I r refutable Proof that the HanaELODK:HUH6IV

Prepared by Abl Layth ibn Ata

Dr. George Makdisi in his masterpiece, Religion, Law and Learning in Classical Islam
argues eIIectively that the major classical scholars oI the Hanbal Madh-hab were SI.
To many, this argument is insignificant. However, for myself,and those who have been
spiritually castrated by the pseudo salafi cult, this needed information is heart warming
and soul satisfying. The intent of this brief treatise is to spread the message that Ibn
Qudmah, Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Al Qayyim Al-Jawzya, Ibn Rajab and others Irom
amongst the Hanbilah are orthodox SI.


In a brieI article 'L`isnad Initiatique SouIi de MuwaIIaq Ad-Din Ibn Qudama the
Khirqah (the cloak oI the SI`s) oI Ibn Qudmah is shown. The following is a pictorial
scan of that Khirqah. This manuscript can be found in the Thhirya Library in
Damascus, Syria.



You will notice aIter review that there are multiple Hanbal scholars mentioned in this
Khirqah.

1) YsuI ibn Muhammad ibn Nasr ibn Qsim Al-Ma`dn Al Hanbal.
2) Ab Abdillah Muhammad ibn Shaykh Al-Allmah mdud-dn Ab Is-hq
Ibrhm ibn Abdul Whid Al Maqdis Al Hanbal.
3) Ab Muhammad Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Qudmah Al Maqdis
Al Hanbal.
4) The master of the SIs and great Hanbal, Ab Muhammad Abdul-Qdir ibn Ab
Slih ibn Abdillah Al-Jl (Jiln).
5) Mukharrim, who was also a Hanbal
6) Abl Fadhl Abdul Whid ibn Abdul-Azz ibn Al Hrith ibn Asad At-Tamm
Al-Hanbal |died 410 in Baghdad|
7) Abl Hasan Abdul-Azz At-Tamm, the Iather oI Abl Fadhl previously
mentioned, was also a well known Hanbal oI his time. He died in 371 A.H. in
Dhul Qa`dah.


These are the seven well known Hanbal`s who took the Khirqah Irom each others
hands, labeling themselves from amongst the SIs.

This Khirqah (cloak of Sufism) is a clear refutation of those amongst the orientalist
and Muslim scholars who believe that the Islamic Hanbal School was opposed to
SuIsm. It should be noted that Abdul Qdir Al-Jl (Jln), who was well known
Hanbal and author oI the Hanbal manual Al Ghunyah, is the eponym oI the
Qdiriyyah SI Tarqah.

Dr. G. Makdisi theorizes the following regarding Al-Ansr Al Harawi Al Hanbal
and Abdul Qdir Al Jl,

'With just these two Iacts, one would have thought that some notions would be
changed. But nothing of the kinds happened. An explanation was offered, and
remains to this day accepted, that these two SIs were Hanbals merely because they
were refugees from rationalist theology, or kalm; it just so happens, we were told,
that the Hanbali School appealed to them because it, too, opposed kalm. |Page 121|


The Iollowing are the scanned words oI Dr. G. Makdis regarding the SuIism oI Ibn
Taymiyyah. Pay careful attention to the manuscripts referenced.












We have stopped here because we feel that the point has been made. G. Makdisi
continues his assertion that Ibn Taymiyyah was a SI because he used the language oI
the SIs in discourse and when issuing Iatw. We ask Allh to beneIit the Muslims with
this brieI article. mn!