Thread by @Aal_Moalim

Is there a consensus really?

Ibn Jarir Al Tabari does not seem to think so:

He says when explaining the verse "إلا ما شاء ربك" in Surah Hud 11:107

https://twitter.com/nomorehemloc/status/1322613515019046912

وقال آخرون: عنى بذلك أهل النار، وكل من دخلها

ذكر من قال ذلك:

حدثت عن المسيب، عمن ذكره عن ابن عباس، " {§خالدين فيها ما دامت السموات والأرض} لا يموتون، ولا هم منها يخرجون ما دامت السماوات والأرض. {إلا ما شاء ربك} [هود: 107] قال: استثناء الله.

قال: يأمر النار أن تأكلهم. قال: وقال ابن مسعود: ليأتين على جهنم زمان تخفق أبوابها ليس فيها أحد، وذلك بعد ما يلبثون فيها أحقابا

حدثنا ابن حميد، قال: ثنا جرير، عن بيان، عن الشعبي، قال: «§جهنم أسرع الدارين عمرانا، وأسرعهما خرابا»

وقال آخرون: أخبرنا الله بمشيئته لأهل الجنة، فعرفنا معنى ثنياه بقوله: {عطاء غير مجذوذ} [هود: 108] أنها في الزيادة على مقدار مدة السماوات والأرض قال: ولم يخبرنا بمشيئته في أهل النار، وجائز أن تكون مشيئته في الزيادة، وجائز أن تكون في النقصان

ذكر من قال ذلك:

حدثني يونس، قال: أخبرنا ابن وهب، قال: قال ابن زيد، في قوله: " {§خالدين فيها ما دامت السموات والأرض إلا ما شاء ربك} فقرأ حتى بلغ : {عطاء غير مجذوذ} [هود: 108] قال: وأخبرنا بالذي يشاء لأهل الجنة، فقال: عطاء غير مجذوذ، ولم يخبرنا بالذي يشاء لأهل النار"

Ibn Jarir mentions three views to the Salaf:

View 1: That Jahannam and its people will cease to exist (the view Ibn Taymiyyah softly advocates for)

View 2: That we should do Tawaqquf as Allaah has not informed us of what He wills for the people of Jahannam

View 3: That Jahannam is eternal and the Istithnaa' here refers to the Muwahideen who were in Jahannam and they will be removed from it...

Ibn Jarir chose the third view as the most correct however the point here is to show that Ibn Jarir never claimed consensus on the issue

Also the point here is not to give victory to the first two views, rather it is to show that there is indeed a very old Khilaaf among the Salaf on this issue and that Ibn Taymiyyah was not alone in this nor did they "violate the Ijma'"

So, to berate him on such an issue is foolish and indicative of a personal problem against him...

Academic discussions are always welcome but many, whether pro or anti Ibn Taymiyyah, have this habit of just not getting it...

The OP also claimed that "Al Subki took Ibn Taymiyyah to task for this violation of the jama'a."

My response is quite simple. I will quote Ahmad Al Ghumari, one of the 20th century's biggest enemies of Ibn Taymiyyah, for his reaction to this refutation

Ahmad Al Ghumari said:

وما رد به التقي السبكي على ابن تيمية في هذه المسألة لم أستفد من شيئاً ما لما قرأته منذ عشرين سنة إلا معرفة أن التقي السبكي فضلاً عن ابنه التاج خلاف ما كنا نظن به وخلاف ما يهول به ابنه عنه فإني كتبت تلك الساعة بآخر الرد كتابة مضمنها: إن بين السبكي وابن تيمية بونا كبيراً في العلم

وقوة الاستدلال وأن الثاني أعلم بمراحل"

"That which Taqi Al Subki refuted Ibn Taymiyyah with in this issue (i.e. Fana' Al Naar) I did not benefit anything from it when I read it from 20 years ago except knowledge that Taqi Al Subki, let alone his son Taj, were different to what

we initially thought regarding them and different to what his son [i.e. Taj] had pontificated regarding his father [Taqi]. For, I wrote at that time, when completing [the reading] of his book [i.e. the refutation] what contained the following:

"The difference between Subki and Ibn Taymiyyah when it comes to knowledge and strong inference abilities is massive and that the latter [i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah] is miles more knowledgable"

See در الغمام الرقيق برسائل الشيخ السيد أحمد بن الصديق] p227

Comment:

وشهد شاهد من اهلها

Furthermore, to compare the way Ibn Taymiyyah reached his view (which btw he never explicitly stated to hold but it can be inferred that he was a soft advocate for it) to Jahm b. Safwan is a transgression against Ibn Taymiyyah

Ibn Taymiyyah built his view upon Aathaar that he had come across from the Salaf taken in conjunction with the Qur'anic verses (some of which quoted in the Tabari quote) and he actually has precedence such as 'Abd b. Humayd and Ibn Jarir.

He did not build his view from baseless 'Aqliyyat such as امتناع تسلسل الحوادث the way Jahm b. Safwaan did for there to even be a comparison...

Al Suyuti also brings these quotes and adds onto Ibn Jarir's quotings in his Durar Al Manthur as well

See 4/478

Someone may claim some, maybe many, of these Aathaar are inauthentic and that can be discussed as an ilmi dialogue. But to claim Ibn Taymiyyah has violated Ijmaa' is patently false as Ibn Jarir himself has shown

Finally, a brief look into Al Razi's tafsir can lead us to actually validating this view as a possibility.

In the Tafsir of Surah Ma'idah the verse "وإن تغفر لهم فإنك أنت العزيز الحكيم"

Razi says:

وفيه سؤال: وهو أنه كيف جاز لعيسى عليه السلام أن يقول وإن تغفر لهم والله لا يغفر الشرك...

والثاني: أنه يجوز على مذهبنا من الله تعالى أن يدخل الكفار الجنة وأن يدخل الزهاد والعباد النار، لأن الملك ملكه ولا اعتراض لأحد عليه،

فذكر عيسى هذا الكلام ومقصوده منه تفويض الأمور كلها إلى الله وترك التعرض والاعتراض بالكلية، ولذلك ختم الكلام بقوله فإنك أنت العزيز الحكيم يعني أنت قادر على ما تريد، حكيم في كل ما تفعل لا اعتراض لأحد عليك، فمن أنا والخوض في أحوال الربوبية،"

He says that it is allowed, in our school, for Allaah to enter the Disbeliever into paradise and to enter the ascetic worshippers into the for the Kingdom is His Kingdom and no one can object to Him

Based on this, it is possible that Allaah takes out all the disbelievers from the Fire and place them into Heaven and then make the Fire cease to exist.

Why?

Well, just as Razi said, The Kingdom is His Kingdom and no one can object to Him...Do you object?

Therefore, the view of Ibn Taymiyyah here is also entirely possible rationally according to the Mathhab of Al Razi (he is an Ash'ari) and so why is there this berating of Ibn Taymiyyah?

In conclusion, there is no actual consensus on this issue, Ibn Taymiyyah never explicitly said this was his view (although he may have been a soft proponent of it), his view is based on Aathaar affirmed by those before & after him + it is a rationally possible view based on Razi

Finally, as for the claim that Albani refuted Ibn Taymiyyah, then as @YasirQadhi said in his video that many admirers of Ibn Taymiyyah, be it those for him or against him, misread and hence misunderstand him...

@m_alkulify has an entire lesson on this issue which I will link where he discusses the view of Ibn Taymiyyah, how to understand it and a look into some of the responses to Ibn Taymiyyah from both admirers and haters along with his own response:

t.me/doros_alkulify…

YQ’s conclusions on the issue

https://twitter.com/aal_moalim/status/1322722792723406848