Scholar Profiling

Let me speak softly, because this topic has much heat! The pre-Islamic Arab Bedouins used to have an evil practice against animals, which is to mark their cattle through burning or wounding the face with a special symbol that indicates the owning tribe. This practice was condemned later by Islam because it involves excessive torturing of animals. When I flash back and give a glance at my body, I still can see the traces of burns in different parts of my body sometimes with memories of sensual pain. It is through an evolved version of the mentioned practice, this time targeting humans instead of animals. The difference here is that it had become so popular, that even not all the "wise" (wo)men condemn it, because they sometimes practice it. It is metaphoric but not far from reality to say that thousands of people in our time, in more than an occasion, were dragged in a corner, held by few gigantic figures and then stamped with a tattoo that remains with them up to this date. You just need to be courageous, or sometimes naïve, and declare your opinion about specific previous or recent Muslim scholars, and that where the ceremonies start. No need to speak anymore, you have been stamped; we know how you think and who you are. It is very difficult to assume that kicking around will give you an exit; you will be stamped anyways. 

I am talking about a serious issue that is wounded deep in the unconscious of many educated Muslims nowadays. How you view specific figures in our history has to do much about how people view you nowadays. Whether you praise or criticize, you will have enemies, and if you try to be in the middle then you will have everyone as your enemy. In this article I am interested in having a chat, probably in some length and depth, with the general Muslim educated youth residing in the western side of the world, but without objections to the dear friends residing in the east of listening to the conversation. I will rely on your smartness to read the lines and what is between them, and also on your politeness to judge the article as a whole and not through individual sentences. I will be informal when I address you, but academic when I want to convince you. I will be sharing some personal experiences and some valuable statements that I am digging out from years of reading and contemplation on thousands of pages in our traditional works. I have no authority in the field, but I have good hope in you for enjoying the discussion.   

What is your opinion of Ibn Taymiyyah [728 AH]? You really shocked me when you told me about your views of Ibn Arabi [638 AH]! What is wrong with Al-Ghazali [505 AH][1] that so many people criticize him? Why do you seem uncomfortable with Ibn Hazem [456 AH]? These questions and tens alike, I was asked in the Arab lands, I witnessed people debating about in Kuala Lumpur, and I still receive emails about from friends living in small cities in Ontario. I am not a scholar, so when I am asked about these questions I am either being tested about my belief, or being sincerely addressed from a close friend who is confused and is searching for an answer.

The modern belief-testers used to make me angry, but I used to swallow it with all its bitterness. In my second year in college, a person who rarely spoke with me, asked me: "Where is Allah?" I was surprised and then disgusted so I remained silent, but that was good enough for him because he got what he wanted. After five years, while praying on one of the downtown Toronto mosques, I heard a person with a white robe asking the same question to a young African Muslim. I have heard the same question many times in between that I have built some immunity and the question does not agitate me anymore. If people want to judge my faith based on an answer to a question that I believe is wrong from the first place, then peace. My first advice is to flee away whenever you find yourself in such situations, because there is no place for fruitful debate.

I was confused at a specific time of my life about how I should treat the contradictory views about specific old scholars. I admit that it was at a specific point a barrier in my progress in Islamic studies. Therefore, when I find a person in that position, then I understand it, and I feel some sort of responsibility to convey my experience and that is my intention of writing this article. It is not enough nor wise to ask the seekers of truth to stop thinking about these questions, because they live in an environment that pushes them to have answers. At the same time, it is unfair to convince them of your opinion about specific scholars. What we should do instead, is to provide a general methodology and framework for the youth to be able to answer these questions, regardless of our agreement or disagreement with the conclusions. 

I will limit my examples to three scholars who are described as "controversial" for a wide spectrum of reasons. I am referring to Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Arabi, and Ibn Hazem. My main focus however, will be on Ibn Arabi for three main reasons. The first is that amongst the three, he is the most difficult to defend, which makes his scenario the best candidate for challenging the suggested points of methodology. In my humble experience, people will tell you: you have gone too far when you start defending Ibn Arabi, as a good number of previous scholars and the vast majority of the current educated Muslims believe that he was a non-Muslim[2]. Two weeks ago, a person in the local mosque I pray in told me that he was very disappointed with me because when I discussed this topic I put Ibn Arabi and Ibn Taymiyyah in the same category. This is a reflection of a dominant atmosphere that winds out the idea of tolerating less harsh judgment on this figure, because to many, Ibn Arabi's status has been determined and it is out of discussion. This is exactly what I need for this article. The second reason is the high profiling of those who do not condemn the ideas of Ibn Arabi, nay to say those who agree with him. If you get a chance to read the biography collections, you will not be surprised to see that amongst the factors that describe a scholar's life is his agreement or disagreement with Ibn Arabi. Nowadays, if you speak softly about Ibn Arabi you will be profiled as a Sufi, more specifically the "misguided" Sufi". Again this works well for the purposes of our discussion. The third reason is the academic challenge of making simple judgments about his ideas without extensive effort in reading thousands of pages written in a language full of "Sufi jargon" that we don't understand nowadays. This point is of interest because the youth can not simply take a stance through reading a book or two by Ibn Arabi and then take an independent neutral stance based on self-reflection and study. This is not to say that the other two scholars are easier to "analyze", but rather claiming that Ibn Arabi is the most difficult.  In the following paragraphs, I will present a short biography of the three scholars highlighting the points of controversy in their ideas, and then proceed to the discussion.

Muhiee Al-Deen Mohammad Ibn Arabi was born in Murcia (Andalusia) in 560 AH and was buried in Damascus in 638 AH. He studied Hadith, Jurisprudence and Sufism which he mastered and was known for. He is described as the Greatest Master (al-Sheikh al-Akbar) by many Sufis. Ibn Al Zamalkani[3] said: "He is a vast sea in the divine gnosis". Ibn Al-Safadi[4] [764 AH] said: "He has ultimate exposure (to Islamic sciences), sharp thinking, and maximum memory, who ever looks at his book (The Meccan Illuminations – Al Futuhat Al Makkiyya) will know his high rank (in Islamic sciences)". Ibn Al-Najjar[5] [402 AH] said: "I met him in Damascus, wrote some poetry from him, and what a (praiseworthy) sheikh he was!". Al-Fairoozabaddi [6] [817 AH] said: "What I believe in and attest Allah with is that he was the master of the path (tareeq) in knowledge and state, and the imam (leader) of the reality …. and the reviver of the traces of divine gnosis".  Imam Al-Manawi[7] [871 AH] said: "What I believe in, and nothing is correct except this, is that he was a pious wali (friend of Allah), and a sincere scholar; the arrows of criticism are pointed to him only by those who did not understand his words". On the other hand, some jurists accuse him of promoting the beliefs of divine indwelling (hulul) and union with God (ittihad). Ibn al-Muqry[8] [837 AH] said: "Who does not believe the disbelief (kuffur) of the group of Ibn Arabi, he himself is a disbeliever (kaffir)". Imam Al-Dhahbi said: "If there is no disbelief in his book (al-Fusus), then there is no disbelief on earth"

Ahmad ibn Abdul-Haleem Ibn Taymiyyah was born in Harran in Turkey in 661 AH. He studied and mastered the Hanbali school of thought, Hadith (prophetic traditions) and Tafseer (interpretation of the Quran). He spent most of his life traveling between Damascus and Egypt, and had effective participation in the battles against the Mongols. His fame came from his theological writings which focused on attacking philosophy and Kalam methodologies, and his strong criticism of many scholars of Sufism (spirituality). He was jailed three times in his life for ideas that were renounced by the majority of scholars in his time. He passed away in jail on 728 AH, leaving more than 300 volumes in different sciences. Imam al-Dhahabi [9] [748 AH] said: "Astonishment is endless when you hear him speak about an issue of (jurisprudential) dispute, and no one is better than him in recalling texts (from memory), the Sunnah stands in front of his eyes, eloquent expressions are on the tip of his tongue, and he used to be one of the signs of Allah in Tafseer". al-Shawkani [10] [1250 AH] said: "I don't know anyone who came after ibn Hazem more knowledgeable than him (ibn Taymiyyah)". Ibn Rajab Al Hanbali [11] [795 AH] said: "He was the sole of his time in Tafseer and the realities of faith". Al-hafiz Al-Mizzi [12] [742 AH] said: "No one was seen like him for the past 400 years".  Ibn Taymiyyah is the most prominent figure to the modern Salafis. It is not of exaggeration to claim that his opinions in the Salafi circles are considered the main (and sometimes the only) source, especially in issues of belief and spirituality. He was called by some of his students/lovers "The Sheikh of Islam", as a sign of his vast knowledge. Many contemporary scholars consider him one of the reforms of Islam and present him as a social revolutionist. On the other hand, his writings are considered by many to be the main source for the modern anthropomorphism (tajseem). Imam al-Hisni [13] [829 AH] said: "It is enough to see what is present in his fatwas and in his books; it is certainly disbelief, no one who has the slightest understanding of knowledge doubts that". Ibn Hajar Al-Haitamy [14] [974 AH] said: "The upshot is not to give any value to his words…. and to believe that he was an innovator and misguided".

Ali bin Ahmad bin Saeed bin Hazm was born in Cordoba in 384 AH. He spent his early life in luxury and lived as a prince in the royal palaces. Later on, he devoted himself to the Islamic sciences where he ended up being a master of hadith, tafseer and a furious defender of the Dhahiri (literalist) school of thought. Abul Al-Qassim bin Saed said: "He was the most comprehensive scholar of the Islamic scholars in Andalusia". Al-Ezz bin Abdul Salam [15] [660 AH] said: "There is no book in Islam like Almuhalla for ibn Hazm and Almogni for ibn Qudamah". The majority of scholars attest to his deepness in the Islamic sciences, however, he received high criticism from them for his literalist approach. Imam Al-Juwainy [16] [478 AH] said: "We do not count him amongst the scholars of Islam". More specifically, he was against the use of legal analogy (reasoning) in jurisprudence which is considered one of the four sources of rulings (Quran, Sunnah, Consensus and Legal Analog) by the four Sunni schools of thought. He passed away on 456 AH. The Pope mentioned him in his controversial speech two years back, and that has brought recent attention to his life and ideas.

With this background, we can proceed to the methodological points for analyzing the life of these scholars, which is only a simplified example of the larger problem that we are discussing in this article. These points are not supposed to be comprehensive or definitive. It is merely a helping tool for the average educated Muslim who seeks a solid ground to rely on when it comes to this issue. We ask Him to guide us all to what benefits us in the two lives and help us say only what pleases Him.

Point 1: You are not obliged to take a stance

This is the first and simplest point, which we tend to forget in the middle of dizziness of thoughts. We can do well in life without taking a cutting-edge stance pro or anti any of the previous scholars. We are created in this Earth for a purpose, which is to be obedient servants to the Almighty and be model representative of the divinely revealed way of life. Classifying people and throwing them in different baskets, is in simple terms "none of our business". This means that when we are asked about our deeds in the Last Day, not having a specific opinion on these issues will not do us any harm. Imam Al-Nawawi answered someone who asked him about Ibn Arabi by the Quranic verse: "That was a People that hath passed away. They shall reap the fruits of what they did, and ye of what ye do! Of their merits there is no question in your case!", and then commented "and I take refuge in speaking against the friends of Allah" This is a beautiful answer from a well-respected scholar who is known for his scholarship and piety. Ibn Al-Safadi said: "In general, he [Ibn Arabi] was a great man, what we understand from his nice words we follow, and what we find problematic we devote its true meaning to Allah Almighty, and Allah didn't prescribe on us to follow him, nor to apply all what he said". Nothing more eloquent can be said after the words of these two masters.

Point 2: Take a stance on ideas  

Regardless of whether we decided to "love" or "hate" a scholar, which is how we erroneously tend to view people in life, these emotions should not be ahead of our tenants of faith and main Islamic principles. When it comes to issues of faith, divine indwelling or unity is disbelief and there is no joke about it. The anthropomorphist approach of analyzing the attributes of Allah is without doubt an unaccepted method, which if not called disbelief; it is a dangerous approach that is located on the borders of disbelief. Whoever carries these two ideas is condemned by the tongue of Islam, even if the majority emphasize on celebrating him/her. However, did Ibn Arabi or Ibn Taymiyya actually believe and spread these two ideas? This is the question that we argue should be separated from the questions on the category of the tenants of faith. Connecting the spoken with the speaker is an academic problem, not a question on the tenants of faith. Meaning, if we find a "problematic" statement that carries ideas not in harmony with our Islamic creed, and it is claimed to be said by a scholar, then we should do three things. The first is to condemn what is against the Islamic doctrine[17], and extend that to anyone who said it if they actually meant it. The second is to investigate the authenticity of the proclaimed statement to its connection to the scholar. The third is to try to understand the context of that statement and verify if it can have multiple interpretations. The latter two points will be elaborated more on the following points. In summary, our faith should not be shaken by the association of some of the names of whom we respect with some of the ideas that we reject.    

Point 3: Draw the red line

Accusing someone of disbelief [kufur] is playing with dynamite. The moment we utter such a word, the moment we enter the binary state; either us or him/her is a true disbeliever. A wise (wo)man would keep him/herself far from such risky gambling. In our time, we should draw a red line towards judging others and throwing them outside the circle of Islam. We have witnessed in the last twenty years many groups who dangled their tongues out spitting their accusations of disbelief east and west. Rarely, if none, we have seen good ending to these people. On the other hand, we have seen how Allah honored those who kept their modesty by showing no interest in such theological court cases. Imam Al-Tahawi, one of the earliest prominent scholars, whose text on "tenants of faith" (known as: Al-Aqeedah Al-Tahawyia) is widely accepted amongst Muslims said: "A believing servant does not depart from faith except by the denial of that which brought him into it"[18]. By Allah's sake, did we see such denial from the mentioned scholars? The more I research the biographies of these "characters", and collect the contradicting views, the more I realize that the distance between safety [in the hereafter] and attaining certainty of the "disbelief" of one these scholars is beyond thousands of miles.

Point 4: Be fair!

Thanks to Hollywood, our minds have been well-manipulated to view people as either "leaders of evil" or "angels of kindness".  After two hours of action full of car crashing destroying everything without causing the death of the driver, hundreds of bullets flying around letting us feel that shooting is simpler than crunching a cookie, few off-plot romance scenes which are necessary to increment the box-office accounting sheets, here-and-there stunts that will let you jump off your sofa with every time spilling a soft drink or the pop corn, after all that, the hero has to give us good ending by the "good" wiping off the "evil". Although, this "all-good" and "all-bad" concept goes deep in the psychology of humans much before the existence of Hollywood, I could not resist commenting on the damaging effect of the cinema industry on blowing the balloon of this idea. Making the reflection of this phenomenon on our topic shows us that most people take the extremes. Imam Al-Dhahabi said: "People are of two groups (of Ibn Taymiyyah). One that is scant on granting him the state he deserves and accuses him of enormities, and another that exaggerates in describing him, exceeds the limits, and takes a rigid stance comparable to the first group. This is a general rule of every scholar that digs deep in the Islamic sciences…." On another note concerning Ibn Hazem, he says: "Although I disagree with him in many views on the sciences of hadith transmitters and hadith discrepancies, also with many opinions in belief and jurisprudence, and I am firmly certain of his mistake in more than an issue, I do not call him a disbeliever or a misguided. I hope for him [divine] forgiveness and to all Muslims, and I submit to his sharp intelligence and measureless scholarship." A master of one science does not grant him the mastery of other sciences; a mistake in one (or multiple) issues does not nullify the accreditation of other issues of agreement; and the praiseworthy status of a scholar does not grant credibility to his "disputable" opinions. We are ordered to be fair and just, and it is surprising how we fail to apply it here.

Point 5: Good intentions come first

What a wonderful book is the "Layers of Shafi Scholars[19]" written by Imam Tajju Deen Alsubki [771 AH]. There is much in the book than the eloquence of a poet, the knowledge of a jurist, and the intellect of a logician.  To give a glimpse to the glory of this book; Ibn Alsubki wrote a hundred page in the introduction mentioning his chains of narration and wonderful comments on the famous hadith on the virtue of starting (any action) with the Name of Allah. He ended the six volume compilation with another hundred pages about the biography of his father, Taqqiu Aldeen Alsubki, presenting one of the most beautiful biographies about the daily life of a prominent scholar in the Islamic history. Zuhair Zaza, one of the contemporary writers specialized in bibliographies described this book as: "A book of mortality and the pride of Shafis in existence". Anyone browsing this book will be left with immense love to the scholars, and that is something we miss nowadays. I am referring to this book in this article because of presenting a model of dealing with the scholars' "mistakes". Ibn Alsubki paid every effort to defend the scholars against baseless criticism and provided many excuses and alternative interpretation to their words/works. For him, good thoughts come first, and politeness is an integral part of scholarship. He was objective; so he applied his methodology to all scholars: theologians, jurists and Sufis. He was harsh, but on those who take every chance to criticize the scholars or use baseless incidents to dishonor their state. Listen to what he said about his own sheikh, Imam Al Dhahabi, who criticized imam Al Ghazali and others using unjustifiable proofs: "He is my sheikh, and to him I am grateful to my mastery in hadith sciences, but the path of truthfulness should be followed, and I have to say the truth…. I believe he will stand (in the last day) between the hands of Allah and he will find the scholars of the fours schools of thoughts, the pious amongst the Sufis and the greatest of the hadith scholars, and he will sway in the darkness (of his thoughts)…. And I think it is better for me to stop here, because I have delivered my point and I retain the rights of my sheikh upon me."[20] This specific attitude bothered many of the ignorant plaguing a good number of Islamic internet forums, by calling Imam Alsubki "subjective and biased". I am certain to a high extent that most of these writers did not read the book, and only put ahead "bad thoughts" of everyone whom they disagree with. Defending Imam Al Ghazali in seventy pages did not stop imam Ibn Alsubki from compiling a booklet about the fabricated hadiths in Ihya' Ulum Aldeen. Instead of cursing Imam Al Ghazali for putting these hadiths in his book, he instead believed that Imam Al Ghazali did not know that they were fabricated. What a praiseworthy way!.   

Point 6: How to be safe?

I love how Imam Al-Sayuti expressed his opinion on the polarization of ideas on Ibn Arabi. He said in a book which he wrote to refute the allegations against Ibn Arabi: "My final word in Arabi is something that the two parties won't agree upon: It is obligatory to believe in his Wilaya (friendship with Allah) but also declare the reading his books prohibited". On a similar tone, Sheikh Zarooq said in his amazing work "The Pillars of Sufism:": "Our Sheikh Abu Abdullah Al-Qoory was asked and I was listening: "What do you say about Ibn Arabi Al-Hatimy?" He replied: "He is more knowledgeable in every Art from the people of that Art". It was said: "This is not what we asked you for", He said: "He was disputed upon from disbelief (Kufr) to being the Pole (al-Qutbaniya)". It was said: "So what do you think is the more accurate opinion", He replied: "Submission (of his reality to Allah)". Sheikh Zarooq comments on that: "Because declaring someone a disbeliever is dangerous, and glorifying him might harm as the listener/reader might follow the ambiguous and unclear words, and Allah Almighty knows the best".  Scholars of all times kept on reminding students to stay firm on texts which acquired credibility and consensus instead of swimming without a live jacket in texts with unclear arguments/opinions to the non-experts.

Point 7: Do not extend the string!

Blindness is another word for darkness and arrogance is tied with misguidance. It is surprising how some people created a peculiar chain of transmission based on hate. If I believe in scholar X, and I found him criticized by scholar Y, then not only I condemn scholar Y, but I will also condemn the other scholars who praised scholar Y. This is propagation of hate, and inheritance of condemnation. Whatever happened between two scholars should remain with them, and we have nothing to do with it. If we will accept such criticism and expand upon it, then let us throw the works of Yahya bin Ma'een because of speaking against Imam Al Shafi, Al Khateeb Al Baghdadi for speaking against Imam Abu Hanifa, Mohammad bin Isaac for speaking against Imam Malik, Al Nasaey for speaking against imam Al Tabari, Al Sayuti and Al Sakhawi for speaking against each other, Ibn Hajjar Al Asqalani and Bader Addin Al'ainy[21] for speaking against each other, and the list can grow more than you think. Large volumes can be written to explain the reasons of these conflicts, case by case. However, why should we waste our time investigating such conflicts? The correct way of dealing with such conflicts is through the words of Imam Ibn Alsubki whom we mentioned earlier: "Neither we accept the words of scholars against each other, nor we use it against the [attacked] or the [attacker]". An important point is raised here, which is to also believe that when a scholar criticizes another, then he is actually doing it for the sake of protecting the borders of this religion. Ibn Rajab Al-Hanbali said about Ibn Taymiyyah's criticism of the scholars of Sufism: "The Sheikh (may Allah has his mercy on him) used to only intend the good and debate for the truth, insha'Allah". Ibn Al-Hajar Al-Haytamy said in a long answer about Ibn Arabi: "I asked one of the adversaries of Ibn Arabi: Do you love to be in the last day one of the opponent of Ibn Arabi, while he is one of the Awliay (friends) of Allah?" He said: "Yes, because if he was on the truth, then it will be unveiled to him that I only criticized him for the sake of Allah, so he will be pleased by that. On the other hand, if he was not on the truth then I am safer (better) than him in all cases". Imam Ibn Hajar commented: "Look how this (man) applied fairness, although he is below the level of perfection, because submission (to Allah about the reality) is safer, but this group is better than the first (who criticize without sincere and sound grounds)."

Point 8: The Authentication Sciences

One of the unique characteristics of this Ummah is the sciences of transmission and authentication. In the introduction of Sahih Muslim, Imam Muslim narrates the words of ibn Seereen: "This knowledge (i.e. hadith) is the religion, so contemplate on whom you take this religion from". This science is unbelievable; this science is extraordinary; and this science is oblivious to most current Muslims, especially those residing in the west. There is a complicated process that involves studying the connectivity of the chain of transmission (i.e. making sure that every person heard the narration lip to lip or hand to hand), the memory strength of the transmitters (e.g. few mistakes in hundreds of hadiths might cause the transmitter the title of "weak transmitter"), the good being (i.e. trustworthiness) of the transmitters, making sure that the words are kept intact throughout the transmission, knowing the original setting of the narration, making sure that it does not contradict narrations transmitted through more reliable chains, and putting the narration in the larger context of other narrations. There is no more Islamic science that astonishes the western academicians than this science, and we have failed to convey the beauty of this science to a larger audience. The reason of mentioning this science here is to raise attention to the fact that scholarly works are subject to authentication studies based on original manuscripts written by the author or in his/her presence, copies from the original manuscript with witnesses and signatures, and finally reliable transmission of the text. It is very easy to fabricate scholars' words, and the fact that people even dared to fabricate traditions on the messenger (peace be upon him and his family) is an important gesture to us. There are many occasions when scholars are condemned for things that they have never written or said. Imam Abdul Wahaab al Sharani, who is one of the most well known scholars who studied the works of Ibn Arabi, provided many proofs that the current copies of the Meccan Illuminations has some fabricated paragraphs inserted by some people who were jealous of the state of Ibn Arabi. He narrates personal experiences where people fabricated books under his own name, which contain words that are against the rulings of the Shariah. Many previous and contemporary scholars believe that "Seals of Wisdoms" (Fusus al Hikam), which is one of the most problematic writings of Ibn Arabi, is actually not written by him. On another note, there is an incident in the famous trip of ibn Batuta about ibn Taymiyya which if deemed authentic might throw him outside Islam. However, we have some facts that indicate that this paragraph might be inserted in the book, and ibn Batuta did not actually witness such incident. These examples and others inspire us not to hasten in making judgments without careful investigation and authentication of the sources.    

Point 9: Accept the facts

There are two facts we have to accept. The first is the fact that peer scholars speak against each other and the second is that no unanimous agreement will be reached regarding the "controversial scholars".  Imam Ibn Abdel Barr [463 AH] in his valuable book: "Exposition of the virtue of knowledge and its people" [22] wrote a chapter about the ruling of dealing with the scholars' criticism of each other. He provided many examples that elaborate that no one was safe from criticism including the most respected scholars like Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik and Imam Al-Shafi. He concluded the chapter by saying: "Who wishes to accept the criticism of the trustworthy scholars on each other, then let him accept the words of the companions against each other! If he does that, then he has wandered far astray, and has suffered a manifest loss. However, if he does not, and he shall not if Allah guided and inspired him, then let him agree to what we have proposed of not accepting any criticism against a trustworthy scholar". Allah says in the Quran: "If your Lord had so willed, He could have made mankind one people; but they will not cease to dispute". People will keep on arguing on these scholars, and we should not expect the Ummah to have a unified opinion on them, and Allah has wisdom on all this. However, this should not stop us from taking the safe path which will grant us wellbeing in the Hereafter, which is to think well of these scholars or take the advice of Sharaf Al-Deen Almanawi. When he was asked about Ibn Arabi he replied: "To be silent is safer. This is what is appropriate for any pious man worried about himself".

After presenting the above nine points of methodology I have little interest in mentioning my views about the three scholars. Nevertheless, I have an advice to give, because of your kindness and patience in reading this long article. It is important to recognize the complexity of our time and realize the damaging impact of "scholar profiling" people. There is little benefit in debating about these topics with the general crowds because of blind imitation and lack of respect towards the Islamic traditional sciences. If our energy should be devoted to something then let it be towards learning and teaching the traditional sciences that benefit us in the two lives. Those who use the writings of Ibn Arabi, Ibn Taymiyya, ibn Hazem or other controversial scholars (may Allah has His mercy on all o fthem) as the first sources of knowledge rarely end up on good grounding or ending. I am not aware of any reliable scholar in all eras who advised their students to start with the writings of these figures contrary to what we see nowadays. Yes for academic studies that focus on reforming our current Muslim state, and not that cause further segregation amongst the crowds. We have to search for truths through the guidance of the pious and reliable scholars, and not hesitate to take stances after purifying our intentions. My final word is to remind ourselves that a mistake in judging someone as "kafir" or "misguided" might cause us years of punishment in the Hell fire.

Peace and Prayers!

---

[1] Abu Hamid Al Ghazali is one of the most prominent scholars of Islam. He is a master of Shafi school of thought, Usul Alfiqeh, tenants of faith and Sufism. A list of his works is found here.

[2] It is ironic that within the western academic religious studies departments, Ibn Arabi is currently the most studied Islamic figure.

[3] Kamal Eddeen Ibn Al Zamalkani lived in Damascus and was the leader of the Shafis in His time.

[4] Salahuddin Al Safadi is a famous historian and linguistic in the 8^th century. He has over 200 books in which the most well known is the "The Complete record of the deceased" (Alwafi fi alwafayat) which is a large collection of the biographies of the scholars of his time.

[5] His name is Mohammad bin Jaffar bin Mohammd bin Haroon. He is scholar in the recitations of Quran. He lived in Kuffa, and wrote a book on its History.

[6] He is one of the highest masters of Arabic language. His dictionary "The Comprehensive Dictionary" (Alqamoos Almuheet) is widely circulated in the academic circles.

[7] Sharaf Aldeen Almanawi is a Shafi scholar who lived in Cairo. He was a judge of Egypt and he is the grandfather of the famous Hadith scholar Mohammad Abdul Ra'oof Al Manawi.

[8] Shaf Aldeen Ismail al-Muqri is a shafi scholar from Yemen. His most famous work is "The Garden of the Seeker" (Raudh Altalib) which is an abbreviation of Imam Nawawi's work on Shafi fiqeh: "The Garden of Seekers" (Raudhat Altalibeen).

[9] Shamsul Deen al Dahabi is one of the greatest late hadith scholars specialized in the sciences of transmitters. He was also a prominent historian and his book "History of Islam" is one of the largest historical writings we have nowadays. 

[10] Mohammad bin Ali al Shawkani is a Yemeni scholar with a zaidi but after claiming Ijtihad his writings are close to the sunni teachings.  His tafeer "The Illuminations from The Mighty" (Fateh al Qadeer), and his comparative jurisprudence book "The Reach of Hopes" (Nail al 'Awttar) are amongst his great heritage.

[11] A famous Hanbali jurist and hadith scholar. He has a commentary on Bukhari, Tirmidi and the forty hadith of Nawawi. He is also the author of the largest work on the biographies of Hanbali scholars.

[12]  A respected Shafi hadith scholar. His book on the biographies of transmitters of the six hadith books, called "Pruning the Perfection" (Tahdheeb al Kamal) is considered one of the main references in the field for all scholars who came after him.

[13] Taqqi Eddeen al Hisni is a Shafi scholar who lived in Damascus. He has a neat commentary on the famous and primary shafi text (Abu Shuja') called "The Suffice of the Nobles" (Kiffayyat al –Akhiar).

[14] Ahmad ibn Hajjar al Haitamy is a respectful hadith and shafi jurist. His commentary on Imam Nawawi's text al Minhaj is considered one of the most reliable shafi texts in fatwas.

[15] One of the greatest Islamic scholars of all times. His book "The Pillars of Rulings" (Qawaeed al Ahkam) had a major influence on many scholars up to this date.

[16] One of the most intelligent scholars of Islam. He is an expert in Shafi jurisprudence, tenants of faith and Usul al Fiqeh. He was called the "Imam of the Two Holy Mosques".

[17]  The discussion here is about issues of faith that are indisputable, i.e. firmly established by the Islamic creed. Issues that are disputed amongst the reliable Muslim scholars are not inline with the discussion.

[18] The translation is taken (with little alteration) from the translation of Sheikh Talal Al Ahdab.

[19] Tabakat Al-shafi'iyah.

[20]  These words should not be used to lower the state of Imam Al Dhahabi, who is one of the most prominent hadith scholars especially on the biographies of hadith transimitters. I have provided this statement to prove that "not giving excuses" to scholars is a mistake, even though some of the respected scholars fall in its trap.

[21] Both of them wrote fascinating commentaries on Bukhari.

[22]  See: Jame' Bayaan Fadhl Al'elm wa 'Ahleh.