Journal ofSemitic Studies XXXIX/1 Spring 1994

IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

To "Be-Bop"
(Michael Emerson)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

SHERMAN A. JACKSON
INDIANA UNIVERSITY

The Damascus trials of TaqI al-Dln Ibn Taymiyyah (661-728/1263-

1328) constitute a land-mark not only in die career of this celebrated
Hanball theologian but also in the ongoing confrontation between tra-
ditionalism and rationalism in Islam. Seminal to theological discourse
since, these trials stand on a par with such milestones as die promul-
gation of die Qadiri Creed1 by the Baghdad Caliphs al-Qadir (381-
422/991-1031) and al-Qa'im (422-67/1031-75) or, before that, the
famous Inquisition {mihnah) inaugurated by die Caliph al-Ma'mun
(198-218/818-33). Indeed, not only would Ibn Taymiyyah's testimony
(and subsequent writings) raise traditionalism to a new level of
respectability, but rationalism, in confronting diis redoutable foe,
would also be forced to refine its theological and polemical approach.
The Damascus trials took place over a period of approximately one
month and included three separate hearings. These were held on
Monday, 8 Rajab 26 January, Friday, 12 Rajab 30 January and Tues-
day, 7 Sha'ban 24 February, 705/1306. Though they ended ostensi-
bly in a vindication of Ibn Taymiyyah, they were immediately fol-
lowed by a summons from the high court in Cairo, where he was
made to appear the following month on 23 Ramadan 8 April
705/1306. This time he was accused of anthropomorphism and sen-
tenced to imprisonment in the Cairo citadel. This marked the begin-
ning of a seven-year sojourn in Egypt, a period of intense debate and
great intellectual output, a period that in many ways defined Ibn
Taymiyyah's agenda for the rest of his life.2

1
The Qadiri Creed was a religious manifesto promulgated against radical Shi'ism,
ratonalistic Mu'tazilism and AsrTarism. See G. Makdisi, Ibn 'Aqll et la resurgence de
I'Islam traditonaliste au XI' siecle (V siecle de I'Higire) (Damascus, 1963), 303-10.
2
Summaries of these events can be found in the studies of H. Laoust, 'Ibn
Taymiyya,' EP\ "La biographie d'lbn Taymiya d'apres Ibn Katir," Bulletin d'itudes
onentales, DC (1942-3), 136-48; Essai sur Us doctrines sociales etpohttques de Takl-l-
Dln Ahmad b. Taymiya (Cairo, 1939), 125-43. See also M Swartz's discussion

41
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

There are numerous references to the Damascus trials scattered

throughout the chronicles and biographical sources on the period.
What is known of the actual details, however, comes mainly from the
accounts of two Shafi'l historians, 'Alam al-Dln al-Birzall (665-
739/1261-1339) and Shams al-Dln al-Dhahabl (673-748/1274-
1347).3 These accounts, while favourable to Ibn Taymiyyah, present
an incomplete picture of the trials, which obscures their overall

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

meaning. The present study is thus an attempt to shed additional
light on the Damascus hearings by introducing in translation a mem-
oir written by Ibn Taymiyyah himself.
The exact date of Ibn Taymiyyah's memoir is not known, though
it must have been written not less than several years after the trials.
Shortly after the third hearing, on Monday 5 Ramadan 21 March
705/1306, Ibn Taymiyyah left Damascus for Cairo4 whence he did
not return until Dhu al-Qa'dah 712/1313. 5 This seven year time
lapse is reflected in the text, where frequently he states that his mem-
ory of certain details has grown faint and that he is thus unable to
recall them exactly as they occurred. This defect, however, is more
than compensated for by the depth and quantity of details given and
by the fact that other than the brief summary by his brother, Sharaf

along with his translation of al-Aqidah al-Wdsitiyah, A seventh-century (A.H.)

Sunni creed: the 'Aqlda Wasitlya of Ibn Taymlya,' Humamoum Islamica I, ed. H.W
Mason, R.L. Nettler and J. Waardenburg (Monton, The Hague, Paris, 1973), 101-
02. D.P. Little also discusses the trials, adding some valuable insights and sugges-
tions in "The Historical and Histonographical Significance of the Detention of Ibn
Taymiyya," International Journal of Middle East Studies 4 (1973), 320-27.
Little's article provides an extensive list, with some useful descriptions, of the pri-
mary sources dealing with the life and times of Ibn Taymiyyah.
3
Little, 'Detention', 319. What is known of al-Dhahabl's account is distributed
throughout the biographical sources on the period. Al-Birzall is the source of the
brief account entitled 'al-Munazarah fi al-'Aqidah al-Wasitiyyah' in Ibn Taymiyah's
Majmu' al-rasd'il al-kubrd (hereafter MR), 2 vols. (Cairo, n.d.), 1:415-21. See also,
Majmu fatdwd Shaykh al-hl&m Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyah (hereafter MF), 37 vols. ed.
'Abd al-Rahman b. Muhammad Qasim al'Asiml al-Najdi al-Hanball (Beirut,
1398/1977), 3:194-201.
4
Ibn Kathlr, al-Biddyah wa-al-mhdyah, 14 vols. (Beirut, 1405/1984), 14:38;
Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalanl, al-Durar al-kdmtnah, 5 vols. ed. Muhammad Sayyid Jad
al-Haqq (Cairo, 1385/1966), 1:156; Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Abd al-Hadl,
al-'Uqud al-dumyyah min mandqib Shaykh al-IslAm Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah, ed.
Muhammad Hamid al-Fiqi (Beirut, 1356/1938), 248-49. See also Abu Bakr b.
Muhammad b. Aybak al-Dawadari, Kanz al-durar wa-jdmt' al-ghurar vol. 9, ed.
H. R. Roemer (Cairo, 1960), 9:136-37, where it is stated that the subpoena from
Cairo arrived in Damascus on 5 Ramadan, that Ibn Taymiyyah departed on 10
Ramadan and that he arrived in Cairo on Thursday, 22 Ramadan.
5
Laoust, Ibn Taymiyya, 52.

42
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

al-Dln, Ibn Taymiyyah's remains the only eyewitness account of the

trials that has come down to us thus far. These qualities, inevitable
bias notwithstanding, render it easily the most reliable account
known to date.
There are two rescensions of Ibn Taymiyyah's memoir. One is pre-
served by a Hanball pupil of his, Muhammad b. Ahmad b. 'Abd al-
Hadl (704-44/1304-43), in al-'Uqud al-durriyyah min mandqib

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

Shaykh al-Isldm Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyah.6 The other appears in
Majmic' Fatdwd Shaykh al-Isldm Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah? These two
rescensions are comparable both in length and content. The MF
rescension includes, however, a number of extremely important addi-
tions.8 I have therefore chosen to translate the latter, placing between
asterisks additional material not found in 'Uqiid. Minor differences
between the two rescensions are indicated in the notes.

The Account of Sharaf al-Dln Ibn Taymiyyah

Ibn Taymiyyah's younger brother, Sharaf al-Dln (666-727/1267-
1327),9 includes a brief summary of the trials in a letter to another
brother, Zayn al-Dln, in which he attempts to dispel rumours that
had been circulating about what had happened at the trials. This is
an adumbrated summary, mostly paraphrases with few direct quotes.
It tells little about the actual proceedings other than the more
assertive role played by certain Maliki opponents.10 Its chief attrac-
tion is a list it provides of those who attended the trials. Sharaf
al-Dln indicates that these scholars were all at the first hearing, while
he states that he himself only attended the second.11 As Ibn
Taymiyyah states that the second hearing included scholars who were
not present at the first, Sharaf al-Din's list probably consists of those
he counted at the second hearing and assumed to have been also pre-
sent at the first and third. His list includes the following:

6
'Uqiid, 206-48. The editor indicates that this edition was based on a unique
manuscript from the Zahinyyah library in Damascus. Ibid, 13.
7
MF, 3:160-93. The editor gives no information about his manuscript source.
8
See especially paragraphs 44 through 48 of the translation.
9
For a biographical note on Sharaf al-Dln Ibn Taymiyyah, see Ibn Rajab, Kitdb
al-Dhayl 'aid Tabaqdt al-Handbilah, 2 vols. (Beirut, n.d.), 2: 382-84 Sharaf al-
Din's account appears in MF, 3:202-10.
10
MF, 3:208-09. In particular, Sharaf al-Din identifies a Maliki deputy judge
by the name of Najm al-Dln, whom I have not been able to locate in the sources.
11
Ibid., 3:204.

43
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

1. Najm al-Dln b. Sasra (Shafi'l chief justice)

2. Shams al-Dln al-Harirl (Hanafi chief justice)
3. Jamal al-Dln al-ZuwawI (Malikl chief justice)
4. TaqI al-Dln Sulayman (Hanbali chief justice)
5. Jalal al-Dln [al-QazwInl] (Shafi'l deputy)
6. Shams al-Dln b. al-'Izz (Hanafi deputy),
7. 'Izz al-Dln [?] (Hanbali deputy judge)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

8. Najm al-Dln [?] (Malikl deputy judge)
9. Kamal al-Dln b. al-Zamlakanl (Shafi'l)
10. Kamal al-Dln al-SharisI (Shafi'l)
11. Sadr al-Dln b. al-Wakil (Shafi'l)
12. Burhan al-Dln b. 'Abd al-Haqq (Hanafi),
13. Shams al-Dln al-Harirl (Malikl) [sic]
14. Shihab al-Dln al-Majd (Shafi'l)
15- Muhammad b. Qawwam
16. Muhammad b. Ibrahim al-ArmawI
17. Safi'al-Dln al-Hindl (Shafi'l)12

Al-Dhahabl and al-Birzall

Neither al-Dhahabi nor al-Birzall appear on the list of Sharaf al-Dln.
The reason for their exclusion from the trials may be that they were
regarded more as hadith experts than as theologians and juriscon-
sults.13 In addition, at thirty-two, al-Dhahabi appears to have been
slightly too young to serve on the tribunal. His first formal teaching
position had been that of tasdlr of a halqah at Umayyad mosque
— a position normally reserved for advanced graduate students14 —
which he did not assume until 699/1299.15 Assuming that the trials

12
Safi al-Dln was brought along to the second hearing. MF, 3:181.
13
This appears to have applied to the Shafi'l traditionalist, al-Mizzi, as well On
Monday, 22 Rajab, roughly half-way between the second and diird hearings, he was
ordered to be arrested by the Shafi'l chief justice, Ibn Sasra, after publicly denigrat-
ing Ash'arism before a gathering at Umayyad mosque. This action by al-Mizzi
appears to have been based on a gross miscalculation on his part, one he would not
have committed had he been present at the trials. For more on the al-Mizzi affair,
see Ibn Hajar, Durar, 155-56; al-Dawadarl, Kanz, 9:134-35; 'Uqud, pp. 204-05;
Biddyah, 14:37.
14
Tasaddur (or tasdlr) was the final step towards the ultimate aim of receiving
the licence to teach and issue legal opinions (al-ijdzah li-al tadris wa-al-ifid'). See
the excellent study by G. Makdisi, The Rise of Colleges: Institutions of Learning in
Islam and the West (Edinburgh, 1981), 203-04.
15
Ibn Hajar, Durar, 3:427.

44
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

were held in closed session,16 even if al-Dhahabl had reached the

rank of master-jurisconsult by 705/1306, he would have been
excluded on grounds that he was too junior. For he would have been
just coming into this rank, while the normal custom was that only
ranking jurisconsults {akdbir) spoke out on important matters while
junior scholars (asdgbir) remained silent in deference to the mas-
ters.17

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

As for al-Birzall, who was forty at the time of the trials and whose
account is not piecemeal but narrative, here too there is further evi-
dence suggesting that he was not in attendance. To begin with, his
introduction states that he related his information on the authority
of Ibn Taymiyyah: naqala al-Shaykh 'Alam al-Dln [al-Birzdli] 'an al-
Shaykh [Ibn Taymiyyah] anna-hu qdla}& This statement is of course
ambiguous, meaning either that al-Birzali received this information
at the trials or at some later date. Al-Birzall goes on, however, to nar-
rate his entire account in the first person, frequently stating, in the
words of Ibn Taymiyyah, 'It was said to me ... So I said...' This sug-
gests that he was himself not present at the trials but received his
information from Ibn Taymiyyah at a later date, most likely after the
latters return to Damascus in 712/1313. Though al-Birzali's account
is much shorter and less detailed than that of Ibn Taymiyyah, it bears
a striking resemblance to the latter and shows clear signs of a com-
mon source.19

The Main Players

Damascus in the years around 705/1306 was dominated by the
Shafi'l school of law. It comes as no surprise, then, that they played
the major role in prosecuting the case against Ibn Taymiyyah. The
leading Shafi'is at the trials include the following: Najm al-Dln
b. Sasra, Sadr al-Dln b. al-Wakll, Safl al-Dln al-Hindl and Kamal

16
This is suggested by the statement of Ibn Taymiyyah's brother, Sharaf al-Dln,
who says that he did not attend the first hearing because he did not know when or
where it was to take place. MF, 3:204.
17
See, for example, the statement by Ibn Amir al-Hajj, al-Taqrir wa-al-tahblr,
3 vols. (Beirut, 1403/1983), 3:102, line 32-3.
18
"Al-Munazarah," MR, 1.415.
19
It should be noted that Ibn Kathlr, another important source of information
on the trials, was also not an eyewitness. First, he was only four years old at the
time of the trials. Second, he states that he and his family did not move to Damas-
cus until 706/1307. See Btddyah, 14:17; see also, ibid., 14:46, where he states that
his family relocated in 707/1308.

45
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

al-Din al-Zamlakanl. Following are brief profiles on these important

men.
1. Najm al-Din Ibn Sasra20 (Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Salim b.
Abl al-Mawahib) (655-723/1257-1323): ShafTl chief justice of
Damascus in 705/1306,21 he belonged to one of the more powerful
families in Damascus, his brother, Nasr al-Din, serving as wazir.22 In
addition to several prestigious teaching posts, he served in the chan-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

cellory (dlwdn al-inshd'), as shaykh al-shuyilkh, and qddi al-'askar.23
In terms of political influence, he was probably the single most pow-
erful ShafTl at the trials, though he was not the most accomplished
in the religious sciences. Ibn Kathlr describes him as the enemy of al-
Mizzi, which suggests that he had Ash'ari leanings.24 Some confir-
mation of this may be inferred from al-Subkl s favourable treatment
of him in the latter's TabaqdtP His relationship with Ibn Taymiyyah,
meanwhile, was mercurial. The two had a bitter confrontation over
the arrest of al-Mizzi.26 Yet, at the third hearing when Ibn Sasra
resigned as chief justice in response to comments made by his fellow
Shafi'ls, Ibn Taymiyyah offered him words of support.27 At the end
of the trials he was summoned to Cairo, along with Ibn Taymiyyah,
as a witness for the prosecution.
2. Sadr al-Din Ibn al-Wakll (Muhammad b. 'Umar b. Makkl b.
Abd al-Samad b. al-Murahhil) (665-716/1266-1316): a leading and
charismatic ShafTi, he held several teaching positions and was an
apparent favourite of the viceroy, al-Afram,28 the Sufi shaykh, Nasr
al-Din al-Manbiji, (advisor to Baybars al-Jashnikir, ustaddr and later
sultan in Egypt), as well as Sultan al-Nasir.29 A somewhat wily
character, he was charged at one point with moral turpitude30 and

20
Ibn Sasra is referred to in Western sources as Ibn Sasarl, Ibn Sasarra a n d I b n
Sasarl. W. M . Brinner has concluded the correct pronunciation to be Ibn Sasra. See
' T h e Banu Sasra: a Study in the Transmission of a Scholarly Tradition,' Arabtca (7)
I960, 171-73.
21
Biddyah, 14:21-02.
22
Ibid., 14:5.
23
Ibid., 14:106-07.
24
Ibid., 14:37.
25
T a j al-Din al-Subkl, Tabaqdt al-Shdfi'iyyah, 10 vols. 'Abd al-Fattah M u h a m -
mad al-Hulw and Mahmiid Muhammad al-Tanahl (Cairo, n.d.), 9:20-22.
26
See above, n. 1 3 .
27
MF, 3:173-74. Cf. however, Laoust, Essai, 130-31.
28
Biddyah, 14-80; Durar, 1:426, 4:235- See the lengthy biographical note on
al-Afram in Durar, 4:234-41.
29
Biddyah, 14:58.
30
Durar, 4:235.

46
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

stripped of his positions in Damascus, afterwhich time he moved to

Aleppo and then to Cairo, where he died.31 He was a committed
rationalist; al-Subki praises him for being of sound belief and 'versed
in Ash'ari kaldm.'32 He dabbled as well in medicine, philosophy and
the Greek sciences ('ulum al-awd'il), in light of which he would
often interpret scripture.33 He was not on particularly good terms
with Ibn Taymiyyah and often engaged the latter in public disputa-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

tions.34 Sharaf al-Dln Ibn Taymiyyah reports that Ibn al-Wakll
spread lies after the trials, including the rumor that Ibn Taymiyyah
had recanted and claimed to be 'a ShafTl in theology'.35
3. Safl al-Dln al-Hindl (Muhammad b. eAbd al-Rahlm b.
Muhammad) (644-715/1246-1315): born in Delhi, he settled in
Damascus in 685/1286 after having lived in several other parts of the
Muslim world. Despite a thick Indian accent, he landed several teach-
ing positions, in addition to a brief tenure as shaykh al-shuyukh. Ibn
Kathlr refers to him as 'the rationalist',36 while al-Subkl is more
explicit, hailing him as 'the Ash'ari rationalist' (al-mutakallim 'aid
madhhab al-Ash'ari)?7 Both al-Subkl and Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalanl inti-
mate that al-Hindl was limited as a disputator, al-Subkl describing
him as naive and prolix, often losing his listeners in his arguments.38
Ibn Hajar even cites an incredible report to the effect that al-Hindl
had memorized only one fourth of the Qur'an and that he once
recited the mysterious letters alif, lam, mlm, sad as 'al-mass\39 These
comments may represent an attempt by al-Subkl and Ibn Hajar, both
Ash'aris, to explain away al-Hindl's failure to defeat Ibn Taymiyyah
despite the fact that he was universally recognized as the leading ratio-
nalist of the day. In fact, it was in this capacity that he was brought
along to the second hearing to prosecute the case against Ibn
Taymiyyah.40 He reportedly proved no match for the latter, however,
and was subsequently replaced by Kama! al-Dln al-Zamlakanl.41

31
Bidayah, 14:59.
32
Tabaqdt, 9:254.
33
Bidayah, 14:80.
34
Ibid., 14:80. I b n 'Abd al-Hadl records three such disputations in 'Uqud, 9 5 -
103, 107-12, 113-16.
35
MF, 3.210. See also 'Uqud, 2 0 4 ; Durar, 1:155; Kanz, 9:134.
36
Bidayah, \A-75.
37
Tabaqdt, 9:162.
38
Ibid., 9:163-64.
39
Durar, 4:133.
40
MF, 3:181, 3:204; Bidayah, 14:36; Kanz, 9:133.
41
Bidayah, \A-3G; Kanz, 9:133; 'Uqud, 204.

47
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

4. Kamal al-Din al-Zamlakanl (Muhammad b. eAll b. "Abd al-

Wahid b. 'Abd al-Karlm) (666 or 7-727/1267 or 8-1327): perhaps
the most accomplished Shafi'l in terms of his mastery of the religious
sciences, he held several prestigious teaching positions and a number
of government posts, including nazar al-khizdnah, nazar al-mdristdn
al-nuri, nazar dlwdn al-malik al-sa'id and wikdlat bayt al-mdl.42 In
724/1324, he was appointed chief justice of Aleppo and was later

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

called to Cairo to receive investiture as chief justice of Damascus.
He died, however, before reaching the capital city. His position at the
trials is not quite clear. On the one hand, Ibn Taymiyyah reports
that he became furious over charges of unbelief cast against Shafi'l-
Ash'arls such as al-Juwaynl and others.43 On the other hand, the tra-
ditionalists, al-Dhahabl44 and Ibn Kathir45 (both ShafTi supporters
of Ibn Taymiyyah) praise him highly, Ibn Kathir even reporting that
al-Zamlakanl was summoned to Cairo following the trials, 'due to
his (close) affiliation with Ibn Taymiyyah.'46 Al-Subkl, meanwhile, is
cool towards him,47 and Ibn Hajar is even hostile: 'He was extremely
arrogant (kdna kathir al-takhayyut) and was often annoyed by his fel-
low ShafTls and would oppose them, as they would oppose him.
And because of this they worked against him on several occasions.'48
Overall, al-Zamlakanl appears to have had strong traditionalist lean-
ings but to have also been bound by an intense loyalty to the Shafi'l
school, home of the leading Ash'aris.49 This may explain why in the
years after the trials, as Ibn Taymiyyah grew to be an embarassment
to all ShafTls, especially the traditionalist wing, al-Zamlakanl ended
up writing two refutations against the shaykh, not in theology but in
law, one on divorce, the other on visitation of graves.50 Ibn Kathir

42
Btddyah, 1 4 : 1 3 1 .
43
MF, 3 : 1 7 3 . See also Kanz, 9:135.
44
See Durar, 4 : 1 9 3 . Al-Zamlakanl is also referred to as Ibn al-ZamlakanT.
45
Biddyah, 14:131.
46
Ibid., 14:41; Kanz, 9:136. H e sought t h e intervention of the viceroy, al-
Afram, however, w h o got the s u m m o n s rescinded.
47
Tabaqdt, 9 : 190-206.
48
Durar., 4 : 1 9 4 . Makdisi has eloquently argued that the great upheaval between
Aih'arism a n d traditionalism, particularly in Damascus, was taking place n o t
between Shafits a n d Hanballs but 'within the Shdfi'i school itself, (emphasis n o t
added) See 'Ash'ari a n d the Ash'arites in Islamic Religious History II,' Studta Islam-
tca 18 (1963), 3 8 .
49
According to Makdisi, traditionalist ShafTis were always limited in their abil-
ity t o attack Ash'arism by the fact that the majortiy of Ash'arts belonged to their
school of law. See ibid., 3 7 .
50
Biddyah, 1 4 . 1 3 1 ; Durar, 4 : 1 9 3 ; Tabaqdt, 9 : 1 9 1 .

48
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

reports that upon his return to Damascus as chief justice in 727/

1327, al-Zamlakanl had planned on finally putting Ibn Taymiyyah
in his place.51

Why al-'Aqidah al-Wdsitiyyah?

It is commonly held that the Damascus trials were convened for the

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

purpose of conducting an inquiry into Ibn Taymiyyah's al-Aqldah al-
Wdstiyyah?1 Ibn Taymiyyahs account, meanwhile, raises some doubt
about this.53 He reports that the decree ordering his trial came from
Sultan al-Nisir in Egypt instructing the viceroy, al-Afram, to sum-
mon him before the notables of Damascus to ask him about his
creed and about certain theological works that he had allegedly writ-
ten to people in Egypt.54 After hearing Ibn Taymiyyah's response to
these charges, the viceroy asks him to clarify his creed before the tri-
bunal. Ibn Taymiyyah proceeds to dictate his creed but then stops
and says,
I know that some groups have [recently] invented lies against me, as
they have spread lies about me before on more than one occasion. And
were I to go on dictating my creed from memory, they are likely to say,
'He is concealing parts of it,' or 'He is trying to wheedle his way,' or
'He is circumventing [issues].' So let me bring forth a written credo,
compiled some seven years ago before the Mongols came to Syria.55
This account suggests that it was not Ibn Taymiyyahs al-
Wdsitiyyah that landed him before the viceroy but, rather, his alleged

51
Biddyah, 14:132.
52
Laoust, Ibn Taymiyya, 9 5 2 ; Swartz, 'Aqlda Wdsitiya, 1 0 1 .
53
Laoust appears to have had some access to Ibn Taymiyyah's account via Ibn
'Abd al-Hadl's 'Uqud. However, it is not clear in what form n o r to what extent he
was able to use it. At one point he cites it in a footnote in Essai (which appeared in
1939), indicating that M u h a m m a d H a m i d al-Fiql would publish it in 1938 (p. 11).
At another point in Essai (p. 130, n. 1), he refers the reader to p 95 of 'Uqud for
a discussion between I b n Taymiyyah and I b n al-Wakll. This discussion is in fact
found beginning on p. 95 of the printed edition. But Laoust also states that al-
Wdsitiyyah was written in response to a request from a group of people from Wasit
(Essai, p . 112), whereas Ibn Taymiyyah gives the name of the individual for w h o m
he wrote this work, a certain Radl al-Dln al-Wasitl ('Uqud, 210). O n p. 129,
Laoust states, 'Le vice-roi fit alors savoir au saih qu'il etait chargd d e l'interroger sur
son credo; le saih presenta, en reponse, sa 'Aklda wdsitiya.' (emphassis added) This
comports with I b n Taymiyyah's account in 'Uqud, 207-10, b u t goes against the
account in Laoust's article in El2, which appeared in 1965.
54
Ibn Taymiyyah had in fact gone to Egypt in 700/1300 to seek the sultan's
assistance in stemming the Mongol threat. Biddyah, 14:15.
55
MF, 3:162-63; 'Uqud, 209 (para.9, below).

49
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

activities overall, including those in Egypt. This explanation, how-

ever, while addressing the question of the states motives in trying
Ibn Taymiyyah raises a further question about Ibn Taymiyyah him-
self, namely, why draw the authorities' attention to the Wdsitiyyahi
Certainly in the years prior to 705/1305, he had written other theo-
logical works, e.g. his al-Hamawiyyah al-Kubrd, which dates back to
698/1298 and which became a central focus at the subsequent hear-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

ings in Cairo.56 What, if any, specific reasons could he have had in
presenting al-Wdsitiyyah to the tibunal?
It appears that Ibn Taymiyyah chose al-'Aqidah al-Wditiyyah in
order to be able to refute certain political charges that had been asso-
ciated with the theological accusations being made against him. In
Jumada I December 702/1302, he was accused of collaborating with
the Mongols in a plot to unseat al-Afram and replace him with his
predecessor, Qibjaq,57 who had governed Damascus during the reign
of al-Nasir's predecessor, Lajln, but who had gone over to the Mon-
gols in 698/1299.58 These rumours, alongside Ibn Taymiyyah's suc-
cess in negotiating with the Mongols during the Qazan crucible of
699-700/1299-1300, must have reached the authorities in Cairo
and aroused their suspicions about a now much-talked-about 'Ibn
Taymiyyah phenomenon,'59 i.e. the idea that Ibn Taymiyyah was
not devoid of political ambitions which, if left unchecked, might
conceivably shake the throne of Egypt and Syria.60 Al-Wdsitiyyah,
meanwhile, must have been identified by his detractors as the vehicle
through which he planned to convert the Mongols, to his cause.
Wasit, the town after which the credo was named, was, afterall, an
important Hanball centre.61 It had recently come under Mongol
control and some of the latter had even professed Islam. Ibn
Taymiyyah's grasp of this coincidence of facts must have increased as

56
In 698/1299, Ibn Taymiyyah was subpoenaed and questioned about this
work in Damascus. See 'Uqud, 200-2; Biddyah, 14:12; Laoust, Essai, 117; Ibn
Taymiyya, 951. A number of sources intimate that the file on al-Hamawiyyah was
later reopened in Cairo following the failed attempt to convict Ibn Taymiyyah in
Damascus. Biddyah, 14-37; Kanz, 9:136.
57
'Detention', 322. Implicated along with Ibn Taymiyyah were Kamal al-Din
al-Zamlakanl, Shams al-Din al-Harlri, and a third Shafi'l jurist, Ibn al-'Attar. See
al-Biddyah, 14:22. According to Ibn Kathlr, Ibn Taymiyyah finally succeeded in
having al-Afram transferred to Tripoli in 711/1311. Biddyah, 14:60-61.
58
Biddyah, 14:2.
59
'Detention', 321.
60
Ibid., 322.
61
Laoust, Essai, 112.

50
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

things began to unfold before the viceroy. But so did his realization
that to refute these political charges would be a major blow to his
opponents' case overall, impugning their credibility and placing dis-
tance between them and the viceroy al-Afram. On this realisation,
Ibn Taymiyyah decided to disassociate himself publicly, along with
al-Wdsitiyyah, from all political activity involving the Mongols. To
this end he conspicuously announced: (1) this credo had been writ-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

ten before the Mongols came to Syria by seven years; (2) he had been
requested to write it, while he himelf had tried to turn the request
down; (3) this credo was written for an individual-whom he names
and who was neither a Mongol nor a Hanball; and (4) though he
wrote it for a man in Wash, copies of it had circulated not only in
Egypt but in Iraq and other places as well.62 In other words, Ibn
Taymiyyah set out to make it perfectly clear that his al-Wdsitiyyah
was not a catechism with which he intended to convert the Mongols
and lead them in some type of reform movement after the fashion of
an Ibn Tumart. The Damascus trials represented for him the right
time and the right place to bring this point forcefully to the fore.

The Theological Debate

Reports implicating Shi'ites, Sufis and others notwithstanding, Ibn
Taymiyyah's account reveals that the Damascus trials involved no
more than a confrontation between traditionalism and Ash'arism.
The main objective of his adversaries was to establish the legitimacy
of allegorcial interpretation (ta'wil). To this end they argued (1) that
some of the pious ancestors (salafi, e.g., al-Shafi'i and Mujahid,63
had actually practiced ta'wil;64 (2) those 'anthropomorphic' hadiths
for which no authoritative allegorical interpretation had been handed
down were actually unauthentic;65 (3) ta'wil was an acceptable prac-
tice according to al-Ash'ari;66 and (4) the disallowance of ta'wil led
necessarily in some cases to anthropomorphism.67

62
MF, 3:164; 'Uqud, 210-11 (para. 14, below).
63
Mujahid b. Jabr, (ca. 21/642-104/722) a famous Successor and student of the
Companion, Ibn 'Abbas, from whom he reportedly learned Quranic exegesis. See
Zirikll, al-A'ldm, 5:278.
64
MF, 3.193; Uqud, 247-48 (para. 115 ff., below).
65
MF, 3:191-92; 'Uqud, 245-46 (para. 109 ff., below).
66
MF, 3:172, 187, 188, 189-90; 'Uqud, 234, 241, 242, 243. (para. 77, 97,
102, 106, below).
67
MF, 3:178; 'Uqud, 229 (para. 65, below).

51
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

Ibn Taymiyyah's response was first of all to deny that the Pious
Ancestors had ever practiced ta'wil as it later developed among the
mutakallimun. In those cases where they had denied the literal mean-
ing of an expression, no divine attribute had been at stake.68 Indeed,
the policy of the salafwas to accept the scriptural references to the
divine attributes with their literal meanings in tact, 'without tahrif,
without ta'til, without takylf and without tamthil.' As for those

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

'problematic' hadiths deemed unauthentic, here Ibn Taymiyyah sim-
ply produced evidence to show that they were not.69 But it was
clearly in response to the claim that ta'wil was endorsed by al-Ash'ari
and that it was a practice necessary to the avoidance of anthropo-
morphism that Ibn Taymiyyah delivered his most vexing and indeed
most damaging testimony.
Ibn Taymiyyah reports that along with his al-Wdsitiyyah a number
of other books were brought to the trials to serve as evidence in his
defense. Among these was a copy of Tabyin kadhib al-muftari fi-md
nusiba ill al-Imdm Abi al-Hasan al-Ash'ari of the ShafTi-Ash'ari, Ibn
"Asakir (d.571/1175). This work, as shown by Professor G. Makdisi,
was actually an apologia aimed at legitimizing kaldm in the eyes of
traditionalist ShafTls, the better to preempt the latters' attacks
against their Ash'arl co-religionists within the ShafTl school.70 In the
process of crafting this work, however, Ibn 'Asakir had included in it
an unforeseen weakness that would later prove to be its undoing at
the hands of Ibn Taymiyyah. This was his attempt to place al-Ash'ari
beyond traditionalist reproach by aligning his theology with that of
the great champion of traditionalism, Ahmad b. Hanbal.
This was a risky decision on the part of Ibn 'Asakir; for it would
be impossible for anyone to claim that Ahmad b. Hanbal had
endorsed kalim. And if al-Ash'ari was to be considered a true fol-
lower of Ibn Hanbal, the same would have to be said of him. But
there it was in black and white; and Ibn Taymiyyah availed himself
fully. Publicly, before the entire tribunal, he read aloud from Ibn
'Asakir's Tabyin not only al-Ash'ari's thoroughly traditionalist creed,
as it appeared in al-Ibdnah fi usul al-diydnah, but also the latters
statement to the effect that he was a follower of 'the virtuous imam
and consumate leader, Ahmad b. Hanbal, dirough whom God made

68
See for example, MF, 3:193; 'Uqud, 247-48 (para. 115-16, below), for his
discussion of the term wajh (face) in t h e Q u r ' a n .
69
MF, 3:192; 'Uqud, 246-47 (para. 111-13).
70
'Ash'art and the Ash'arites in Islamic Religious History I,' Studio. Islamtca 17
(1962), 53-57.

52
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

manifest the truth.'71 From here, Ibn Taymiyyah would go on to

refute the claim, later resurrected by al-Subkl, that al-Ash'ari had two
positions on kaldm, one for and one against.72 This, Ibn Taymiyyah
insisted, was pure fiction. It was only a party of al-Ashcaris followers
who held two views on kaldm; al-Ash'ari himself had nothing to do
with this.73
To be sure, this public dissection of Ibn "Asakir's Tabyin was noth-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

ing short of a coup. By this act, Ibn Taymiyyah virtually destroyed
the single most important work that had insulated Ash'arism within
the Shafi'l school for over a century and a half. Now not only was
Ash'arism in Damascus crippled; it was without a crutch to stand
on. Little wonder it is that just over a generation later the great Taj
al-Dln al-Subkl would produce his masterful Tabaqdt al-Shdfi'iyyah,
clearly an attempt to fill the void left by Ibn "Asakir's fallen Tabyin.74
But if the rationalist programme, including ta'wil, was superflu-
ous, how was the literal truth of the divine attributes to be main-
tained without this constituting anthropomorphism? Here Ibn
Taymiyyah was a bit more esoteric. His response, however, was
clearly conditioned by his desire to address a more permanent prob-
lem in the history of Muslim theological discourse, namely, the
conflict between immanence and transcendence. From the early days
of the Mu'tazilites, rationalist tendencies in Islam had exerted an
upward presure on the idea of God's transcendence, a tendency that
threatened to place God beyond the reach of the ordinary worship-
per. Traditionalism, meanwhile, often responded in ways that
offended the intellect. Ibn Taymiyyah recognized the inadequacy
of both extremes. For him, right theological belief had at once to
safeguard God's transcendence while at the same time providing for
His immanence.

71
For the relevant passages from Ibn 'Asakir, see 'All b. al-Hasan b. Hibat Allah
b. Asakir, Tabyin kadhib al-muftarifi-md nusiba ild al-Imdm Abl al-Hasan al-Ash'arl
(Beirut, 1404/1984), 152-63. On p. 157, al-Ash'ari is quoted referring to Ibn
Hanbal as 'al-imdm al-fddd wa-al-ra'ts al-kdmilalladhlabdna Alldhu bi-hi al-haqq!
Ibn Taymiyyah's reading from the Tabyin is confirmed by his brother, Sharaf al-
Dln. See MF, 3:205.
72
See Makdisi, Ash'aft II, 34-35.
73
MF, 3:190; 'Uqud, 242 (para 106, below).
74
On al-Subkl's Tabaqdt, see Makdisi, Ash'arll, 57-70. Interestingly, during the
same period, the traditionalist Ibn Kathlr also produced a Tabaqdt al-Shdfi'iyyah,
perhaps as a counter to al-Subkl. See Tabaqdt al-Shdfi'iyyah, Arabic MS no. 4993,
Yahuda section, Garrett collection, Princeton University library.

53
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

Ibn Taymiyyah's approach begins with the distinction between

denotative (musbtarak) and connotative {mutawdti') terms.75 A deno-
tative term is one originally coined two or more times {yild'u
wad'ayn) to carry as many meanings, making it applicable to multi-
ple, mutually exclusive referents; e.g., the Arabic word 'ayn may refer
to an eye, a letter of the alphabet, a spring of water. Connotative
terms, meanwhile, entail abstract universals and, though they are

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

coined only once to carry a single meaning, they may also apply to
several mutually distinct entities; e.g., the Arabic word hayawdn sub-
sumes horses, frogs, lions, squirrels and even humans. According to
Ibn Taymiyyah, the divine attributes are connotative. As such, in the
same way that their common status as animals {hayawdn) does not
blur the distinction between frogs and humans, neither does God's
participation in abstract categories blur the distinction between the
Creator and the created. Hence, just as God can literally exist, as do
created beings, so can He literally have a hand or mount the throne,
even if how cannot be known exactly, since the Creator is not per-
fectly analogous to any created being.76

75
MF, 3:188, 190-91; 'Uqud, 240-1, 243-44 (para. 101, 107-8, below). I have
diverged from the c o m m o n translations of 'mushtarak' (sometimes cited erroneously
as mushtank) a n d 'mutawdti". S. Pines, e.g., translates mushtarik [sic] as 'equivocal'
{The Guide of the Perplexed, 2 vols. [Chicago, 1963], 2:640). W. Madelung gives
'equivocal' for ishtirdk and 'univocal' for tawdtu' ('Aspects of Isma'ili Theology: T h e
Prophetic C h a i n a n d the G o d Beyond Being,' Religious Schools and Sects in Islam
(London: 1985), 6 0 (XVII)). G. Hourani, meanwhile, gives ' h o m o n y m y ' for
ishtirdk al-ism (Averroes on the Harmony of Religion and Philosophy [London, 1961],
119). H o m o n y m y is certainly t h e closest of these to the meaning of ishtirdk I mus-
tarak ('equivocal' a n d 'univocal' are better reserved for terms like mujmal, zdhir,
nass). M y use of 'denotative' a n d 'connotative,' however, is designed to highlight a
particular distinction between mushtarak and mutawdti' terms, namely, that the
mutawdti' refers to several things via a single act of coinage, whereas the mushtarak
does so via more than o n e act of coinage Mushtarak terms thus denote several
things, whereas mutawdti' terms connote several things by virtue of their mutual
participation in an abstract universal. For more on this aspect of istirdk lafzi, see
Shihab al-Din al-Qarafi, al-'Iqd al-manzum fi al-khusus wa-al-'umilm, Arabic M S
n o 16724 ( D a r al-Kutub al-Misriyah), fol. 9 recto-verso. O n mushtarak a n d
mutawdti' terms in general, along with a third type, 'ambiguous' {mushakkikah), see
Shihab al-Din al-Qarafi, Shark tanqih al-fusul, ed. T a h a 'Abd al-Ra'uf Sa'd (Cairo,
1398/1977), 2 9 - 3 1 ; Sayf al-Din al-Amidl, al-Ihkdm fi usulal-ahkdm, 4 vols. (Cairo,
n.d.) 1:18-24. Ibn Taymiyyah also discusses these terms discursively in MF, 5 ' 2 0 1 -
0 3 , 331-32 a n d passim.
76
Ibn Taymiyyah insisted that it was only, ' T h e ignorant [who] think that the
term 'literal' {haqiqah) is applicable only to created entities' {MF, 5:202). It was o n
this fallacy that the rationalists, according to h i m , were driven to a n t h r o p o m o r -
phism, which in turn led to divestiture {ta'til) by way of ta'wil: 'As for the partisans

54
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

The true significance and indeed innovativeness of Ibn Taymiy-

yah's approach emerges when one considers that the problem of the
divine attributes could have just as easily been resolved assuming
them to be denotative, i.e., by saying that just as 'ayn has one mean-
ing when the subject is bodies of water and another when the subject
is the alphabet, so does 'mounting' have one meaning when applied
to created beings and another when applied to God. The problem

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

with this solution, however, would be that, since God is not compa-
rable to any created entity, His attributes would remain sui generis,
i.e., abstract and essentially devoid of concrete meaning. This in fact
appears to have been the position maintained by traditionalism up
to the time of Ibn Taymiyyah. Witness, for example, the statement
of his recent predecessor, the Hanball Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdisi
(d. 620/1223).
We are in no need of knowing the meaning of what God intended by
His attributes. For they require no action; and there is no duty con-
nected with them other than belief in them. And belief is possible
without knowing the meaning intended by them. For, indeed, belief
without knowledge is sound.77
This was not satisfactory to Ibn Taymiyyah. For him, the divine
attributes had to have not abstract but concrete meaning. The key to
his solution was the idea that connotative terms, via which all divine
attributes were expressed, entailed abstract universals. This provided
for a more concrete conceptualizaton of God in that the remaining
constituents of these abstract universals were grounded in creation,
which gave rise to a natural association in the mind between, the
divine attributes and those of created entities. Meanwhile, God's
transcendence is preserved in that this relationship between Creator
and created exists only in the mind and does not extend to the outside
world7& In other words, God remains transcendent in that there are

of divestiture, they understand God's names and attributes only as these would befit
created entities. Then, on this understanding they set out to deny these attributes,
thus joining the practice of assuming likenesses to God with that of divestiture:
they begin by assuming likenesses to Him and they end by divesting Him of His
attributes. This is tashblh and tamthil on their part.' See MR, 1:439.
77
Tahrim al-nazarfi kutub ahl al-kaldm (Ibn Qudamah's Censure of Speculative
Theology), ed. and trans. G. Makdisi (London, 1962), 32 (Arabic text).
78
In MF, 5:203 Ibn Taymiyyah stated explicitly that to say that God and
created entities share a particular quality does not imply that they are somehow
physically related or that they share some substance in the outside world. They
participate, rather, only in an abstract universal, which exists only in the mind.

55
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

no existential likenesses to Him, while He is immanently conceived

of in the mind of the believer via these mental associations.79 On this
approach, a hadlth such as the one asserting God's descent to the
lower heavens to offer forgiveness to repentent sinners80 is trans-
formed from an abstract mystery into a concrete promise of immanent
grace. For, what is understood by 'descent' is now informed by its
meaning in the case of created entities, without this entailing, mean-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

while, the belief that God actually descends like anything created.
To be sure, Ibn Taymiyyah's testimony at the Damascus trials was
formidable; and it raised the traditionalism-rationalism debate to a
new level of intensity. In the end, however, his refusal to compromise
reduced the confrontation to a zero-sum propostion. At one point,
fearing schism, even those who supported him pleaded with him to
allow the dispute to be settled by exchanging recognition for his
view, as the Hanball position, for recognition of the view of his
opponents. But Ibn Taymiyyah flatly refused, insisting that his was
the view not of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, but of the Prophet himself. This
left his adversaries with only two choices: convert to his doctrine or
destroy him. Having refused the first, they would go on to pursue
the second. But this is altogether another chapter of history.

Translation
In the name of God, the Ever-Merciful, the Mercy-Giving
1. Praise be to God, the Ever-Merciful, the Mercy-Giving, Master
of the Day of Judgment. I bear witness that there is no god except
God alone, Who has no partner, no aid and no assistant. And I bear
witness that Muhammad is His servant and His messenger whom He
sent to all of humanity, may God's blessings and abundant saluta-
tions be upon him, his family, *his Companions* and the rest of
God's righteous servants.
2. To proceed: I have been asked, on more than one occasion, to
write down whatever I could recall of what transpired at the three
hearings held to discuss [my] theological beliefs in compliance with
a royal decree from the sultan in Egypt to his viceroy in Damascus,
following the complaints of a group of Jahmites, ittihddiyyah panthe-
ists, Shi'ites {rdfidah) and others who harboured ill will. The viceroy

79
This is perhaps what Ibn Taymiyyah has in m i n d when he asserts that it may
be wrong to disallow what some people m a y refer to as tashblh. See MF, 3:166;
'Uqud, 2 1 0 (para, 2 3 , below).
80
See 'al-Aqldah al-Wisitiyyah,' MR, 1:398-99.

56
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

duly summoned the four chief justices of the four schools of law,
among others, including the latters' deputies, the muftis, shaykhs and
others who were revered and whose opinions were deemed worthy of
consideration, these people all the while unaware of the reason for
which they were being summoned. This occurred on Monday 8
Rajab 705 [1306].
3. The viceroy said to me, This assembly has been convened for

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

you. We have received a royal decree from the sultan [in Cairo]
ordering that I ask you about your creed and about the books you
wrote to the people of Egypt inviting them to [your] theological
doctrine. And I think he said, 'and that I summon the judges and
jurisconsults and that you debate these matters [in my presence].'
4. So I said, As for the tenets of faith {i'tiqdd), they are received
neither from me nor from any other scholar greater than me. Rather,
they are received from God, His Messenger and the consensus of the
Ancestors of the community. Whatever appears in the Qur'an must
be believed in, even as those hadlths that have been confirmed as
sound, such as those embodied in the sahlh collections of al-Bukhari
and Muslim. As for the books [you mention], I have not on my own
accord written anything to anyone inviting him to any creed. I sim-
ply wrote responses to whomever among the people of Egypt or else-
where asked me [about such things]. And it had reached me that a
book containing heretical views had been falsely attributed to me
and sent to the sultan's ustdddr, Rukn al-Dln al-Jashnikir. Though I
did not know the exact contents of this book, I knew that it had
been trumped up [against me]. Meanwhile, I continued to receive
from Egypt and other places people who would ask me questions
about theological and other matters, to which I would respond based
on the Qur'an, the Sunnah and the doctrines of the Ancestors of the
community.
5. So he said, We would like you to draw up a creed for us [right
here].
6. I said, Let it be written.
7. So he ordered Shaykh Kamal al-Dln [al-Zamlakanl]81 to write
down [what I said]. I dictated for him an adumbrated creed covering
the divine attributes (sifdt), predestination (qadar), questions on faith
(imdn), divine threat {wa'id), the imamate and the superiority of
some of the Companions over others (tafdit):

81
Sharaf al-Dln identifies al-Zamlakanl as the viceroy's secretary. MF, 3:204.

57
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

The creed of AhI al-Sunnah iva al-Jamd'ah is to believe in God as He

and His Messenger have described Him, without distorting this
description {tahrifi, without divesting Him of any attribute (ta'til),
without inquiring about the modality of His attributes (takytfj, and
without assuming similarities between Him and created beings
{tamthlt); and to believe that the Qur'an is the uncreated word of
God, from Him it began and to Him it will return; and to believe that
God is the creator of every thing, including the acts of humans and

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

other things; and that whatever God wills comes into being, and what-
ever He does not will does not; and that He commanded obedience to
Him, being pleased therewith and loving it, and forbade disobedience
and loathes it; and that the human being actually commits his actions
{fa'dun haqiqatan), while God is the creator of his acts {khdliqfi'li-h);
and that faith and religion consist of words and deeds and are subject
to increase and decrease; and that we do not hold to be an infidel,
because of sins committed, any professing Muslim {ahl al-qiblah); and
we do not hold that any believing Muslim {ahl al-tmdn) will dwell in
hell-fire forever; and that the caliphs succeeding the Prophet are Abu
Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthman, and 'All, respectively, may God be pleased with
them;82 and their order in virtue is as their order in assuming the
caliphate; and whoever places 'All above 'Uthman denigrates both the
Emigrants {Muhdjiriin) and the Helpers {Ansdr).
8. I mentioned this and similar things. But my memory has now
grown faint, and I do not quite remember exactly what I said at the
time. *But everything I said was duly recorded at the time.*
9. Then I said to the viceroy and those in attendance, I know that
some groups have [recently] invented lies against me, as they have
spread lies about me before on more than one occasion. And were I
to go on dictating my creed from memory, they are likely to say, 'He
is concealing parts of it,' or 'He is trying to wheedle his way,' or 'He
is circumventing [issues].' So let me bring forth a written credo,
compiled some seven years ago before the Mongols came to Syria.
10. Before the written creed was brought fordi, I said some other
diings of which my memory has now grown faint; and I remember
becoming extremely angry. And I remember diat I said, I know that
people have spread lies about me and that they have related things to
the sultan [about me]. And I said some other things that I felt needed
to be said, e.g., I said, Who, other dian me, has stood up for Islam in
its time of need? And who has clarified its proofs and made clear its
essence, and fought against its enemies? Who straightened its back
when it began to slope, when everyone else had abandoned it and

82
Radiya Allah 'art-hum, 'Uqud, 209.

58
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

there was no one to enunciate its plea nor to fight in its defence
when I stood up, openly proclaiming its proofs, fighting in its
defence and enhancing its attractiveness? Now, if these people desire
to talk [negatively] about me, what will they perpetrate against
others? And were some Jew to request a fair hearing from the sultan,
it would be incumbent upon the latter to oblige him. As for me,
I may relinquish my right [to justice]; and I may not. I may instead

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

request from the sultan that he treat me justly and that he summon
those who spread lies against me to be questioned83 about their
inventions. I went on at length, adding similar things. But my mem-
ory of all of this has now grown faint.
11. Anyway, the amir instructed the chancellor, Muhyl al-Dln, to
make a record of what I had said.
. 12. I added, I know the doctrines of those who disagree with any-
thing I have written better than they themselves. I do not remember
whether I said this before or after the written creed was brought
forth. But I [do remember that] after the creed was brought forth and
read aloud [in court] I said, There is not a single chapter in this creed
that does not have its opponents among those who profess Islam;
every sentence in it contradicts the doctrine of some or another group.
13. Then I sent [someone] to my home to get a copy of the writ-
ten creed, along with some notebooks that had been written in my
own hand. Al- 'Aqidah al-Wdsitiyyah was thus brought forth.
14. I said to them, The reason this work was written was that one
of the qddts from a district in Wasit, a man named Radl al-Dln al-
Wasiti, *a ShafTi,* came to us on his way to the pilgrimage, he being
a man of righteousness and religion, and he complained about the
preponderance of ignorance and injustice among his people and the
effacement of religion and knowledge from their land and those areas
now under the Mongols. He asked me to write a creed for him that
could serve as a pillar for him and his family. I tried to extricate
myself from this request, and I said to him, People have composed
numerous creeds; choose one of those by one of the imams of the
Sunnah. But he persisted in his request, saying, 'I shall not be pleased
except by a creed drawn up by you yourself.' So I drew up this creed
for him as I sat after the afternoon prayer. And many copies of it
have since circulated in Egypt, Iraq and other places.
15. The amir signalled that I not read the written creed myself, the
better to avoid suspicion. He gave it, instead, to his secretary, Shaykh

83
MF, 3:162: li-yuwafaqu; 'Uqud, 210: li-yuhdqaqu.

59
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

Kamal al-Dln [al-Zamlakanl]. The latter read it aloud to those in

attendance, word for word, while everyone listened. Those who had
objections would stop him at various points to voice their objections.
The amir would also inquire about a point from time to time.
16. Everyone knew of the antagonism and undisciplined passions
harboured by a party among those in attendance, some of which was
widely known among the people. Some of this [antagonism] was due

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

to theological differences, and some of it was based on other things.
17. Now, I cannot recall everything that was said, nor all of the
debates that took place during these proceedings; for a lot was said,
some of which cannot be reproduced exactly. But I will write a sum-
mary for you of what I am able to recall, even though my memory
of these things has now grown faint and despite all of the shouting
and clamour that took place, all of which cannot be reproduced.
18. Among the things to which one of them objected was my
mentioning in the beginning of the creed, "And a part of belief in
God is to believe in Him as He and His messenger have described
Him, without distorting this description (tahrif), without divesting
Him of any attribute (ta'til), without inquiring about the modality
of any attribute (takyif) and without assuming similarities between
Him and created beings (tamthil)."
19. He said, What do you mean by tahrif and ta'til? His point
was that this disallows ta'wil, which is to divert a term away from
its apparent meaning, either by necessity or by licence, a method
claimed valid by the partisans of allegorical interpretation (ta'wil).
20. I said, [I mean] diverting words away from their proper usage
(tahrif al-kalim 'an mawadi'i-h), which God has censured in His
Book. This means divesting utterances of the meaning they [nor-
mally] convey, such as obtains in the allegorical interpretation
(ta'wil) of some Jahmites regarding the words of the Exalted, 'and
God spoke to Moses literally' (kallama Alldhu Musd takliman)-}^
They say that this means, "He cleaved him literally with the talons of
wisdom" (jarraha-hu bi-azdfir al-hikmah tajrihan). And such as the
allegorical interpretations of the bdtiniyyah Qarmathians and others,
including Jahmites, Shi'ites, Qadarites and others.
21. At this he fell silent, his soul, however, harbouring what it
would.
22. I mentioned on another occasion, not at this hearing, that I
opted to cite the term tahrif instead of ta 'wil because tahrif is a term

84
4.164.

60
 1BN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

censured in the Qur'an itself; and I have taken care in this creed to
follow the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Thus I rejected that which God
had censued of tahrif, without making specific mention of ta'wil,
either for or against, because the latter is a term that has a number of
meanings, as I have made clear in a related discussion on religious
precepts {qawd'id). Indeed, the meaning of ta'wil in the Book of
God is not the same as its meaning in the technical language of later

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

legal theoreticians and jurists, nor in the technical parlance of many
Quranic exegetes and Ancestors. In fact, among those practices
referred to as ta'wil are some that are sound and have been handed
down on the authority of some of the Ancestors. Thus, I chose not
to reject that for which there is proof of its soundness. For, if there
is proof of its soundness and it has also been handed down on the
authority of the Ancestors, it cannot be considered tahrif.
23. I also said to him, I cited the disallowance of tamthil-anthro-
pomorphism without citing the disallowance of tasbbih-znthiopo-
morphism because God disallowed tamthll unequivocally in His
Book, where He said, 'Nothing is anything like him' (laysa ka-mithli-
hi shay');8^ and where He said, 'Do you know of a likeness to Him?'
(hal ta'lamu la-hu samiyyan)86 Thus I preferred [citing the word
tamtbil] over a term that is not in the Book of God nor in the Sun-
nah of the Messenger of God, even though the latter term [i.e., tash-
bih] may carry a meaning whose disallowance would be proper, just
as it may carry a meaning whose disallowance would be improper!
24. When I mentioned, 'They [Ml al-Sunnah wa-al-Jamd'ah] do not
reject any attribute that He ascribes to Himself; nor do they distort the
meanings of words; nor do they cast aspersions on God's names and His
verses,' one of those in attendance took offence, realizing that this was an
open refutation of his position. But he could not find the words [with
which to voice his objections]. So he tried to overtake me with questions
that I had grown used to hearing. But this did not avail him because he
could not avoid acknowledging the soundness of my responses.
25. When I cited the Verse of the Chair (dyat al-kursi), I think
it was the amir who asked about my statement, '... no devil
will approach him until he awakes [the following morning].' 87 So I
related to him the hadlth of Abu Hurayrah about the man who used
to steal from the alms offerred at the end of Ramadan; and I men-
tioned that al-Bukhari cited this in his sahih collection.

85
42:11.
86
19:65.
87
Part of a longer hadlth cited by the editor of al-'Uqud, 215-16.

61
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

26. Then they began citing the disallowance of tashbih- and

tajsim- anthropomorphism, being excessive therein and making allu-
sions to what some people have attributed to us [Hanbalis] of such
things.
27. So I said, My statement, 'without inquiring about their
modality (takyif) and without iawz^/Z-anthropomorphism,' disallows
all such fallacies. I simply chose these two terms [in particular]

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

because the disallowance of inquiring about the modality of God's
attributes (takyif) has been handed down on the authority of the
Ancestors, as appears, for example, in the famous dictum of Rabl'ah,
Malik, Ibn 'Uyaynah and others, which the scholars [over the gener-
ations] have received with favour: 'God's mounting the throne is
known; how is unkown; belief in it is obligatory; and inquiring
about its modality is unsanctioned innovation (bid'ah).' Now, these
great Ancestors all agreed that how is unkown to us. Thus, I disal-
lowed takyif, following the example of the Ancestors, while it is also
forbidden by scripture; for subjecting the verses on God's attributes
to allegorical interpretation (ta'wil) entails allegorically interpreting
the One described, as well as His attributes. These are matters the
inner meaning (ta'wil) of which is the preserve of God alone, as I
have established in a separate precept on 'inner meaning' (ta'wil) and
'meaning,' (ma'nd) and the difference between our knowing the
meaning of a statement and our knowing its inner meaning.
28. Similarly, tamthil -anthropomorphism has been disallowed by
scripture, as well as age-old consensus, not to mention the rational
proofs of its incorrectness along with the incorrectness of takyif since
the inner essence of the Giver of Form is not known to man.
29. I mentioned in the course of this the words of al-Khattabl,88
who related that it was the doctrine of the Ancestors to pass on the
verses and hadlths on God's attributes with their literal meanings
intact, without engaging in takyif or iaf^^i^-anthropomorphism,
since speculating about the divine attributes entails speculation
about the divine essence itself, the former going along with the latter

88
Abu Sulayman Hamd b. Muhammad b. Ibrahim b. al-Khattab (al-Khattabl)
al-Bustl, 319/931-388/998), a Shafi'I traditionalist jurist and hadlth expert He
wrote an anti-kaldm work entitled, al-Ghunyah 'an al-kaldm wa-ahl-h (Dispensing
with kaldm and its partisans) to which Ibn Taymiyyah is probably referring here.
See Makdisi, Ash'ari I, 48-49, nt. 2. Ibn Taymiyyah appears fond of quoting this
work apparently as proof that his position is not exclusive to Hanbalis but is shared
especially by leading ancestors of the Shafi'I school. See, for example, 'al-'Aqldah al-
Hamawiyyah al-Kubra,' MR, 1:45O.

62
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

and following its example. Moreover, just as the affirmation of any

essence is an affirmation of its existence, not of its modality, so is the
affirmation of an attribute an affirmation of its existence, not of its
modality.
30. So one of the leaders from among the opponents protested,
'Then it is permissible to say that He is a body dissimilar to [other]
bodies (huwa jismun Id ka-al-ajsdm)V I said, along with some of the

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

savants in attendance, '[On the conrary], it is simply said that God is
described according to the manner that He and His Messenger have
described Him.' And there is nothing in either die Qur'an or the
Sunnah suggesting that God is a body, such that would raise such a
question. * I added — I'm not sure whether this was during the first
or second sessions — The First person to say that God is a body was
the Shi'ite, Hisham b. al-Hakam.89
31. At this, one of the judges among those in attendance who
were known for their religiosity wanted to make an open show of his
disavowel of the charges levelled by some against us. So he began an
exaggerated disavowel of tashblh- and ftz/.si>«-anthropomorphism.90
So I said, It has already been stated in more than one place, 'without
distortion (tahrif), without divestiture {ta'til), without positing
modalities (takyif) and without assuming likenesses to created beings
{tamthlt)!
32. I Had already stated early on in the credo, 'And part of belief
in God is belief in Him as He has described Himself in His Book
and as His Prophet Muhammad has described Him, without distor-
tion (tahrtf), without divestiture {ta'til), without positing modality

89
A b u M u h a m m a d Hisham b. al-Hakam was a Shi'ite mutakallim, born in
Kufa, raised in Basra and later settling in Baghdad. H e is said to have attached him-
self to Yahya al-Barmakl and the Barmakid halqah a n d to have gone into hiding
when the Barmakids fell in 1 8 7 / 8 0 3 . While he is said to have died while in hiding,
there is a wide controversy over his date of death. Al-Zirikll cites a series of dates
ranging from 175/791 to 199/814. See al-A'ldm, 8:85, n. 1. From the asterisk to
the end of this paragraph actually appears in the text between paragraph 9 3 and 94.
(See MF, 3:186; 'Uqud, p. 238) There, however, it appears o u t of place. I have
relied o n al-Birzall's account in inserting it here. See 'al-Munazarah,' MR, All.
90
This was probably the Hanafi chief justice, Shams al-Din al-Harlrl
( M u h a m m a d b. c U t h m a n b. Abl al-Hasan) (653-728/1255-1328). A staunch sup-
porter of Ibn Taymiyyah, he insisted that if the latter was n o t a shaykh al-isldm, n o
one was. H e even went so far as to write an affidavit in support of Ibn Taymiyyah
to the authorities in Cairo following the latter's imprisonment in Ramadan (April)
of 7 0 5 / 1 3 0 6 . H e also submitted affidavits against Ibn al-Wakll, insisting on the lat-
ter's incompetence. See Biddyah, 14:134; Durar, 4 : 1 5 7 - 5 9 , 4 : 2 3 6 - 3 7 .

63
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

(takyif), and without assuming likenesses between Him and created

beings {tamthil).'
33. So I followed this up, '... and in the Prophet's description of
his Lord, as appears in the sound hadlths which the scholars have
received with favour; belief in this too is an article of faith' ... until I
said, '... and (in) the likes of those sound hadlths in which the
Prophet informs us of whatever he informs us. For the Party of Sal-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

vation (al-firqah al-ndjiyah), Ahl al-Sunnah wa-al Jamd'ab, believe in
all of this, as they believe in the reports God gives in His Book, with-
out distortion, without divestiture, without positing modalities, and
without assuming created likenesses to God. Indeed, they follow a
middle path amid the various factions of the community, just as the
community follows a middle path amid other communities. Indeed,
regarding God's attributes, the community follows a middle path
between the Jahmite partisans of divestiture and the tamthil-a.nthro-
pomorphists.'
34. But when the aforementioned judge saw how conspirational
and partisan they were and how few of them would acknowledge and
support [the truth] and he became fearful of them, he said, 'You have
compiled the creed of Imam Ahmad; shall we91 just say, then, that
this is the creed of Ahmad [b. Hanbal]? I mean, the man has merely
compiled [a creed] according to his school {madhhab); he should not
be molested for this. For this [Hanbali] school is a recognized
school.' His aim in all of this was simply to dismantle the disputants'
objections.
35. So I said, I have simply compiled the creed of the Pious Ances-
tors as a whole; Imam Ahmad has no special claim to this. Imam
Ahmad simply communicates whatever knowledge comes to him on
the authority of the Prophet. Were he to assert, on his own, some-
thing that did not come from the Prophet, we would not accept it.
Indeed, this creed is the creed of Muhammad, God's blessings and
salutations be upon him!
36. I reiterated many times over: I give three years respite to
anyone who disagrees with anything I have mentioned in this
creed. Should he bring forth from the first three centuries of Islam
— which the Prophet praised via his statement, 'The best of cen-
turies is the one in which I was sent, then the following one, then the
one following that' — a single consonant contradicting what I have
stated herein, I will rescind my statement, while I assume, on the
other hand, the duty of bringing forth what has been handed down
91
'Uqiui, 218: fa-naqulu; MF, 169: fa-taqulu.
64
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

from all the parties from the first three centuries — Hanafis, Malikls,
ShafTls, Hanball's, Ash'arls, Sufis, the Partisans of Hadith and others
— all of which concurs with what I have said.
37. I also stated on another occasion, not at this hearing, Because
Imam Ahmad came to possess more than other scholars in the way
of the Sunnah and textual reports on the authority of the Prophet
and because he weathered the Great Inquisition (mihnah) and

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

(courageously) repudiated those given to unsanctioned innovation
(ahl al-bid'ah) more than did other scholars, his statements and
knowledge92 in this area surpass that of other scholars. As a cham-
pion {imam) of the Sunnah, he thus became more prominent than
others. Or, one might put the matter in the words of one of the
righteous, knowledgeable shaykhs from North Africa, 'Credit for
establishing doctrine belongs to Malik and al-ShafTl, while promi-
nence as a leader belongs to Ahmad b. Hanbal,' meaning that
Ahmad's doctrine was the same as that of all the great imams,
notwithstanding the fact that some of them may surpass others in
terms of knowledge, clarity of articulation, championing the cause of
truth and fighting against falsehood.
38. *And when the secretary came to that section of the creed that
stated, ... and [to believe in] the Prophet's description of his Lord
contained in the sound hadlths which the people of knowledge have
received with favour* and he read [during the course of this] the
hadith of Abu Sa'id cited in the two sound collections [of Muslim
and al-Bukhari] on the authority of the Prophet, 'God will say on the
Day of Judgment, "O Adam!" The latter will respond, "Your wish
and Your command {labayka wa-sa'dayk)." Then a voice will cry out,
"God commands that you send a contingent to hell-fire",'93 the amir
asked, "Is this hadith sound?"
39. I said, Yes. It is in the two sound collections [of Muslim and
al-Bukhari]. No one disputed this. The disputant was thus forced to
demur, *and everyone else agreed.*
40. Then the amir requested a discussion of the issue of the voice
and the letter, as was requested of him.94

92
'Uqud, 2 2 0 : kdna kaldmu-hu wa-'amalu-h; MF, 170: kdna kaldmu-hu wa-
'ilmu-h.
93
For this and other such hadlths appearing in the credo, see 'al-'Aqldah al-
Wastiyyah,' MR, 1:399. According to Sharaf al-Dln, the Malikl deputy judge,
Najm al-Dln, protested at this point, 'You are saying that G o d calls o u t in a voice!'
MF, 3:209.
94
According to Kanz, 9:135, this request seems to have come from Ibn al-Wakll.

65
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

41. I said, That which many people attribute to Imam Ahmad

and his disciples *on the authority of Majd al-Dln b. al-Khatlb and
others,* i.e. that the voice of the reciters and die ink in the written
copies of the Qur'an have existed from eternity, is a concocted lie.
Ahmad never said this; nor has any other Muslim scholar, neither
from among the disciples of Ahmad nor any other party. I brought
forth a copybook, which had been brought along with the written

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

copy of the creed, containing verbatim what Abu Bakr al-Khallal had
cited in Kitdb al-Sunnah on the authority of Imam Ahmad, along
with what his companion, Abu Bakr al-Mirwadhl, had collected of
the statements of Imam Ahmad, his disciples and the leading schol-
ars of his times, Whoever says, 'My utterance of the Qur'an is cre-
ated,' is a Jahmite; and whoever says that it is uncreated is a hereti-
cal innovator. I said, T h i s is what al-AshfarI cited in Maqdldt
[al-Isldmiyyin] on the authority of Ahl al-Sunnah and the Partisans of
Hadlth, adding that this was the view that he himself endorsed.'*
Then I said, 'So what about one who says, "My utterances [of the
Qur'an] have existed from eternity?" What about one who says, "My
voice is uncreated?" What about one who says, "My voice is sem-
peternal?'" *And there are clear statements on the authority of Imam
Ahmad, as have been related by al-Bukari, author of al-Sahih, in his
Kitdb Khalq afdl al-'ibdd, among others from the imams of the Sun-
nah, stipulating the difference between God's speaking with a voice
and the voice of humans.*
42. I brought forth the response to a question I had been asked
long ago about a man who swears, on pain of divorce, concerning
the issue of the voice and the letter and the literal truth of the [verses
on the] throne. *I cited the response that I had given to this question
back then, along with an explanation thereof and the fact that
unqualified statements to the effect that the Qur'an is both the voice
and the letter or neither the voice nor the letter are both heretical
innovations which did not appear until after the third century of
Islam.* Then I said, Here, this is my response.
43. This question [on the voice and the letter] had actually been
sent by a group of obstinent pseudo-Jahmites, some of whom were
present at the hearing. But when they were confronted with the inci-
sive response, which is the [true] position of Ahl al-Sunnah, not the
position that tiiey advocate, nor what diey attribute to Ahl al-Sunnah,
perhaps on the authority of some ignorant people, they were flabber-
gasted. My response included, Indeed the Qur'an in its entirety is die
word of God, both its words and its meaning; for 'qur'an is not a
term that is restricted to eidier words or meaning alone.
66
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

44. *I said in the course of this to Sadr al-Dln b. al-Wakil, in order

to show the extent to which he contradicted himself and the fact that
he did not hold consistently to any doctrine but merely strove to
cause strife {fitnah) and dissension among the Muslims, 'I have a
credo by Shaykh Abu al-Bayan in which it is stated, 'Whoever says
that a single letter in the Qur'an is created is an unbeliever,' to which
you attached in your own hand, 'This is the madhhab of al-ShafTi

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

and his leading disciples.' You indicated further that you yourself
worshipped God according to this creed.' He admitted this; and
when he did, Shaykh Kamal al-Dln b. al-Zamlakanl rose to con-
demn him.
45. Ibn al-Wakll responded, 'This is the doctrine of al-Shafi'l ver-
batim.' And he challenged the latter's objections repeatedly. So when
we met at the second hearing it was mentioned to Ibn al-Wakll that
Ibn Darbas95 related exactly what I had cited in his Kitdb al-Intis&r
on the authority of al-ShafTl. Then, when we met at the third hear-
ing, Ibn al-Wakll returned to this issue [once again].
46. So Shaykh Kamal al-Dln [al-Zamlakanl] said to Sadr al-Dln
b. al-Wakll, 'You said to Shaykh Taql al-Dln [Ibn Taymiyyah] at the
[first] hearing that whoever says that a single letter in the Qur'an is
created is an unbeliever.' He [Ibn al-Wakll] then reiterated this doc-
trine. At this Shaykh Kamal al-Dln became extremely angry and
raised his voice, exclaiming, 'This man charges our rationalist Ash'arl
brethren, such as Imam al-Haramayn [al-Juwaynl] and others who
say that the letters of the Qur'an are created, with unbelief. We can-
not tolerate such charges against our fellow ShafTls!'
47. Ibn al-Wakll then denied that he had said this, and said, 'I
never said that; I simply said that whoever denies a single letter of
the Qur'an is an unbeliever.' Those in attendance promptly repudi-
ated this, saying, '[Nay] you said such and such [i.e., exactly what al-
Zamakanl claimed].' They added: 'You should not make statements
and then retract them.' Then one of them said, 'He never said this
[i.e., what al-Zamlakanl claimed].' So when they [succeeded in]
twisting his words, the latter said, 'We never heard him say this.'
This reached the point that the viceroy himself interjected, 'One
person lies; another bears witness; and Shaykh Kamal al-Dln is
now upset.' So they turned to the Shafi'l chief justice, Najm al-Dln
[b. Sasra], urging him to reprimand Ibn al-Wakll, since the latter had

95
Ibn Darbas was the first Shafi'I chief justice of Egypt appointed by Saladin
upon the latter's ascension to the sultanate. See Ibn Iyas, Badd'i' al-zuhurfi waqd'i'
al-duhiir, 6 vols. ed. Muhammad Mustafa (Cairo, 1402/1982), 1:233.

67
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

charged his [Shafi'l] partisans with unbelief. But Qadl Najm al-Dln
said, 'I never heard this.' At this Shaykh Kamal al-Dln became
exceedingly angry, and uttered something the exact wording of
which I did not catch but the meaning of which was that this was a
denigration of al-ShafieI and a disgrace to the ShafTls, that their lead-
ing scholars should be charged with unbelief and no one comes to
their defense.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

48. I myself did not hear what Shaykh Kamal al-Dln had said
about Qadl Najm al-Dln, though I tried to ascertain this from oth-
ers who were in attendance, asking them if they heard him say any-
thing about the latter. They responded in the negative. But Qadl
Najm al-Dln took whatever was said to be an insult directed against
him and his position as judge representing the [ShafTl] madhhab and
the fact that he did not defend his [ShafTl] partisans.96 It was his
belief that Shaykh Kamal al-Dln's words [regarding the denigration
of Shafi'l, etc.] were directed at him. So he became angry and said,
'Be it witnessed that I hereby remove myself from office!' He pro-
ceeded to cite the reasons why he deserved to lead [his partisans] and
to be paid the proper respects, along with the fact that he had never
spoken in a manner prejudicial to the honour of any of those in
attendance, calling upon the viceroy himself to confirm this. I myself
spoke to him words of support, including the fact that he deserved
to remain in office under the present circumstances.*
49. When it came to the issue of the Qur'an, i.e., 'And part of
belief in God is belief that the Qur'an is the uncreated word of God,
from Him it began and to Him it will return,' some of them dis-
puted its beginning with and returning to Him, and they petitioned
an explanation thereof.
50. I said, As for this doctrine, it is the established doctrine
handed down on the authority of the Ancestors, such as, for exam-
ple, what 'Amr b. Dinar related, 'For seventy years I have known the
people to say, "God is the Creator; all else is created, except the
Qur'an; it is the uncreated word of God. From Him it proceeded,
and to Him will it return".' And a number of people, * such as the
hadith experts Abu al-Fadl b. Nasir and Abu'Abd Allah al-MaqdisI,*
have collected statements on the authority of the Prophet, the Com-
panions and Successors to this effect.

96
According to al-Dawadarl, al-Zamlakanl's statement was, 'What has befallen
the Shafi'ls is nothing compared to the fact that you should be their leader (mdjard
'aid al-Shdfi'iyyah qalilun kawnu an takuna anta ra'isa-hd).' Kanz, 9:135. See also
Durar, 1:151 for a similar report.

68
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

51. As for the meaning of their statement, 'from Him it pro-

ceeded,' it is that it is He who actually uttered it and revealed it from
Himself. It was not, as the Jahmites claim, created in the air or some
other place, nor did it proceed from other than Him.
52. As for 'to Him it will return,' He will lift it from the copies of
the Qur'an and from the breasts of men at the end of time so that
not a word of it remains in the breasts of men and not a letter in the

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

written copies. Most of those in attendance agreed on this point, and
those who disagreed fell silent.
53. I had spoken to one of them outside these hearings, during
which conversation I showed him a copy of the creed that had been
compiled by the [Abbasid] Caliph al-Qadir bi-Allah, in which it was
stated, 'The Qur'an is the word of God; it issued forth from Him
{kharaja min-h).' He [my interlocutor] expressed some reservation
about the phrase kharaja min-h (it issued forth from Him). So I said,
This is the wording of the Prophet himself: 'God's servants draw not
near to Him via anything as they do via that which issued forth from
Him,' meaning the Qur'an. Khabbab b. al-Aratt97said, O so and
so!98 Draw near to God by whatever means you can; but you will
never draw near to Him by anything more loved by Him than that
which issued forth from Him.' And Abu Bakr al-Siddlq said, when
the qur'an of Musaylamah the arch-liar was read to him, 'This speech
did not issue forth from any sacred being,' meaning, 'any Lord.'
54. It was read from [al-Wdsitiyyah],99 'And Part of belief in Him
is to believe that the Qur'an is the uncreated revealed speech of God;
from Him it proceeded and to Him it will return; and that God
actually spoke its words {takallama bi-hi haqiqatan); and that this
Qur'an which God revealed to Muhammad is the actual speech of
God, not the speech of anyone else. It is not permissible to say that
it is a report about God's speech (hikdyah 'an kaldm Allah) or simply
a means of conveying it {'ibdrah). Rather, when the people recite the
Qur'an or make written copies of it, it does not cease thereby to be
the speech of God. For indeed speech is attributed to the one who

97
Khabbab was a C o m p a n i o n
98
According to Ibn Manzur's Lisdn al-'Arab 6. vols. (Cairo, n.d), 6 : 4 7 1 5 , yd
hant&h (or hanatdh) is used either as a second person feminine vocative, i.e., yd hdd-
hthi, or to mean, " O dull-witted one," (yd balhd") to a female. However, the dialects
of Banu 'Uqayl and Banu Qays allow the use of hanatdh (with sukun over the final
hd") as a vocative in the masculine. See ibid., 6:4714. This is apparently the case in
the present hadith, as all of the subsequent verbs are second person masculine.
99
"Al-'Aqldah al-Wasitiyyah," MR, 1:401-02.

69
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

utters it originally, not to the one who utters it as transmitter or

communicator.'
55. So one of them took exception to the assertion that it was the
actual speech of God, after conceding that God actually spoke it.
Then he conceded that it was the actual speech of God when it was
explained to him that, while it is permissible to deny the literal truth
of metaphorical statements, it is not permissible to deny this [which

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

proves that it is not merely metaphorically true], and that the state-
ments handed down from the ancients and the poetry attributed to
the poets is their actual speech, and that the relationship of the
Qur'an to God is no less than this. *A11 in attendance concurred
with what I cited on the question of the Qur'an and the fact that
God actually spoke it and that it is the literal word of God, not the
speech of anyone else.*
56. When it was mentioned [in the creed] that actual speech is
attributed literally to whomever utters it originally not to one who
utters it as communicator, they applauded these words and lauded
them. Even some of the chief disputants,100 *such as Ibn al-Wakll
and others,* began to extol these words *and to make an open show
of how pleased they were with this synopsis.* One of them said, 'You
have done away with our apprehensions *and put our hearts at
ease.'* And he went on to make similar declarations.
57. When it came to what I had mentioned about belief in the
Last Day, its details and the chronology of its events, they applauded
this and extolled it.
58. The same occured when it came to belief in predestination
{qadar) and the fact that it operates on two levels, and other venera-
ble precepts regarding this doctrine.
59. The same occurred when it came to what was said about mis-
creant professing Muslims (al-fdsiq al-millt) and faith. But here they
raised a number of objections,101 which I shall now cite.
60. All in all, the objections of these tendentious quarrelers, after
the entire creed had been read and discussed, came down to four
questions: first, our statement, Among the tenets of the Party of Sal-
vation (usiil al-firqah al-ndjiyah) is that faith and religion comprise
words and deeds and are subject to increase and decrease; they
comprise the words of the heart and tongue and the deeds of die
heart, tongue and limbs.' They said, If diese are held to be among

100
'Uqud, 226. wa-akhada ahadkubara al-khusum; MF, 176: wa-akhadha akbar
al-khusum.
101
''Uqud, 226. itaradu; MF, 176: itarada-hu.

70
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

the principles of the Party of Salvation, then those who do not hold
this position must not be included among this party, e.g., our ratio-
nalist bretheren (ashdbu-nd al-mutakallimun) who say that faith is
[merely] assent (tasdiq), or those who hold that faith is assent joined
by verbal profession (al-tasdiq wa-al-iqrdr). If these people are not
going to be saved, then they must be doomed to perdition.102
61. As for the remaining three objections — which constituted

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

their main contention — they were levied against our statement,
'And included in what we have mentioned of belief in God is belief
in that of which He informs us in His Book and in what reaches us
via disparate and concurrent channels (tawatara) from the Prophet
and in that upon which the Ancestors of the community were in
unanimous agreement (ijmd'), i.e. that He, be He exalted, is above
the heavens, upon His throne, exalted above His creation, yet with
them wherever they are and knows what they do, as He has indicated
in His statement,' He it is who created the heavens and the earth in
six terms; then He mounted the throne. He knows what enters the
earth and what exists therefrom and what descends from the heavens
and what ascends through it. And He is with you wherever you are.
And God sees every act that you commit.103
62. Now, the meaning of, 'He is with you,' is not that he [physi-
cally] permeates creation; for such is not dictated from the stand-
point of language, as it also contradicts the consensus of the Ances-
tors and runs counter to man's God-given intuition. Rather, the
moon is one of God's signs from among the smallest of His creation.
And while it is placed in the sky, it is with the traveller [on earth],
along with those who are not travelling, wherever they may be. And
He, be He exalted, is above the throne, watching over His creation,
guarding over them, cognizant of what they do, etc. , according to all
that is commensurate with His divine lordship (rububiyyah). All that
God has mentioned here, e.g., that He is above die throne and that
He is with us, is literal truth in need of no distortion [of its literal
meaning]. But it should be guarded against false ideas.

102
Interestingly, these were Hanafi positions, the first being attributed to al-
Maturidl and even Abu Hanlfa himself, though the latter was more popularly
known to endorse the second view. See Abu Ja'far Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Tahawi,
Shark al-'aqidah wa-al-tahdwlyah (Cairo, n.d.), 313-31. See also, J. M. Pessagno,
'The Murji'a, Iman and Abu 'Ubayd,' Journal of the American Oriental Society, 95-3
(1975): 382-94.
103
57:4.

71
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

63. The second objection,104 Some of them said, 'We accept the
literal wording of these reports, as we do the hadlth of al-cAbbas,105
i.e., the so-called "hadlth of the Ibex {hadlth al-aw'dl)," and the lit-
eral wording of, "God is above the Throne." But we do not say, "He
is above the heavens," or "He is upon the Throne".' And they added,
'We say 'The Merciful settled upon the throne {al-Rahmdnu 'aid al-
'arsh istawd)," but we do not say, "God settled upon the throne

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

{Allah 'aid al-'arsh istawd);" nor do we say, "He is settling"...' And
they repeated this doctrine many times over, i.e., that the wording of
scripture must be reproduced verbatim, and that it may not be sub-
stituted for by synonyms, and that no meaning is to be understood
from these words at all, and that they may not be said to constitute
proof of the existence of any divine attribute. This was discussed at
length106 during the second hearing, as I shall mention subsequently,
God willing.
64. The third objection,107 They said, 'Your comparison involving
the moon entails comparing God's being in the heavens with the
moon's being in the heavens.'
65. The fourth objection,108 They said, 'Concerning your state-
ment, "literally true" {haqqun 'aid haqiqati-h); now, literal truth
{haqiqah) refers to the lexical meaning [of a term]. And [in this case]
literal truth could only be understood to refer to the mounting
{istiwd') and aboveness {fawqiyyah) of corporeal bodies {ajsdm), as
the Arabs coined these terms to be used exclusively with reference to
corporeal bodies. Thus, to speak of literal truth [in this case] is sheer
ta/V/wz-anthropomorphism. And to disavow tajsim while speaking of
literal truth is either contradiction or sheer sophistry.'
66. At this point I offered a response to these objections.
67. I said, My statement, 'the doctrine of the Party of Salvation,'
refers to the party described by the Prophet as being saved, in his
statement: 'My community will divide into seventy-three sects;
seventy-two wil enter hell-fire and one paradise. The latter is com-
posed of those who adhere to my way and that of my Companions.'
This doctrine, then, has been handed down on the authority of the
Prophet and his Companions. They, along with those who follow

104
'Uqiid, 2 2 8 : al-su'dl al-awwal.
105
Uqiid, 2 2 8 : radiya Allah 'anh.
106
Mf, 3:178: nabsitu al-kaldm ft hddhd...; 'Uqiid, 229: inbasata al-kaldm ft
hddhd...
107
'Uqiid, 229: al-su'dlal-thdni.
108
Ibid.: al-su'dlal-thdlith.

72
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

them, are the Party of Salvation. And, it has been confirmed on the
authority of more than one of the Companions that they used to
say, 'Faith increases and decreases.' Indeed, everything that I have
mentioned in this regard has been handed down on the authority of
the Companions, through sound chains of transmission, in letter or
in spirit.109 And if those who came after the Companions contra-
dicted this, this does no harm to these doctrines.110

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

68. Then I said to them, Not everyone who disagrees with some
part of this creed is necessarily doomed. For one who disputes some
aspect of this creed may do so on the basis of some faulty exercise of
personal judgment {ijtihdd), for which God may forgive him. Or the
information he has received regarding a particular point may not
constitute sufficient proof to him. Or his good deeds may be of such
magnitude that God uses them to wipe out bad deeds. And since the
pronouncements of divine threat against those who violate right
belief are not necessarily inclusive of those who do so on the basis
of [innocently faulty] interpretation (al-muta'awwil), or those who
repent,111 or those who have expiatory good deeds, or those whose
faults have been forgiven, among others, one who commits some
[minor] violation is exempted a fortiori. Nay, the upshot of what I
have said here is that whoever believes according to this creed attains
salvation commensurate with this belief. And those whose belief con-
tradicts this creed may attain salvation; and they may not. As the
saying goes, 'Saved is the one who suspends judgment.'
69. As for the second objection, firsdy, I answered that every word
that I have said has been handed down on the authority of the Prophet,
e.g., 'above the heavens,' 'upon the throne,' 'above the throne...' And I
said, Write down my response! So the secretary commenced writing.
70. Then some of them said, Today's session has gone on long
enough. Let us postpone this response for another session. You can
prepare a written response and bring it to that session. Some of those
who were in agreement [with me] supported the suggestion that the
discussion be concluded with a written response, in order to limit the
number of questions and objections raised by the opposition.
71. And it appeared that the opposition112 was seeking some
advantage in postponing the recording of my response: They wanted
to prepare themselves, read up [on a few matters], summon some of

109 j^F, 3:179: lafzu-hu wa-ma'nd-hu; 'Uqud, 230: lajzu-hu aw ma'nd-hu.

110
MF, 3:179: lam yadurra ft dhdlika, 'Uqud, 230: lam yadurra-ni dhdlika.
111
MF, 3:179: aw al-qdnit; 'Uqud, 231: aw al-td'tb.
112
MF, 3:180: wa-kdna al-khusum; 'Uqud, 231: wa-ka-anna al-khusuma.

73
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

their colleagues who were not present [at the first hearing], and pon-
der [my] creed among themselves in order to be able to impugne it
and raise further objections against it.
72. So agreement was reached that the discussion be concluded
on the coming Friday. And at this we adjourned.
73. And God had manifested the veracity of [my] proofs and the
clarity of the [right] way such that He raised the stature of the

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

sunnah and the Orthodox Majority (al-jamd'ab), and He debased the
people of unsanctioned innovation and error. But many of those in
attendance harboured apprehensions about what would happen at
the second session.
74. In the meantime, [the opposition] pondered my creed and the
manner in which I had responded to certain questions connected to
matters of belief, such as the Hamawiyyah question on mounting the
throne, the divine attributes and other things.

II
75. When the second session was held on Friday 12 Rajab, fol-
lowing the congregational prayer,113 they brought with them their
leading shaykbs,114 some of whom were not present at the first hear-
ing, *In addition, they brought along Safl al-Din al-Hindl, and they
said, 'He is the most accomplished of the group and our shaykh
in 'ilm al-kaldm* They [had] discussed matters among themselves,
agreed on a plan and conspired. And they came forth in great
strength and with a readiness which they did not have before; for the
first session had taken them by surprise, not to mention that it also
took me by surpise, I being the defendant, the respondent and the chief
discussant.
76. So when we met, and I had brought forth my written response
to their questions, the reply to which they requested be postponed
until today, I opened by praising God via the preamble of need, the
preamble of Ibn Mas'ud.115 Then I said, Indeed, God has commanded

113
'Uqud, 232: bdda al-saldh.
114
Mf, 3:181: ahdaru aktham shuyukhi-him; 'Uqud, 232: ahdaru akbara
shuyukhi-him.
115
'Indeed, praise is for God. We seek His aid, His guidance and His forgive-
ness And we seek refuge in God from the evil of our souls and the ill of our
deeds...' (innal-hamda U-Alldh, nasta'inu-hu wa-nastahdi-hi wa-nastaghfiru-hu, wa-
na'udhu bi-Alldh min shurun anfusi-nd wa-min sayyi'dti dmdli-nd...) This is part of
a longer hadith recorded by al-Tirmidhl on the authority of 'Abd Allah Ibn Mas'ud.
See the editor's footnote in 'Uqud, 233.

74
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

us to remain a harmonious community; and He has forbidden divi-

sion and schism. He said to us in the Qur'an, 'And hold fast,
altogether, to the rope of God, and be not disunited.'116 And He
said, 'Verily those who have divided their religion and become
sectarians, you have nothing to do with them.'117 And He said, And
be not as those who became divided and differed among themselves
after clear guidance had come to them.'118 And our lord is one; our

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

Book is one; our Prophet is one; and the basic principles of our reli-
gion do not accomodate division and dissension. And I advocate that
which promotes community among the Muslims. And this is what
was agreed upon by the Ancestors. Now, if the group agrees [with
this], then God be praised. If not, I will uncover the secrets and
shred the veils of whomever disagrees with me, and I will expose
those heretical doctrines that have corrupted religious communities
and governments. I will go to the sultan [in Egypt] myself, by
post-mule, and acquaint him with matters that I have not mentioned
during these hearings. For, indeed, there are words to be spoken at
times of peace, and there are words to be spoken at times of war!
77. I said, No doubt, people dispute among themselves, this one
saying, 'I am a Hanball,' that one, 'I am an Ash'ari,' and then there
runs among them division, *strife* and dissension over matters the
truth of which they do not understand. But I have brought along with
me a work that clearly establishes that all of the schools of thought
are in agreement with what I have stated [during the course of these
hearings]. Then I brought forth Kitdb Tabyln Kadhib al-Muftari fi-
md Yunsabu ild al-Shaykh Abi al-Hasan al-Ash'ari *(God show him
mercy)* of the hadith expert, Abu al-Qasim b. al-Asakir, *(God
show him mercy)* and I said, Nothing comparable to this book
on the praiseworthy reports from al-Ash'arl has ever been written.
It includes al-Ashcarl's position exactly as it appears in [the latter's]
Kitdb al-Ibdnah (fi usul al-diydnah).U9
78. When I came to mention of the Mu'tazilites,120 the amir
asked about the meaning of 'Mu'tazilites.'
79. I said, In ancient times, people disputed over die status of mis-
creant professing Muslims [i.e., are they believers or unbelievers?].

116
3:103.
117
6:159.
118
3:105.
119
Here is where Ibn Taymiyyah apparently began reading from Ibn 'Asakir's
Tabyln.
120
The Tabyin includes al-Ash'ari's refutation of Mu'tazilism.

75
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

This was the first controversy that occurred in the community. The
Kharijites said, 'They are unbelievers,' while the [orthodox] majority
(al-jamd'ah) said, 'They are believers.' So one group responded, 'We
say that they are miscreants, neither believers nor unbelievers; rather,
we relegate them to a status between the two {manzilah bayn al-
manzilatayn).' And they held that such people would dwell in hell-
fire forever. Then they seceded from the study circle of al-Hasan al-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

Basrl [d. 110/728] *(God show him mercy)* and his companions.
Because of this they were named 'secessionists' {Mu'tazilah).
80. The chief among them objected vociferously, It is not as you
have explained! Rather, the first controversy among the Muslims was
over the question of [divine] speech, and the mutakallimun were
named so because of their discourse about this issue. The first one to
raise this issue was 'Amr b. 'Ubayd [d. 144/761], who was then suc-
ceeded after his death by 'Ata' b. Wasil — sic; and he mentioned
similar things.
81. I became extremely angry at this shaykh and I said, You are
wrong! And this is a lie that contradicts consensus. I said to him, You
have shown neither propriety, nor virtue, nor have you conducted
yourself properly in addressing me; nor is your response correct!
82. Then I said, The controversy over divine speech occurred dur-
ing the caliphate of al-Ma'mun [198-218/813-33] and afterwards,
during the last part of the second [eigth] century. As for the
Mu'tazilites, they appeared long before that, during the time of 'Amr
b. 'Ubayd, after the death of al-Hasan al-Basrl at the beginning of
the second [eigth] century. These early Mu'tazilites did not discuss
the issue of divine speech, nor were they party to any controversy
over it. Rather, their first innovations involved their discourse over
the divine names (al-asmd'), the [five] principles (al-ahkdm),m and
the issue of divine threat (al-wa'id).
83. So he [this shaykh] responded, Al-Shahrastani cites the view
that I just stated in his Kitdb al-Milal wa-al-Nihal.
84. I said, Al-Shahrastani mentioned that in connection with
the term, mutakallimun, i.e. why they were called mutakallimun.
He did not cite this in connection with the term, mu'tazilah. And
the amir simply asked about the term mu'tazilah.

121
A reference to the famous 'five principles' {al-abkdm al-khamsah) of the
Mu'tazilites: (1) montheism (tawhld); (2) divine justice (W/); (3) divine threat and
punishment {al-wa'd wa-al-wa'id); (4) the station between the two {al-manzilah
bayn al-manzilatayn); (5) commanding good and forbidding evil (al-amr bi-al-
ma'ruf wa-al-nahy 'an al-munkaf).

76
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

85. Those in attendance then rose against this shaykh and said,
'You are wrong.'122
86. I said during the course of this: I know of every innovation
that has occurred in Islam, the first one's to introduce it, and the
reason behind its being introduced. Moreover, that which al-Shahras-
tanl cited regarding the term, mutakallimum is wrong. For the
mutakallimun were called by this name before their involvement in

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

the controversy over divine speech. [In fact,] they used to endorse the
view that God speaks and they credited Him with the attribute of
speech, on the authority of Wasil b. 'Ata', before the controversy
over divine speech had even occurred.
87. I said, along with some others, It was Wasil b. 'Ata'
[d. 131/748] [who first introduced the question of divine speech],
not cAta' b. Wasil, as peviously stated. I said, And Wasil did not
live after the death of 'Amr b. 'Ubayd; he was, rather, a [contempo-
rary] relative (qarib) of the latter.123 Thus it could be related that
Wasil once delivered a speech, to which 'Amr b. 'Ubayd replied,
'Were a prophet to be sent, he would not speak words more beauti-
ful than these.' And Wasil's eloquence was well-known, to the point
that it was said that though he suffered a speech impediment because
of which he would avoid pronouncing the letter r (ra), one day it
was said to him, The amir has ordered that a well be dug in the
middle of the road.124 To this he responded, Is the general too good
to have a well dug in the road?125
88. *When I came to what al-Ash'arl had stated,*126 their leading
shaykh, who had been put forth to represent them, said, There is no
doubt that Imam Ahmad is a great imam, among the greatest in
Islam. But there are people who have made unsanctioned innova-
tions while claiming affiliation with him.
89. I said, This is true. But this is not exclusive to Imam Ahmad.
On the contrary, there is not a single imam who has not been
claimed by some party with whom he has nothing to do. Malik has
been claimed by people with whom he has nothing to do. Al-ShafTl

122
'Uqud, 235: wa-qdla; MF, 184; wa-qdlu.
123
Wasil was married to a sister of 'Amr. See W. M. Watt, The Formative Period
of Islamic Thought (Edingburgh, 1973), 213.
124
'Uqud, 236: Amara al-amiru an yuhfara bi'run fl qdri'ati al-tariq (a state-
ment replete with the letter V. ); MF, 184: amara al-amlru anyahfara bi'run.
125
A-wa-'azza al-qd'idu an yuqallaba qallbun fi al-jdddah, a phrase replete with
recondite words but essentially carrying the same meaning without a single V.
126
Probably a reference to al-AsrTari's praise of Ahmad b. Hanbal. See Tabyin,
157-58. See above, note 70.

77
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

has been claimed by people with whom he has nothing to do. Abu
Hanlfah has been claimed by people with whom he has nothing to
do. Moses, upon him be peace, has been claimed by people with
whom he has nothing to do. Jesus, upon him be peace, has been
claimed by people with whom he has nothing to do. "All b. Abl Talib
has been claimed by people with whom he has nothing to do. And
our Prophet, God's blessings and salutations be upon him, has been

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

claimed by the Qarmathians, the Bdtiniyyah and others, including all
types of atheists and hypocrites, with whom he has nothing to do.
90. This shaykh had mentioned in the course of this that people
from among the hashwiyyah and fcw/;£z#-anthropomorphists have
claimed affiliation with Ahmad. And he added similar assertions.
91. I said, The tashblh- and i3/«>w-anthropomorphists number
more among other groups than they do among the disciples of Imam
Ahmad. These various groups of Kurds, for example, all of them are
ShafTls; and there is tashblh- and ta/.«>?z-anthropomorphism among
them such as exists among no other group. The people of Jllan, some
of them are ShafTls and some Hanbalis. I said: As for the pure
Hanbalis {al-Hanbaliyyah al-mahdah), these fallacies do not afflict
them as they do their counterparts. And my coup de grace here was,
These ta/yfwz-anthropomorphist Karramites, all of them are Hanafis!
92. I went on to speak about the term, hashwiyyah, though I am
not sure whether this was in response to a question from the amir or
someone else, or simply of my own accord.
93. I said, The first ones to innovate this term were the
Mu'tazilites, who used to refer to the majority and the masses as
hashw, just as the Shi'ites refer to them as al-jumhicr (plebians,
general public). The hashw among a people are its commoners, the
majority, in contradistinction to the distinguished nobility. They say,
'This person is from the hashw of the people,' just as it is said, 'This
person is from the jumhur.' And the first person to speak of this was
Amr b. 'Ubayd, who used to say: "Abd Allah b. 'Umar was a
hashwl! Thus, the Mu'tazilites refer to the majority as hashw, just as
the Shi'ites refer to them as al-jumhur.
94. I said to the aforementioned shaykh, 'Who among the leading
disciples of Imam Ahmad, God show him mercy, are hashwiyyah,
according to what you mean by that term.127 Al-Athram? Abu

127
In para. 93, Ibn Taymiyyah had discussed the original meaning of the term
haswhl. Here he discusses it in its later sense, viz., fideism, anti-intellectualism and
unsophisticated literal interpretation of scripture. See further, Ibn Rushd, Kashf'an
mandhij al-addlah fi 'aqd'td abl al-mtllah (Cairo: Muhammad 'All Subayh, 1353/
1935), 42.
78
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

Dawud? Al-Mirwadhl? Al-Khallal? Abu Bakr cAbd al-'AzIz?128 Abu

al-Hasan al-Tamlml? Ibn Hamid? Qadl Abu Ya'la? Abu al-Khattab?
Ibn 'Aqll?' Then I raised my voice and said, 'Name them! Tell me!
Are any of these men hashwisi Who are they?129 Is the sharfah to be
dismantled and the lineaments of religion effaced on the strength of
Ibn al-Khatlb's130 lies and his misrepresenting people's doctrines? For
example, as he and others have attributed to some people that they

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

say, 'The sempiternal Qur'an is the voices of the reciters and the ink
of the copyists, and the voice and the ink are sempiternal.' Now,
whoever said this? And in what book are these statements of theirs to
be found? Tell me! Similar is his attributing to them the belief that
there will be no beautific vision of God in the Hereafter, according
to what he claimed to be the necessary implications of a premise he
claimed they endorsed.'
95. I went on to insist that this shaykh, being the leader of the group,
their patron and a man of reason and religious devotion, deserved to be
treated accordingly. And I instructed [the secretary] to read the creed
all over for him, since he was not present at the first session but was
simply brought along to the second to strengthen the opposition.
96. After this hearing, a trusted individual (thiqah) informed me
that he met with this shaykh and that the latter said to him, 'Tell me
what happened at the first hearing.' So this individual said to him:
'So and so [i.e., Ibn Taymiyyah?] has committed no sin, and neither
have I. The amir simply asked him about something to which he
responded, though you may have been given to understand that he
had asked him about something else.'
97. He [my informant] said, I said to them, You have no valid
objections against the man; he simply supported abstaining from
allegorical interpretation (ta'wil), while you support allegorical inter-
pretation. And both of these are positions attributed to al-Asheari.
He added, I myself favour the position against allegorical interpreta-
tion. He presented his credo in which he had affirmed his creed; and
in it was the doctrine of abstaining from allegorical interpretation.
98. My informant then said to me, 'So I said to this shaykh, "I
hear that at the end of the hearing, when everyone was called upon

128
'Uqud, 238: Abu Bakrtn bnu 'Abdi al-Aziz.
129
'Uqud, 238: man hum? man hum?; MF, 186: min-hum? man hum?
130
Perhaps a reference to the famed Fakhr al-Dln al-Razi (544/1149-
606/1209). According to Laoust, Ibn Taymiyya, 952, SafI al-Dln al-Hindl was a
pupil of al-Razi.

79
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

to give sworn testimony indicating their agreement [to exonerate Ibn

Taymiyyah], you said, 'Do not write that I approve nor that I disap-
prove.' Now, why was that?"'
99. The shaykh responded, 'For two reasons; first, I did not attend
the full reading of the creed at the first session. Second, because the
members of my school asked me to attend the hearings in order to
bolster their position; and it would have been improper, in light of

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

this, for me to make an open display of disagreement with them. So
I abstained from supporting either party.'
100. I had reiterated the order more than once that the creed be
read over in its entirety for this shaykh. But some of those in atten-
dance thought that this would take too long, so they suggested that
only those parts about which they had questions be read. And the
most significant matter here was [my use of] the word haqiqah. So
they read this to him.
101. This shaykh himself cited a handsome argument in connec-
tion with the meaning of the term [haqiqah], for which I expressed
my admiration and praised him. I added, There is no doubt that
God is literally alive {hayyun haqiqatan), *literally knows,* literally
hears, and literally sees. On this there is consensus among Ahl al-
Sunnah and those who accept the divine attributes among all the
parties. Were some who are given to unsanctioned innovation {ahl
al-bid'ah) to dispute any part of this, there would remain no doubt
that God [still] exists. But created beings also exist. Whether the
term 'existence' is applied to the uncreated and the created denota-
tively {bi-al-ishtirdk al-lafzi), or connotatively (bi-al-tawdtu'), which
entails the intermingling of both the expression and its meaning, or
ambiguously (bi-al-tashkik), which is a type of connotative usage —
on every usage, God literally exists; and created entities literally exist
as well. To apply a term in its literal sense to both the Creator and
the created entails no danger.
102. During this session, however, I did not come out in favour
of any one of these three usages. For my point was duly made assum-
ing any one of them.131 My point was simply to establish the truth
of what I had said about the position of all the parties, and to clarify
the fact that the position of the Ancestors and those who follow
them is in agreement with what I said, and that the position of the
leading scholars of the four schools of law, as well as that of al-Ash'ari
and his leading disciples, concurs with what I have said.

131
MF, 3:188: 'aid kulli maqsudh; 'Uqud, 241: 'aid kulli maqsudin.

80
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

103. For, sometime before this second hearing, I was visited by a

group of leading scholars, some ShafTls, some who claim affiliation
with al-AshearI, some Hanafls, and others, all of whom had grave
apprehensions about the upcoming hearing and [the possibility of] a
triumph by the opposition. They were also fearful of what would
befall them [should this hearing result] in schism. For, were I to give
manifest proof in support of what I said, or if none of the leaders of

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

their schools concurred with my arguments, the result would be
schism, and it would become difficult thereafter for those who vis-
ited me to express publicly views that contradicted those of their
group, this being grist to the mill of their adversaries. Meanwhile,
were there among the leaders of their schools some who supported
my view, there being proof to back up what I had said and to clarify
the fact that this was the position of the Ancestors, these people
would then be able to advocate these views openly, not to mention
that this is what they believed in their hearts to be the truth all along.
104. [Their apprehensions reached the point] that one of the
leading Hanafls who had come to meet me said, If you would only
say, 'This is the position of Ahmad b. Hanbal,' and substantiate it,
the dispute would be terminated. He meant that I could fend off the
opposition on grounds.that this was a recognized school of thought,
while, at the same time, both those who supported me and those
who disagreed with me would be relieved of having to express
approval [with my creed].132
105. I said, No, by God! Ahmad b. Hanbal has no special claim
to this. This is simply the doctrine of the ancestors of the commu-
nity and the Imams of the Parisans of Hadlth. This, I added, is the
creed of the Messenger of God. For every word I have mentioned I
could cite a verse from the Qur'an, or a hadlth, or an ancient con-
sensus, and I could quote from all the parties of Muslims — the fol-
lowers of the four schools, the mutakallimun, the Partisans of
Hadlth, and the Sufis — people who related a consensus on the
authority of the Ancestors [confirming what I said].
106. I said to the those leading Shafi'is who addressed me: "Look,
I will make clear that what I have stated is the position of the Ances-
tors and the leading scholars among the followers of al-Shafi'l. I
will cite the doctrine of al-Ash'ari and the leading scholars among his

132
In other words, it would not matter whether they agreed with it or not; it
would enjoy protected status as one of several equally orthodox views. Makdisi has
pointed out that al-Subki was fond of invoking this 'principle of the double legal
truth' in an effort to insulate divergent theological views. See Ash'ari II 34-35.

81
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

disciples, which will refute #the position of these opponents. Every

ShafTl will gain a victory; and so will everyone who advocates that
position of al-Ash'ari which is in agreement with the doctrine of the
Ancestors. I will prove that the view attributed to him [al-Ash'ari] in
support of allegorically interpreting the divine attributes has no basis
in anything he ever said but is, rather, the view of a party of his fol-
lowers. Indeed, it is the Ash'arites who have two views [on this

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

issue], not al-Ash'ari!"
107. When I mentioned at the hearings that all of the names of
God that are also used with reference to created beings, such as the
term 'existence', which is used to refer to the reality of the necessary
{wdjib) and the possible (mumkin), according to the three [previously
mentioned] usages, two of the elders began to dispute over whether
the term 'existence' is used denotatively (bi-al-ishtir&k) or connota-
tively (bi-al-tawdtu'). Said one of them, 'It is used connotatively.'
Said the other, 'It is used denotatively,' in order to avoid being
bound to a theory of composition (tarkib).m Said the latter, 'Fakhr
al-Dln [al-Razl] has said that this controversy is based on the ques-
tion of whether His existence is identical to His essence. Those who
say that the existence of every thing is identical to its essence say that
"existence" is denotative; those who say that the existence of a thing
is something additional to its essence say that "existence" is connota-
tive.' Then the former began to give preponderance to the view of
those who say that existence is additional to essence, in order to
defend the thesis that 'existence' is used connotatively. The second
disputant replied, 'It is not the thesis of al-Ashcari and Ahl al-Sunnah
that His existence is identical to His essence.'134 The first elder then
denounced this.

133
According to Ibn Taymiyyah, the theory of composition was a fallacy of the
philosophers and some mutakallimun, apparently following Plato: 'They thought
that abstract universals {kulliydt mutlaqah) actually existed in the outside world as a
part of individual entities and that, as such, individual entities were composed of
this common or shared universal plus that which distinguished them as individual
entities. On such a view, they were bound to hold that God, the Necessarily Exist-
ing, is composed of this universally shared existence plus that which distinguished
Him as God, i.e., necessariness, existence, ipseity, despite the fact that it is well
known among the logicians that universals exist only in the mind, not in individ-
ual entities themselves.' See MF, 5:332. Ibn Taymiyyah's point, is, again, that the
feared composition would occur only in the mind, not in reality
134
Both rescensions of the text read laysa madhhabu al Ash'ari wa-ahli al-sunnah
anna wujuda-hu 'aynu mdhdyatt-h. Perhaps 'laysa here is a mistake.

82
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

108. So I said, As for the Speculative Rationalists of Ahl al-Sun-

nah {mutakallimu ahl al-sunnah), according to them the existence of
every thing is identical to its essence. As for the other doctrine, it is
the doctrine of the Mu'tazilites, i.e., that the existence of everything
is something additional to its essence. And both of these groups are
correct from a certain point of view. Indeed, the truth of the matter
is that these names are in fact used connotatively {bi-al-tawdpi'), as

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

I have established elsewhere where I rectified the fallacy of composi-
tion {shubhat al-tarkib) in two well-known treatises. As for this being
based on the existence of every thing being identical to its essence or
not, this is a result of the false doctrine attributed to Ibn al-Khatlb.
For, indeed, even if we say that the existence of every thing is identi-
cal to its essence, it does not necessarily follow that the name used to
designate this thing and its corresponding likeness {nazir) denotes
only nominal similarity {ishtirdk lajzi) between them, as is the case
with generic nouns. For indeed, the term 'blackness' applies, conno-
tatively {bi-al-tawdtu'), to this blackness and to that blackness, while
this blackness is not the same as that. Rather, what the term refers to
is only what is common {al-qadr al-mushtarak) between them,
namely, an abstract universal. But true abstract universals exist only
in the mind. Yet, it does not follow [from this] that what is common
among entities existing in the outside world must be denied. For
such would necessitate the denial of all connotative nouns {al-asmd'
al-mutawdti'ah); and these constitute the bulk of nouns found in
languages, i.e., generic nouns (asmd' al-ajnds), which are nouns that
apply to a thing and all its resemblances, be it a concrete noun {ism
al-'ayn), or an adjectival noun {ism sifah), primary {jdmid), or deriv-
ative {mushtaqq), and whether it be a generic of logic, law, or other.
Nay, generic nouns [alone], linguistically speaking, include genera,
categories, species and the like. And all of these are connotative
nouns whose referents are individually distinguishable in the outside
world.
109. Then one of them petitioned a re-reading of the hadlths cited
in the creed, so that he could impugne the validity of some of them.
110. I understood what he was hinting at, so I said, 'It seems that
you have come prepared to impugne die hadldi of the Ibexes {hadlth al-
aw'at), i.e., the hadlth of al-'Abbas b. eAbd al-Muttalib.' And they had
gone to great pains until theyfinallycame upon what Zaki al-Din cAbd
al-'AzIm mentioned about al-Bukharl's statement in die latter's Tdrlkh,
i.e., "Abd Allah b. cAmIrah is not known to have heard from al-Ahnaf.'
111. I said, This hadlth, in addition to being narrated by the
compilers of the sunan collections, such as Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah,
83
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

al-Tirmidhi and others, has also been narrated via two other well-
known channels. To criticise one of these does not amount to a valid
criticism of the others.
112. So he responded, Does not this hadlth revolve around the
person of Ibn 'Amlrah, while al-Bukharl has already stated that he
was not known to have heard from al-Ahnaf?
113. I said, The great imam of imams, Ibn Khuzaymah, related

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

this hadlth in his Kitdb al-Tawhld, a book in which he stipulated that
he would adduce only those reports that had been passed on from one
reliable transmitter to another, going all the way back to the Prophet.
I added, Assertion [in matters such as the validity of a report] takes
precedence over denial. Al-Bukharl, meanwhile, simply denied that he
knew of Ibn 'Amlrah's having heard from al-Ahnaf; he did not deny
that other people might know of this. If someone else, such as the
imam of imams, Ibn Khuzaymah, knows of an unbroken chain of
transmitters, his knowledge and his assertion are to be given prece-
dence over the denial and lack of knowledge on the part of others.
114. The group then agreed on this. And some of them began to
heap praise upon me in ways better left unmentioned.
115. Then they began to debate things that had not been men-
tioned in the creed but which were related to some of the things that
I had said in response to [their] questions and in response to what
some people may have understood from what was stated in the
creed. One of the chiefs among them brought forth al-Bayhaql's
Kitdb al-Asmd' wa-al-sifdt, and said, This contains an allegorical
interpretation (ta'wil) of the face (al-wajh) on the authority of the
Ancestors. I said, Perhaps you have in mind the Exalted's statement,
'So whichever way you turn, there will be the face of God (fa-aynamd
tuwallu fa-thamma tuajhu Allah).Xii He said, 'Yes; and Mujahid
and al-ShafTl have said, "This means the direction of God {'qiblat
AllAh)"-
116. I said: Yes. This is rightly attributed to Mujahid, al-ShafTl
and others. And this [interpretation] is correct. But this verse is not
of the verses on divine attributes. Whoever considers it such, as one
party does, is simply in error. For the context of these words point to
its intended meaning: God says, 'And to God belongs the east and
the west. So whichever way you turn, there will be the face {wajh) of
God.136 Now, the east and west are directions; and 'face' {wajh) here

135
2:115.
136
2:115.

84
 IBN TAYMIYYAH ON TRIAL IN DAMASCUS

means direction. One says, 'Which face do you want,' meaning,

'Which direction do you want [to go],' as one says, 'I want this face,'
meaning, 'I want [to go in] this direction,' as the Exalted said, 'Every
community has a direction towards which it faces {wa-li-kullin
wijhatun huwa muwalli-hd) .137 And because of this He said, 'So
whichever way you turn, there will be the face of God', meaning
whichever way you face, whichever way you turn. God knows best.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jss/article/XXXIX/1/41/1723603 by guest on 22 September 2021

*And may He shower His blessings upon Muhammad.*

137
2:148.

85