[MedicineMan]

BismillahirRahmanirRahim

Asalamu`aleikum

I'm under the impression that all Muslims heroes (scholars, saints, warriors) throughout history have been traditional Sunnis. Some heroes which the Salafis claim to themselves were Sunnis in reality: Shaykh Ibn Taymiyya and Shaykh Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya. Are there any heroes whom followed a Salafi creed (or something similar to it)?

JazakAllah khayran

[faqir]

as-salamu `alaikum
I'm not sure how 'sunni' the creed of Ibn T and Ibn Q were!?
Also, how do you define 'hero'? Muhammad Ibn Abdal Wahhab is a 'hero' to some. There are other modern day heros of salafis like Sayyid Qutb - although his creed isn't really totally 'salafi'.

[Abu Sufyan al-Amin]

Asalaamu Alaikum,

I second brother Faqir's answer masha'Allah.

Just to add on a bit though, when the Salafis turn to history in order to justify or glorify their methodology and Aqeedah they often do 3 things.

1.) Reference and quote from their actual scholars such as Ibn Taymiyyah (their spiritual master in terms of creed), Ibn Abdul Wahab (who they love to use as an example of methodology), Ibn al-Qayyim, etc.

These are men who shared their actual beliefs and contributed to the developing their creed as we see it, Ibn Taymiyyah and ibn Abdul Wahab more so than the others.

This is done by all Salafis including each and every sub-group.

2.) They quote people who they pick and choose from in their methodology but try to sweep the reality of their creed under the rug. Ash-Shaheed Sayyid Qutb raheema'Allah ta'alaa is a perfect example as the brother mentioned. Sayyid Qutb himself was in fact an Ashari and this was apparent namely in his tafsir 'In The Shade of The Qur'an'. He was close friends to a major Ashari and Sufi Shaykh, Imam Hassan al-Banna raheema'Allah ta'alaa, who he condoned and supported (Imam al-Banna did the same in return) and shared the same exact Aqeedah. If you speak to his brother Muhammad Qutb he is an Ashari still and this is the Aqeedah he teaches till this day in Saudi Arabia I believe. With this being a known fact the wrongfully called Salafis assist on taking from his books on methodology (actually they just pick and choose from his writing what they want to follow) and try to keep his creed as a "dirty little secret".

They do the same thing for Salahuddin Ayyubi, Imam an-Nawawi, etc. It is a lot like a "don't ask don't tell policy" among themselves. This is done more so in the 'Salafi-Jihadi' sub-group or 'Salafi-Sahwahee' sub-group.

3.) They quote scholars and heroes from among Ahluls Sunnah wal-Jammah dating all the way back to As-Salaf us-Salih and ether take their works out of its original context, isolate a single line and quote that alone, refuse to provide the historical context it was revealed, sometimes change the work completely and distort or destroy the original writings (as they have done with many of Imam Ahmad's raheema'Allah ta'alaa books).

This they do more so than anything as this is done by all Salafis in each and every sub-group.

So those are the three usual methods taking when it comes to "describing the heroes of Salafiyyah". Ignoring the methods 2 and 3 and focusing on number one is where you get them.

The actual "heroes" and major figures in the "Salafi/Wahabi" movement who actually represent both their actual creed and methodology are perhaps heroes for them but Ahluls Sunnah wal-Jammah remembers them as heretics, deviants, mujassima, terrorists (by the western definition, never forget Taif ya Muslimeen), genocidal maniacs, etc.

And again Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Abdul Wahab being the two best examples of all of these things listed above in my humble and meaningless opinion.

I am speaking about this as a former Salafi/Wahabi myself who happens to know the mentality and thinking of these people.

This post has been edited by Abu Sufyan al-Amin: 15 May 2010 - 06:06 AM

[MedicineMan]

JazakAllah khayran for your answers brothers. May Allah reward you both and raise you higher in rank and knowledge.
Alhumdulillah, things are more clear to me now.
By hero I meant someone who:
1) exemplified the sunnah both inwardly and outwardly
2) left a positive mark on history
3) was an example for others to emulate

Regarding Ibn Taymiyya, I've read and heard that he was a Sufi (Qadri) and acknowledged himself to be of Ahle-Sunna wal Jammah. The deviant beliefs he did hold were condemned by the majority ulema of his time and later.
But I'd be grateful for the opinion of someone more learned than me.

Could you please recommend any texts (preferably in English) about the lives of ibn Taymiyya, ibn Abdul Wahab and Sayyid Qutb?

[suleimanibnsalim]

Calling yourself a Qadiri does not protect you from mistakes in `aqidah. Everyone says they are from ahl as-sunnah.

[Abu Sufyan al-Amin]

MedicineMan, on 15 May 2010 - 05:45 AM, said:

JazakAllah khayran for your answers brothers. May Allah reward you both and raise you higher in rank and knowledge.
Alhumdulillah, things are more clear to me now.
By hero I meant someone who:
1) exemplified the sunnah both inwardly and outwardly
2) left a positive mark on history
3) was an example for others to emulate

Regarding Ibn Taymiyya, I've read and heard that he was a Sufi (Qadri) and acknowledged himself to be of Ahle-Sunna wal Jammah. The deviant beliefs he did hold were condemned by the majority ulema of his time and later.
But I'd be grateful for the opinion of someone more learned than me.

Could you please recommend any texts (preferably in English) about the lives of ibn Taymiyya, ibn Abdul Wahab and Sayyid Qutb?

Ibn Taymiyyah up till the age of 30 was ok, it was after this time he came forth with his deviant beliefs and was jailed for them.

As for texts on Ibn Taymiyyah. There is not a lot available in English besides the biographies brought out by the Wahabis. However, ironically, tonight a group of Ashari brothers from the Nur uz-Zamaan Institute just so happen to be doing a broadcast about him talking about why he was imprisoned, the deviant beliefs he came from, etc. In many of their lectures they address the fitnah of Ibn Taymiyyah as well you could also read the book Subduing the Subduer where they touch a bit on the later part of his life where he had deviated. However the earlier parts of his life I don't really think ASWJ has paid much mind to and the Wahabis are the ones who put out the novel long biographies about him. Some one else here may know of something Allahu'Alim.

http://www.nuruzzama...the_Subduer.pdf

As for Ibn Abdul Wahab I advise you to stay away from the Wahabi interpretation of his life. This is because a majority of what they say are lies or history out of its context. Because of this man's reign of terror and the unbelievable fitnah he had caused, the Wahabis had to exert extra effort in covering up what actually took place.

However Imam Imran Hussien wrote a book about it and the 'Wahabi State':
http://imranhosein.o...s/caliphate.pdf

Also here is a book entitled 'Confessions of A British Spy':
http://www.sunna.inf...es/htm/spy1.htm

There are a few other books out there I am sure the other brothers and sisters can link you to as well there are lots of books written about the Wahabi movement by kuffar, the only reason I dislike these is they often try to group any form of Islamic revivalism in there with it, however usually they give a very correct interpretation of the history of the Wahabi movement. So take the good and leave the bad in that case.

As for Ash-Shaheed Sayyid Qutb, there is an excellent lecture which gives the history about his life. I have posted this on Youtube and will give you the link to the playlist:
http://www.youtube.c...5A6EFB29C549FF3

Also I believe the works of the brother himself represent what type of man he truly was masha'Allah.

[Seth]

Bismi Llah
As-salaamu 'alaykum.
A truly excellent exposition--not necessarily on Ibn Taymiyyah's and Ibn Abdul Wahhab's lives "as such," but on their beliefs and methodologies--is the "This is Jihad?" series of lectures by the Ash'ari Shadhili murshid Sheikh Nuh Keller. I think things might be even more clear after listening to this:

http://www.shadhilit...?act=file&id=22

[suleimanibnsalim]

Quote

Also here is a book entitled 'Confessions of A British Spy':
http://www.sunna.inf...es/htm/spy1.htm

No need to quote forgeries...

[absalih]

suleimanibnsalim, on 16 May 2010 - 02:51 PM, said:

Quote

Also here is a book entitled 'Confessions of A British Spy':
http://www.sunna.inf...es/htm/spy1.htm

No need to quote forgeries...

http://www.marifah.n...-a-british-spy/

[absalih]

On Ibn Taymiyyah and the like:Shaykh Huseyn Hilmi Isik wrote:

http://www.hizmetboo...slam/ref-42.htm

Hadrat Shah Wali-Allah ad-Dahlawi .d.1176.AH, WROTE ABOUT Ahl as-Sunnat scholars:

Quote

"Rasulullah ('alaihi 's-salam) said, 'Great scholars will come in Iran.' Besides great hadith scholars such as al-Bukhari, Muslim, at-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, an-Nasai, Ibn Maja, ad-Darimi, ad-Dara-Qutni, Hakim, al-Baihaki and many others who were educated in Iran, there are the great fiqh scholars such as Abu 't-Tayyib [Qadi Tahir at-Tabari], Shaikh Abu Hamid [al-Isfaraini], Shaikh Abu Ishaq ash-Shirazi, and al-Juwaini ['Abdullah ibn Yusuf and his son], Imam al-Haramain 'Abd al-Malik ibn 'Abdullah al-Juwaini and Imam Muhammad al-Ghazali and many many others, who were also educated in Iran. Even Imam Abu Hanifa and his disciples in Mawara an-nahr and Khurasan are the scholars of Iran and are the subject of the good news in the Hadith.
A hadith declares, 'There will come a mujaddid in every hundred years.' As he declared, a mujaddid came in each century and strengthened the religion. In the first century of the Hegira, 'Umar ibn 'Abd al-Aziz removed the cruelty of the rulers and established the principles of justice. In the second century, al-Imam ash-Shafi'i explained the knowledge of iman and separated the knowledge of fiqh. In the third century, Abu 'l-Hasan al-Ashari formulated the Ahl-as-Sunnat knowledge and rebutted the people of bidat. In the fourth century, Hakim and al-Baihaki and the like established the fundamentals of the knowledge of the Hadith, and Abu Hamid and the like spread the knowledge of fiqh. In the fifth century, Imam al-Ghazali opened a new way and said fiqh, tasawwuf and kalam were not different from one another. In the sixth century, Imam Fakhr ad-din ar-Razi spread the knowledge of kalam; and Imam an-Nawawi spread the knowledge of fiqh. Thus, a mujaddid, coming in each century up to our time, strengthened the religion. We should not dismiss the matter by just saying that the above hadith and the like are the miracles predicting future happenings. We should also realize the importance and the value of the predicted happenings." [Shah Wali-Allah ad-Dahlawi, Izalat al-Khafa 'an khilafati'l-Khulafa'. v II. p. 377, Karachi, 1372.]

http://www.hizmetboo...slam/ref-44.htm
Huseyn Hilmi Isik Effendi writes again:

Quote

"Ustad Ibn Khalifa Aliwi, a graduate of the Islamic University of Jami' al-Azhar, wrote in his book Aqidat as-Salafi wal-khalaf: "As 'Allama Abu Zuhra writes in his book Tarikh al-madhahibi 'l-Islamiyya, some people, who dissented from the Hanbali madhhab in the fourth century after Hegira, called themselves Salafiyyin. Abu 'l-Faraj ibn al-Jawzi and other scholars in the Hanbali madhhab, too, by proclaiming that those Salafis were not the followers of Salaf as-salihin but were the owners of bidat, belonging to the group of Mujassima, prevented this fitna from spreading. In the seventh century Ibn Taymiyya waged this fitna again."

Also:

Quote

"Of the corrupt, heretical men of religious position, Ibn Taymiyya has been the most harmful. In his books, particularly in Al-wasita, he disagreed with the ijma' al-Muslimin, contradicted the clear declarations in the Qur'an al-karim and Hadith ash-Sharif, and did not follow the path of Salaf as-salihin. Following his defective mind and corrupt thoughts, he deviated into heresy. He had much knowledge. Allahu ta'ala made his knowledge the cause of his heresy and perdition. He followed the desires of his nafs. He tried to spread his wrong and heretical ideas in the name of truth".

http://www.hizmetboo...lam/bsalafy.htm

This post has been edited by absalih: 22 July 2010 - 09:27 AM

[Abul Layth]

To declare Ibn Taymiyyah a Sunni is a mistake, that only one who does not know his views would make. Not only did he innovate in 'aqidah - many of his beliefs arguably kufristic in nature, but in fiqh as well, a point that many leave out. This man contradicted the Ijma' of the Imams on the issue of divorce, he made it haraam to travel to visit the grave of the Nabi 'alayhis salam - an innovated opinion of his that was rebuked even by some of his students, his rejection of tawassul and tabarruk, and his sick belief that the fire of hell is not eternal!

There is no doubt that this man deserved to die in the dungeons of Ahlus Sunnah, and Alhamdulillah the Muslims did not fear to call him out for his baatil and bida'ah!

[absalih]

Abul Layth, on 22 July 2010 - 10:18 PM, said:

Ibn Taymiyyah --- in 'aqidah - many of his beliefs arguably kufristic in nature,------ his sick belief that the fire of hell is not eternal!-------------------
There is no doubt that this man deserved to die in the dungeons of Ahlus Sunnah.

Ibn Taimiyyal al Harrani.d.728.AH was a great scholar and a mujthahid in Hanbali madh'hab,though his claim to the position of Absolute[Mutlaq] Mujthahid was not approved of.It is wrong to say that he had kufristic aqida because he had based every thing which he put forward,on the basis of Qur'an and Sunnah.If such a person errs, it can only be innovation(bid'at).Blind views without referance to Qur'an and sunnah and also the denial of the Fundamentals of Islam{Zaruriyat e Deen} will only be kufr.It was widespread that Ibn Taymiyyah was much learned and a tradition not seen by him was not a tradition at all.None of the cautioussunni scholars who refuted him had denied his depth of knowledge and piety.WE CANNOT SAY BY OURSLVES WHAT THEY HAVE NOT SAID.
Imam Rabbani Shaykh Ahmed Sirhindi.QS.wrote:
[ MAKTUBAT E IMAM RABBANI .THIRD VOLUME, 38th LETTER ]

This letter, written to Mulla Ibrahim, explains the hadith which informs that this Ummat will part into seventy-three groups:

Quote

"It is declared in a hadith that this Ummat will part into seventy-three groups, seventy-two of whom will go to Hell. This hadith informs that the seventy-two groups will be tormented in the fire of Hell. It does not inform that they will stay in torment eternally. Remaining in the torment of Hell-fire eternally is for those who do not have iman. That is, it is for disbelievers. The seventy- two groups, on account of their corrupt belief, will go to Hell and will burn as much as the corruptness of their belief. One group, the seventy-third, will be saved from Hell-fire because their belief is not corrupt. If among the members of this one group there are those who committed evil deeds and if these evil deeds of theirs have not been forgiven through tawba or shafaat, it is possible that these, too, will burn in Hell as much as their sins. All of those who are in the seventy-two groups will go to Hell. But none of them will remain in Hell eternally. Not all of those who are in this one group will go to Hell. Of these only those who have committed evil deeds will go to Hell. The seventy-two reported groups of bidat, which will go to Hell, should not all be called "disbelievers", because they are Ahl-i qibla. However, of these people, the ones who disbelieve those Islamic tenets that are indispensable to be believed, as well as those who deny those rules of the Shariat which every Muslim has heard and knows become disbelievers. The savants of the Ahl as-sunnat declare: "If a Muslim's statement signifies a hundred meanings ninety-nine of which causing disbelief and one showing that he is a Muslim, it is necessary to take this one meaning, thus saving him from the state of disbelief." Allahu ta'ala knows the truth of everything. His Word is the most reliable word. "

http://www.hizmetboo...le/bliss3_2.htm

As for the belief that the Hell will be burnt out eventually,some othe Great sufis also held that belief, though on the basis of mystical unveilings.Here too Imam Rabbani.QS. wrote as:

Quote

"Paradise and Hell exist. On the Day of Judgement after the settling of accounts, many people will be sent to Paradise, and many others will be put into Hell. The rewards, the blessings of Paradise, and the torment of Hell are eternal, everlasting. These facts are declared clearly in Qur'an al-karim and in hadith ash-Sharifs. Muhyiddin-i 'Arabi "quddisa sirruh" says in his book, Fusus, "At last everybody will attain compassion," and, quoting the ayat, "My Mercy has covered everything," he says, "After disbelievers stay in Hell for three thousand years, Hell will become cool and comfortable for disbelievers, exactly as the fire was salvation for Ibrahim "alaihissalam" in the world. Allahu ta'ala may go back on His promise concerning torment." By saying, "None of the 'arifs said that disbelievers will remain in Hell eternally," he diverges from the right way here, too. He did not realize that the ayat, "My Mercy includes everything," indicates that in the world the mercy is both upon Muslims and upon disbelievers. In the next world there will not be even a mote of mercy upon disbelievers. Allahu ta'ala intimates this fact in Qur'an al-karim, and after declaring, "My Mercy covers everything," He also declares, "My Mercy is upon those who, fearing Me, forbear the forbidden, pay their zakat, and believe My Qur'an." Muhyiddin-i Arabi "quddisa sirruh" reads the beginning of the ayat and omits the rest. Allahu ta'ala declares in the fifty-fifth ayat of Surat-ul-Araf, "My Mercy is upon those with iman and goodness." The forty-seventh ayat of Sura Ibrahim, "Do not think Allahu ta'ala may go back on His promise which He has given to Prophets," does not imply that He may go back on that which He has given to others. Perhaps His declaring only that He will not go back on His promise which He has given to Prophets, is meant to promise that His Prophets will be more powerful than disbelievers and will overcome them; thus He has promised both Prophets and their enemies, disbelievers. Then, this ayat declares that He will never go back on His word, neither with Prophets nor with disbelievers; thus this ayat, which he quotes in order to prove his thesis, exposes the fact that he is wrong. We should also remember that His going back on His word which He has given to His enemies, like His going back on the word given to His beloved ones, would be mendacity, an attribute which would be quite offensive to ascribe to Allahu ta'ala. For, it would be very repulsive to say that for some uses Allahu ta'ala said that He would torment disbelievers eternally though He knew He would not torment them. And the 'arifs' saying that disbelievers will not remain in Hell is one of the statements which Muhyiddin-i 'Arabi "qaddasAllahu ta'ala sirrahul 'aziz' says through kashf, that is, by sensing through heart. There are often errors in things that come to the heart. Such kashfs of the great religious superiors, which contradict what they write by following our Prophet "sall-Allahu alaihi wa sallam' and the Sahaba "ridwanullahi 'alaihim ajmain', are without any value or importance."

Huseyn Hilmi Isik adds:

Quote

"[Also, Ibni Taymiyya denies the fact that disbelievers will remain eternally in Hell]."

http://www.hizmetboo...le/bliss2-1.htm

HUSEYN HILMI ISIK.Rah.qoutes the great shafii Imam,Tjudin as-Subki.d.770.AH AS:

Quote

"Taj ad-din as-Subki listed the matters on which Ibn Taymiyya disagreed with Salaf as-salihin as in the following:
1 - He said, 'Talaq (divorce as prescribed by Islam) does not become actual; [in case it happens,] it is necessary to pay kaffara (equal to that which is paid) for an oath.' None of the Islamic scholars that came before him had said that kaffara might be paid.

2 - He said, 'Talaq given to a haid (menstruating) woman does not become actual, nor does the talaq given to her during the time of her purity become actual.'

3 - He said, 'It is not necessary to make qada for a salat omitted deliberately.'

4 - He said, 'It is mubah (permissible) for a haid woman to perform tawaf of the Kaba. [If she does] she will not have to pay kaffara.'

5 - He said, 'One talaq given in the name of three talaqs is still one talaq.' Whereas, before saying so, he repeatedly said for many years that ijma' al-Muslimin was not so.

6 - He said, 'Taxes incompatible with Islam are halal for those who demand them.'

7 - 'When taxes are collected from tradesmen, they stand for zakat even if they do not intend [for zakat],' he said.

8 - He said, 'Water does not become najs when a mouse or the like dies in it.'

9 - He said, 'It is permissible for a person who is junub to perform supererogatory salat without making a ghusl at night.'

10 - He said, 'Conditions stipulated by the waqif (person who devotes property to a pious foundation) are not taken into consideration.

11 - He said, 'A person who disagrees with ijma' al-umma does not become a disbeliever or a sinner.'

12 - He said, 'Allahu ta'ala is mahall-i hawadith and is made up of particles coming together.'

13 - He said, 'The Qur'an al-karim was created in the Dhat (essence, person) of Allahu ta'ala.'

14 - He said, 'The 'alam, that is, all creatures are eternal with their kinds.'

15 - He said, 'Allahu ta'ala has to create good things.'

16 - He said, 'Allahu ta'ala has a body and directions; He changes His place'.

17 - He said, 'Hell is not eternal; it will go out at last.'

18 - He denied the fact that prophets are impeccable.

19 - He said, 'Rasulullah [sall-Allahu ta'ala 'alaihi wa sallam] is no different from other people. It is not permissible to pray through his intercession.'

20 - He said, 'It is sinful to go to Medina with the intention of visiting Rasulullah.'

21 - He also said, 'It is haram to go there to ask for shafa'a (intercession).'

22 - He said, 'The books Tawra and al-Injil did not change in vocabulary. They changed in meaning.'

"Some scholars said that most of the above-quoted statements did not belong to Ibn Taymiyya, but there
has been none who denied his saying that Allahu ta'ala had directions and that He was made of particles coming together. However, it was declared by consensus that he[IBN TAYMIYYAH] was rich in 'ilm, in jalala and in diyana. A person who has fiqh, knowledge, justice and reason must first observe a matter and then decide about it with prudence. Especially, judging Muslim's disbelief or apostasy or heresy or that he must be killed requires very minute observations and utter circumspection.
"

http://www.hizmetboo...lam/bsalafy.htm

[absalih]

As for Ibn qayyim al Jawziyyah.d.751.AH. The current profound sunni scholar G.F.HADDAD writes:

Quote

"A specialist in Qur'anic commentary, hadith, fiqh and its principles, Arabic philology and grammar, and the foremost disciple of Taqi al-Din Abu al-'Abbas Ahmad ibn 'Abd al-Halim ibn Taymiyya al-Harrani (d. 728), whose anthropomorphic and anti-madhhab teachings he helped perpetuate. Ibn Taymiyya had suggested that Allah was a corporeal entity in writings such as al-'Aqida al-Hamawiyya, al-'Aqida al-Wasitiyya, and al-Ta'sis al-Radd 'ala Asas al-Taqdis. Here and in other works he indicates that Allah's "Hand," "Foot" (qadam), "Shin" (sâq), "Face" (wajh), and "Elevation" ('uluw) are literal (haqîqi) attributes, and that He is upon the Throne "in person" (bi al-dhât), a phrase which his student al-Dhahabi frequently condemns as innovated in the Religion. Ibn Taymiyya's error was in believing such Attributes to be literal, and declaring as nullifiers-of-the-Attributes (mu'attila) all the Ahl al-Sunna who believed them to be metaphorical. These are among his unwarranted innovations in faith which Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki (d. 756) refuted in his al-Durra al-Mudiyya and al-Rasa'il al-Subkiyya fi al-Radd 'ala Ibn Taymiyya."

Also:

Quote

Ibn Qayyim followed the same path as his teacher in his infamous poem entitled al-Qasida al-Nuniyya ("Ode Rhyming in the Letter N"). This lengthy poem on the tenets of faith is filled with corrupt suggestions about the divine Attributes, which Subki analyzes in detail in his al-Sayf al-Saqil fi al-Radd 'ala Ibn Zafil ("The Burnished Sword in Refuting Ibn Zafil" i.e. Ibn al-Qayyim)"

http://www.livingislam.org/qayy_e.html
ALSO,about Ibn Taymiyyah:
http://www.livingisl...g/n/itay_e.html

We should also realize that the chief opponent of Ibn Taymiyyah.d.728.AH ie, his Junior contemporary and the Great Shafii Scholar Imam Taqi al-Din `Ali ibn `Abd al-Kafi al-Subki.(RA).d.756.AH was only praised by others.

It was written about him:

Quote

“Taqi al-Din `Ali ibn `Abd al-Kafi al-Subki, - was one of the most famous men of his time. He and his son, (Tajudin al-Subki), were no doubt the greatest among all the Subkis. Taqi al-Din was born in Subk 673 A.H., but as his father moved over to Cairo, he received his education there. His teachers besides his own father were Taqi al-Din Abu bint al-`Izz, `Alam al-Din al-`Iraqi, Taqi al-Din al-Sa’igh, al-Dimyati, `Ala’ al-Din al-Baji, Sayf al-Din al-Baghdadi, the great grammarian Abu Hayyan, Taj al-Din Ibn `Ala’. He became famous as one of the greatest scholars and teachers of his time. He was equally renowned as traditionist, jurisconsult, interpreter of al-Qur’an, theologian, philosopher, logician and grammarian. He also enjoyed a high reputation for his personal qualities and virtue. For many years he was professor at the great schools of learning in Cairo, as al-Mansuriyya, al-Hakkariyya and al-Saifiyya. In 739 A.H. he was called to Damascus to take the office of head qadi, an office which he held for 16 years. At the same time he was professor at the higher schools of learning, in Damascus as al-Ghazzaliyya, al-`Adiliyya the great, al-Atabakiyya, al-Mansuriyya, al-Shamiyya al-Barraniyya, and the tradition school al-Ashrafiyya. Taqi al-Din also wrote a number of books. He died at Cairo 756 A.H.”

http://www.sunnah.or...aldin_subki.htm

Links to Arabic works of The Great Shafii scholar Imam Taqiudin Subki.®
الإمام أبي الحسن تقي الدين علي بن عبد الكافي السبكي refuting the Teacher and Disciple:

1]
شفاء السقام في زيارة خير الأنام

http://read.kitabkla...t-khair-al.html
http://al-mostafa.in...ile=i000252.pdf
http://ia331427.us.a...iqam/chifaa.pdf


2]
السيف الصقيل في الرد على ابن زفيل
http://read.kitabkla...dd-ala-ibn.html
http://aslein.org/bo...h/rdod/syef.rar

This post has been edited by absalih: 23 July 2010 - 09:52 AM