The Hanbali School of Law and Ibn Taymiyyah: A New Research Paper

[abu imaan an-nepalee]

As-sallamu 'alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu

A new book was published earlier this year called:

The Hanbali School of Law and Ibn Taymiyyah Conflict or conciliation by Abdul Hakim I. Al-Matroudi, a visiting senior lecturer in SOAS, published by Routledge.

It is basically a study to see if Shaykul-Islam(rh) departed from the Hanbali school or not, and the conclusion is no!

But due to the copyright restrictions I will post (in my own words) some of the interesting facts the author mentions.

There are various aspects of study like the issue of the triple talaaq, the influence on the post Ibn Taymiyyah Hanbalites and the books of Fiqh, 'Usul al-Fiqh, ibn Taymiyyah and the Hanbali school and other points!

It is a work in English which I would recommend to anyone who has not got access to the Arabic language and the vast biographical, juristic and theological materials available only in arabic, this book with over 250 A5 pages of text, notes and references it is a must for those who would like to know more about the subject matter!

The Author even went to various post taymiyyah books of fiqh and referenced all the time Ibn Taymiyyah(rh) and His positions are cited and/or made reference to in the books of the Hanabilah! Maasha'ALLAH.....

[abuzakarya]

As-salamu alaykum. Is the author saying Ibn Taimiyah NEVER differed from the four schools including the Hanabilah? What about, for instance, allowing wiping on any sock, such as cotton ones which cause moisture to seep through to the skin; this is against all 4 schools. I also don't understand why then Sheikh Haytham often quotes his opinion as being different from those of the Hanabilah. I have him on tape giving many examples. Surely, one can say that where he did not differ, it was because he felt the Hanbali position was the strongest rather than because it was the Hanbali position per se.

[abu imaan an-nepalee]

As-salamu alaykum. Is the author saying Ibn Taimiyah NEVER differed from the four schools including the Hanabilah? What about, for instance, allowing wiping on any sock, such as cotton ones which cause moisture to seep through to the skin; this is against all 4 schools. I also don't understand why then Sheikh Haytham often quotes his opinion as being different from those of the Hanabilah. I have him on tape giving many examples. Surely, one can say that where he did not differ, it was because he felt the Hanbali position was the strongest rather than because it was the Hanbali position per se.


walaikum as-sallam bro,

the author actually brings many examples of where shaykul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah(rh) differed and offered rebuttles to positions to other hanbali mujtahideen like Qadi abu Ya'la(rh) and others. on a variety of matters.

The author also concluded that ibn Taymiyyah was a mujtahid mutlaq by capability but remained affiliated to the hanbali madhab in generality.

I will post some points tommorow innsha'ALLAH

[abu imaan an-nepalee]

The author asks:

Is ibn Taymiyyah's opinion on triple divorce in opposition to an existing consensus amongst the scholars?


to which he makes mention of shaykul-Islaam's refutation of the claims of ijmaa' on this issue:

1-That his view was held by senior Sahaaba(radiALLAHU 'anhum) like Abu Bakr, 'Umar - in his first 2 years of his khilafah, 'Ali, Ibn Mas'ud, Ibn Abbas (in one of his views, al-Zubayr and ibn 'awf. And that the ikhtilaf amongst the salaf upon this matter cannot be denied

Reference: ibn Taymiyyah, fatawa. vol. 33 p.91

2-That his grandfather Shaykul-Islaam Majd ad-Deen Ibn Taymiyyah(rahimahullah) also held this opinion, however would use his ijtihad to arrive at the opposing opinions in certains circumstances based upon maslaha in individual cases.

Reference: Ibid., Vol. 33 p.93

3a-Ibn Mughith cites Ibn Taymiyyah's position in his book al-Muqni' to maliki scholars of Cordoba such as Ibn Zinba, al-Husayni, Ibn Mukhlid and Ibn al-Habab. Also that 20 scholars from Toledo (Andalus) held this position

Reference: Ibid., p. 83. The text of Ibn Mughith is also cited by Ibn Qayyim in his Ighaathat, Vol. 1 p.482, al-Mardawi, al-Insaf, vol. 8 p. 455, Ibn Hajar, Fath, vol. 11 p.278, al-Shawkani, Nayl, Vol. 8 p.20

3b-as well as a narration from Malik.

Reference: Ibn Taymiyyah, Fatawa, vol. 33 p. 83


4-Muhammad b. Muqatil al-Razi a famous hanafi 'alim held this opinion.

Reference: Ibid., vol. 33 p. 83

5-The majority of the dhahiris held this opinion on triple talaaq.

Reference: Ibid., p. 8, Ibn Qayyim, al-Ighaathat vol. 1 p. 435, 482, Ibn al-Mubarrid, Sayr al-Hath, p. 157

There are other points mentioned by the author from Ibn Taymiyyah, however interestingly enough he mentions other scholars who held the same position as Ibn Taymiyyah:

Ibn Hazm al-Muhalla, vol. 10 p. 204

Ibn Rushd Bidayat al-Mujtahid, vol. 2 p. 72

An-Nawawi Sharh Sahih Muslim, Vol. 4 p. 70

Ibn Qudamah - He mentions the scholars ikhtilaf on a triple divorce pronounced by one word al-mughni, Vol. 10 pp. 96-97. He also mentions the existence of disagreement on triple divorce which is carried out in separate words, in the case of a wife whose husband has not consummated the marriage. al-Mughni, vol. 10 pp. 298-301

al-Lakhmi Ibn Qayyim al-Ighaathat, vol. 1 p.482

al-Tahawi ibid., vol. 1 p.483

al-Nasafi ibid., p. 484

Abu l-Wahid al-Qurtubi ibid., p.484

Ibn Qayyim he cites 20 proofs why there is no ijmaa' ibid., vol. 1 pp. 478 - 487

Ibn Hajar Fath, vol. 11 pp.277-278

al-Shawkani Nayl, vol. 8 pp 19-20

Ibn Baz - Fatawa al-Talaaq pp. 79-81

Wa ALLAHU Ta'ala a'lam