Taj al Din al Subki was the sufi, The Ashari who hates Ibn Taymiyah and Hanbalis. When Ibn Taymiyah won the hearts of scholars in the debate and the scholars accepted the aqeeda of Ibn Taymiyah, but Taj al Din did not even mention this victory.
The debate between Ibn Taymiyyah and Safi ud din al Hindi
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 whould 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]
Note 2: Taj ud din as-Subki who was staunch against his own teacher Imam ad-Dahabi and Shaykh ul Islam said regarding this debate in Tabqaat al Kubra ash-Shaafiyah under the biography of al Hindi
فلما شرع يقرر أخذ ابْن تيمية يعجل عليه على عادته , ويخرج من شيء إلى شيء ، فقال له الهندي : ما أراك يابْن تيمية إلا كالعصفور ، حيث أردت أن أقبضه من مكان فر إلى مكان آخر
“When he debated Ibn Taymiyya, He (Ibn Taymiyya) precipitated as was his habit moving from one issue to another. al-Hindi said to him: I do not see you except like a sparrow O Ibn Taymiyah that I when I try to catch it at a place, it moves to another.(end quote)
Unlike Ibn Kathir who said “his (al Hindi’s) small stream tried to push a vast ocean (Ibn Taymiyyah). Few things should be mentioned regarding the version of Taj ud din Subki.
He was born in 727 h, whereas, Ibn Taymiyyah died in 728 h. So there is problem in believing in Taj ud din`s version. Especially when the student of Safi ud din al Hindi, Kamal ud din bin Zamalkani who also debated Ibn Taymiyyah, said regarding his debates:
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.
Scholars on Taj al din al Subki’s bigotry
1. Izz al din al Kinani (767 ah) about Taj as-Subki
Izz al din was cheif Justice and teacher of Taj al Subki. He said:
: هو رجل قليل الادب، عديم الانصاف جاهل بأهل السنة ورتبهم”
He is a man having little manners, lack of scholarly integrity, ignorant of Ahl as-Sunnah and their ranks.
(ref: الاعلان للسخاوي: 469 فما بعد، ومعجم الشافعية لابن عبد الهادي، الورقة: 48 47 (الظاهرية)
Izz al din rahimahullah was right because Taj al Subki even spoke against the giant, Imam ad-Dhahabi, who was his own teacher, he said about him:
وَأَنا أخْشَى عَلَيْهِ يَوْم الْقِيَامَة من غَالب عُلَمَاء الْمُسلمين وأئمتهم الَّذين حملُوا لنا الشَّرِيعَة النَّبَوِيَّة فَإِن غالبهم أشاعرة وَهُوَ إِذا وَقع بأشعري لَا يبقي وَلَا يذر ،وَالَّذِي أعتقده أَنهم خصماؤه يَوْم الْقِيَامَة
“I fear for Dhahabi regarding the majority of the Imams and scholars of the Muslim Ummah, who have transmitted the Sharia to us, because most of them are Ash’aris. And when Dhahabi criticizes an Ash’ari, he leaves no stone unturned. I think that all these scholars and Imams will stand against Dhahabi on the Day of Judgment.”
[Tabaqat al-Shafi’iyyah al-Kubra by al-Subki, 2/14]He also said about great Dhahabi in ill manner:
ثمَّ هُوَ مَعَ ذَلِك غير خَبِير بمدلولات الْأَلْفَاظ كَمَا يَنْبَغِي فَرُبمَا ذكر لَفْظَة من الذَّم لَو عقل مَعْنَاهَا لما نطق بهَا
“Then, despite this, he is not sufficiently aware of the implications of words as he should be, so he might mention a phrase that is blameworthy; if he had understood its meaning, he would not have spoken it.”
Tabqaat al Shaafiyyah 2/14
He also misbehaved with another scholar, Ibn Qadhi Jabal l, who silenced Taj al Subki with his good manners on his foul mouth.
Ibn Tulun mentioned: al-Subki said to him:
يا مولانا لما رأيناكم من بعيد حسبناكم يهودًا»، فقال ابن قاضي الجبل: «ولكنا لما رأيناكم حسبناكم مسلمين»، فندم السبكي على ما قال.
“Maulana, when we saw you from afar, we thought you were a Jew.” Ibn Qadi al-Jabal said: “But when we saw you, we thought you were among the Muslims.” So al-Subki regretted on what he said.
. القلائد الجوهرية في تاريخ الصالحية صفحة 493
2. as-Sakhawi and 3. Mawsoo‘at Ar-Radd ‘ala Al-Mathaahib Al-Fikriyyah Al-Mu‘aasirah about Taj as-Subki.
Islamweb Fatwa No : 250687 stated
“As for As-Subki (the son [Taaj-ud-Deen], not the father [Taqiyy-ud-Deen]), he cited this statement in his book Tabaqaat Ash-Shaafi‘iyah Al-Kubra. In fact, this is not surprising because he was one of those people who hated and fiercely criticized Ibn Taymiyyah. Mawsoo‘at Ar-Radd ‘ala Al-Mathaahib Al-Fikriyyah Al-Mu‘aasirah reads, “As-Subki, the son, did not follow the example of his father; he disparaged and fiercely criticised Ibn Taymiyyah using the most reprehensible language. People criticized him for that; Imaam As-Sakhaawi attributed him to utter bigotry as he (As-Subki, the son) wrote in his book At-Tabaqaat, ‘Since when did the Hanbalis win a debate?’ As-Sakhaawi commented, “This is very odd and reflects worst type of bigotry!” In fact, As-Subki even criticized his own teacher Ath-Thahabi.
As-Subki’s words underlined that Shaykh Safiyy Al-Deen Al-Hindi said that statement to Ibn Taymiyyah; perhaps this was his personal opinion, given that one may assume that his opponent is dodging his questions in a debate. Even if we assumed that Ibn Taymiyyah was dodging the questions in the debate, this does not necessarily mean that Al-Hindi had won the debate (and proved his argument stronger). Instead, what has been reported is that Ibn Az-Zamalkaani completed the debate with Ibn Taymiyyah and that he was convinced of the argument of Ibn Taymiyyah.”(end quote)
4. al Alusi Kabeer responding Taj ud din on tawassul.
And Taj As-Subki insulted Al-Majd (in fact At Taqi Ibn Taymiyah), as he us used to and said : “And Tawassul is recommended, and likewise Istighathah with the Prophet (saw) to the Lord, and none of the Salaf or Khalaf denied this until Ibn Taymiyah came, and he denied this, and deviated from the right path and innovated….”
(Al-Alusi answered:) “And you know that Du’a reported in narrations from pure Ahlul Bayt (household of the Prophet (saw)) and others from Imams, there is not in them Tawassul with his noble essence (Dhat)…the one who claims a text, then he should present it” [ Imam Mahmud Al-Alusi in his “Ruh ul-Ma’ani” in Tafsir of the verse “Seek Wasilah to Him” (Maidah: 35)]
5. Shaykh ul Islam Saleh bin Umar Siraj ud din al Bulqini defending Ibn taymiyyah and commenting on Taj al Subki.
It is mentioned in al Radd al Wafir Ibn Nasir al-Din ad-Damishqi page 249, Ghayat al Amani fe Radd al Nabhani 2/161-164.
Shaykh ul Islam Saleh bin Umar Siraj ud din al Bulqini said:
ولقد افتخر قاضي القضاة تاج الدين ابن السبكي في ترجمة أبيه الشيخ تقي الدين السبكي في ثناء الأئمة عليه بأن الحافظ المزي لم يكتب بخطه لفظة شيخ الإسلام إلا لأبيه وللشيخ تقي الدين أبن تيمية وللشيخ شمس الدين ابن أبي عمر، فلولا أن ابن تيمية في غاية العلو في العلم والعمل ما قرن ابن السبكي أباه معه في هذه المنقبة التي نقلها ولو كان ابن تيمية مبتدعا أو زنديقاً ما رضي أن يكون أباه قريناً له.
نعم نسب الشيخ تقي الدين إليه أشياء أنكرها عليه معاصروه، وانتصب للرد عليه الشيخ تقي الدين السبكي في مسألتي الزيارة والطلاق، وأفرد كلاً منهما بتصنيف، وليس في ذلك ما يقتضي كفره ولا زندقته أصلاً، وكل أحد يؤخذ من قوله ويترك إلا صاحب هذا القبر- يعني النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم – والسعيد من عدت غلطاته، وانحصرت سقطاته، ثم إن الظن بالشيخ تقي الدين أنه لم يصدر منه ذلك تهوراً وعدواناً- حاش لله- بل نعله لرأي رآه وأقام عليه برهاناً، ولم نقف إلى الآن بعد الفحص والتتبع على شيء من كلامه يقتضي كفره ولا زندقته، وإنما نقف على رده على أهل البدع والأهواء وغير ذلك مما يظن به براءة الرجل وعلو مرتبته في العلم والدين، وتوقير العلماء والكبار وأهل الفضل متعين، قال الله تعالى {قُلْ هَلْ يَسْتَوِي الَّذِينَ يَعْلَمُونَ وَالَّذِينَ لا يَعْلَمُونَ} .
وصح أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: “ليس منا من لم يرحم صغيرنا، ويعرف شرف كبيرنا” وفي رواية “حق كبيرنا
وكيف يجوز أن يقدم على رمي عالم بالفسق أو الكفر ولم يكن فيه ذلك وقد صح أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: ” لا يرمي رجل رجلاً بالفسق أو الكفر إلا ارتدت عليه إن لم يكن صاحبه كذلك” 1، ثم كيف يجوز الإقدام على سب الأموات بغير حق وهو محرم، فقد صح أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: “لا تسبوا الأموات فإنهم قد أفضوا إلى ما قدموا”2. وكيف يجوز أذى المؤمن بغير حق والله تعالى يقول: {وَالَّذِينَ يُؤْذُونَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتِ بِغَيْرِ مَا اكْتَسَبُوا فَقَدِ احْتَمَلُوا بُهْتَاناً وَإِثْماً مُبِيناً} 3 وصح أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: “المسلم من سلم المسلمون من لسانه ويده والمهاجر من هجر ما نهى الله عنه”4.
فالواجب على من أقدم على رمي هذا العالم بما ليس فيه الرجوع إلى الله تعالى، والإقلاع عما صدر منه، ليحوز الأجر الجزيل بالقصد الجميل، وإن اطلع على أمر يحتمل التأويل فلا يقطع بما يخالف ذلك التأويل بغير دليل، وإن صح عنده أمر جازم عنه يقتضي إنكاره فينكره قاصداً للنصيحة، ولا يهضم مقام الرجل مع شهرته بالعلم والفضل والتصانيف والفتاوى التي سارت بها الركبان، والله تعالى يحفظنا من الخطأ والخطل، ويحمينا من الزيغ والزلل، والحمد لله رب العالمين، وكتب في اليوم الموافق ليوم ولادة النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، يوم الاثنين ثاني عشر شهر ربيع الأول سنة 835”.
Cheif Justice Taj al din as-Subki proudly mentioned in the biography of his father Shaykh Taqi al-Din as-Subki:
“The scholars praised him (Taqi al-din as-Subki) that Hafiz al Mizzi wrote Shaykh al Islam only for three scholars. My father (Taqi ud din as-Subki), Shaykh Taqi al-din Ibn Taymiyyah and Shaykh Shams al-din Ibn Abi Umar”
If Ibn Taymiyyah was not reaching highest level of knowledge and practice than (Taj al-din) as-Subki would not mention him in this praise with his father. If Ibn Taymiyyah was an innovator or zindeeq than he would not make the level of his father like him.
Yes he attributed somethings to shaykh Taqi al-din (Ibn Taymiyyah) which were rejected by the scholars of his time. Then Taqi ud din as-Subki started to refute him on the topics of Ziyarah and divorce and wrote books on these issues. There is nothing in these issues because of which kufr and zindeeq are applicable to him. We take and reject the saying of everyone except Prophet peace be upon him… And to say that Shaykh Taqi al-Din said this because of carelessness and agression? May Allah save us! It can not happen, maybe they had an opinion and gave evidence for that, But even after finding and searching I did not find anything which is kufr and zanadaqa. We just know that he refuted the people of innovations and desires because of which we think he is free (from the lies) and he is at the highest level in knowledge of deen. Reverence of the scholars and great people of knowledge is specified as Allah says:
“Say, “Are those who know equal to those who do not know?” [39:9]
and the Prophet peace be upon him rightly said:
“”He is not one of us who shows no mercy to younger ones and does not acknowledge the honour due to our elders” and in another narration “the right of our elders”.[Sunan Abu Dawud:3943, Musnad Ahmad etc]
Who can allow this dare that to say that scholar an evildoer and diebeliever who is totally free from these accusations? It is authentically proven from prophet peace be upon him that:
“When any Muslim accuses another Muslim of sin or of disbelief, the reproach rebounds upon the one who utters it, if the other person is not deserving of it.” [Bukhari 3508]
Then how can it be allowed to abuse wrongfully who are already died? When it is not allowed to abuse them. It is authentically proven from Prophet peace be upon him that:
” “Do not abuse the dead, because they have attained that which they had forwarded” [Bukhari 1393]
And where it is allowed to wrongfully harm a Momin? Allah says:
“And those who harm believing men and believing women for [something] other than what they have earned have certainly born upon themselves a slander and manifest sin.” [33:58]
“A Muslim is the one from whose tongue and hands the Muslims are safe; and a Muhajir (Emigrant) is the one who refrains from what Allah has forbidden”.[Bukhari,Muslim]
Whoever attributed those things to him which are not in him, they must turn back to Allah and do not accuse in future, so that they can be rewarded with good intention. If they know any issue in which taweel can be done, than they should not go against it without evidence. If they know any issue which must be negated than they should dislike it with good intention to resolve that issue. Do not humiliate the status of that person when his knowledge, virtue, Book and fatawa are famous in vast area.
May Allah save us from mistakes and absurd things, And protect us from slipping and crooked nature. Allah praise to be Allah this is written on 12th of Rabi al Awwal on the day when Prophet peace be upon him was born (Monday), 835 h” (end quote)
6. Abdul wahaab Sha’rani said about Taj al Subki:
al Alusi said:
ونقل الشيخ عبد الوهاب الشعرانى في كتابه ((الأجوبة المرضية)) : أن أهل زمانه رموه بالكفر واستحلال شرب الخمر والزنا وأنه كان يلبس الغيار والزنار بالليل ويخلعهما بالنهار، وتحزبوا عليه وأتوا به مقيداً مغلولاً من الشام إلى مصر، وجاء معه خلائق من الشام يشهدون عليه؛ ثم تداركه اللطف على يد الشيخ جمال الدين الإسنوى. اهـ.
Sheikh Abdul Wahhab al-Sha’rani reported in his book “Al-Ajwibah al-Mardiyah” that the people of his time accused him of:
– Disbelief (Kufr)
– Allowing the drinking of wine
– Allowing adultery
– Wearing a Christian monk’s habit (Ghiyar) and belt (Zunnar) at night, and removing them during the day
They formed a party against him, brought him in chains and shackles from Damascus to Egypt, and a group of people from Damascus came to testify against him. However, he was later treated with kindness by Sheikh Jamal al-Din al-Isna’i.
Jala al aynayn page 35
Note: we believe the last quote above is wrongfully attributed to Taj al Subki, as we believe he was far above from doing these acts.
Taj al din al Subki on al Ghazaali.
let us see what The defender of al Ghazaali, Taj al din as-Subki himself said regarding al Ghazaali
وأما ما عاب به ” الإحياء ” من توهنة بعض الأحاديث ، فالغزالي معروف بأنه لم تكن له فِي الحديث يد باسطة ، وعامة ما فِي ” الإحياء ” من الأخبار والآثار ، مبدد فِي كتب من سبقه من الصوفية والفقهاء ، ولم يسند الرجل لحديث واحد ، وقد اعتنى بتخريج أحاديث ” الإحياء ” بعض أصحابنا ، فلم يشذ عنه إلا اليسير.
Some of the ahadeeth mentioned in “al Ihya” are fabrications because It is known that Al Ghazaali didn’t know about ahadeeth, its general reports and narrations are mentioned in previous books of Sufis and The scholars, He did not mentioned a single chain of narrations. Some of our companions did its takhreej. [Tabqaat ash-Shafiya al Kubra 6/249]
Some wise words from Taj al din al Subki.
a) Allamah Taj Uddin Subki(d.771 h) says
وأما تعصبكم في فروع الدين وحملكم الناس على مذهب واحد فهو الذي لا يقبله الله منكم ولا يحملكم عليه إلا محض التعصب والتحاسد ولو أن الشافعي وأبا حنيفة ومالكا وأحمد أحياء يرزقون لشددوا النكير عليكم وتبرءوا منكم فيما تفعلون
Your fanaticism in Furoo’ Deen and encouraging people to follow one Madhhab is an act which Allah will never accept from you and nothing encourages you do this except your fanaticism and jealousy. And if Shafi’ee, Abu hanifa, Malik and Ahmed would have been alive they would have refuted you badly and would have disavowal from what you do. [passage translated by Abdul Raheem Salafi “Mu’eed an Na’m wa Mubeed an Naqm page” 76] iii) As-Subki said: “It is permissible for someone with no knowledge to occasionally follow the concessions of the scholars in cases of necessity as long as he or she does not seek out concessions [as a habit].” [Islamweb Fatwa No : 234370]
b) Taj ud din as-Subki said:
ينبغي لك أيها المسترشد أن تسلك سبيل الأدب مع الأئمة الماضين، وأن لا تنظر إلى كلام بعضهم في بعض، إلا إذا أتى ببرهان واضح، ثم إن قدرت على التأويل وتحسين الظن فَدُونَك، وإلا فاضرب صفحًا عما جرى بينهم، فإنك لم تُخْلَق لهذا، فاشتغل بما يعنيك ودع ما لا يعنيك، ولا يزال طالبُ العلم عندي نبيلاً حتى يخوض فيما جرى بين السلف الماضين، ويقضي لبعضهم على بعض، فإياك ثم إياك أن تصغي إلى ما اتفق بين أبي حنيفة وسفيان الثوري، أو بين مالك وابن أبي ذئب، أو بين أحمد بن صالح والنسائي، أو بين أحمد بن حنبل والحارث المحاسبي، وهلُمَّ جرًّا إلى زمان الشيخ عز الدين بن عبد السلام والشيخ تقي الدين ابن الصلاح، فإنك إن اشتغلت بذلك خشيتُ عليك الهلاك، فالقومُ أئمةٌ أعلام، ولأقوالهم مَحامِلُ ربما لم يُفهم بعضُها، فليس لنا إلا الترضي عنهم، والسكوتُ عما جرى بينهم، كما يُفعل ذلك فيما جرى بين الصحابة رضي الله عنهم
I look at any knowledge seeker as a noble person till he start thinking about what happened between previous scholars and he start to make some are right and others are wrong (with his own ijtihaad). I say never ever look at what happened between Abu Hanifa and Sufian Al-Thauri, Malik and Ibn Abi Al-Thi’b, Ahmed bin Salih and Al-Nassa’i or between Ahmed and Al-Harith bin Asad Al-Muhasibi. In any time there is some difference in knowledge, and human nature in scholars. But all of them are like falcons in the sky and we are just like little chickens on the ground as compared to them. Till the time of Al-Iz bin Abdul Salam and Al-Taqi bin Al-Salah.
I am afraid you will be lost if you keep thinking about these things, because those scholars were great and there may be other meanings for what they said, you may not exactly understand what they are talking about in some points.
You have nothing to do with what happened between them, like what we say about Sahaba (رضي الله عنهم أجمعين)] [Tabqaat ash-Shafiya (2/ 39), Translation taken from www ahlalhdeeth com]