Did Ibn Taymiyyah make Takfīr of Al-bakri and his sect?
Let’s take a deep dive:
All quotes are from: Al-istighatha fi radd ala Al-bakri
There isn’t in the book express statements like “Bakri is a Kafir or Bakri is A Mushrik” but also note that there is no express statement Bakri is a Muslim, the statements of Ibn Taymiyyah indicate that he considered them to be mushrikiin and nowhere did he give them an excuse.
فليتدبر العاقل فعل من بدل دين الله ، وسلك سبيل المرتدين والمنافقين الذين جعلوا الإيمان كفراً
Here Ibn Taymiyyah asserts that Bakri and his group have taken the path of the apostates and the Munafiqeen
"Let the thinking person contemplate the action of one who turns the religion of Allah and took the path of the apostates and hypocrites who made iman kufr
This latter part [who made iman kufr] is a clear reference to Bakri"
وهذا مما يعلم بالاضطرار من دين الإسلام أن أحداً منهم ما كان إذا نزلت به حاجة لميت يا سيدي فلان أنا في حسبك أو اقض حاجتي كما يقول بعض هؤلاء المشركين
Again, Ibn Taymiyyah says "It is known by necessity in Islam that any one of them if a need befalls him, he would rush to the dead saying "O My Master X! I am in your reckoning or fulfill my needs as some of those Mushrikeen say"
غاية ما أقر به على نفسه وعلى أصحابه لما خاطبه بعض أصحابنا فقال أنتم نسبتمونا إلى الشرك ونحن ننسبكم إلى تنقص الرسول
فغاية الأمر أن ما يدعيه منازعيه تنقص الرسول وهم يقولون عنه وعن أمثاله إنهم مشركون
Here Ibn Taymiyyah asserts that he and his companions/students say Bakri and his followers are Mushrikeen
“The End goal of what he has confessed upon himself and his companions when some of our companions spoke to him where he said: “You have attributed us to Shirk and we have attributed you to belittling the Prophet.
Thus, the end goal of this affair is that what he claims against his enemies is belittling the Prophets meanwhile they (ie the enemies who are Ibn Taymiyyah’s companions and students, and by necessity him also, is that He (Bakri) and his likes are Mushrikeen”
فيقول السادن قد قلت للشيخ والشيخ يقول للنبي والنبي يقول لله والله قد بعث رسولاً إلى السلطان فلان فهل إلا محض دين المشركين والنصارى وفيه من الكذب والجهل ما يستجيزه كل مشرك أو نصراني ولا يروج عليه
Here Ibn Taymiyyah prefers the religion of the Nasara to them
“The servant [of the monastery] says: “You said to the Shaykh who says to the Prophet who says to Allah and Allah has sent a messenger to Sultan X.
So is this nothing except the exact religion of the Mushrikeen and Christians and that in it is from the lies and ignorance that which no Mushrik or Christian would even think about permitting himself say or spread”
لوجه الرابع : أن يقال : الغلاة المشركون هم في الحقيقة من بخسوا الرسل ما يستحقونه من التعظيم
Here Ibn Taymiyyah calls these people extremist Mushrikeen, who are these extremist mushrikeen except Bakri & his ilk
“The extremists Mushrikeen are in reality those who have been stingy towards the prophets concerning what they deserve in veneration."
فهذا القول الذي يقوله هذا _ يعني البكري _ هو مطابق لأحوال هؤلاء المشركين الضالين _ يعني عباد الكواكب _ لكن هذا يقوله مسلم ولا عاقل يتصور ما يقوله بل هو جنس قول النصارى
Here Ibn Taymiyyah asserts that the statement of Bakri is a carbon copy of the state of those Mushrikeen, meaning the planet worshippers, and that no Muslim or sane person can say that rather it is a part of what the Christians say.
وهؤلاء إذا قصد أحدهم القبر الذي يعظمه يبكي عنده ويخضع ويتضرع ويدعو ويحصل له من الرقة والتواضع والعبودية وحضور القلب ما لا يحصل له مثله في الصلوات الخمس والجمعة وقيام الليل وقراءة القرآن فهل هذا إلا حال المشركين المبتدعين
Here Ibn Taymiyyah again calls them Mushrikiin
"And those who when he seeks out the grave that he venerates, he cries and humbles and submits and supplicates and there is softness and humility and servitude and the heart is serene and sincere and present,
such a state that he doesn’t get when he prays his five and prays the night or reads the Quran. Then is this not but the state of the mushrikeen innovators?!!"
فإن الله تعالى أمر أن يدعى هو ويسأل هو ولم يجعل دعاء أحد من المخلوقين دعاء له بل قد نهى الله تعالى عن دعائه ولو كان هذا حقا لكان من دعا الملائكة والأنبياء دعاء لله فلا يكون مشركا والله تعالى قد جعلهم مشركين وقد قال تعالى
قل ادعوا الذين زعمتم من دونه فلا يملكون كشف الضر عنكم ولا تحويلا أولئك الذين يدعون يبتغون إلى ربهم الوسيلة أيهم أقرب ويرجون رحمته ويخافون عذابه إن عذاب ربك كان محذورا
Allah has commanded that He be invoked and asked and He did not make [one] Invoking the creation [mean that he is] invoking Him. Rather, Allah forbade invoking him [ie the created being] and if this was true [ie invoking the creation means invoking Allah]
then the one who invoked the Angels and Prophets would be an invocation to Allah and so he would not be a Mushrik. But Allah made them Mushrikeen as He stated in the verse
Say, "Invoke those you have claimed besides Him, for they do not possess the [ability for] removal of adversity from you or [for its] transfer [to someone else]."
This refutes those who use the Mājaz Aqli argument who say that when someone invoked Jeelani they’re actually invoking Allah and that’s why it’s not shirk. But Ibn Taymiyyah clearly believes it’s shirk.
"There is one part in the book, which is the only part quoted to claim that Ibn Taymiyyah gave Bakri excuse of ignorance
فلهاذا لم يقابل جهاله وافتراوه بالتكفير بمثله
In reality what had happened is Al-bakri made takfir of Ibn Taymiyyah, to which he responds and says that we’re not going to be childish and simply respond with Takfīr just because he made Takfīr.
Why? Because the principle is that takfir is a hukum shari and we only make takfir of those who Allah and his messenger made takfir of. So Ibn Taymiyyah is saying takfir has to be based on evidence and not emotions,
This doesn't mean he doesn't consider them mushrikeen as established in the thread.
Plus clearly Ibn Taymiyyah says Takfīr is dependant on Bulugh Al Hujjah. And what the else is Ibn Taymiyyah doing in this work?
In summary:
1. He believes what they did to be shirk 2. Calls them mushrikeen 3. Compares them to other mushrikeen and christians 4. Doesn't call them Muslim or believers 5. Never states he gives them an excuse for their shirk
It is clear that Ibn Taymiyyah made takfir of bakri
Thread showing Ibn Taymiyyah considered Istighatha to be shirk.
Does fighting and killing “Muslims” who profess the Shahada, believe in Allah & say they worship him alone, accept Muhammad as the messenger of Allah and are people of the Qiblah, make one from the Khawarij?
There are many who say yes to this question believing that such an action only comes from those who are from the Khawarij
But is this correct?
To understand this we will look back at the actions of the the Sahaba and most famously the wars of Apostasy.
We know during the wars of Riddah there were different groups fought for different reasons, those who returned to idolatry, those who followed a false prophet, and there were also those who Abu Bakar fought for refusing to pay the Zakah.
Are actions from the foundations of Iman and can it take you out of the fold of Islam?
There exists the deviant belief that actions are not a requirement for one to have Iman nor are actions in of themselves able to take you out of Islam.
Meaning that if you live without ever doing any action and simply believe in your heart then you’re a believer with Iman.
Let’s have a look at the belief of the Sahaba and see if this is inline with them.
Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah in his Minhaj Al-Sunnah
He says that one of the greatest forms of Jihad is to clarify falsehood and defend the Quran and Sunnah against the innovators.
“And all the innovations: like the innovations of the Khawarij, Shia, Murjia and Qadariyyah have similarities in the texts of the Prophets, unlike the innovations of the Jahmiyyah because they don’t have with them evidences from the revelations in the first place,
and that is why it was the last innovation to occur in Islam, and when it occurred the Imams of the Salaf made takfir of its people because they know the reality of their speech negates the existence of the creator, their most knowledgeable scholars become like Pharaoh
Imam Al-Tabari talks about the Ashari belief of Kalam Nafsi regarding the Quran.
He concluded that it is disbelief that takes one out of the fold of Islam.
First what is the Ashari belief?
The Asharis believe in Kalam Nafsi which is the uncreated Quran from the speech of Allah in the heavens and that the Quran we have with us today on the Earth is created
You can read more on that on the the linked thread
Now what does Imam Al-Tabari say about this belief
He says:
“The Quran is the speech of Allah that he revealed and it is from the meanings of his Towheed, what’s correct from the statement in this matter for us is that, the speech of Allah is uncreated
You guys now want to attribute lies to me like the way you do with our Imams from the Salaf or have you just lost your ability to read? This is such a desperate attempt at a reply, all you have done is reply to points I never made.
1) Where did I attribute any statement or an Athar to Imam Malik? Those were the words of Khuwayz Mindaad in his own book with his own understanding of the Malikiyyah Before him, he didn't quote Imam Malik or say this is his speech, there's literally no isnaad needed.
2) I simply shared what Ibn Abd Al-Barr said regarding Ahlul Kalam and put it into context using the statement of Khuwayz that Ibn Abd Al-Barr brings from the book of Khuwayz in regards to Ahlul Kalam, and show how another scholar from the Malikis made tabdee of the Ashairah.
Imam Abu Hamid Al-Isfarayini stance against the Ashairah and his Tabdee of Aba Bakar Al-Baqilani.
Imam Abu Hamid Al-Isfarayini who was the Imam of the Shafi'iyyah in the 4th century and the biggest Faqeeh of the Madhab in his time, would disassociate himself from the Ashairah and would harshly rebuke their scholars as deviants such as Al-Baqilani.
Imam Shaykh Abu Al-Hassan Al-Karji Al-Shafi'i said:
( كان الشيخ أبو حامد الاسفراييني شديد الإنكار على الباقلاني وأصحاب الكلام )
وقال أيضاً : ( كان الشيخ أبو حامد الاسفراييني إمام الأئمة الذي طبق الأرض علماً وأصحاباً إذا سعى إلى الجمعة من - قطيعة الكرخ - إلى الجامع