Ibn Taymiyyah : The Founder of ISIS

Ibn Taymiyyah is one of the most quoted personalities of ISIS, Al Qaeda and Boko Haram. In this article we will learn about him, his ideas and why so many Muslims of the salafi sect go on to join terrorist groups or commit homeland attacks.


Which Groups Take Inspiration and Guidance from Ibn Taymiyyah’s Works?

Boko Haram founder Mohammed Yusuf is reported in the Financial Times article to have based his teachings on the works of Ibn Taymiyya, after whom he named his mosque in Maiduguri, Markaz Ibn Taymiyyah ( Translates to the Ibn Taymiyyah Centre). Mohammed Yusuf was killed in 2009 by a police raid.

ISIS distribute a magazine in English which frequently references Ibn Taymiyyah.

Dabiq Issue 7 page 21
The ISIS magazine : Dabiq Issue 7 page 21

Al Qaeda former leader, Osama Bin Laden famously quoted Ibn Taymiyyah’s Fatwa of Madin as justification for civilian and Muslim casualties in his terror attacks.

Dabiq Issue 6 page 40

Dabiq Issue 6 page 40: Al Qaeda member reports how he studied Ibn Taymiyyah’s books.



Who is Ibn Taymiyyah?


Aḥmad ibn Taymiyyah (Arabic: تقي الدين أحمد ابن تيمية) known as Ibn Taymiyyah (22 January 1263 – 26 September 1328) was an Islamic scholar, theologian and logician. He lived during the troubled times of the Mongol invasions, much of the time in Damascus. He was a member of the school founded by Ahmad ibn Hanbal and is considered by his followers, along with Ibn Qudamah, as one of the two most significant proponents of Hanbalism. In the modern era, his adherents often refer to the two as “the two sheikhs” and Ibn Taymiyyah in particular as “Sheikh ul-Islam”. Ibn Taymiyyah sought the return of Sunni Islam to what he viewed as earlier interpretations of the Qur’an and the Sunnah, and is considered to have had considerable influence in contemporary Wahhabism, Salafism, and Jihadism. He is renowned for his fatwa issued against the Mongol rulers declaring jihad by Muslims against them compulsory, on the grounds that they did not follow Sharia and as such were not Muslim, their claims to have converted to Islam notwithstanding. His teachings had a profound influence on Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, and other later Wahabi scholars. 


The main issues Ibn Taymiyyah is famous for are as follows:


  • Belief in God in Human form (anthropomorphism) eg Allah has a Hand, and moves like this etc. He was sent to prison for this several times.
  • Belief that there is no intercession at all.
  • Belief that if someone does not accept his exact version of Islam, they should be fought and killed.
  • Belief in Qiyas or inductive reasoning.


Ibn Taymiyyah is particularly useful for groups like ISIS as he provides them with a (false) religious backing that justifies their actions. 


Dabiq is a magazine published by ISIS for the English speaking world, it includes their ideas, news reports and propaganda for their cause. One of the religious personalities that ISIS quote regularly is Ibn Taymiyyah, they even call him the “Sheikh of Islam”, which translates to the leader or founder of Islam. This is high praise indeed. 




ibn taymiyyah quote1
From Dabiq Issue 2 page 23



Ibn Taymiyyah’s best student, Ibn Qayyim is also a favorite of ISIS, referred to as “Ibnul-Qayyim” he is frequently quoted and used as a religious source of religious authority.


ibn taymiyyah quote 2
Dabiq Issue 4 page 15




Selected Quotes from Ibn Taymiyyah et al in ISIS Magazine : Dabiq


It is not possible to include every quote from Ibn Taymiyyah, Abdul Wahab or Ibn Qayyim, there are simply too many, so I have selected the more interesting and controversial ones to give a glimpse into the mind of the ideology which fuels ISIS and the other terror groups.



Dabiq Issue 7 page 59
Dabiq Issue 7 page 59


The above quote is discussing the situation of those non-Muslims who are protected in an Islamic area, they are to be killed if they “curse” Islam, however in reality the “cursing” could just take the form of a mild mannered joke, such as when the 14 year old tea boy would not give free tea to ISIS fighters he mentioned he would not even give the Prophet SAW free tea, he was immediately executed.



Dabiq Issue 6 page 11
Dabiq Issue 6 page 11


Here Abdul Wahab was trying to lay down the religious justification for fighting the Ottoman Muslims, paving the way for the puppet leaders of the Arab world, many of which are still going. Yasir Qadhi has summarised the situation very well in his video lecture of the History of the Middle East. 

wahab quote 1
Dabiq Issue 5 page 26
Dabiq Issue 8 page 45
Dabiq Issue 8 page 45



This is the crux of the issue. This is the dirty secret that the vast majority of the innocent masses that attend Salafi institutions around the world are not told. Ibn Taymiyyah says that if someone becomes a Muslim, and acts like a Muslim, but there are some issues that they disagree with Ibn Taymiyyah’s views on Islam, then that person should be executed immediately. This is the justification for the deaths of so many Muslims by the hands of ISIS, Al Qaeda, and Boko Haram, the Muslims that died were not “real” Muslims as they didnt have the exact same view of Islam as they did. For the Non-Muslims there is just no chance, they are to be executed, as was seen above, Jihad and the spreading of the religion is continuous and they feel must never end and continue to be spread by the sword.


Dabiq Issue 8 page 46
Dabiq Issue 8 page 46
Dabiq Issue 8 page 46
Dabiq Issue 8 page 46
Dabiq Issue 8 page 52
Dabiq Issue 8 page 52


So those that do not agree in the very narrow view of Islam as defined by Ibn Taymiyyah are either apostates (murtad) and to be executed, or they come under the category of hypocrites (munafiq) if there difference is more subtle. The punishment is the same, execution.


Ibn Taymiyyah Ruling on the Druze from Dabiq Issue 10 page 9
Ibn Taymiyyah Ruling on the Druze from Dabiq Issue 10 page 9


If you are unfortunate enough to have a very different world view to Ibn Taymiyyah then your fate is even worse. Ibn Taymiyyah and his like have no concept of pluralistic views, there is also no chance to even “repent”, as Ibn Taymiyyah views even the repentance as unacceptable.

Ibn Taymiyyah encourages Jihad against his opponents by labelling them "apostates". ISIS do the same, from Dabiq Issue 10 page 10
Ibn Taymiyyah encourages Jihad against his opponents by labelling them “apostates”. ISIS do the same, from Dabiq Issue 10 page 10
Dabiq Issue 10 page 56
Dabiq Issue 10 page 56
Dabiq Issue 10 page 57
Dabiq Issue 10 page 57
Dabiq Issue 10 page 63
Dabiq Issue 10 page 63



This is just a snap shot of the impact Ibn Taymiyyah has had on the terrorist groups of the world, and due to this impact, Egypt, France, JordanTajikistanAlgeria have either banned or considering to ban all works from the Salafi sect.

You May Also Like

48 thoughts on “Ibn Taymiyyah : The Founder of ISIS

  1. I started to read this article but stopped at the point where clear misrepresentations began about Ibn Taymeeyah. If the author had researched properly, he would not have made the erroneous claim of Ibn Taymeeyah likening the Creator to His creation. A quick flick through the pages of one of his most popular books – Aqeedatil Wasiteeyah would have revealed his detailed discussion about this.

    For example, in the English rendition of this book, page 32 Ibn Taymeeyah clearly states:

    “…And it forms part of the faith in Allah that we believe in those Attributes with which Allah has qualified Himself and with which the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) has qualified Allah. Neither should alterations be made nor negations, nor attributing a state of being nor of likeness to creation. The belief should rather be that the Self of Allah is as He has mentioned in the verse: “There is nothing like unto Him and He is the All-Hearer, the All-Seer.”

    Ibn Taymeeyah goes on to elucidate about the danger of committing Tahreef, Ta’teel, Takyeef and Tamtheel -the latter being the false belief that Allah’s attributes are like the attributes of the creature.

    This short comment should be enough of a reminder that the author not present an article as academic and unbiased, especially when making such glaring errors and what amounts to slander of a classical scholar.

    I doubt whether this comment will be published in view of its refutation in this regard.

    Abu Yusuf, Anthony

    1. Abu Yusuf (Anthony),

      I hope your are well.

      Your comment is published in full.

      As for the content, the scholars of the time were practically unanimous in their statement that Ibn Taymiyyah likens Allah to the creation. He went to prison for it and this is all known and not debated.

      That Taqi al Hisni from Abul Hasan Ali ad-Damishqi from his father that He was with Ibn Taymiyah in Jam`e al amwi and Ibn Taymiyah said Allah’s Istawa is like my Istiwa.
      [Daf`a ash-Shubha page 123]

      Its well known that Ibn Taymiyyah, and his followers/students such as Ibn Al Qayyim believe Allah has hands and shins etc. This is not debated. I have a hand and a shin, and they say Allah has hands and a shin etc, what is that then?

      Anyone who has read the Quran from cover to cover knows that the use of the word Hand in the Arabic language is figurative, eg allegorical.

      Have a read of this

      For example, when we see verses such as :

      Those who pledge allegiance to you are pledging allegiance to God. The hand of God is over their hands. Whoever breaks his pledge breaks it to his own loss. And whoever fulfills his covenant with God, He will grant him a great reward. (48:10)

      We know that it means that Allah is with those who pledge, it doesnt mean that Allah literally has a hand that He is placing above the other peoples hands so that Allah will pledge by raising his hand.

      As for the “get out clause” of adding “a hand but not like other hands”, this is not acceptable. As if you wanted to be pedantic, no hand is like any other hand, every hand is slightly different, but when we say hand, we know what it is, so to claim something has a hand, is to claim something that is a hand, if you claim the “hand” in question is not a “hand”, then why call it a hand?

      Effectively Ibn Taymiyyah et al are playing with words to justify their anthropomorphism and the scholars of the time and most after have seen right through it.

      1. Thank you for your response and for articulating it in detail.

        However, your assertion that Ibn Taymeeyah is playing with words needs to substantiated by evidence that refutes his numerous theologically works that are consistent in warning against the reprehensible innovation of resembling Allah’s attributes to His creation. His words are clear and to intimate his imprisonment was because he did the very thing he spent most of his life warning against is historically and factually inaccurate.

        As a researcher, it is important that when presenting particular positions or arguments, substantive evidence that can be accurately referenced are produced. Your reducing this issue to basic semantics that all hands are different was not even done by opponents to Ibn Taymeeyah during his era and is a reflection of the lack of respect and inherent bias behind the article written. They at least attempted to provide scholarly rebuttals, albeit unsuccessfully and due to their ideologically affiliations during that era, decided to imprison him.

        If you simply would like to say you dislike Ibn Taymeeyah and his works due to a particular ideological delineation you have or follow, then you should simply profess this instead of writing an opinionated piece and disguising it as academic, nuanced and unbiased which it clearly is not.

        I have cited from one of his more famous books. Please provide unequivocal evidence from his own words that confirm the erroneous allegation that you have asserted in your article. Secondary, unsubstantiated accounts do not remove or reduce his statements; however, if you were to produce contradictory words (in their complete and correct context) from him regarding this issue, it would give your allegations the required weight. In any event, I very much doubt you will be able to do this.

        I conclude by acknowledging that you have provided me with a platform to respond without censure or editing and must commend you for this – especially in today’s climate where partisanship causes other opinions and views to be marginalised and the space to challenge narratives, shut down.


        Abu Yusuf, Anthony

    2. You are completely correct in your statements about this author. Perhaps out of misguided understanding and or beliefs. This Imam was from those of Sunnah. And those of ISIS are far from that. ISIS in no way shape or form are Salafi in belief. No real Salafi would join them and all the Scholars upon Salafi Manhaj speak a word of good about or from such groups. These dogs of helfire (ISIS) deface Islam. Salafi is Islam in it’s purest form. To go against the understanding of the the Salaf is not Salafi.

      1. Charles,

        We have already established that ISIS is the logical conclusion of Salafi works, this is beyond doubt. If you are unsure feel free to read this article where ISIS quote the salafi scholars : http://islam.hilmi.eu/ibn-taymiyyah-the-founder-of-isis/

        You have to remember that Salafism is just one sect or understanding of Islam, those that disregard pluralism are taking the first step to extremism.

    3. Dear Abu Yusuf,
      Please enlighten us the source from were ISIS draws inspiration.
      If not Ibne Taymiyah and Sulah Ibne Majah and Abdul Wahab then who else is the black sheep giving bad names to the muslim world.

  2. Abu Yusuf,

    your assertion that Ibn Taymeeyah is playing with words needs to substantiated by evidence that refutes his numerous theologically works that are consistent in warning against the reprehensible innovation of resembling Allah’s attributes to His creation.

    This is exactly what I have already done, and not just me, the vast majority of the ulama of the time labeled him an anthromorphist. He was tried and convicted several times.

    Here is just a short list of some of his more famous statements:

    Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 4 page 374:

    فَقَدْ حَدَثَ الْعُلَمَاءُ الْمَرْضِيُّونَ وَأَوْلِيَاؤُهُ الْمَقْبُولُونَ : أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يُجْلِسُهُ رَبُّهُ عَلَى الْعَرْشِ مَعَهُ .
    The reliable and acceptable scholars narrated that, God shall make Muhammad the messenger of Allah sit next to Him [swt] on the throne.

    We read in Bayan Talbis al-Jahamia by ibn Taimiyah, Volume 1 page 568:

    ولو قد شاء لاستقر على ظهر بعوضة
    If He (God) wants, He can sit on a mosquito’s back.

    in al-Tasis fi al-rad ala Asas al-Taqdis, Volume 3 page 214:

    فيتضح أنها رؤية عين كما في الحديث الصحيح المرفوع عن قتادة عن عكرمة عن ابن عباس قال قال رسول الله رأيت ربي في صورة أمرد له وفرة جعد قطط في روضة خضراء
    We conclude that it was eyesight as it is in the Sahih narration from Qutada from Ikrama from Ibn Abbas said that the Prophet said : ‘I saw my God in image of beardless (man), with long curly hair in a green garden’

    We read in Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 2 page 76:

    اللَّهَ قَادِرٌ عَلَى أَنْ يَخْرُقَ مِنْ هُنَا إلَى هُنَاكَ بِحَبْلِ
    ”Allah is able to relocate from here to there through rope”

    We read in Majmo’a al-Fatawa, Volume 17 page 92:

    وَقَدْ جَاءَ ذِكْرُ الْيَدَيْنِ فِي عِدَّةِ أَحَادِيثَ وَيَذْكُرُ فِيهَا أَنَّ كِلْتَاهُمَا يَمِينٌ
    “The hands are mentioned in several traditions and we are informed that both of them are right hands.”

    There are many others, and hence his multiple jail sentences, he was effectively relegetated to nothing in history, only to be brought back by Abdul Wahab for the Saud/British political goals of overthrowing the Ottoman (Muslim) empire. Saud and co needed a religious justification for rebelling against the Muslims and Ibn Taymiyyah provided that, hence he is now “Sheikh Al Islam” from the Salafi mosques.

  3. Dear Islamic Philosopher,

    You have proceeded to do precisely what I requested you not do – cite excerpts without a discernible context. You’ve simply chosen specific examples to justify your attack of Ibn Taymeeyah who, coincidentally is held in high esteem by scholars – Muslim and non-Muslim alike – from the classical and contemporary ages so much so that his works are studied in reputable educational institutions across the world (and not from a prism of extremism but quite the opposite).

    Referring back to a stylistic and subjective referring of particular quotes to justify one’s bias and perspective, this is an established trait from non academic based journalism and articles, as well as partisan publications – of which I in no doubt, your article and site are both. No Muslim would cite the ayat in Surah Ma’un – ‘Woe to those who pray…’ as Quranic evidence not to perform the prayer as it is clear from the context of the surah and indeed, subsequent ayat this reference is to a particular type of people.

    With this in mind (and numerous examples can be given regarding citing things in context), I cannot and do not accept, your stock regurgitation and assertion of what Ibn Taymeeyah is purported to have said without it being within the context with which it was written AND meant. I have already provided excerpts – in context of the entire book – in which he warns against the very things you say he was imprisoned for. I do not therefore need to delve into any more of his works on this particular point due to its clarity.

    As you are the invigilator of this site, I expect you to ensure that your word and position is final – after all, it is also your article…

    If I felt there would be more objectivity in a dialogue on this important theological area and this renowned imam of the Sunnah, I would be happy to engage in such a debate; however, it is clear at this point that our positions are polarised.


    1. Not really Abu Yusuf, Ibn Taymiyyah has long been linked to terrorism, eg have a read of this.

      More specifically, the London School of Economics even runs a course titled : “Political Islam: From Ibn Taymiyya to Osama bin Laden”

      I think your point is that I have somehow taken things out of context and theres a rational explanation for the “outlandish” statements made by Ibn Taymiyyah, lets have a look.

      Abu Yusuf, you seem like a nice guy, but I can see your struggling to justify Ibn Taymiyyah’s position here. Remember that you need to be honest to your self before anyone or anything else.

      Let me just ask you one to clarify one point, if someone has a different understanding of Islam to you, do you think they should be executed? Does that make any sense or seem morally right to you?

      1. Dear Islamic Philosopher,

        I can answer your last question first by stating categorically that I do not believe that if someone has a different understanding to Islam than me, that they should be executed.

        Secondly, I am not struggling to justify Ibn Taymiyyah’s position in this regard. The only person who we are to follow and adhere to without doubt is our Prophet Muhammad, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him.

        No scholar – whether he is from our school of thought, tariqa or otherwise is to be blindly adhered to – particularly where we have clear and authentic evidence from the Quran and Sunnah. Indeed, Ibn Taymiyyah was even challenged and refuted by his contemporaries who had the same understanding as him. He certainly made mistakes and should not be defended in these.

        However, when critically reviewing a scholar’s work – mistakes and all – this should be done within the context of 1. his wider work and 2. the timing of such work – errors in particular and whether he / they recanted them. This is from the science of ilm mustalah hadeeth. For example, we see historically that some scholars made edicts based on some of their early works but later due to loss of memory, the loss / destruction of their books etc. they made errors or occasionally spurious edicts as a result. Scholars proficient with these sciences advised that the later edicts etc. could not be relied upon. Reference could, therefore, only be these scholars earlier works.

        The same was true of scholars whose earlier edicts and beliefs etc. were erroneous and outside mainstream Islamic beliefs and practices – subsequent to them changing such beliefs and recanting them, their subsequent works were acknowledged and accepted.

        To reiterate, blind adherence to scholars – even today – seeking partisan fatawa or edicts that do not reflect our varying realities and contexts, often cause harm to us as Muslims – especially in the west. I believe that some scholars are more proficient and reliable regarding areas of theology (aqeedah) and manhaj (methodology) whereas honesty, transparency and admission illustrates that some scholars of different schools are more proficient in areas of Maqasid Sharia etc.

        That should not open the door to a ‘mixed bag’ of aqeedahs and erroneous interpretations – alien and/or divorced from our classical scholars and righteous predecessors. The wheel does not need to be reinvented so to speak.

        Nas, I couldn’t agree with the bulk of what you’ve said more…and you shouldn’t be labelled a liberal Muslim or a Sufi who should bring your proof – the sad reality you mention is there for all to see.

        1. There is no context, or excuse for takfeer.

          You agree that it is wrong, but that is exactly what Ibn Taymiyyah did.

          Now ISIS base their strategy on Ibn Taymiyyah takfeeri position, so your argument that Im not analyzing things correctly or taking things out of context just doesnt hold up. Not only did he say these things, but he did them, he implemented them in his life.

          I appreciate your making a general point that things have a context, and I agree with that. However if someone looks at Ibn Taymiyyah’s works with an open mind will end up concluding that his ideas are not compatible with Islam or basic human morality.

          1. Actually, Islamic Philospher, you are wrong in what you are saying regarding a context or indeed rationale for takfeer. Under specific stringent conditions – and by the relevant authority and/or people of knowledge takfeer can be pronounced but NOT as it is being done by extremists and other ignorant laymen today.

            Also, please don’t misconstrue or play with my words in this regard – they were very clear and I have reproduced them here:

            “I can answer your last question first by stating categorically that I do not believe that if someone has a different understanding to Islam than me, that they should be executed.”

            My unequivocal response was to your question regarding someone having a different understanding of Islam not having takfeer pronounced upon them or being executed.

            If they possess a belief that is tantamount to clear and expressed disbelief in fundamental tenets of Islam and against clear legislative texts/practices and contradicts these, the issue is whether they remain within the fold of Islam. For example, may I ask you if a Muslim professes the belief – with knowledge and after it being clarified and explained to him – that Isa is part of a trinity and the son of God – does this individual – by virtue if this belief, remain a Muslim? Now, if you state that he doesn’t by virtue of this belief and confirmation of such, then you agree that pronouncing takfeer upon him in this instance is relevant (unless he is genuinely confused or there are other legislatively acceptable/understood mitigating factors).

            However, it doesn’t automatically mean – within the context of today’s societal dictates and norms – that he should be executed. There are those who argue that he should be and others who argue contrary, according to what I have highlighted regarding societal and social dictates and norms via the Maqasid Sharia etc.

            This discussion has been informative to the extent that we will remain on opposite sides of the fence – as I’ve said in earlier posts, you have a position and objective that is inherently biased, hence the whole premise of this website. You may also hold that I have come from a biased perspective; however, the difference in this regard is that I have tried to be a little more objective.


            Abu Yusuf

    2. MashaaAllah Abuu yusuf absolutely your are true I agree with you give us more benefits those we know them are the enemies of Shaykhul ul-Islam

  4. Assalamualaikum Brothers!

    With full respect to Sh. Ibn Taymiya (who dedicated his life to Islam), it is clear that blind adherence to certain scholars, who have become cult figures, and are largely misquoted and misunderstood, is producing Muslims who are killing innocent people, blaming others for manipulating us, living lazy lives with zero accountability, shrinking away from society, destroying Islam from within, and slinging mud at each others.

    Talk is cheap. It’s much harder to study an ayah in depth to understand it’s full meaning than to quote from a scholar who I like and who confirms my internal desires and fears (nafs). It’s easier to blame others than study hard, find a job, collaborate with humanity, and be inheritors and custodians of the earth.

    Of course now I will be labelled a liberal Muslim or Sufi, and someone will ask me to “bring the proof” for what I wrote….

  5. It is good to see that opposing viewpoints are not met with hostility. This is what is needed in today’s world. This is Islamic behaviour. I applaud both “Islamic Philosopher” and Abu Yusuf.

    1. Thank you S Mohammad.

      I agree Abu Yusuf has been polite and well mannered.

      It is ironic that this has been brought up, as one of the criticisms of Ibn Taymiyyah was his crude rudeness in the way he debated with others of different views, a classic example of this was his insulting Allama Hilli. Hilli was also known, and referred to as Ibn Mutahhir, meaning son of the pure. Hilli and Ibn Taymiyyah had many debates in books, Hilli would refer to Ibn Taymiyyah in a polite manner, and Ibn Taymiyyah would call Hilli the son of filth.

  6. You are liar, stupid! You are not under the shadow of Islam. All Salafi are fighting against the terrorism. So how they can be founder of terrorist group. Think well, your brain not work properly.

    1. Its very simple. No one is claiming that all salafis are terrorist. However if you follow the salafi ideology, it is a risk factor in becoming a terrorist. The reason for this is clear, the history shows us that if you have views such as anyone else with a different opinion is a murtad and must immediately be executed, this is going to lead to problems, which we are seeing.

  7. Assalamu alaikum. The author quoted mostly from the Dabiq which was an ISIS magazine. It is an established fact that all terrorists organisations always tried to justify their misdeeds by quoting the Quran, Hadith or any other famous Islamic scholar and then misinterpret these to suit their interests so as to attract sympathy to their mischief. I therefore advice interested readers who would like to know more to look at the ideology of Ibn Taymiyya and compare it with any of the ideology of these terrorists. And definitely the reader will realise that there is no basis for comparism. There are people who seek knowledge in order to mislead the Muslim Umma while in reality they are not Muslims. The Jews, the Christians etc are just out to desperately paint the Islamic religion black.
    I would like to ask the author whether he has an aorta of knowledge about the genesis of Al Qaida, ISIS and the Boko haram. Recently Hillary Clinton who served as the secretary of states during the Bush administration was bold enough to own the fact that the US created Al Qaida to solve a problem. In the ideology of the US, ‘ you create a problem to solve a problem’. Was the US drawing inspiration from Ibn Taymiyya when they invented the Al Qaida?. Secondly is the fact that ISIS was a break away faction of rebels fighting to over throw Mr A sad of Syria. The rebellion against Mr Asad was actively being backed by the US and her allies while the Russians were busy warning the US about the repercussions of such act. Unfortunately all the warnings fell on deaf ears. The US and her allies supplied bulk of weapons within the Isis’s arsenal. And unfortunately today only the Russians are blaming the US for creating the Isis. The question also remain the same. Is Ibn Taymiyya also behind the US when they were busy arming rebels against the Syrian govt. i would like to also advice the author as well as the innocent readers who may have read this author’s writeup to read more about the genesis of ISIS. Thanks

    1. Samaila,

      I think you have misunderstood. Ibn Taymiyah did not only say they things, he did them. The Quran and the authentic sunnah are nothing to do with these people. There is a deviated ideology based on bidah and ISIS and those before them such as Ibn Taymiyah right back to the khawarij have all walked the same path.

      I have noticed a trend among the critics here, firstly they doubt the sources, then they doubt the context, when all that fails they call me ignorant.

  8. .
    some people were born with an empty brain(brainless). just because of “Aqeedah” differences, a muslim brother relating his brother with those idiot group of people like ISIS and the rest. how mad u re that u will related Ibn Taimiyyah with Jews party(ISIS)?
    U re nobody but and idiot Islamic philosopher from nowhere!

  9. It’s True that ISIS is a Terrorist organization founded by Iran and USA etc. But if you say that Ibn e Taimiyah is the founder of this theme, then I will call you an ignorant scholar or reporter because these type of people or organizations have their own meanings and impacts from His Fatawa and Teachings. He never say to kill someone by burn or slaughter someone even if he is unbeliever. Poeple like you propegate such kind of news or article to speard anarchy among innocent Muslims. Always remeber those crictical circumstances in which ibn e Taimiyah was born and grown up and also faced, then you will b able to judge the reality of his fatawa.

  10. Why doesn’t ISIS just use the Generous Qur’an there’s plenty in there to justify everything they’re doing. Or they could recite many stories front the Hadith (Sahih Muslim or al-Bukhari), or the Sira by Ibn Ishaq.

    1. There is nothing in the Quran which they can use, hence they dont.

      Why dont you share some of your theories here with us, and we can see how truthful they are.

      1. You are wrong the bad people can use anything from anywhere as their shield.They can misinterpret Quran also like the khawariz did.

  11. THiSe PEOPLE are not muslim,, OUR PROPHET mohammad saw said ,about this people (isis bokoharam etc) who is the enemy of humanity,,,,prophet said that, thise people will say that ,we fallow prophet n Quran ,but actually they dont act on it,,,,They fallow ibna tayeem who is the founder of isis ,boko haram etc,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Iba tayee hiself lack the quality of human,how u following this bastard man,,,,,,,,Love each other ;;its the teaching of prophet

    1. The prison where ibn Taimiyah died was in Citadel, Damascus and not in Alexandria as i was mentioned it on my previous comment

  12. Dear Islamic philosopher,
    Could you please write a strong rebuttal against brother Abu Yusuf, Anthony’s comments.
    Also please mention why ibn Taymiyah did not give fatwa for a second time jihad and chosen to die inside a prison in Alexandria? I hope through your “unbiased” research you already know that he had huge fan following those days and one call was sufficient to instigate a big battle.
    I am not angry with you because Allah is patient with you.
    لَا يُكَلِّفُ اللَّهُ نَفْسًا إِلَّا وُسْعَهَا ۚ لَهَا مَا كَسَبَتْ وَعَلَيْهَا مَا اكْتَسَبَتْ ۗ رَبَّنَا لَا تُؤَاخِذْنَا إِن نَّسِينَا أَوْ أَخْطَأْنَا ۚ رَبَّنَا وَلَا تَحْمِلْ عَلَيْنَا إِصْرًا كَمَا حَمَلْتَهُ عَلَى الَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِنَا ۚ رَبَّنَا وَلَا تُحَمِّلْنَا مَا لَا طَاقَةَ لَنَا بِهِ ۖ وَاعْفُ عَنَّا وَاغْفِرْ لَنَا وَارْحَمْنَا ۚ أَنتَ مَوْلَانَا فَانصُرْنَا عَلَى الْقَوْمِ الْكَافِرِينَ – 2:286

    1. Dear Raja,

      What would you like me to rebut? Abu Yusuf has ignored the facts. I have quoted Ibn Taymiyah from his own books, just as ISIS have. He says kill the shia, and isis do it. He says kill those who get in your way, even if they are Muslim ! and ISIS do it. We are past the point of understanding what is at fault, we should now be looking at what we need to do to fix this.

  13. Sheikh Al Islam Ibn Taymmiah is innocent of this lies, i read in his books how does he explain that acts of ISIS is against islam and he got perfect replies on their allegations, Ibn taymmeah is one of the right scholars of islam just like Ahmad bin hanbal and shafee and imam malek those are the right scholars of islam

  14. Islamic philosopher offers sources for his condemnation of ibn Taymiyyah. After Abu Yusuf asked him to show proof that Taymiyyah was giving human qualities to Allah, he does just this. Then Abu Yusuf proceeds to accuse him of taking the passages out of context, but does not explain the actual context. Furthermore, Abu Yusuf resorts to simple name calling and challenging Islamic philosopher’s scholarship. Abu Yusuf defends Taymiyyah and calls him a rightful and esteemed scholar of Islam. However, he ignores the larger accusation: that Taymiyyah advocates for killing those that even slightly disagree with his version of Islam. How can you call a man an esteemed scholar of Islam when he thinks like this? Who cares if Taymiyaah thought that God had a hand or not–the bigger issue is that Taymiyyah is a violent jihadist.

    1. Ben,

      Its difficult to discuss things with people who openly reject rational thought and reason. These Ibn Taymiyah supporters are probably unaware Ibn Taymiyah even wrote a book on this topic, called the “Rejection of the logicians”. See https://www.medinaminds.com/does-islam-promote-philosophy/

      They will not listen to reason. The simple fact is that Ibn Taymiyah published books which contain isis type ideology, there is no way to deny this. Abdul Wahab also published similar ideas much later. Again, there is now way to deny this, its in clear black and white. Not only that, their followers acted on their words in exactly the same way as we see isis doing today. For example, the wahabi raids of the 18c.

      1. Very interesting comment it would be prudent if you did a search and look at Yasir Kazi dissertation presented at Yale University regarding your allegations. ISIS are along with these other renegade groups are nothing short of Kawarij…

  15. Excellent work Islamic Philosopher. Had it not been for saudi petrodollars and the shameful alliance of the saud with the british against the Ottomans, ibn taymiyyah and his warped beliefs would have been an insignificant dot ..or blot in the history of Islam. There would have been no salafism…and no terrorism. All salafis are certainly not terrorists but all terrorists are salafis…fact!

  16. Whoever makes the claim that Ibn Taymiyyah was not an antropomorphist is being decieved. When Ibn Taymiyyah condemns tajseem (likening allah to a body or creation) you must understand that his definition of body is very different from the Salaf or muslims in general. He defines a body as something that can be divided (and not just measured and quantified, but actually separated), and this he does not affirm for Allah (swt). he DOES, however, affirm Size, Limits, Direction and physical boundries in each 6 directions. This is antropomirphism by orthodox muslim definition.

  17. If u r intelligent you will take the word of ibn Taimiya positively and if you are stupid like ISIS then you will make the meaning that is helpfull to you like khawariz,they interpret the quran in their own way.So who are trying to attach ibn Taimiya or any Islamic group with ISIS he is on the way of true khwarizs.He will enter the hell insa-allah.So be smart and think Islamicly.

  18. Our Prophet(saw) also took the sword against the kafirs and Ali (RA) took the sword against rebelious Muslims.Non Muslim told that Muhammad (saw) inspired terrorism.And the Muslim brothers are telling that ibn Taimiya inspired them.Now my question is whom should we believe those non muslims or our muslim brothers?Answer is that we should believe none of them.Our islamic teachings dont promote terrorism but peace.Our Islam dont promote hatred but love.

  19. The entire argument presented on this page is ridiculous and farcical to the extreme – Look how the USA has gotten Muslims in arguing about scholarship and aqeeda in Islam. Only fools try to justify any side of this argument – the answer to this entire issue is that ISIS is NOT the creation of ibn Taymiyyah – it is the creation of the USA as a tool of US foreign policy.

    It was created to allow the US a pretext into ANY Middle Eastern country rapidly by allowing them and NATO states to simply create a false flag terror attack on their soil. blame the amorphous ISIS, then claim they are not invading Iraq, Syria or Wherever they need to attack, but defending themselves against an “ISIS” terrorists whose bases happen to be in their area of interest., rapidly circumventing international law.

    To do this, ISIS needs to be as BRUTAL and inhumane as possible to warrant immediate and total approval by the US’s populace.

    This they have achieved very well – Strange how “ISIS” have NO clear leader, how their faces are always concealed and how, after every False Flag terror attack in the USA or Europe, the “victim” countries become embroiled in the Middle East.

    Taymiyyah was the vanguard against all imperialist designs on the land of the Muslims – Now the US has made him Public enemy No.1 with good reason – to rid islam of the thought and scholarship that would provide any real intellectual resistance to US-NATO-Zionist Hegemony of the Muslim Lands and to replace the real Islam with the shit of the sufi grave worshipping idolatars. see http://badpolitix101.blogspot.co.za/2017/07/wasatiyyah-and-owning-isis-wasatiyyah.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *