Removing blame from the great imams

Ibn Taimiya Abdul Rahman Al-Jameez raises blame from the noble imams and with him the comments of Ibn Al-Qayyim on a piece of the book | Ahmad bin Abdul Halim bin Abdul Salam bin Taimiya edition checked against seven manuscript copies of "Raising blame from the noble imams." A book authored by Ibn Taimiya, its title indicating its content; raising blame from the noble imams, in which he mentions the reasons for the differences among the scholars of the nation in some branches of Islamic jurisprudence issues, and that this does not diminish their status and value, and it was not driven by personal desires. The motivation behind writing this book was the blame issued by some people against some of the scholars of the nation for their disagreement with some of the hadiths of the Prophet, peace be upon him. The goal of this book was to lift that blame from them and justify their stance. Therefore, it was necessary to clarify to the people that such blame is falsehood. Ibn Taimiya here specifically addresses the scholars of the nation, not any student of knowledge who may err and repeat mistakes from himself. The Prophet, peace be upon him, said: "Judges are three: two in Hell, and one in Paradise. As for the one in Paradise, he is a man who knew the truth and acted upon it, and as for the two in Hell, one who judged for people out of ignorance, and one who knew the truth but judged contrary to it." Ibn Taimiya states in the book: "And know that none of the imams intentionally contradicts the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, for they are unanimously agreed upon the obligation of following the Prophet and that everyone’s words are to be taken or left except the Messenger of Allah." The reason for this was that if one of them had a statement supported by a authentic hadith that contradicted it, he would have an excuse for leaving it. The importance of the book Ibn Taimiya defended the logicality of differences among the fatwas of the imams of the Islamic nation, which is a matter of great importance for Muslims, for the necessity of steadfastness and firm piety and competence of those from whom they take their religion. It was mentioned in the book of Al-Jarh and Ta'dil: (And among the most beneficial writings in this field is the book "Raising blame from the noble imams," which is worthy if it were in China to be traveled to, and to bite with the molars on it. May Allah have mercy on those who make excuses for the imams, and know that their effort is only toward the truth and guidance). Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Baz said regarding the excuses of the jurists: (As elaborated by the eminent scholar Sheikh Islam Ibn Taimiya, may Allah have mercy on him, in his great book "Raising blame from the noble imams," and he did well and benefited, clarifying the excuses of scholars in what they disagreed with from the Sharia. It is very beneficial for the seeker of truth to review it). In the explanation of Sunan Abi Dawood: (Scholars have written in this regard books and apologies for the imams when authentic hadiths are found that contradict what one of them saw. One of the best writings on this is a valuable letter by Ibn Taimiya, may Allah have mercy on him, called "Raising blame from the noble imams"). Book topics The reasons Ibn Taimiya mentioned for the occurrence of disagreement Ibn Taimiya divided these excuses into three main reasons: 1- Not believing that the Prophet, peace be upon him, said it. 2- Not believing that the intention behind that statement was that issue. 3- Believing that the ruling is abrogated. Then Ibn Taimiya detailed these excuses into 10 reasons, summarized as: 1- The hadith did not reach him: such as the story of the grandmother’s inheritance, when Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, was asked about it, and he said: "You have nothing in the Book of Allah, nor do I know anything from the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah, but I will ask the people." So he asked them, and Mughira ibn Shuba and Muhammad ibn Muslim, may Allah be pleased with them, testified that the Prophet, peace be upon him, gave her her share. 2- The hadith reached him but was not authentic to him: as stated in the book: "The hadiths had spread and become famous, but they reached many scholars through weak routes, and others through authentic routes, which serve as proof from that aspect, even though they did not reach those who opposed them from that aspect." 3- Belief that the hadith is weak due to an opposing opinion: one may see the narrator as weak, another as trustworthy. For example, Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Yahiya Abu Ishaq al-Madani was considered weak by most narrators, but al-Shafi’i considered him good. 4- Requiring in the single report that the judge be just and a حافظ (memorizer or scholar), which others do not require: such as some requiring the hadith to be checked against the Qur'an and Sunnah, some requiring the narrator to be a jurist if he contradicts the principles of jurisprudence, some requiring the hadith to be widespread and apparent if it involves widespread issues... etc. 5- The hadith reached him and was established but he forgot it: such as Umar ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, forgetting the hadith of Tayammum when asked about a man who is junub in travel and cannot find water, and he said: "He should not pray until he finds water." It was mentioned by Ammar about an incident that happened to them, and they informed the Prophet, peace be upon him, who said to them: "It was enough for you like this," and struck the earth with his hands, wiping his face and hands. 6- Not knowing the indication of the hadith: this may be due to a strange word in the hadith that may have different interpretations among scholars, such as the hadith: "The Prophet, peace be upon him, forbade Muzabana." Or it may be due to language differences between the original and customary usage, such as with wine, where the term "nabiid" was used to refer to water sweetening (like soaked dates). 7- Belief that the indication in the hadith is not to be taken: Ibn Taimiya mentioned many aspects of this, including that a mere command does not imply obligation or urgency, or that the known with "lam" (the definite article) is not general, or that negated actions do not negate their entities or all their rulings, etc. 8- Belief that that indication was opposed by what indicates it is not intended: such as opposing a general with a specific, or an absolute with a restricted, or an absolute command with something that negates obligation, etc. 9- Belief that the hadith is opposed by what indicates its weakness, abrogation, or interpretation that makes it an opposition. 10- Opposing it with what indicates its weakness, abrogation, or interpretation: which others do not believe is an opposition, or that it is not truly an opposition. Examples include many Kufa narrators opposing authentic hadiths with apparent Quranic verses, believing that the apparent Quranic generality and similar issues take precedence over the text of the hadith. Also, rejecting a report that contains a specification of the generality of the Book, or a restriction of its absolute, or an addition to it. Also, opposing a group of Madinan scholars who consider a authentic hadith to be contradicted by the practice of the people of Medina, based on their consensus to oppose the report, and their consensus being a decisive proof over the hadith, such as opposing the hadith of the best of the sale councils, while the choice of council is established in Bukhari and Muslim. Warnings about punishment Then Ibn Taimiya in the continuation of the book discussed the hadiths of warning, giving examples of scholars’ differing opinions on them and how some specified some over others. Among them is the hadith of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him: "When two Muslims meet with their swords, the killer and the killed are in the Fire." Its apparent meaning is the prohibition of fighting among believers. Then he mentioned: "We know that the people of Jamal and Siffin are not in the Fire, because they have an excuse and a valid interpretation in the fighting, and good deeds prevented the obligation to act upon it." Another example is the hadith: "Three people Allah will not speak to them, nor look at them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He purify them, and they will have a painful punishment: a man who withholds water from the traveler, saying to Allah: Today I will prevent you from my favor as you prevented from the favor of what your hands did not do..." Ibn Taimiya elaborated on this, raising many questions and issues for discussion, with his answers, which require reviewing the entire book.