Regarding Ibn Taymiyyah and the 'Naseehah Dhahabiyyah' Ascribed to Imaam adh-Dhahabee - Part 2
Posted by Abu.Iyaad on Wednesday, June, 24 2009 and filed under Ibn Taymiyyah
Key topics: Adh-Dhahabee Naseehah Dhahabiyyah Ibn Taymiyyah Al-Kawtharee Adh-Dhahabee Naseehah Dhahabiyyah Ibn Taymiyyah Al-Kawtharee

The Shaykh, Bakr Ibn Abdullaah Abu Zaid, rahimahullaah said (as quoted in the book "Kutub Hadhdhara Minhaa al-Ulamaa", 2/309):

Imaam adh-Dhahabee in his religion, his piety and manners is far above the likes of this treatise whose expressions call to the nullification of all of these [noble traits of adh-Dhahabee].

And Muhammad Ibn Ibraaheem ash-Shaybaanee has compiled a treatise entitled, 'At-Tawdeeh al-Jalee fi radd 'alaa an-Naseehati adh-Dhahabeeyah al-Manhoolati 'alaa al-Imaam adh-Dhahabee' in which he nullifies [with evidence] the ascription of this treatise to Imaam adh-Dhahabee. And from that which it contains is:

I say: The ascription of this treatise to Imaam adh-Dhahabee is not correct for a number of reasons:

Firstly: That this treatise has not been mentioned by anyone who gave attention to the works of adh-Dhahabee (rahimahullaah).

Secondly: adh-Dhahabee was a student [of Ibn Taymiyyah] and his close companionship with Shaikh Ibn Taymiyyah was prolonged, even until the last days of his (Ibn Taymiyyah's) life, until his death (rahimahullaah).

Thirdly: All of the statements of adh-Dhahabee in his established and dependable books and likewise in his well-known and well-spread statements in praise of Ibn Taymiyyah and friendliness with him demolishes this treatise and shows the falsehood of its ascription to adh-Dhahabee - rather it is a fabrication upon him.

Fourthly: This treatise is written in the handwriting of a staunch opponent of Ibn Taymiyyah [and not in the handwriting of adh-Dhahabee] who casts aspersions with empty speech. And this witness [of Ibn Qaadee Shubhah], therefore, is rejected according to legislative (principles)

Fifthly: Until this time we have not seen any acceptable, reliable evidence of its veracity that connects the authenticity of its ascription to him. And before one can do that, one must strip the thorny plant of its leaves (i.e. something that is impossible to do).

Sixthly: We do not see anyone who has ascribed it to adh-Dhahabee (rahimahullaah), after Ibn Qaadee Shuhbah except his contemporary al-Haafidh as-Sakhaawee (rahimahullaah), and in the time in which he did not mention any support for its veracity, we do not doubt that his dependence upon this manuscript passed beyond his time, and is from the misleading of his contemporary, Ibn Qaadee Shuhbah. And they [both] have a union in orientation that is opposed to the da'wah of Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullaah).

Seventhly: As for the contemporaries who affirm its ascription to adh-Dhahabee then they are between a man who is united with Ibn Qaadee Shuhbah in madhhab and orientation, or another [man] that does not bring any evidence. And how can there be acceptance of a saying that is devoid of evidence?

Eighthly: [This type of] harshness [in the claimed "Naseehah"] is not befitting towards the people of knowledge, and from them is Imaam adh-Dhahabee, with his Shaikh, the Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah.

Note: There is doubt as to whether this manuscript is in the handwriting of Ibn Qaadee Shuhbah. See this article for more details.