهل البدع دخل النار بعد أن يغتسل، فإن ذلك لا يدل على صلاحه ولا على كرامته؛ بل حاله من أحوال الدجاجلة المخالفة للشريعة إذا كان صاحبها على السنة، فما الظن بخلاف ذلك.
فابتدر شيخ المنيبع الشيخ صالح وقال: نحن أحوالنا إنما تنفق عند التتر ليست تنفق عند الشرع.
فضبط الحاضرون عليه تلك الكلمة، وكثر الإنكار عليهم من كل أحد، ثم اتفق الحال على أنهم يخلعون الأطواق الحديد من رقابهم، وأن من خرج عن الكتاب والسنة ضربت عنقه.
وصنف الشيخ جزءا في طريقة الأحمدية، وبين فيه أحوالهم ومسالكهم وتخيلاتهم، وما في طريقتهم من مقبول ومردود بالكتاب، وأظهر الله السنة على يديه أخمد بدعتهم ولله الحمد والمنة.
On 9th Jamadi al Awla a big group of Fuqara from Ahmadiya came to Deputy of the empire at Qasr Abaaq. Shaykh Taqi ud din Ibn Tamiyah also came there. They asked in front of leaders from Deputy that Shaykh Taqi ud din should stop his Imarah and leave them alone. Shaykh replied this is not possible rather it is obligation for everyone to act upon Quran and Sunnah with his sayings and practice and who ever leave the Quran and Sunnah He should be rebuked. They (Ahmadis) wanted to do something satanic for this situation which they used to do in their Sama. Shaykh said these are satanic things and most of their things are from tricks and slanders. Whoever among them wants to go into the fire he should wash his body thoroughly and then rub it with vinegar and Isnan (the thing which is used for washing hands). And then if he is truthful he can go into the fire, for the sake of argument if someone from people of innovation after washing himself go into the fire then this thing is not evidence for his piety and Karamah. Rather they would be from those liars who are against Islamic law. And Sahib of shariyah (Wali) follows according to the sunnah and we can not even think against him. Shaykh al Muni Shaykh Saaleh came forward and said: Our acts works on Tataars not in front of shariyah. The people who were present took these words of him and everyone of them rebuked them.Then they (the Ahmadis) started to take off their Iron shackles from their necks. And whoever among them leaft Quran and sunnah was killed. Shaykh (Ibn Tamiyah) wrote a book on Tariqah of Ahmadiya and mentioned their conditions, groups and imaginations. And also mentioned whatever is accepted and rejected according to Quran in their Tariqah. Allah gave victory to sunnah on his hands and stopped their innovations. Praise to be Allah [Al Bidaya wal Nihaya 14/51]
M) Written debate between Ibn Taymiyyah and Ahmad bin Ibraheem Al Hanafi commentator of al Hidayah.
Ibn Kathir mentioned:
أحمد بن إبراهيم بن عبد الغني السروجي الحنفي، شارح (الهداية)، كان بارعا في علوم شتى، وولي الحكم بمصر مدة وعزل قبل موته بأيام، توفي يوم الخميس ثاني عشر ربيع الآخر ودفن بقرب الشافعي وله اعتراضات على الشيخ تقي الدين بن تيمية في علم الكلام، أضحك فيها على نفسه، وقد رد عليه الشيخ تقي الدين في مجلدات، وأبطل حجته.
Ahmad bin Ibraheem bin Abdul Ghani al Sarawji al Hanafi, The commentator of “Al Hidayah”… He objected to Shaykh Taqi ud din Ibn Taymiyyah on Ilm al Kalaam in which he made people laugh at him. Shaykh Taqi ud din wrote many volumes in his Refutation and invalidated his evidences [Al Bidaya wal Nihaya 14/77]
N) The debate of Abdul Ghani al Maqdasi on the aqeeda of Nuzool, and al Uluw in the eyes of Ibn Kathir.
Ibn Kathir said regarding Hafidh Abdul Ghani al Maqdasi (Student of Sh Abul Qadir and cousin of Ibn Qudama al Maqdasi).
فذكر يوما عقيدته على الكرسي فثار عليه القاضي ابن الزكي، وضياء الدين الدولعي، وعقدوا له مجلسا في القلعة يوم الاثنين الرابع والعشرين من ذي القعدة سنة خمس وتسعين.
وتكلموا معه في مسألة العلو ومسألة النزول، ومسألة ا لحرف والصوت، وطال الكلام وظهر عليهم بالحجة، فقال له برغش نائب القلعة: كل هؤلاء على الضلالة وأنت على الحق؟ قال: نعم، فغضب برغش من ذلك وأمره بالخروج من البلد.
He (Abdul Ghani) mentioned his aqeeda regarding on al Kursi due to which Qadi Ibn al Zaki and Dia al Din al Dawl`ee attacked him, And they held a majlis for him on Monday, 24th Zi Qa`da 595 h, And they did debate in detail on the issue of al Uluw, Nuzool, al Harf and Soot, He (Abdul ghani) BECAME HEAVY ON THEM BECAUSE OF THE EVIDENCE HE QUOTED. The deputy of the castle Berghash asked him, all of these people are on misguidance and you are on truth?, He said: yes, this made Berghash angry and he ordered that he (Abdul Ghani) should go out from the city. [al Bidaya wal Nihaya vol 12, tarjuma of Abdul Ghani al Maqdasi]
Then he said:
فلقد كانا نادرين في زمانهما في أسماء الرجال حفظا وإتقانا وسماعا وإسماعا وسردا للمتون وأسماء الرجال، والحاسد لا يفلح ولا ينال منالا طائلا.
Both of them (al Mizzi the teacher of Ibn Kathir and Abdul Ghani al Maqdasi) were exceptional with regards to hifdh of Asma al Rijaal.. and THE ENVIOUS CAN NEVER SUCCEED, NEITHER CAN HE BENEFIT FROM ANYTHING. [Ibid]