A Formal Investigation Using the Principles of the Laws of Evidence
By Abdalla S. Alothman
Structure of the Available Manuscript
The Reasons For Investigating the Letter
The Analytical Methods Used for Inspection
Dating Letters in Islamic history
Problems With Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya
The Significance of Al-Naseeha Under the Laws of Evidence
Welcome to the Sufi World of Deception!
Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya is the letter that was supposedly sent by AlThahabi to his teacher Ibn Taymiyya. None, amongst late scholars
considered it authentic. The Sufis deceitfully claim that two late scholars
encountered it: One of them didn't reject it, while the other praised it –
this deception will be discussed. Among recent scholars, only two among
thousands have considered it authentic.
What should be the general ruling on this letter? It is legally invalid. Pay
attention to legally, because in my approach I will resort to the
fundamentals of Evidence Laws that exist in universal legal proceedings
found in the Islamic Jurisprudence (I don't mean fiqh, here, but rather
qadhaa-a, as if the letter is presented to a Qadhi/Judge).
The reason why I selected to legally inspect Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya is
because the Laws of Evidence are 100% in accord with common logic. If
the Laws of Evidence are illogical there would simply be no justice
anywhere in the world. Since Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya is supposed to be
a written communication between two parties, it is a perfect candidate to
pass through legal inspection.
However, at the end of this study, we will not only see that Al-Naseeha AlThahabiyya does not constitute to be a letter (or a message, or an epistle,
or whatever flashy name the Sufis have used to describe Al-Naseeha), but
the evidence that will float while you are reading this paper will show that
even the Epistles of Paul are more genuine and authentic than AlNaseeha.
Structure of the Available Manuscript
An image of the available manuscript of Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya will be
enclosed along with this document.
The document consists of the following:
1. A statement from the last copier – Zahid Al-Kawthari (d. 1371 A.H.) –
where he states: "This is what I found in the handwriting of Ibn Qadhi
Shubah (d. 851 A.H.): 'A letter from Al-Thahabi (d. 748 A.H.) to Ibn
Taymiyya which I copied from the handwriting of Burhan Ad-Deen bin
Jama'ah, who copied it from Abu Sa'eed bin Al-'Alaa-ee, who copied it
from the handwriting of Al-Thahabi.' "
2. Following the above is the contents of the document that includes no
dates, no names, no signatures, or anything.
3. After the document ends, the last copier immediately writes a couple of
notes as if he was with Al-Thahabi when he supposedly wrote the letter.
The Reasons For Investigating the Letter
Attempting to prove that this message is genuine is – in my opinion –
unnecessary, because it cannot be proven genuine and successfully
attributed to its supposed sender in the first place. In legal proceedings,
the burden of proof lies on the claimant (Sufis, etc.). However, inspecting
the document is certainly a delightful experience to whoever enjoys
watching the Sufis getting more and more bankrupt, and to whoever
enjoys knowing how the Sufis tailor their deceptions.
Analyzing the letter by Ahl Al-Sunnah has two purposes:
To defend Ibn Taymiyya
And defend Al-Thahabi
Although it is supplementary, the defense of Ibn Taymiyya is taken
seriously by Ahl Al-Sunnah because he operated on a lot of innovations
and deviated sects of today. However, the arguments and the rich
knowledge inherited from Ibn Taymiyya is considered separate from his
persona. Therefore, if the Sufis and the Ash'ariyya (and many others)
discredit Ibn Taymiyya, the arguments he presented and the knowledge
inherited from him stand unshaken.
As for Al-Thahabi, the Sufis do not care how he appears, because he is of
no importance to them. What they consider important are the shaikhs who
fly, walk on water, talk to horses, charm snakes, and such. Remember,
Sufism is mysticism, it looks behind the text. People like Al-Thahabi and
Ibn Taymiyya stick to the text and do not exceed by approaching Sufi-like
Therefore the Sufis and their likes do not care if Imam Al-Thahabi appears
as an unstable scholar of Islam where he presents hundreds of pages full
with text that praises Ibn Taymiyya and lists his qualities and virtues, and
then he writes nonsensical letters like Al-Naseeha about his shaikh.
Also see the commentary preceding a biographical entry in the enclosed
The Analytical Methods Used for Inspection
To sum up how this message is analyzed by Ahl Al-Sunnah, I noticed two
paths in discussing this message. I was guided by those two techniques to
extract two methods: The Elaborate Method and the Formal Method.
The Elaborate Method is an exhausting analysis of the message that
proposes numerous valid and controversial possibilities, it also traces the
message and its beholders: the sender and the receiver, and uses a lot of
formal techniques when desired.
The Elaborate Method also examines everything, from the title of the
letter, (i.e., is Al-Thahabiyya a reference to Imam Al-Thahabi or is it way
to express the description of the letter? As to say: The Golden
(thahabiyya) Advice (Naseeha)?) passes through it word by word,
analyzing every statement and linking it with possible conclusions.
Furthermore, the style of the expressions present in the letter (which are
very harsh, while Al-Thahabi was known in his writings to be very gentle)
is compared with the originator's available style throughout his writings.
The Formal Method relies on the formal given facts without suggesting
any valid or invalid possibilities. The formal aspect of any written
communication consists of the usual elements found in a written
communication. Personally, I favor the Formal Method.
Further, In the Formal Method, the content of the message is not
investigated. Thus, we don't really care what the message talks about.
Further, we don't delve into the personal details of the sender and the
receiver, because in this method they are nothing more than elements.
The elements are necessary fields, such as:
[contents of the message]
[closing of the message]
Xyz [Name / Signature / seal]
Date: Jan 5, 2010.
Thus, when we find this formality missing in Al-Naseeha – which is
supposed to be a personal letter from Al-Thahabi – it would certainly be
perplexing and more doubtful, especially when we keep in mind that AlThahabi is a highly learned scholar.
This type of formality existed many centuries before Al-Thahabi was
known, in fact we know for sure that it was a common norm in Islam
seven centuries before Al-Thahabi appeared.
A letter from the Messenger of Allah to Al-Munthir bin Sawi, the governor of Bahrain.
The green line shows that the letter starts with: "From Muhammad The Messenger of Allah"
The red line shows: "To Al-Munthir bin Sawi." The pointing finger in yellow is the sender's
Another letter from the Messenger of Allah to Heraclius, the Emperor of Byzantine.
The green line: "From Muhammad The Slave and Messenger of Allah."
The Red line: "To Heraclius, the great man of the Romans."
The blue pointing finger is pointing to the sender's SEAL.
Dating Letters in Islamic history
Dating written communications in Islam started during the reign of the
Caliph 'Umar bin Al-Khattab – the story is recorded in Islamic history and
presented by many historians such as Ibn Katheer in Volume 7 of his book
Al-Bidaaya Wan-Nihaaya. The first full dating took place in the year 16
A.H., before that the date included the day and month only.
That means that by the time of Al-Thahabi, adhering to the norms of
written communications was an established norm.
Problems With Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya
• The paper is not dated.
• Neither the name of the sender nor the receiver, are present at the top
of the letter as required by communication norms.
• Further, the sender did not sign, seal, or even write his name at the
end of the message.
• There is absolutely no proof that the supposed receiver received the
Under the light of the above discrepancies, if this letter is presented to
any court of law, it will be immediately discarded. The field of Islamic
detection and inspection of oral and textual reports, however, is much
more complicated and less dismissive than any court of law.
In a court of law the authenticity of a communication is determined by
three main elements:
1. The Date of the Document
The date of the document guides the court or whoever is making a
judgment – such as the audience in our case – to any other position or
opinion made prior to or after the document. For example: X writes down
all his negative impressions about Y in a letter dated May, 1, 1990. A year
later, the problems X had with Y are solved and they become great
friends, so X writes a flattering letter to Y on June 8, 1991.
Without the date, we can't determined whether there were any changes
that took place on X's negative impressions or that he changed his opinion
When it comes to Al-Thahabi and Ibn Taymiyya, the given evidences show
that both scholars had an unusual relationship: Simply put, the writings of
Al-Thahabi on Ibn Taymiyya show that the former loved the latter.
Therefore, the date is an essential requirement which is missing from AlNaseeha.
2. The Source of the Document
The source of the document is the primary source of which the copies
where produced from. It includes the sender's name, and his handwriting.
In Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya, this element does not exist.
3. The Destination of the Document
The destination is the element which includes the letter that Ibn Taymiyya
received which includes his name on the document.
In Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya, this element also does not exist. There is no
proof that exists that shows Ibn Taymiyya received the document.
Furthermore, the document does not include Ibn Taymiyya's name.
Let the court of law = The objective reader.
Let Al-Thahabi = All those who reject Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya.
Let Ibn Taymiyya = All those who claim that Al-Naseeha is genuine.
Then: Consider Al-Naseeha as a dispute:
Al-Thahabi writes a letter where he openly insults and bashes Ibn
Taymiyya, and then he sends the letter to someone to copy it (Abu Sa'eed
Al-'Alaa-ee), who sends it to another one to copy it (Burhan Ad-Deen bin
Jamaa'ah), who sends it to another person to copy it (Ibn Qadhi Shubha).
The last copier writes his notes, and then publishes the letter. Afterwards,
the first two copiers disappear, but the last one hangs around.
Ibn Taymiyya receives the letter, and decides to sue Al-Thahabi and asks
for a compensation by fining Al-Thahabi. Both attend in front of the judge.
Ibn Taymiyya presents the letter. Al-Thahabi denies that the letter
originated from him.
The judge looks at the letter and notices the three copiers, he asks AlThahabi: Where is the original letter you wrote? He replies: It doesn't
exist. The judge asks: What date did you write this letter? He replies: I
didn't write in the first place.
If Ibn Taymiyya confronts Al-Thahabi by referring to the statements made
in the document, Al-Thahabi can reply: "I did not intend addressing you."
And when the judge looks at the letter, he wont find Ibn Taymiyya's name
or nickname or anything specific related to him.
If the judge calls Ibn Qadhi Shuhba as a witness, since he is the one who
wrote: "A letter from Al-Thahabi to Ibn Taymiyya," Al-Thahabi can object,
because any ruling cannot be based on any other party's personal
conclusion or interpretation when the sender is already present -especially when we know that Ibn Qadhi Shuhba wasn't born when the
letter was supposedly written (Al-Thahabi died in 748 A.H., Ibn Qadhi
Shuhba died 851 A.H.! That's more than a 103-year gap!)
But even if Ibn Qadhi Shuhba attends, the first question he will be asked
is: Where is the source document you copied from? Unfortunately, it's
unavailable. That's why the Law of Evidence is useful.
The Significance of Al-Naseeha Under the Laws of Evidence
A universal subsystem of laws exists in every court of law. This subsystem
is called The Law of Evidence – it existed in Islamic litigation centuries
ago and explained in almost all Islamic Fiqh (jurisprudence)
encyclopedias. The modern Laws of Evidence present in almost any civil
country are very much similar when it comes to written documents.
Since I am a Kuwaiti living in Kuwait, and since I'm familiar with our laws,
I will use the Kuwaiti Law of Evidence (KLE), but the reader can use any
Law of Evidence for any country (the differences rarely apply to written
The set of laws in the Evidence of Law are basic and adhere to common
sense, especially when it comes to written documents.
Touring the Law of Evidence
Written communications addressed by the Law of Evidence come in two
1. Official Documents:
• These documents confirm what a civilian or a public servant obliged to
do during the execution a certain task and show the type of task that
has been executed by hand under the given legal circumstances and
within the limits of his authority. The document becomes official
whenever the authorized officers sign it, else it becomes a customary
document. (See KLE, Article:8.)
• The carried task present in an official document and committed by the
signee, and within his authorization, is contested by all disputing
parties. (See KLE, Article:9)
• A copy of an official document obtains the power of evidence as long as
it matches the original copy. (See KLE, Article:10)
• The copy of the original obtains its power as long as long as its
authenticity is not challenged. (See KLE, Article:11)
• Every copy of the original provides no evidence except for entertaining
the court. (See KLE, Article:11) (bad news for Al-Naseeha)
2. Customary Documents:
• The originating source of the customary document is attributed to
whoever signed it, sealed it, or stamped it with his fingerprint, unless
the originating source clearly denies the document. (See KLE,
• The customary document cannot be contested upon others unless it has
a fixed date inserted by the originator or another party designated by
the originator. (See KLE, Article:14)
• Signed letters (Messages, etc.) are considered customary papers.
Telegraphs possess the same consideration, if the submitted original
copy is signed by the sender, and the originally submitted document
matches the telegraph. If the original submitted document does not
exist, it serves to entertain the court but not used as evidence. (See
Applying the Law of Evidence to Al-Naseeha
Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya is a mixture of both document types. It is an
official document because it has been published, thus the communication
is no longer private between two parties. Al-Naseeha is also a customary
document, because in its original form is it nothing more than a personal
communication between two parties.
Notice that we don't really need the actual law, we just need to test the
validity and the authenticity of the document using the principles of the
Law of Evidence.
In a nutshell:
Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya is not dated.
It does not contain the name of the sender.
The sender did not sign it.
The original copy (and reproduced copies) does not exist.
The handwriting of the sender cannot be compared with the published
Thus, under the Laws of Evidence, Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya
becomes an attractive VIP for every trashcan.
We can close the case here, but we should continue in weakening it
further by showing the greasy, high-calorie Sufi deception!
Welcome to the Sufi World of Deception!
We will first take a look at how the Sufis interact with Al-Naseeha:
28. Bayan Zaghl al-`Ilm wa al-Talab in which al-Dhahabi states: "Ibn Taymiyya was considered
by his enemies to be a wicked Anti-Christ and disbeliever, while great numbers of the wise and the
elite considered him an eminent, brilliant, and scholarly innovator (mubtadi` fadil muhaqqiq bari`)."33
29. An epistle entitled al-Nasiha al-Dhahabiyya written when al-Dhahabi was around fifty-five
years of age and addressed to Ibn Taymiyya towards the end of his life. In this brief but
scathing epistle the author distances himself from his contemporary and admonishes him without
naming him, calling him "an eloquent polemicist who neither rests nor sleeps."34 A "Salafi" apologist
recently cast doubt on the authenticity of al-Dhahabi's authorship of this epistle, also claiming that,
even if al-Dhahabi wrote it, then it is directed to someone other than Ibn Taymiyya.35 However,
both Salah al-Din al-Munajjid and Dr. Bashshar `Awwad Ma`ruf declared that there was no
doubt al-Dhahabi wrote it towards the end of his life and addressed Ibn Taymiyya.36 Ibn
Hajar voiced no doubt as to the authenticity of this epistle as attributed to al-Dhahabi,37 nor alSakhawi who calls it "a glorious statement of doctrine."38 [Source]
Let's comment on some of the foolishness those people say:
28. Bayan Zaghl al-`Ilm wa al-Talab in which al-Dhahabi states: "Ibn Taymiyya was considered
by his enemies to be a wicked Anti-Christ and disbeliever, while great numbers of the wise and the
elite considered him an eminent, brilliant, and scholarly innovator (mubtadi` fadil muhaqqiq bari`)."
I don't know if the writer of this joke was sketching his opinion during a
loud Sufi dancing ritual or some other weird Sufi ceremony. Of course Ibn
Taymiyya was considered a liar and a dajjal and even more, but by his
enemies. If the Sufi expects Ibn Taymiyya's enemies to consider him an
angel or a teddy bear, then I guess he needs serious help.
"An epistle entitled al-Nasiha al-Dhahabiyya written when al-Dhahabi was around fifty-five
years of age and addressed to Ibn Taymiyya towards the end of his life. In this brief but
scathing epistle the author distances himself from his contemporary and admonishes him without
[A]. First, it is not an epistle. It can't be an epistle since it doesn't have
the name of the sender and the name of the receiver. Even the Epistles
of Paul are properly addressed than this so called Epistle!
[B]. How did they know that Al-Thahabi was 55 when he supposedly wrote
the letter? No clue. In The Sufi Land of Wonders, everything is possible!
[C]. They say that the letter is addressed to Ibn Taymiyya…. But
surprisingly they admit that Ibn Taymiyya's name never appears once
throughout the contents of the so called letter.
However, both Salah al-Din al-Munajjid and Dr. Bashshar `Awwad Ma`ruf declared that there
was no doubt al-Dhahabi wrote it towards the end of his life and addressed Ibn
[A] Again, "towards the end of his life" in this context proposes a
reference to Al-Thahabi. Was the letter that Al-Thahabi supposedly wrote
was written towards the end of Al-Thahabi's life, or was it written towards
the end of Ibn Taymiyya's life? Ibn Taymiyya died in 728 A.H. while AlThahabi died in 748 A.H. and he was born in 673 A.H. So if he wrote the
letter in 728 (The year Ibn Taymiyya died) he was 55, and lived 20 more
years. That doesn't sound as the "end" of anybody's life.
[B] They make a conclusion based on two references, one by Salah AdDeen Al-Munajjid, and the other by Dr. Bashar Awwad. But they list one,
and dismiss the other: "36. Cf. Bashshar `Awwad Ma`ruf, al-Dhahabi (p. 146)."
• As for Salah Ad-Deen Al-Munajjid, that's what he really declared:
ﻓﻘﺪ ﻧﻘﻠﺖ ﻣﺨﻄﻮﻁﺎﺗﻬﺎ، ﻭﻻ ﺷﻚ ﻋﻨﺪﻧﺎ ﺃﻧﻬﺎ ﻟﻪ،»ﺷﻚ ﺑﻌﻀﻬﻢ ﻓﻲ ﻧﺴﺒﺔ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﻴﺤﺔ ﻟﻠﺬﻫﺒﻲ
. ﻭﻟﻢ ﻳﻨﻜﺮﻫﺎ ﺃﺣﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎء ﺍﻟﺬﻳﻦ ﻧﻘﻠﻮﻫﺎ ﻛﺘﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ ﻗﺎﺿﻲ ﺷﻬﺒﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺮﻩ،ﻣﻦ ﺧﻂ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ
ﻭﻟﻢ ﻳﺜﻦ ﺃﺣﺪ. ﻭﻳﺒﺪﻭ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻛﺘﺒﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺁﺧﺮ ﻋﻤﺮﻩ،ﺛﻢ ﺇﻥ ﻫﺬﺍ ﻫﻮ ﺃﺳﻠﻮﺏ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﻳُﻬﺎﺟﻢ
« ﻭﺇﺷﻔﺎﻗﺎً ﻋﻠﻴﻪ، ﻟﻜﻨﻪ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺪﻩ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻓﻲ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻷﻣﻮﺭ ﺣﺒﺎً ﻟﻪ،ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻛﺜﻨﺎء ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ
[14 . ﺹ، ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻘﻖ ﺻﻼﺡ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺠﺪ،]ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﺳﻴﺮﺗﻪ ﻭﺃﺧﺒﺎﺭﻩ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﺆﺭﺧﻴﻦ
"Some have doubted the attribution of this 'Naseeha/Advice' to Al-Thahabi, but I have no doubts
that it belongs to Al-Thahabi because its manuscripts had been copied from the handwriting of AlThahabi and none of the scholars who copied it – such as Ibn Qadhi Shubha – have denied it. In
addition, this is Al-Thahabi's style when he attacks, and though it appears that he wrote the
letter at the end of his life. And nobody has flattered and praised Ibn Taymiyya like the way AlThahabi did, but he criticized Ibn Taymiyya in some issues for the sake of his love to Ibn Taymiyya
and sympathy." [ Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya, by Salah Ad-Deen Al-Munajjid, P. 14]
• As for Bashar 'Awwad Ma'rouf, that's what he declared:
ﻣﻤﺎ ﻭﺛﻖ، ﻭﻫﻮ )ﺍﻟﺴﺨﺎﻭﻱ( ﺍﻟﻮﺣﻴﺪ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺃﺷﺎﺭ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ...»
«...ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻬﺎ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﻻ ﺳﻴﻤﺎ ﻭﻗﺪ ﺷﻚ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ
ﻭﻻ ﻋﺒﺮﺓ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ « ]ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ ﻭﻣﻨﻬﺠﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ، »ﻭﺫﻫﺐ ﺑﻌﻀﻬﻢ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺑﺄﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﺰﻭﺭﺓ
[146 ،102 ،61 . ﺹ،ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡـ ﻟﻠﺪﻛﺘﻮﺭ ﺑﺸﺎﺭ ﻋﻮﺍﺩ ﻣﻌﺮﻭﻑ
"Al-Sakhawi is the only one who referred to that letter, and that made it possible to
attribute the letter to Al-Thahabi, even though more than one have doubted it."
He Also says: "… and some have considered it a forgery, but I see no use in that." [AlThahabi wa-Manhajuhu fee Kitabat Tareekh Al-Islam, By Dr. Bashar Awwad Ma'rouf. P. 61,
The perplexing issue is that Al-Munajjid suggests that Al-Thahabi
supposedly wrote the letter at the end of his life. Notice Al-Munajjid does
not even mention any numbers like 55. But anyway, if Al-Thahabi wrote
that letter at the end of his life, the receiver (Ibn Taymiyya) was already
But if Al-Thahabi wrote it towards the end of Ibn Taymiyya's life, then
three copiers would have known about it as well as the guards of the jail,
because the royal creed dictates that Ibn Taymiyya should rarely interact
with the outside world (see Ibn Katheer, V. 14). The royal creed forbade
Ibn Taymiyya from issuing any rulings (Fatwa), therefore when he
receives a letter from the outside world, the jailers would regularly open it
and verify that it is not a request for a Fatwa. So if the jailers saw Al-
Thahabi's letter, they would spread the news much faster than a whirling
Sufi dancing in fast motion.
The Intent Behind Obfuscating "Towards the End of His Life"
As it is apparent from what we quoted from the Sufis, they intentionally
bewilder their audience regarding the period the letter was written by its
supposed original author. From nowhere, the calaimed that Al-Thahabi was 55.
In their first usage, they say: "when al-Dhahabi was around fifty-five years of age
and addressed to Ibn Taymiyya towards the end of his life." In their second usage,
they say: "However, both Salah al-Din al-Munajjid and Dr. Bashshar `Awwad Ma`ruf
declared that there was no doubt al-Dhahabi wrote it towards the end of his life
and addressed Ibn Taymiyya."
The trick is where " Ibn Taymiyya" is positioned: In the first instance, it precedes
"towards the end of his life," while in the second instance it proceeds "towards the
end of his life." This is not a mere coincidence by those specific Sufis, they are
used to tricking their readers. The first instance serves to convey that AlThahabi wrote the letter at the end of Ibn Taymiya's life. While the second
instance suggest that Al-Thahabi wrote it towards the end of his own life.
The reason why this obfuscation was inserted by the Sufis is because they
really want to consider Al-Naseeha as a form of evidence, but they know for a
fact that it is not dated. Also, notice how they capitalize on "addressed to Ibn
Taymiyya," because they know that addressing the receiver is a requirement in
every letter and it doesn't exist in their artifact. When it comes to the date, the
poor Sufis do not have it. So they give themselves the permission to make up
ideas that Al-Thahabi was 55 and rely on others who made conclusions based
on misleading information. Further, both instances are locks to counter and
avoid the embarrassment when obvious objections are raised:
1. If Al-Thahabi (d. 748 A.H.) wrote the letter towards the end of his life, then
this would be a time when Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728 A.H.) was dead.
2. If Al-Thahabi wrote the letter towards the end of Ibn Taymiyya's life, then
they will certainly be confronted by the massive works of Al-Thahabi, which are
biographies that flatter and praise Ibn Taymiyya in his books: Thayl Tareekh
Al-Islam, Tabaqat Al-Huffaath, Mu'jam Shiyookh Al-Thahabi, and including an
entire book titled," Al-Durra Al-Yatamiyya, fee seerat Ibn Taymiyya." Not to
mention that he wrote a sad post-death bemoaning poem (marthiyya) on his
shaikh Ibn Taymiyya. Not to mention that a lot of the works of Ibn Taymiyya
came to us through Al-Thahabi. ALL these works were made after Ibn
Furthermore, both Al-Munajjid and Dr. Bashar have made it clear that
there were doubts regarding this so called letter, but the Sufis said that
those two declared that there were no doubts! Also Dr. Bashar gives the
reason why he considers this authentic: Because Al-Sakhawi made a
reference to it – no one else other than Al-Sakhawi. So from where did
the Sufis conclude that Ibn Hajar " voiced no doubt as to the authenticity of this epistle
as attributed to al-Dhahabi?" We will see that shortly. But first we should inspect
what Al-Sakhawi presented in his book!
The reference given for Al-Sakhawi was cited by the Sufis: " 38In al-I`lan wa
al-Tawbikh (p. 77=54)." Now, when you go to that book (which is available
online) you will see that Al-Sakhawi was pointing to Bayan Zaghl Al-'Ilm,
not Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya – Al-Sakhawi never mentions Al-Naseeha
Al-Thahabiyya, and he doesn't quote a single word from it. So what made
those two scholars, Al-Munajjid and Bashar Awad claim that Al-Sakhawi
pointed to Al-Naseeha? The were mislead by Al-Kawathari, the deceiver
who has serious psychological problems.
This is what Al-Sakhawi said:
... ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﻣﺮﺓ ﻓﻴﻪ،
»ﻭﺭﺃﻳﺖ ﻟﻪ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﻛﺘﺒﻬﺎ ﻻﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻫﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺩﻓﻊ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻪ ﻟﻤﺰﻳﺪ ﺗﻌﺼﺒﻪ ﻣﻔﻴﺪﺓ
« ...()ﻛﻼﻡ ﻣﻘﺘﺒﺲ ﻣﻦ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺯﻏﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ
"And I (Al-Sakhawi) have seen a letter that Al-Thahabi wrote to Ibn Taymiyya to show that he (AlThahabi) has no fanaticism towards Ibn Taymiyya, where he once said about him…. (Quoting Zaghl
Al-'ilm)." [Al-I'lan Bit-Tawbeekh, by Al-Sakhawi, p. 136]
What happens is that Al-Kawthari twisted Al-Sakhawi's defense of AlThahabi, and made the statement appear as if Al-Sakhawi saw both, AlNaseeha and Bayan Zaghl Al-'Ilm, when Al-Sakhawi only intended to refer
to Zaghl Al-'ilm, with the proof that he didn't quote a single word from AlNaseeha.
Ibn Hajar Al-'Asqalani:
The also cited Al-Durrar Al-Kamina by Ibn Hajr Al-'Asqalani, and
concluded: " Ibn Hajar voiced no doubt as to the authenticity of this epistle as attributed to alDhahabi,37 " When you go to 37, it is: 37. In al-Durar al-Kamina (1:166). And they
have taken the liberty to translate that passage:
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852/1449; Rahimahullah) recorded al-Dhahabi as
saying in his al-Durar al-Kamina (1,161): "People who know him well sometimes accuse me of
failing to do justice; his opponents sometimes charge me with puffery. I have been abused by both
parties-his supporters and his adversaries. (His hair and beard were salt-and pepper coloured,
containing little grey, his hair reaching his ear lobes. His eyes were like eloquent tongues. Of
medium height, he was broad shouldered and had a loud, expressive voice and was quick of
speech). Though anger would sometimes grip him, he would conquer it with forbearance. I have not
seen his like for supplications and appeals and for his abundant concern for others. But I do not
believe him to be infallible; indeed, I disagree with him on both basic and secondary issues. For,
despite his vast learning, his extreme courage, his fluid mind, and his regard for the sanctities of
religion, he was but a man."
Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani also recorded al-Dhahabi as saying in al-Durar alKamina (1,161): "In discussion he would be possessed by rage, anger, and hostility against his
adversaries, which implanted enmity in their spirits. If he had only treated his antagonists with civility,
they would have been reconciled with him, for the most notable of them deferred to his learning,
acknowledged his ardent zeal, and agreed that his lapses were few."
Here is a portion of the original passage in Arabic:
ﺫﻫﻨﻪ ﻭﺗﻌﻈﻴﻤﻪ ﻟﺤﺮﻣﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﺸﺮﺍ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺮ ﺗﻌﺘﺮﻳﻪ ﺣﺪﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﻭﻏﻀﺐ ﻭﺷﻈﻒ..."
ﻟﻠﺨﺼﻢ ﺗﺰﺭﻉ ﻟﻪ ﻋﺪﺍﻭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﻮﺱ ﻭﺇﻻ ﻟﻮ ﻻﻁﻒ ﺧﺼﻮﻣﻪ ﻟﻜﺎﻥ ﻛﻠﻤﺔ ﺇﺟﻤﺎﻉ ﻓﺈﻥ ﻛﺒﺎﺭﻫﻢ ﺧﺎﺿﻌﻮﻥ
ﻟﻌﻠﻮﻣﻪ ﻣﻌﺘﺮﻓﻮﻥ ﺑﺸﻨﻮﻓﻪ ﻣﻘﺮﻭﻥ ﺑﻨﺪﻭﺭ ﺧﻄﺎﺋﻪ ﻭﺃﻧﻪ ﺑﺤﺮ ﻻ ﺳﺎﺣﻞ ﻟﻪ ﻭﻛﻨﺰ ﻻ ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﻟﻪ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻳﻨﻘﻤﻮﻥ
".ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺃﺧﻼﻓﺎ ﻭﺃﻓﻌﺎﻻ ﻭﻛﻞ ﺃﺣﺪ ﻳﺆﺧﺬ ﻣﻦ ﻗﻮﻟﻪ ﻭﻳﺘﺮﻙ
In reality, the two passages are one. Therefore, both passages should be
linked instead of splitting them up: ".. Due to his high regard for the sanctities of
religion, he was a human like every other human, where in discussion he would be subjected to
sharpness in researching the matter discussed, anger, and harshness towards his opponents. If he
would only treat his opponents with more kindness (lutf), they would have agreed with him…"
Anyway, I personally fail to see how this passage is a reference to AlNaseeha Al-Thahabiyya which is cruel and unfair. The way I see it is that
Ibn Hajar voiced null in regards to Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya.
Also, the tarjama (biographical entry) that Ibn Hajar reported from AlThahabi has been reported and is present in several other books that are
dedicated to the virtues and qualities of Ibn Taymiyya (Like Al-'Uqood AlDurriyya, and is also copied by Ibn Rajab Al-Hanbali in his books Thayl
(tail) Tabaqat Al-Hanabila (V.2) – none of those many others proposed
that Al-Thahabi hated Ibn Taymiyya as suggested by Al-Naseeha AlThahabiyya. Moreover, most of the people we mentioned were AlThahabi's companions who studied along with him under Ibn Taymiyya –
so they are the closest witnesses one can have.
Thus, the Sufi claim that: "Ibn Hajar voiced no doubt as to the authenticity of this epistle
as attributed to al-Dhahabi," appears nothing more than wishful thinking that's
worthy of discarding.
Among the references they cited:
35. Muhammad al-Shaybani, al-Tawdih al-Jali fi al-Radd `ala al-Nasiha al-Dhahabiyya alManhula `ala al-Imam al-Dhahabi (al-Kuwait: Markaz al-Makhtutat wa al-Turath, 1993). This
type of revisionist scholarship is reminiscent of the story-teller who was caught by Imam
Ahmad saying: "Ahmad ibn Hanbal narrated to us..." whereupon the unfazed fibber replied:
"I meant another Ahmad ibn Hanbal, not you!"
That's the habitual Sufi response when they are crippled: They always
resort to mockery. And they forget that they are the whirling dervishes.
It should be noted that the Sufi author whom we mostly quoted is a
student of Nazim Al-Haqqani who is quite popular on YouTube, yet he
doesn't hesitate mocking others who are definitely more rational than his
There is, however, another book by Muhammad Abdullah Ahmad AlQuwnawi, titled: "Adhwaa-a 'ala Al-Risaala Al-Mansouba ilaa Al-Hafith Al )ﺃﺿﻮﺍء ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺮﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺴﻮﺑﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻓﻆ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲpublished in 1423
A.H. (2002 C.E.) – The book is pretty comprehensive, yet maintains a
very reasonable size. In fact, I copied the text of Al-Naseeha from that
book, which shows how the letter looks like by including the opening
which the Sufis were hiding. (Please refer to the enclosed materials.)
Wal Hamdulillaahi Rabbil 'Alameen
Abdalla S. Alothman
ﻋﺒﺪﺍﷲ ﺳﻌﻴﺪ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﷲ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻠﻄﻴﻒ ﺍﻟﻌﺜﻤﺎﻥ
Kuwait, May 12, 2010
Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya in its original manuscript in Arabic text, published for
the first time by it's copier Al-Kawthari in 1347 A.H. (1928 C.E.). The opening
(surrounded by red) includes a word from Ibn Qadhi Shuhba, stating that he copied
the letter with his handwriting based on a copy by Burhan Ad-Deen bin Jamaa'ah,
who copied it from the handwriting of Abu Sa'eed bin Al-'Alaa-ee and later sent to
Ibn Jamaa'ah, who copied it from a copy [that was supposedly found] from Al-Imam
All this is present in the Arabic text but it was dismissed in the English translations
for obvious reasons.
The green line indicates where the message is terminated. The rest that follows are notes
by Al-Kawthari. These notes confused many people including Salah Ad-Deen Al-Munajjiid
and Dr. Bashar Awwad. The intention of the notes was to portray the document as a
very popular one.
The Arabic text of Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya
The first paragraph highlighted in purple is the opening that details who
copied from who.
ﻧَﺺﱡ ﺍﻟﺮﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻴﺔ:
)ﻫﺬﺍ ﻣﺎ ﻭﺟﺪ ﺑﺨﻂ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻗﺎﺿﻲ ﺷﻬﺒﺔ(» :ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔٌ ﻛَﺘَﺐَ ﺑﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺷﻤﺲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺃﺑﻮ ﻋﺒﺪ ﷲ
ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ ،ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺗﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ ،ﻛﺘﺒﺘُﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻂ ﻗﺎﺿﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺓ ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ
ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ ﺭﺣﻤﻪ ﷲ ،ﻭﻛﺘﺒﻬﺎ ﻫﻮ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻂ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻓﻆ ﺃﺑﻲ ﺳﻌﻴﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﺋﻲ ،ﻭﻫﻮ ﻛﺘﺒﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ
ﺧﻂ ﻣﺮﺳﻠﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺷﻤﺲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ:
ﺍﻟﺤﻤﺪ ﻟ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﺘﻲ ﻳﺎ ﺭﺏ ﺍﺭﺣﻤﻨﻲ ﻭﺃﻗﻠﻨﻲ ﻋﺜﺮﺗﻲ ،ﻭﺍﺣﻔﻆ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺇﻳﻤﺎﻧﻲ .ﻭﺍﺣﺰﻧﺎﻩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﻠﺔ
ﺣﺰﻧﻲ ،ﻭﺍﺃﺳﻔﺎﻩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﻭﺫﻫﺎﺏ ﺃﻫﻠﻬﺎ ،ﻭﺍﺷﻮﻗﺎﻩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺇﺧﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﺆﻣﻨﻴﻦ ﻳﻌﺎﻭﻧﻮﻧﻨﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﺍﻟﺒﻜﺎء ،ﻭﺍﺣﺰﻧﺎﻩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻓﻘﺪ ﺃﻧﺎﺱ ﻛﺎﻧﻮﺍ ﻣﺼﺎﺑﻴﺢ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ،ﻭﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻮﻯ ،ﻭﻛﻨﻮﺯ ﺍﻟﺨﻴﺮﺍﺕ ،ﺁﻩ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺭﻫﻢ ﺣﻼﻝ ،ﻭﺃﺥ ﻣﺆﻧﺲ.
ﻁﻮﺑﻰ ﻟﻤﻦ ﺷﻐﻠﻪ ﻋﻴﺒﻪ ﻋﻦ ﻋﻴﻮﺏ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ،ﻭﺗﺒﺎً ﻟﻤﻦ ﺷﻐﻠﺘﻪ ﻋﻴﻮﺏ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﻋﻦ ﻋﻴﺒﻪ ،ﺇﻟﻰ ﻛﻢ
ﺗﻤﺪﺡ ﻧﻔﺴﻚ ﻭﺷﻘﺎﺷﻘﻚ ﻭﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺗﻚ ،ﻭﺗﺬﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎء ،ﻭﺗﺘﺒﻊ ﻋﻮﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ؟ ﻣﻊ ﻋﻠﻤﻚ ﺑﻨﻬﻲ
ﺍﻟﺮﺳﻮﻝ ﺻﻠﻰ ﷲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ» :ﻻ ﺗﺬﻛﺮﻭﺍ ﻣﻮﺗﺎﻛﻢ ﺇﻻ ﺑﺨﻴﺮ ﻓﺈﻧﻬﻢ ﻗﺪ ﺃﻓﻀﻮﺍ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻣﺎ ﻗﺪﻣﻮﺍ«.
ﺑﻠﻰ ﺃﻋﺮﻑ ﺃﻧﻚ ﺗﻘﻮﻝ ﻟﻲ ﻟﺘﻨﺼﺮ ﻧﻔﺴﻚ :ﺇﻧﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻴﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺆﻻء ﺍﻟﺬﻳﻦ ﻣﺎ ﺷﻤﻮﺍ ﺭﺍﺋﺤﺔ
ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡ ،ﻭﻻ ﻋﺮﻓﻮﺍ ﻣﺎ ﺟﺎء ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺻﻠﻰ ﷲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﻭﻫﻮ ﺟﻬﺎﺩ.
ﺑﻠﻰ ﻭﷲ ﻋﺮﻓﻮﺍ ﺧﻴﺮﺍً ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺍً ﻣﻤﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻟﻌﺒﺪ ﻓﺎﺯ ،ﻭﺟﻬﻠﻮﺍ ﺷﻴﺌ ًﺎ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ ًﺍ ﻣﻤﺎ ﻻ ﻳﻌﻨﻴﻬﻢ ﻭ»ﻣﻦ
ﻒ ﻋﻨﺎ ،ﻓﺈﻧﻚ ﻣﺤﺠﺎﺝ ،ﻋﻠﻴﻢ
ﺣﺴﻦ ﺇﺳﻼﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺮء ﺗﺮﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻻ ﻳﻌﻨﻴﻪ« .ﻳﺎ ﺭﺟﻞ ہﻠﻟ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ ﻛ ﱠ
ﺍﻟﻠﺴﺎﻥ ﻻ ﺗﻘﺮ ﻭﻻ ﺗﻨﺎﻡ.
ﺇﻳﺎﻛﻢ ﻭﺍﻷﻏﻠﻮﻁﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ،ﻛﺮﻩ ﻧﺒﻴﻚ ﺻﻠﻰ ﷲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻭﻋﺎﺑﻬﺎ ،ﻭﻧﻬﻰ ﻋﻦ
ﻛﺜﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺴﺆﺍﻝ ﻭﻗﺎﻝ»:ﺇﻥ ﺃﺧﻮﻑ ﻣﺎ ﺃﺧﺎﻑ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻣﺘﻲ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﻠﺴﺎﻥ«.
ﻭﻛﺜﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﻡ ﺑﻐﻴﺮ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺗﻘﺴّﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﺐ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﻼﻝ ﻭﺍﻟﺤﺮﺍﻡ ،ﻓﻜﻴﻒ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ
ﺍﻟﻴﻮﻧﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻼﺳﻔﺔ ،ﻭﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻜﻔﺮﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻌﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻮﺏ.
ﻭﷲ ﻗﺪ ﺻﺮﻧﺎ ﺿﺤﻜﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩ ،ﻓﺈﻟﻰ ﻛﻢ ﺗﻨﺒﺶ ﺩﻗﺎﺋﻖ ﺍﻟﻜﻔﺮﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﻴﺔ ،ﻟﻨﺮﺩ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ
ﺑﻌﻘﻮﻟﻨﺎ ؟ ﻳﺎ ﺭﺟﻞ ﻗﺪ ﺑﻠﻌﺖ )ﺳﻤﻮﻡ( ﺍﻟﻔﻼﺳﻔﺔ ﻭﺗﺼﺎﻧﻴﻔﺎﺗﻬﻢ ﻣﺮﺍﺕ ،ﻭﺑﻜﺜﺮﺓ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﻮﻡ،
ﻳُﺪﻣﻦ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺠﺴﻢ ،ﻭﺗﻜﻤﻦ ﻭﷲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﺪﻥ.
ﻭﺍﺷﻮﻗﺎﻩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻣﺠﻠﺲ ﻓﻴﻪ ﺗﻼﻭﺓ ﺑﺘﺪﺑّﺮ ،ﻭﺧﺸﻴﺔ ﺑﺘﺬﻛّﺮ ،ﻭﺻﻤﺖ ﺑﺘﻔﻜّﺮ .ﻭﺍﻫﺎً ﻟﻤﺠﻠﺲ ﻳﺬﻛﺮ ﻓﻴﻪ
ﺍﻷﺑﺮﺍﺭ ،ﻓﻌﻨﺪ ﺫﻛﺮ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﻟﺤﻴﻦ ﺗﺘﻨﺰﻝ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﺔ ،ﻻ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺫﻛﺮ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﻟﺤﻴﻦ ﻳﺬﻛﺮﻭﻥ ﺑﺎﻻﺯﺩﺭﺍء ﻭﺍﻟﻠﻌﻨﺔ .ﻛﺎﻥ
ﺳﻴﻒ ﺍﻟﺤﺠﺎﺝ ﻭﻟﺴﺎﻥ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺣﺰﻡ ﺷﻘﻴﻘﻴﻦ ﻓﻮﺍﺧﻴﺘﻬﻤﺎ.
ہﻠﻟ ﺧﻠﻮﻧﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻛﺮ ﺑﺪﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻤﻴﺲ ﻭﺃﻛﻞ ﺍﻟﺤﺒﻮﺏ ،ﻭﺟﺪﻭﺍ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻛﺮ ﺑﺪﻉ ﻛﻨﺎ ﻧﻌﺪﻫﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺳﺎﺱ
ﺍﻟﻀﻼﻝ ﻗﺪ ﺻﺎﺭﺕ ﻫﻲ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ،ﻭﺃﺳﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺣﻴﺪ ،ﻭﻣﻦ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻌﺮﻓﻬﺎ ﻓﻬﻮ ﻛﺎﻓﺮ ﺃﻭ ﺣﻤﺎﺭ،
ﻭﻣﻦ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻔﺮﻩ ﻓﻬﻮ ﺃﻛﻔﺮ ﻣﻦ ﻓﺮﻋﻮﻥ.
ﻭﺗﻌﺪﱡ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﺜﻠﻨﺎ؟ ﻭﷲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻮﺏ ﺷﻜﻮﻙ ،ﺇﻥ ﺳﻠﻢ ﻟﻚ ﺇﻳﻤﺎﻧﻚ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﻬﺎﺩﺗﻴﻦ ﻓﺄﻧﺖ ﺳﻌﻴﺪ.
ﻳﺎ ﺧﻴﺒﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺗﺒﻌﻚ ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﻣﻌﺮﺽ ﻟﻠﺰﻧﺪﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﻧﺤﻼﻝ ،ﻻﺳﻴﻤﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻗﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻁﻮﻟﻴﺎً
ﺷﻬﻮﺍﻧﻴﺎً،ﻟﻜﻨﻪ ﻳﻨﻔﻌﻚ ﻭﻳﺠﺎﻫﺪ ﻋﻨﻚ ﺑﻴﺪﻩ ﻭﻟﺴﺎﻧﻪ ،ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﻁﻦ ﻋﺪﻭ ﻟﻚ ﺑﺤﺎﻟﻪ ﻭﻗﻠﺒﻪ ،ﻓﻬﻞ
ﻣﻌﻈﻢ ﺃﺗﺒﺎﻋﻚ ﺇﻻ ﻗﻌﻴﺪ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ،ﺧﻔﻴﻒ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻞ ﺃﻭ ﻋﺎﻣﻲ ﻛﺬﺍﺏ،ﺑﻠﻴﺪ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﻦ ﺃﻭ ﻏﺮﻳﺐ ﻭﺍﺟﻢ ﻗﻮﻱ
ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺮ ﺃﻭ ﻧﺎﺷﻒ ﺻﺎﻟﺢ ،ﻋﺪﻳﻢ ﺍﻟﻔﻬﻢ ،ﻓﺈﻥ ﻟﻢ ﺗﺼﺪﻗﻨﻲ ﻓﻔﺘﺸﻬﻢ ﻭﺯﻧﻬﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﺪﻝ.
ﺇﻟﻰ ﻛﻢ ﺗﺼﺎﺩﻗﻬﺎ ﻭﺗﻌﺎﺩﻱ ﺍﻷﺧﻴﺎﺭ ؟ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻛﻢ.ﻳﺎ ﻣﺴﻠﻢ ﺃﻗﺪﻡ ﺣﻤﺎﺭ ﺷﻬﻮﺗﻚ ﻟﻤﺪﺡ ﻧﻔﺴﻚ
ﺗﺼﺎﺩﻗﻬﺎ ﻭﺗﺰﺩﺭﻱ ﺑﺎﻷﺑﺮﺍﺭ ؟ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻛﻢ ﺗﻌﻈﻤﻬﺎ ﻭﺗﺼﻐﺮ ﺍﻟﻌﺒﺎﺩ ؟ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻣﺘﻰ ﺗﺨﺎﻟﻠﻬﺎ ﻭﺗﻤﻘﺖ ﺍﻟﺰﻫﺎﺩ؟
ﺇﻟﻰ ﻣﺘﻰ ﺗﻤﺪﺡ ﻛﻼﻣﻚ ﺑﻜﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﻻ ﺗﻤﺪﺡ ﺑﻬﺎ ـ ﻭﷲ ـ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺚ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺤﻴﻦ؟ ﻳﺎ ﻟﻴﺖ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺚ
. ﺑﻞ ﻓﻲ ﻛﻞ ﻭﻗﺖ ﺗُﻐﻴﺮ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻀﻌﻴﻒ ﻭﺍﻹﻫﺪﺍﺭ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﻭﻳﻞ ﻭﺍﻹﻧﻜﺎﺭ،ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺤﻴﻦ ﺗﺴﻠﻢ ﻣﻨﻚ
ﺃﻣﺎ ﺁﻥ ﻟﻚ ﺃﻥ ﺗﺮﻋﻮﻱ ؟ ﺃﻣﺎ ﺣﺎﻥ ﻟﻚ ﺃﻥ ﺗﺘﻮﺏ ﻭﺗﻨﻴﺐ؟ ﺃﻣﺎ ﺃﻧﺖ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺸﺮ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﻌﻴﻦ ﻭﻗﺪ ﻗﺮﺏ
ﻓﻤﺎ ﺃﻅﻨﻚ ﺗﻘﺒﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ،ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻴﻞ؟ ﺑﻠﻰ ﻭﷲ ﻣﺎ ﺃﺫﻛﺮ ﺃﻧﻚ ﺗﺬﻛﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺕ ﺑﻞ ﺗﺰﺩﺭﻱ ﺑﻤﻦ ﻳﺬﻛﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺕ
ﻭﺗﻘﻄﻊ ﻟﻲ، ﺑﻞ ﻟﻚ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻛﺒﻴﺮﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻧﻘﺾ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻮﺭﻗﺔ ﺑﻤﺠﻠﺪﺍﺕ، ﻭﻻ ﺗﺼﻐﻲ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻭﻋﻈﻲ،ﻗﻮﻟﻲ
. ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺘﺔ ﺳﻜﺖ: ﻭﻻ ﺗﺰﺍﻝ ﺗﻨﺘﺼﺮ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺃﻗﻮﻝ،ﺃﺫﻧﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﻡ
ﻓﻜﻴﻒ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺣﺎﻟﻚ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺃﻋﺪﺍﺋﻚ؟، ﻭﺃﻧﺎ ﺍﻟﺸﻔﻮﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺐ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺩﱢ،ﻓﺈﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺣﺎﻟﻚ ﻋﻨﺪﻱ
، ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺃﻭﻟﻴﺎءﻙ ﻓﻴﻬﻢ ﻓﺠﺮﺓ ﻭﻛﺬﺑﺔ، ﻭﻋﻘﻼء ﻭﻓﻀﻼء،ﻭﺃﻋﺪﺍﺅﻙ ـ ﻭﷲ ـ ﻓﻴﻬﻢ ﺻﻠﺤﺎء ﻭﺃﺧﻴﺎﺭ
!ﻭﺟﻬﻠﺔ ﻭﺑﻄﻠﺔ ﻭﻋﻮﺭ ﻭﺑﻘﺮ
،( ﻭﺗﻨﺘﻔﻊ ﺑﻤﻘﺎﻟﺘﻲ ﺳﺮﺍً )ﺭﺣﻢ ﷲ ﺍﻣﺮﺃً ﺃﻫﺪﻯ ﺇﻟﻲّ ﻋﻴﻮﺑﻲ،ﻗﺪ ﺭﺿﻴﺖ ﻣﻨﻚ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺗﺴﺒﻨﻲ ﻋﻼﻧﻴﺔ
، ﻭﻭﺍﻓﻀﻴﺤﺘﻲ ﻣﻦ ﻋﻼﻡ ﺍﻟﻐﻴﻮﺏ، ﻭﺍﻟﻮﻳﻞ ﻟﻲ ﺇﻥ ﺃﻧﺎ ﻻ ﺃﺗﻮﺏ، ﻏﺰﻳﺮ ﺍﻟﺬﻧﻮﺏ،ﻓﺈﻧﻲ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﻮﺏ
ﻭﺍﻟﺤﻤﺪ ﻟ ﺭﺏ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴﻦ ﻭﺻﻠﻰ ﷲ ﻋﻠﻰ.ﻭﺩﻭﺍﺋﻲ ﻋﻔﻮ ﷲ ﻭﻣﺴﺎﻣﺤﺘﻪ ﻭﺗﻮﻓﻴﻘﻪ ﻭﻫﺪﺍﻳﺘﻪ
ﺁﺧﺮ ﺍﻟﺮﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻴﺔ ﻧﺼﻴﺤﺔ ﻣﻨﻪ ﻻﺑﻦ.ﺳﻴﺪﻧﺎ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﻴﻦ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺁﻟﺔ ﻭﺻﺤﺒﻪ ﺃﺟﻤﻌﻴﻦ
The English translation of Al-Naseeha Al-Thahabiyya
Notice how they omit the opening paragraph in order to show that the
message was directly originated by Al-Thahabi in the headings.
Letter from Hafiz Imam al-Dhahabi
to his former sheikh, Ibn Taymiyya
al-Nasihah al-Dhahabia li ibn Taymiyya
(Sincere Advice to Ibn Taymiyya, Maktab al-Misria 18863)
In the Name of Allah Most Merciful and Compassionate.
Praise be to Allah for my lowliness. O Lord, have mercy on me, diminish
my mistakes, and preserve my Iman for me. What sadness at my lack of
sadness; what sorrow over the sunna and the departure of its people;
what longing for believing brothers to share with me in weeping; what
grief over the loss of people who were light-giving lamps of Sacred
Knowledge, men of taqwa, and treasure-troves of every good; alas for not
finding a dirhem that is halaal or a brother who is loving.
Great good tidings to him whose own faults divert him from those of
others, and woe to whom the faults of others divert him from his own.
How long will you see the speck in your brother's eye and forget the log
in your own? How long will you praise yourself, your prattle, your style,
while blaming religious scholars and searching out people's shameful
points, knowing as you do that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him
peace) forbade it saying:
"Mention not your dead save with good, for they have gone onto what
they have sent ahead."
Of course, I realise that you will defend yourself by telling me the attacks
are only for those who've never smelled the scent of Islam and don't know
what Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace) brought and that is
your jihad. Not so, by Allah those who you attack know what is even
better than the amount that suffices if the servant acts on it to make him
succeed. Moreover, they are ignorant of a great deal that does not
concern them. And "the excellence of a person’s Islam includes leaving
what does not concern him." By Allah man! Give us respite from you, for
you are an eloquent polemicist who neither rests nor sleeps. Beware of
doubt-creating, problematic religious questions. Our Prophet (Allah bless
him and give him peace) was offended by too many questions, found fault
with them, and forbade excessive asking. He also said:
"The thing I fear most for my people is the eloquent hypocrite."
Too much talking, if free of mistakes, hardens the heart when it concerns
the halaal and haraam. So how should it be when it concerns the words of
the Yunusiyya, the philosophers, and expressions of kufr, which make
hearts go blind? By Allah, we've become a laughing stock in existence.
How long will you disinter the details of philosophical expressions of kufr
for us to refute with our minds? You've swallowed, man, the poison of the
philosophers and of their works more than once; and by too much using
of a poison one's constitution gets addicted. It collects, by Allah, in the
O, what longing for a group among whom the Qur'an is recited with
reflection, where awe is experienced through its meditation, where there
is silence from its contemplation. O, what longing for an assembly where
the pious are mentioned, for mercy descends where the righteous people
are remembered, not where the righteous are spoken of with contempt
and curses. The sword of al-Hajjaj and the tongue of Ibn Hazm were
brothers [ie no Muslims was safe from them], and now you have joined
the family. By Allah, give us a break from talking about "the bid`a of
Thursday", and "eating the grains", and rather make a serious effort to
remember the bid`as we used to consider the source of all misguidance,
which have now become the "genuine sunna" and the "basis of tawhid",
and whoever doesn't know them is a Kafir, or a donkey, and whoever
doesn't call him a Kafir is a bigger Kafir than Pharaoh. You consider the
very Christians like us.
By Allah, there are misgivings in hearts. You are fortunate if your faith in
the two shahadahs has remained unscathed. Oh the disappointment of
him who follows you, for he is exposed to corruption in basic beliefs and
to dissolution. Particularly if he is short of learning and religion, a selfindulgent idler who does well for you by fighting on your behalf with his
hand and tongue, while he is actually your enemy in his being and heart.
What are your followers but hidebound do-nothings of little intelligence,
common liars with dull minds, silent outlanders strong in guile, or dryly
righteous without understanding? If you don't believe it, just look at them
and honestly assess them.
The donkey of your lusts, O Muslim, has stepped forward to applaud your
self. How long will you dote on your ego and attack the finest people? How
long will you credit it, and disdain the pious? How long will you exalt it,
and despise the devotees? How long will you be its closest friend, and
detest the abstinent? How long will you praise your own words in a
manner you do not even use for the Sahihs of Bukhari and Muslim? Would
that the hadiths of the two Sahihs were safe from you, as you continually
attack them, by suggesting weakness, considering them fair game, or
with figurative explanations and denial. Hasn't the time come to give up?
Is it not it time to repent and atone? Aren't you at that tenth of a man's
life when he reaches seventy years and the final departure has drawn
near? Indeed, By Allah, I don't recall that you remember death much. You
sneer at whoever remembers death. So I don't think you'll take to my
words or hear my exhortation. You will, instead, probably show great
energy and concern to demolish this piece of paper with weighty volumes,
snipping off the ends of my sentences for me until you gain the upper
hand and can close the argument with a triumphant "...at all. And he was
If this is how you stand in my eyes, and I am someone sympathetic to
you, fond and affectionate, how do you think you stand with your
enemies? By Allah among your enemies, there are the righteous and
intelligent men and virtuous ones, just as among your friends there are
the wicked, liars, ignoramuses, layabouts, the vile, and cattle.
I can accept that you should publicly disparage me, while secretly
benefiting from what I have said. "May Allah have mercy on the man who
shows me my faults" [words attributed to `Umar (Allah be pleased with
him)]. For I have many faults and sins, and woe to me if I myself do not
repent, and how enormous my disgrace from Him who knows the Hidden.
The sole remedy for me is the forgiveness of Allah and His clemency, His
giving success and His guidance.
Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds. Allah bless our lieglord Muhammad,
the Last of the Prophets, his folk and companions one and all.
The Bemoaning Poem Al-Thahabi Authored to His Shaikh Ibn Taymiyya
It is a sad post-death poem where Al-Thahabi praises and flatters Ibn Taymiyya
after he passed away. The poem appeared in a couple of early references such as
Al-Rad Al-Waafir, by Ibn Naser Al-Dimashqi, Al-'Uqood Al-Durriyya, by Muhammad
bin Abd Al-Hadi, and finally Al-Risala Al-Zakiyya, by Mar'i bin Yusuf Al-Hanbali.
The reader can find the poem by searching the books above with the following
search string: "( "ﻳﺎ ﻣﻮﺕAl-Thahabi starts the poem with: "O! Death…")
ﻣﺮﺛﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻓﻆ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ
ﻫﺬﻩ ﻣﺮﺛﻴﺔ ﻣﺆﺭﺥ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻓﻆ ﺃﺑﻲ ﻋﺒﺪ ﷲ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻣﺎﻡ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﺔ ﺷﻴﺦ
"ﺍﻟﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﻮ ﺍﻓﺮ" ﻓﺄﺣﺒﺒﺖ
ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻧﻘﻠﻬﺎ ﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻧﺎﺻﺮ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻣﺸﻘﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻪ
ﻋﺮﺽﻫﺎ ﻟﺠﻤﺎﻝ ﺃﺑﻴﺎﺗﻬﺎ ﻭﺟﺰﺍﻟﺔ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻫﺎ ،ﻓﻘﺎﻝ :ﺃﻧﺒﺄﻧﺎ ﺷﻴﺨﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻓﻆ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﻴﺮ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺑﻜﺮ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻹﻣﺎﻡ
ﺃﺑﻲ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﻋﺒﺪ ﷲ ﺑﻦ ﺃﺣﻤﺪ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﺪﻱ ﻗﺎﻝ ﺃﻧﺸﺪﻧﺎ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻓﻆ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﻴﺮ ﺃﺑﻮ ﻋﺒﺪ ﷲ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺃﺣﻤﺪ ﺍﺑﻦ
ﺍﻝﺫﻫﺒﻲ ﻟﻨﻔﺴﻪ ﻳﺮﺛﻲ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡ ﺃﺑﺎ ﺍﻟﻌﺒﺎﺱ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﺭﺣﻤﺔ ﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ :
ﻳﺎ ﻣﻮﺕ ﺧـــﺬ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺭﺩﺕ ﺃﻭ ﻓـــﺪﻉ
ﺃﺧﺬﺕ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﻹﺳــﻼﻡ ﻭﺍﻧﻔﺼــﻤﺖ
ﻏﻴﺒـــﺖ ﲝـــــﺮﺍً ﻣﻔﺴـــﺮﺍً ﺟﺒــــــﻼ
ﻓﺈﻥ ﳛــــﺪﺙ ﻓﻤﺴــــــﻠﻢ ﺛﻘــــــﺔ
ﳏــــﻮﺕ ﺭﺳــــﻢ ﺍﻟﻌﻠــــﻮﻡ ﻭﺍﻟـــــﻮﺭﻉِ
ﻋﺮﻯ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻰ ﻭﺍﺷﺘﻔﻰ ﻣﻨﻪ ﺃﻭﻟﻮ ﺍﻟﺒﺪﻉِ
ﺣـــﱪﺍً ﺗﻘﻴــــﺎً ﳎـــﺎﻧﺐ ﺍﻟﺸﻴــــــﻊِ
ﻭﺇﻥ ﻳﻨﺎﻇﺮ ﻓﺼــــﺎﺣﺐ ﺍﻟﻠﻤــــﻊِ
ﻭﺇﻥ ﳜـــﺾ ﳓـــــﻮ ﺳﻴﺒــــﻮﻳﻪ ﻳﻔــــﻪ
ﺑﻜــــﻞ ﻣﻌﻨــــﻰ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻦ ﳐـــــﱰﻉِ
ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻘـــﻪ ﻓﻴــــﻪ ﻓﻜــــﺎﻥ ﳎﺘﻬـــﺪﺍً
ﻭﺫﺍ ﺟﻬــــﺎﺩ ﻋـــﺎﺭ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳉــــﺰﻉِ
ﻭﺻــﺎﺭ ﻋﺎﱄ ﺍﻹﺳﻨـــﺎﺩ ﺣﺎﻓﻈــﻪ
ﻛﺸﻌﺒـــﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺳﻌﻴــﺪ ﺍﻟﻀﺒﻌــــﻲ
ﻭﺟـــــــﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﳊﺎﺗــــﻤـﻲ ﻣﺸﺘﻬـــــﺮ
ﻭﺯﻫـــﺪﻩ ﺍﻟﻘــــﺎﺩﺭﻱ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻄـــﻤﻊِ
ﻣــــﻊ ﻣـــﺎﻟﻚ ﺍﻹﻣــــﺎﻡ ﻭﺃﲪـــــﺪ
ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻌﻤﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﺸﺎﻓﻌﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺨﻌــﻲ
ﻣﻀـﻰ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴـــﺔ ﻭﻣﻮﻋـــــﺪﻩ
ﻣﻊ ﺧﺼﻤــــﻪ ﻳﻮﻡ ﻧﻔﺨﺔ ﺍﻟﻔــــﺰﻉِ
ﺃﺳﻜﻨـــــﻪ ﺍ ﰲ ﺍﳉﻨـــــﺎﻥ ﻭﻻ
ﺯﺍﻝ ﻋﻠﻴـــﺎً ﰲ ﺃﲨـــﻞ ﺍﳋــــﻠﻊِ
) (1ﺃﻱ ﻣﺠﺎﻧﺐ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﻓﻀﺔ ﻓﻠﻪ ﻣﺆﻟﻒ ﻛﺒﻴﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﺩ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻢ ﻣﻄﺒﻮﻉ ﻓﻲ
ﻣﻨﻬﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ " ﻗﺪ ﺃﻓﺤﻤﻬﻢ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻭﺑﻴﻦ ﺑﺪﻋﻬﻢ ﻭﺧﺮﺍﻓﺎﺕ ﺍﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩﻫﻢ .
) (2ﻳﻘﺼﺪ ﺑﺄﻧﻪ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﺑﺎﻹﻣﺎﻡ ﻣﺴﻠﻢ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺠﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﻨﻴﺴﺎﺑﻮﺭﻱ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺃﻭ ﻟﻌﻠﻪ ﻳﻘﺼﺪ ﺑﺄﻧﻪ
ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﻮﻱ .
) (3ﺃﻱ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﺋﺪﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﺤﺠﺔ .
ﺍﻟﺘﺘﺎﺭ ﻓﻠﻢ ﻳﺮﻋﺒﻪ ﻗﻮﺗﻬﻢ
) (4ﻳﻘﺼﺪ ﺑﺄﻧﻪ ﺷﺠﺎﻉ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺮﻭﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺭﻙ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺧﺎﺿﻬﺎ ﺃﻣﺎﻡ ﺍﻷﻋﺪﺍء
) (5ﺇﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺨﻌﻲ ﻫﻮ ﺗﺎﺑﻌﻲ ﻣﻦ ﺷﻴﻮﺥ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺣﻨﻴﻔﺔ ﻭﻗﺪ ﺍﺷﺘﻬﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻘﻪ .
9ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺍﺕ ﺃﺳﻤﻪ "
Why The Sufis Target Al-Thahabi Specifically
We present here a typical biographical entry for Ibn Taymiyya by Ibn
Rajab Al-Hanbali from his book Thayl Tabaqat Al-Hanabila, V.2.
The purpose of displaying this entry is to show that most of the scholars
who introduced a biography for Ibn Taymiyya relied heavily on AlThahabi's works (mentioned in the entry below). Notice that Ibn Rajab
was also Ibn Taymiyya's student, as was Muhammad bin Abdil-Hadi who
wrote a book about Ibn Taymiyya (Al-'Uqood Al-Durriyya) and relied on
Therefore, when the Sufis and their likes try to shake Al-Thahabi's opinion
on Ibn Taymiyya, the goal is to defy the good things said about Ibn
Taymiyya, because most of the praising comes from Al-Thahabi.
If the Sufis cannot distract their audience from the goodness found in
those reports (which are relatively very huge chunks of texts found in
encyclopedias and books on Ibn Taymiyya by Al-Thahabi), the least they
can achieve is to portray Al-Thahabi as an unstable person who had
contrary views about Ibn Taymiyya.
Note that Al-Thahabi was bright, he was one of the top historians and
biographers in Islam. But as mentioned, the Sufis care less about the
scholars of Islam, what attracts their attention are so called shaikhs who
fly, and who appear in more than one place at the same time, and who
can turn flesh into gold and such superstitions.
Now, the reader is advised to look at the biographical entry; every line
that starts with bold text highlighted with purple is a reference that comes
from Al-Thahabi about Ibn Taymiyya, and is followed by huge chunks of
texts. It's that huge chunks of texts that disturbs the Sufis.
ﺃﺣﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﺤﻠﻴﻢ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﻡ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪ ﷲ ﺑﻦ ﺃﺑﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺳﻢ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺨﻀﺮ ﺑﻦ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺍﺑﻦ
ﺍﻷﺻﻮﻟﻲ، ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻓﻆ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺴﺮ، ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻬﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺪﺙ، ﺍﻹﻣﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻴﻪ، ﺛﻢ ﺍﻟﺪﻣﺸﻘﻲ،ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺮﺍﻧﻲ
ﻭﺷﻬﺮﺗﻪ ﺗﻐﻨﻲ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻹﻁﻨﺎﺏ، ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡ ﻭﻋﻠﻢ ﺍﻷﻋﻼﻡ، ﺗﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﻌﺒﺎﺱ.ﺍﻟﺰﺍﻫﺪ
. ﻭﺍﻹﺳﻬﺎﺏ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻣﺮﻩ،ﻓﻌﺐ ﺫﻛﺮﻩ
ﻭﻗﺪﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻩ.ﻭﻟﺪ ﻳﻮﻡ ﺍﻹﺛﻨﻴﻦ ﻋﺎﺷﺮ ﺭﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ﺳﻨﺔ ﺇﺣﺪﻯ ﻭﺳﺘﻴﻦ ﻭﺳﺘﻤﺎﺋﺔ ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻥ
. ﺳﻨﺔ ﺳﺒﻊ ﻭﺳﺘﻴﻦ ﻭﺳﺘﻤﺎﺋﺔ، ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﻴﻼء ﺍﻟﺘﺘﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﻼﺩ،ﻭﺑﺈﺧﻮﺗﻪ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺩﻣﺸﻖ
ﻓﺴﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺑﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﻳﻢ ،ﻭﺍﺑﻦ ﺃﺑﻲ ﺍﻟﻴﺴﺮ ،ﻭﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺠﺪ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺴﺎﻛﺮ،
ﻭﻳﺤﻴﻰ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺼﻴﺮﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻴﻪ ،ﻭﺃﺣﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺃﺑﻲ ﺍﻟﺨﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﺍﺩ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺎﺳﻢ ﺍﻷﺭﺑﻠﻲ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ
ﺷﻤﺲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ ﺃﺑﻲ ﻋﻤﺮ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻢ ﺑﻦ ﻋﻼﻥ ،ﻭﺇﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺮﺟﻲ ،ﻭﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ.
ﻭﻋﻨﻰ ﺑﺎﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ .ﻭﺳﻤﻊ "ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻨﺪ" ﻣﺮﺍﺕ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻜﺘﺐ ﺍﻟﺴﺘﺔ ،ﻭﻣُﻌﺠﻢ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﺮﺍﻧﻲ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﻴﺮ ،ﻭﻣﺎ ﻻ
ﻳﺤﺼﻰ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺐ ﻭﺍﻷﺟﺰﺍء .ﻭﻗﺮﺃ ﺑﻨﻔﺴﻪ ،ﻭﻛﺘﺐ ﺑﺨﻄﻪ ﺟﻤﻠﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻷﺟﺰﺍء ،ﻭﺃﻗﺒﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ
ﻓﺄﺧﺬ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﻭﺍﻷﺻﻮﻝ ﻋﻦ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻩ ،ﻭﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺷﻤﺲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ ﺃﺑﻲ ﻋﻤﺮ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺯﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ
ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺠﺎ .ﻭﺑﺮﻉ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﻭﻧﺎﻅﺮ .ﻭﻗﺮﺃ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺃﻳﺎﻣﺎً ﻋﻠﻰ ﺳﻠﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻱ ،ﺛﻢ
ﺃﺧﺬ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺳﻴﺒﻮﻳﻪ ،ﻓﺘﺄﻣﻠﻪ ﻓﻔﻬﻤﻪ .ﻭﺃﻗﺒﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ ﺍﻟﻜﺮﻳﻢ ،ﻓﺒﺮﺯ ﻓﻴﻪ ،ﻭﺃﺣﻜﻢ ﺃﺻﻮﻝ
ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻔﺮﺍﺋﺾ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺤﺴﺎﺏ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﺒﺮ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺑﻠﺔ ،ﻭﻏﻴﺮ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ،ﻭﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﻡ
ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ،ﻭﺑﺮﺯ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻫﻠﻪ ،ﻭﺭﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺭﺅﺳﺎﺋﻬﻢ ﻭﺃﻛﺎﺑﺮﻫﻢ ،ﻭﻣﻬﺮ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻔﻀﺎﺋﻞ،
ﻭﺗﺄﻫﻞ ﻟﻠﻔﺘﻮﻯ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺪﺭﻳﺲ ،ﻭﻟﻪ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺸﺮﻳﻦ ﺳﻨﺔ ،ﻭﺃﻓﺘﻰ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﺸﺮﻳﻦ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ،ﻭﺃﻣﺪﻩ ﷲ
ﺑﻜﺜﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﻜَﺘْﺐ ﻭﺳﺮﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﻔﻆ ،ﻭﻗﻮﺓ ﺍﻹﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻬﻢ ،ﻭﺑُﻂء ﺍﻟﻨﺴﻴﺎﻥ ،ﺣﺘﻰ ﻗﺎﻝ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ :ﺇﻧﻪ
ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻳﺤﻔﻆ ﺷﻴﺌﺎً ﻓﻴﻨﺴﺎﻩ.
ﺛﻢ ﺗﻮﻓﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻩ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺷﻬﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ،ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻘﺪﻡ ﺫﻛﺮﻩ ،ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﻟﻪ ﺣﻴﻨﺌﺬ ﺇﺣﺪﻯ ﻭﻋﺸﺮﻳﻦ ﺳﻨﺔ.
ﻓﻘﺎﻡ ﺑﻮﻅﺎﺋﻔﻪ ﺑﻌﺪﻩ .ﻓﺪﺭﺱ ﺑﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﺍﻟﺴﻜﺮﻳﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻭﻝ ﺳﻨﺔ ﺛﻼﺙ ﻭﺛﻤﺎﻧﻴﻦ ﻭﺳﺘﻤﺎﺋﺔ.
ﻭﺣﻀﺮ ﻋﻨﺪﻩ ﻗﺎﺿﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺓ ﺑﻬﺎء ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺰﻛﻲ .ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺗﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﺰﺍﺭﻱ ،ﻭﺯﻳﺮ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ
ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺟﻞ .ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺯﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺠﺎ ،ﻭﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻭﺫﻛﺮ ﺩﺭﺳﺎً ﻋﻈﻴﻤﺎً ﻓﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺒﺴﻤﻠﺔ .ﻭﻫﻮ
ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺭ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ،ﻭﻋﻈﻤﻪ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺿﺮﻭﻥ ،ﻭﺃﺛﻨﻮﺍ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺛﻨﺎءً ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺍً.
ﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ :ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺗﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﺰﺍﺭﻱ ،ﻳﺒﺎﻟﻎ ﻓﻲ ﺗﻌﻈﻴﻤﻪ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺗﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ،ﺑﺤﻴﺚ
ﺇﻧﻪ ﻋﻠﻖ ﺑﺨﻄﻪ ﺩﺭﺳﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﺴﻜﺮﻳﺔ .ﺛﻢ ﺟﻠﺲ ﻋﻘﺐ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﻟﺠﺎﻣﻊ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻨﺒﺮ ﺃﻳﺎﻡ
ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻊ ،ﻟﺘﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻈﻴﻢ ،ﻭﺷﺮﻉ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ .ﻓﻜﺎﻥ ﻳﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻦ ﺣﻔﻈﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺲ
ﻧﺤﻮ ﻛﺮﺍﺳﻴﻦ ﺃﻭ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ،ﻭﺑﻘﻲ ﻳﻔﺴﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺳﻮﺭﺓ ﻧﻮﺡ ،ﻋﺪﺓ ﺳﻨﻴﻦ ﺃﻳﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻊ.
ﻭﻓﻲ ﺳﻨﺔ ﺗﺴﻌﻴﻦ :ﺫﻛﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻜﺮﺳﻲ ﻳﻮﻡ ﺟﻤﻌﺔ ﺷﻴﺌﺎً ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺼﻔﺎﺕ ،ﻓﻘﺎﻡ ﺑﻌﺾ
ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﻴﻦ ،ﻭﺳﻌﻮﺍ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻨﻌﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺠﻠﻮﺱ ،ﻓﻠﻢ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻬﻢ ﺫﻟﻚ.
ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﻗﺎﺿﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺓ ﺷﻬﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺨﻮﻱ :ﺃﻧﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺗﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ،ﻓﻌﻮﺗﺐ ﻓﻲ
ﺫﻟﻚ .ﻓﻘﺎﻝ :ﻷﻥ ﺫﻫﻨﻪ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ ،ﻭﻣﻮﺍﺩﻩ ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺓ .ﻓﻬﻮ ﻻ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺇﻻ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ.
ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺷﺮﻯ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺪﺳﻲ :ﺃﻧﺎ ﺃﺭﺟﻮ ﺑﺮﻛﺘﻪ ﻭﺩﻋﺎءﻩ ،ﻭﻫﻮ ﺻﺎﺣﺒﻲ ،ﻭﺃﺧﻲ .ﺫﻛﺮ ﺫﻟﻚ
ﺍﻟﺒﺮﺯﺍﻟﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻪ.
ﻭﺷﺮﻉ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻊ ﻭﺇﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻒ ،ﻣﻦ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺸﺮﻳﻦ ،ﻭﻟﻢ ﻳﺰﻝ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻠﻮ ﻭﺍﺯﺩﻳﺎﺩ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ
ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺁﺧﺮ ﻋﻤﺮﻩ.
ﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻌﺠﻢ ﺷﻴﻮﺧﻪ :ﺃﺣﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﺤﻠﻴﻢ -ﻭﺳﺎﻕ ﻧﺴﺒﻪ -ﺍﻟﺤﺮﺍﻧﻲ ،ﺛﻢ
ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡ ،ﻭﻓﺮﻳﺪ ﻟﻌﺼﺮ ﻋﻠﻤﺎً
ﺍﻟﺪﻣﺸﻘﻲ ،ﺍﻟﺤﻨﺒﻠﻲ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﻌﺒﺎﺱ ،ﺗﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ،ﺷﻴﺨﻨﺎ ﻭﺷﻴﺦ ِ
ﻭﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ،ﻭﺷﺠﺎﻋﺔ ﻭﺫﻛﺎء ،ﻭﺗﻨﻮﻳﺮﺍً ﺇﻟﻬﻴﺎً ،ﻭﻛﺮﻣﺎً ﻭﻧﺼﺤﺎً ﻟﻸﻣﺔ ،ﻭﺃﻣﺮﺍً ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻌﺮﻭﻑ ﻭﻧﻬﻴﺎً ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻜﺮ.
ﺳﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ،ﻭﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺑﻨﻔﺴﻪ ﻣﻦ ﻁﻠﺒﻪ ،ﻭﻛﺘﺐ ﻭﺧﺮﺝ ،ﻭﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﺟﺎﻝ ﻭﺍﻟﻄﺒﻘﺎﺕ ،ﻭﺣﺼﻞ ﻣﺎ
ﻟﻢ ﻳﺤﺼﻠﻪ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ .ﺑﺮﻉ ﻓﻲ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ ،ﻭﻏﺎﺹ ﻓﻲ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻴﻪ ﺑﻄﺒﻊ ﺳﻴﺎﻝ ،ﻭﺧﺎﻁﺮ ﺇﻟﻰ
ﺍﻹﺷﻜﺎﻝ ﻣﻴﺎﻝ ،ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻨﺒﻂ ﻣﻨﻪ ﺃﺷﻴﺎء ﻟﻢ ﻳﺴﺒﻖ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ .ﻭﺑﺮﻉ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻭﺣﻔﻈﻪ ،ﻓﻘﻞﱠ
ﻣﻦ ﻳﺤﻔﻆ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺤﻔﻈﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ،ﻣﻌﺰﻭﺍً ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﺻﻮﻟﻪ ﻭﺻﺤﺎﺑﺘﻪ ،ﻣﻊ ﺷﺪﺓ ﺍﺳﺘﺤﻀﺎﺭﻩ ﻟﻪ ﻭﻗﺖ
ﺇﻗﺎﻣﺔ ﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ .ﻭﻓﺎﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ،ﻭﺍﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺬﺍﻫﺐ ،ﻭﻓﺘﺎﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﺎﺑﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺎﺑﻌﻴﻦ،
ﺑﺤﻴﺚ ﺇﻧﻪ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﻓﺘﻰ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻠﺘﺰﻡ ﺑﻤﺬﻫﺐ ،ﺑﻞ ﻳﻘﻮﻡ ﺑﻤﺎ ﺩﻟﻴﻠﻪ ﻋﻨﺪﻩ .ﻭﺃﺗﻘﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺃﺻﻮﻻ ً ﻭﻓﺮﻭﻋﺎً،
ﻭﺗﻌﻠﻴﻼ ً ﻭﺍﺧﺘﻼﻓﺎً .ﻭﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻠﻴﺎﺕ ،ﻭﻋﺮﻑ ﺃﻗﻮﺍﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻜﻠﻤﻴﻦ ،ﻭَﺭَﺩﱠ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻢ ،ﻭَﻧﺒﱠﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﺧﻄﺌﻬﻢ ،ﻭﺣﺬﺭ ﻣﻨﻬﻢ ﻭﻧﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺑﺄﻭﺿﺢ ﺣﺠﺞ ﻭﺃﺑﻬﺮ ﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻦ .ﻭﺃُﻭﺫﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻠّﻪ ﻣﻦ
ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺎﻟﻔﻴﻦ ،ﻭﺃُﺧﻴﻒ ﻓﻲ ﻧﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻀﺔ ،ﺣﺘﻰ ﺃﻋﻠﻰ ﷲ ﻣﻨﺎﺭﻩ ،ﻭﺟﻤﻊ ﻗﻠﻮﺏ ﺃﻫﻞ
ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻮﻯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺤﺒﺘﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻋﺎء ﻟﻪ ،ﻭَﻛَﺒَﺖَ ﺃﻋﺪﺍءﻩ ،ﻭﻫﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺟﺎﻻ ً ﻣﻦ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻞ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺤﻞ،
ﻭﺟﺒﻞ ﻗﻠﻮﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻮﻙ ﻭﺍﻷﻣﺮﺍء ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﻟﻪ ﻏﺎﻟﺒﺎً ،ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻁﺎﻋﺘﻪ ،ﺃﺣﻴﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻡ ،ﺑﻞ
ﻭﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡ ،ﺑﻌﺪ ﺃﻥ ﻛﺎﺩ ﻳﻨﺜﻠﻢ ﺑﺘﺜﺒﻴﺖ ﺃﻭﻟﻰ ﺍﻷﻣﺮ ﻟﻤﺎ ﺃﻗﺒﻞ ﺣﺰﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﺘﺮ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﻐﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺧﻴﻼﺋﻬﻢ،
ﻓﻈُﻨﺖ ہﻠﻟ ﺍﻟﻈﻨﻮﻥ ،ﻭﺯﻟﺰﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﺆﻣﻨﻮﻥ ،ﻭﺍﺷْﺮَﺃَﺏ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺎﻕ ﻭﺃﺑﺪﻯ ﺻﻔﺤﺘﻪ .ﻭﻣﺤﺎﺳﻨﻪ ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺓ ،ﻭﻫﻮ
ﺃﻛﺒﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻨﺒﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺳﻴﺮﺗﻪ ﻣﺜﻠﻲ ،ﻓﻠﻮ ﺣﻠﻔﺖ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﻛﻦ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻡ ،ﻟﺤﻠﻔﺖ :ﺇﻧﻲ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺃﻳﺖ
ﺑﻌﻴﻨﻲ ﻣﺜﻠﻪ ،ﻭﺃﻧﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺃﻯ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ.
ﻭﻗﺪ ﻗﺮﺃﺕ ﺑﺨﻂ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ ﺷﻴﺨﻨﺎ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﻠﻜﺎﻧﻲ ،ﻣﺎ ﻛﺘﺒﻪ ﺳﻨﺔ ﺑﻀﻊ
ﻭﺗﺴﻌﻴﻦ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺍﺳﻢ "ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ" ﻛﺎﻥ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺳﺌﻞ ﻋﻦ ﻓﻦ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ﻅﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﺋﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﺎﻣﻊ :ﺃﻧﻪ ﻻ
ﻳﻌﺮﻑ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺫﺍﻙ ﺍﻟﻔﻦ ،ﻭﺣﻜﻢ ﺃﻥ ﺃﺣﺪﺍً ﻻ ﻳﻌﺮﻓﻪ ﻣﺜﻠﻪ .ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎء ﻣﻦ ﺳﺎﺋﺮ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﺍﺋﻒ ﺇﺫﺍ
ﺟﺎﻟﺴﻮﻩ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻭﺍ ﻣﻨﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺬﻫﺒﻬﻢ ﺃﺷﻴﺎء ،ﻭﻻ ﻳﻌﺮﻑ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻧﺎﻅﺮ ﺃﺣﺪﺍً ﻓﺎﻧﻘﻄﻊ ﻣﻨﻪ ،ﻭﻻ ﺗﻜﻠﻢ
ﻓﻲ ﻋﻠﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ -ﺳﻮﺍء ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﻦ ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻉ ﺃﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻫﺎ -ﺇﻻ ﻓﺎﻕ ﻓﻴﻪ ﺃﻫﻠﻪ ،ﻭﺍﺟﺘﻤﻌﺖ ﻓﻴﻪ
ﺷﺮﻭﻁ ﺍﻻﺟﺘﻬﺎﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺟﻬﻬﺎ.
ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻌﺠﻤﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺮ :ﻛﺎﻥ ﺇﻣﺎﻣﺎً ﻣﺘﺒﺤﺮﺍً ﻓﻲ ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﺎﻧﺔ ،ﺻﺤﻴﺢ
ﺍﻹﺩﺭﺍﻙ ،ﺳﻴﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻔﻬﻢ ،ﻛﺜﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺳﻦ ،ﻣﻮﺻﻮﻓﺎً ﺑﻔﺮﻁ ﺍﻟﺸﺠﺎﻋﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﺮﻡ ،ﻓﺎﺭﻏﺎً
ﺍﻟﺬﻫﻦ ،ﺳﺮﻳﻊ ِ
ﻋﻦ ﺷﻬﻮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺄﻛﻞ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻠﺒﺲ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻤﺎﻉ ،ﻻ ﻟﺬﺓ ﻟﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻧﺸﺮ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ﻭﺗﺪﻭﻳﻨﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ
ﻗﻠﺖ :ﻭﻗﺪ ﻋﺮﺽ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻗﻀﺎء ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺓ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻌﻴﻦ ،ﻭﻣﺸﻴﺨﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﻮﺥ ،ﻓﻠﻢ ﻳﻘﺒﻞ ﺷﻴﺌﺎً ﻣﻦ
ﺫﻟﻚ .ﻗﺮﺃﺕ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺑﺨﻄﻪ.
ﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ :ﺫﻛﺮﻩ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺢ ﺍﻟﻴﻌﻤﺮﻱ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻓﻆ -ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺳﻴﺪ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ -ﻓﻲ ﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﺳﺆﺍﻻﺕ
ﺃﺑﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺒﺎﺱ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻣﻴﺎﻁﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻓﻆ ،ﻓﻘﺎﻝ :ﺃﻟْﻔَﻴﺘُﻪ ﻣﻤﻦ ﺃﺩﺭﻙ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺣﻈﺎً .ﻭﻛﺎﺩ ﻳﺴﺘﻮﻋﺐ
ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻦ ﻭﺍﻵﺛﺎﺭ ﺣﻔﻈﺎً ،ﺇﻥ ﺗﻜﻠﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﻓﻬﻮ ﺣﺎﻣﻞ ﺭﺍﻳﺘﻪ .ﻭﺇﻥ ﺃﻓﺘﻰ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﻓﻬﻮ ﻣﺪﺭﻙ
ﻏﺎﻳﺘﻪ ،ﺃﻭ ﺫﺍﻛﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻓﻬﻮ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﻋﻠﻤﻪ ،ﺫﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺘﻪ ،ﺃﻭ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺤﻞ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻠﻞ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺮَ ﺃﻭﺳﻊ
ﻣﻦ ﻧﺤﻠﺘﻪ ،ﻭﻻ ﺃﺭﻓﻊ ﻣﻦ ﺩﺭﺍﻳﺘﻪ .ﺑﺮﺯ ﻓﻲ ﻛﻞ ﻓﻦ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺑﻨﺎء ﺟﻨﺴﻪ ،ﻭﻟﻢ ﺗﺮ ﻋﻴﻦ ﻣﻦ ﺭﺁﻩ ﻣﺜﻠﻪ،
ﻭﻻ ﺭﺃﺕ ﻋﻴﻨﻪ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ.
ﻭﻗﺪ ﻛﺘﺐ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻪ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﻴﺮ ﻟﻠﺸﻴﺦ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﻄﻮﻟﺔ ،ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ :ﻭﻟﻪ ﺧﺒﺮﺓ
ﺑﺎﻟﺮﺟﺎﻝ ،ﻭﺟﺮﺣﻬﻢ ﻭﺗﻌﺪﻳﻠﻬﻢ ،ﻭﻁﺒﻘﺎﺗﻬﻢ ،ﻭﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺑﻔﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ،ﻭﺑﺎﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺯﻝ ﻭﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ
ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻘﻴﻢ ،ﻣﻊ ﺣﻔﻈﻪ ﻟﻤﺘﻮﻟْﻪ ،ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺍﻧﻔﺮﺩ ﻳﻪ ،ﻓﻼ ﻳﺒﻠﻎ ﺃﺣﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﺮ ﺭﺗﺒﺘﻪ ﻳﻘﺎﺭﺑﻪ ،ﻭﻫﻮ
ﻋﺠﻴﺐ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺳﺘﺤﻀﺎﺭﻩ ،ﻭﺍﺳﺘﺨﺮﺍﺝ ﺍﻟﺤﺠﺞ ﻣﻨﻪ ،ﻭﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﻬﻰ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺰﻭﻩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺐ ﺍﻟﺴﺘﺔ،
ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺴﻨﺪ ،ﺑﺤﻴﺚ ﻳﺼﺪﻕ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻘﺎﻝ :ﻛﻞ ﺣﺪﻳﺚ ﻻ ﻳﻌﺮﻓﻪ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻠﻴﺲ ﺑﺤﺪﻳﺚ.
ﺑﺎﻹﺳﻜﻨﺪﺭﻳﺔ :ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺲ ﻣﻨﻪ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺳﺒﺘﺔ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺠﻴﺰ ﻷﻭﻻﺩﻩ ،ﻓﻜﺘﺐ
ﻭﻗــﺎﻝ :ﻭﻟﻤﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﻼ ً ِ
ﻟﻬﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻧﺤﻮﺍً ﻣﻦ ﺳﺘﻤﺎﺋﺔ ﺳﻄﺮ ،ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺳﺒﻌﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺚ ﺑﺄﺳﺎﻧﻴﺪﻫﺎ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻼﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺻﺤﺘﻬﺎ
ﻭﻣﻌﺎﻧﻴﻬﺎ ،ﻭﺑﺤﺚ ﻭﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺪﺙ ﺧﻀﻊ ﻟﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺻﻨﺎﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ .ﻭﺫﻛﺮ ﺃﺳﺎﻧﻴﺪﻩ
ﻓﻲ ﻋﺪﺓ ﻛﺘﺐ .ﻭﻧﺒﱠﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﻮﺍﻟﻲ .ﻋﻤﻚ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻛﻠﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺣﻔﻈﻪ ،ﻣﻦ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻋﻨﺪﻩ ﺛَﺒَﺖ ﺃﻭ
ﻭﻟﻘﺪ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻋﺠﻴﺒﺎً ﻓﻲ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻋﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ .ﻓﺄﻣﺎ ﺣﻔﻈﻪ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﺎﺡ ﻭﻏﺎﻟﺐ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻦ
ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺴﻨﺪ :ﻓﻤﺎ ﺭﺃﻳﺖ ﻣﻦ ﻳُﺪﺍﻧﻴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺃﺻﻼ ً.
ﻗـــﺎﻝ :ﻭﺃﻣﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﻓﻤﺴﻠﻢ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ .ﻭﻟﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﺤﻀﺎﺭ ﺍﻵﻳﺎﺕ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ -ﻭﻗﺖ ﺇﻗﺎﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ
ﺑﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺄﻟﺔ -ﻗﻮﺓ ﻋﺠﻴﺒﺔ .ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﺭﺁﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺮﺉ ﺗﺤﻴﺰ ﻓﻴﻪ .ﻭﻟﻔﺮﻁ ﺇﻣﺎﻣﺘﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺴﻴﺮ،
ﻭﻋﻈﻢ ﺍﻁﻼﻋﻪ .ﻳﺒﻴﻦ ﺧﻄﺄ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻗﻮﺍﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺴﺮﻳﻦ .ﻭﻳُﻮﻫﻲ ﺃﻗﻮﺍﻻ ً ﻋﺪﻳﺪﺓ .ﻭﻳﻨﺼﺮ ﻗﻮﻻ ً ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺍً،
ﻣﻮﺍﻓﻘﺎً ﻟﻤﺎ ﺩﻝ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ .ﻭﻳﻜﺘﺐ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻴﻮﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﻠﻴﻠﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺴﻴﺮ ،ﺃﻭ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ،ﺃﻭ
ﻣﻦ ﺍﻷﺻﻠﻴﻦ ،ﺃﻭ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﻼﺳﻔﺔ ﻭﺍﻷﻭﺍﺋﻞَ :ﻧﺤﻮﺍً ﻣﻦ ﺃﺭﺑﻌﺔ ﻛﺮﺍﺭﻳﺲ ﺃﻭ ﺃﺯﻳﺪ.
ﻗﻠﺖ :ﻭﻗﺪ ﻛﺘﺐ "ﺍﻟﺤﻤﻮﻳﺔ" ﻓﻲ ﻗﻌﺪﺓ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺓ .ﻭﻫﻲ ﺃﺯﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ .ﻭﻛﺘﺐ ﻓﻲ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻷﺣﻴﺎﻥ
ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻴﻮﻡ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺒﻴﺾ ﻣﻨﻪ ﻣﺠﻠﺪ.
ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺭﺣﻤﻪ ﺍﻟﻠّﻪ ﻓﺮﻳﺪ ﺩﻫﺮﻩ ﻓﻲ ﻓﻬﻢ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ .ﻭﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺣﻘﺎﺋﻖ ﺍﻹﻳﻤﺎﻥ .ﻭﻟﻪ ﻳﺪ ﻁﻮﻟﻰ ﻓﻲ
ﺍﻟﻜﻼﻡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﻭﺍﻷﺣﻮﺍﻝ .ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻤﻴﻴﺰ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻭﺳﻘﻴﻤﻪ .ﻭﻣﻌﻮﺟﻪ ﻭﻗﻮﻳﻤﻪ.
ﻭﻗﺪ ﻛﺘﺐ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﻠﻜﺎﻧﻲ ﺑﺨﻄﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ "ﺇﺑﻄﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ" ﻟﻠﺸﻴﺦ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﻭﺍﺳﻢ
ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ .ﻭﺗﺮﺟﻢ ﻟﻪ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻋﻈﻴﻤﺔ .ﻭﺃﺛﻨﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺛﻨﺎء ﻋﻈﻴﻤﺎً.
ﻭﻛﺘﺐ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﺗﺤﺖ ﺫﻟﻚ:
ﻣﺎﺫﺍ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺻﻔﻮﻥ ﻟـﻪ
ﻫﻮ ﺣﺠﺔ ﻟـﻠـﻪ ﻗـﺎﻫـﺮﺓ
ﻫﻮ ﺁﻳﺔ ﻟﻠﺨﻠﻖ ﻅـﺎﻫـﺮﺓ
ﻭﺻﻔﺎﺗﻪ ﺟﻠﱠﺖْ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺼﺮ
ﻫﻮ ﺑﻴﻨﻨﺎ ﺃﻋﺠﻮﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﻫـﺮ
ﺃﻧﻮﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﺃﺭﺑﺖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﺠﺮ
ﻭﻟﻠﺸﻴﺦ ﺃﺛﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺃﺑﻲ ﺣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻷﻧﺪﻟﺴﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﺤﻮﻱ -ﻟﻤﺎ ﺩﺧﻞ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻣﺼﺮ ﻭﺍﺟﺘﻤﻊ ﺑﻪ -ﻭﻳﻘﺎﻝ:
ﺇﻥ ﺃﺑﺎ ﺣﻴﺎﻥ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻘﻞ ﺃﺑﻴﺎﺗﺎً ﺧﻴﺮﺍً ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﻭﻻ ﺃﻓﺤﻞ:
ﻟﻤﺎ ﺭﺃﻳﻨﺎ ﺗﻘـﻲ ﺍﻟـﺪﻳﻦ ﻻﺡ ﻟـﻨـﺎ
ﺩﺍﻉٍ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﱠﻪ ﻓﺮﺩﺍً .ﻣـﺎﻟـﻪ ﻭﺯﺭ
ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺤﻴﺎﻩ ﻣﻦ ﺳﻴﻤﺎ ﺍﻷﻭﻟﻰ ﺻﺤﺒﻮﺍ
ﺧﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﺒﺮﻳﺔ ﻧﻮﺭٌ ﺩﻭﻧﻪ ﺍﻟـﻘـﻤـﺮ
ﺣَﺒْﺮ ﺗﺴﺮﺑﻞ ﻣﻨﻪ ﺩﻫـﺮﻩ ﺣِـﺒَـﺮﺍً
ﺑﺤﺮ ﺗﻘﺎﺫﻑُ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻣﻮﺍﺟـﻪ ﺍﻟـﺪﺭﺭ
ﻗﺎﻡ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻧﺼﺮ ﺷﺮﻋﺘـﻨـﺎ
ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺳﻴﺪ ﺗَﻴْﻢٍ ﺇﺫْ ﻋَﺼَﺖْ ﻣُـﻀـﺮ
ﻓﺄﻅﻬﺮ ﺍﻟـﺪﻳﻦ ﺇﺫْ ﺁﺛـﺎﺭﻩ ﺩﺭﺳـﺖ
ﻭﺃﺧﻤﺪ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻙ ﺇﺫ ﻁﺎﺭﺕ ﻟﻪ ﺷﺮﺭ
ﻳﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺗﺤﺪﺙ ﻋﻦ ﻋﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﺃﺻِﺦْ
ﺍﻹﻣﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻗﺪ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻳﻨﺘـﻈـﺮ
ﻭﺣﻜﻰ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ :ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺗﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﺪ ﻗﺎﻝ ﻟﻪ -ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻪ
ﺑﻪ ﻭﺳﻤﺎﻋﻪ ﻟﻜﻼﻣﻪ :-ﻣﺎ ﻛﻨﺖ ﺃﻅﻦ ﺃﻥ ﷲ ﺑﻘﻲ ﻳﺨﻠﻖ ﻣﺜﻠﻚ.
ﻭﻣﻤﺎ ﻭﺟﺪ ﻓﻲ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻛﺘﺒﻪ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ ﻗﺎﺿﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺓ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﺤﺴﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﻜﻲ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻓﻆ ﻋﺒﺪ
ﺍﻟﻠ ّﻪ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻣﺮ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺗﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺬﻛﻮﺭ :ﺃﻣﺎ ﻗﻮﻝ ﺳﻴﺪﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻓﺎﻟﻤﻤﻠﻮﻙ
ﻳﺘﺤﻘﻖ ﻛﺒﺮ ﻗﺪﺭﻩ .ﻭﺯﺧﺎﺭﺓ ﺑﺤﺮﻩ .ﻭﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻘﻠﻴﺔ .ﻭﻓﺮﻁ ﺫﻛﺎﺋﻪ
ﻭﺍﺟﺘﻬﺎﺩﻩ .ﻭﺑﻠﻮﻏﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻠﻎ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺘﺠﺎﻭﺯ ﺍﻟﻮﺻﻒ .ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻤﻠﻮﻙ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺩﺍﺋﻤﺎً .ﻭﻗﺪﺭﻩ
ﻓﻲ ﻧﻔﺴﻲ ﺃﻛﺒﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻭﺃﺟﻞّ .ﻣﻊ ﻣﺎ ﺟﻤﻌﻪ ﺍﻟﻠّﻪ ﻟﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺰﻫﺎﺩﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻮﺭﻉ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻳﺎﻧﺔ .ﻭﻧﺼﺮﺓ
ﺍﻟﺤﻖ .ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﻡ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻻ ﻟﻐﺮﺽ ﺳﻮﺍﻩ .ﻭﺟﺮﻳﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺳﻨﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻒ .ﻭﺃﺧﺬﻩ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺄﺧﺬ
ﺍﻷﻭﻓﻰ .ﻭﻏﺮﺍﺑﺔ ﻣﺜﻠﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﺎﻥ .ﺑﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺯﻣﺎﻥ.
ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻓﻆ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﺤﺠﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﻤﺰﻱ :ﻳﺒﺎﻟﻎ ﻓﻲ ﺗﻌﻈﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻭﺍﻟﺜﻨﺎء ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ،ﺣﺘﻰ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ :ﻟﻢ
ﻳُﺮ ﻣﺜﻠﻪ ﻣﻨﺬ ﺃﺭﺑﻌﻤﺎﺋﺔ ﺳﻨﺔ.
ﻭﺑﻠﻐﻨﻲ ﻣﻦ ﻁﺮﻳﻖ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ ﻋﻦ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﻠﻜﺎﻧﻲ :ﺃﻧﻪ ﺳﺌﻞ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ؟ ﻓﻘﺎﻝ :ﻟﻢ ﻳُﺮَ ﻣﻦ
ﺧﻤﺴﻤﺎﺋﺔ ﺳﻨﺔ ،ﺃﻭ ﺃﺭﺑﻌﻤﺎﺋﺔ ﺳﻨﺔ -ﺍﻟﺸﻚ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﻗﻞ .ﻭﻏﺎﻟﺐ ﻅﻨﻪ :ﺃﻧﻪ ﻗﺎﻝ :ﻣﻦ ﺧﻤﺴﻤﺎﺋﺔ
ﻭﻛﺬﻟﻚ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺃﺧﻮﻩ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺷﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﻳﺒﺎﻟﻎ ﻓﻲ ﺗﻌﻈﻴﻤﻪ ﺟﺪﺍً ،ﻭﻛﺬﻟﻚ ﺍﻟﻤِﺸﺎﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺭﻓﻮﻥ،
ﻛﺎﻟﻘﺪﻭﺓ ﺃﺑﻲ ﻋﺒﺪ ﷲ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﻗﻮﺍﻡ .ﻭﻳﺤﻜﻰ ﻋﻨﻪ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ :ﻣﺎ ﺃﺳﻠﻤﺖ ﻣﻌﺎﺭﻓﻨﺎ ﺇﻻ
ﻋﻠﻰ ﻳﺪ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ.
ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻋﻤﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺳﻄﻲ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻳﻌﻈﻤﻪ ﺟﺪﺍً ،ﻭﺗﺘﻠﻤﺬ ﻟﻪ ،ﻣﻊ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺃﺳﻦ ﻣﻨﻪ .ﻭﻛﺎﻥ
ﻳﻘﻮﻝ :ﻗﺪ ﺷﺎﺭﻑ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺍﻷﺋﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﺎﺭ ،ﻭﻳﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻗﻴﺎﻣﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻷﻣﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﺼﺪﻳﻘﻴﻴﻦ.
ﻭﻛﺘﺐ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺧﻮﺍﺹ ﺃﺻﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻳﻮﺻﻴﻬﻢ ﺑﺘﻌﻈﻴﻤﻪ ﻭﺍﺣﺘﺮﺍﻣﻪ ،ﻭﻳﻌﺮﻓﻬﻢ ﺣﻘﻮﻗﻪ،
ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡ ،ﻭﻟﻢ ﻳﺮَ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻣﺜﻞ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻋﻠﻤﺎً ﻭﻋﻤﻼ ً ﻭﺣﺎﻻ ً ﻭﺧﻠﻘﺎً
ﻭﻳﺬﻛﺮ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ :ﺃﻧﻪ ﻁﺎﻑ ﺃﻋﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﻼﺩ ِ
ﻭﺍﺗﺒﺎﻋﺎً ،ﻭﻛﺮﻣﺎً ﻭﺣﻠﻤﺎً ﻓﻲ ﺣﻖ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ،ﻭﻗﻴﺎﻣﺎً ﻓﻲ ﺣﻖ ﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ،ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎﻙ ﺣﺮﻣﺎﺗﻪ.
ﻭﺃﻗﺴﻢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺑﺎﻟﻠّﻪ ﺛﻼﺙ ﻣﺮﺍﺕ .ﺛﻢ ﻗﺎﻝ :ﺃﺻﺪﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﻋﻘﺪﺍً ،ﻭﺃﺻﺤﻬﻢ ﻋﻠﻤﺎً ﻭﻋﺰﻣﺎً،
ﻭﺃﻧﻔﺬﻫﻢ ﻭﺃﻋﻼﻫﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻧﺘﺼﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺤﻖ ﻭﻗﻴﺎﻣﻪ ،ﻭﺃﺳﺨﺎﻫﻢ ﻛﻔﺎً ،ﻭﺃﻛﻤﻠﻬﻢ ﺍﺗﺒﺎﻋﺎً ﻟﻨﺒﻴﻪ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ
ﺻﻠﻰ ﷲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ .ﻣﺎ ﺭﺃﻳﻨﺎ ﻗﻲ ﻋﺼﺮﻧﺎ ﻫﺬﺍ ﻣﻦ ﺗﺴﺘﺠﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﻮﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻤﺪﻳﺔ ﻭﺳﻨﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ
ﺃﻗﻮﺍﻟﻪ ﻭﺃﻓﻌﺎﻟﻪ ﺇﻻ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺮﺟﻞ ،ﺑﺤﻴﺚ ﻳﺸﻬﺪ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﺐ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ :ﺃﻥ ﻫﺬﺍ ﻫﻮ ﺍﻻﺗﺒﺎﻉ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺔ.
ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻫﻮ ﻭﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻮﺍﺹ ﺃﺻﺤﺎﺑﻪ ﺭﺑﻤﺎ ﺃﻧﻜﺮﻭﺍ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻛﻼﻣﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻷﺋﻤﺔ
ﺍﻷﻛﺎﺑﺮ ﺍﻷﻋﻴﺎﻥ ،ﺃﻭ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻠﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﻧﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﻭﻧﺤﻮ ﺫﻟﻚ.
ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺭﺣﻤﻪ ﺍﻟﻠّﻪ ﻻ ﻳﻘﺼﺪ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ ﺇﻻ ﺍﻟﺨﻴﺮ ،ﻭﺍﻻﻧﺘﺼﺎﺭ ﻟﻠﺤﻖ ﺇﻥ ﺷﺎء ﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ.
ﻭﻁﻮﺍﺋﻒ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺋﻤﺔ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻭﺣﻔﺎﻅﻬﻢ ﻭﻓﻘﻬﺎﺋﻬﻢ :ﻛﺎﻧﻮﺍ ﻳﺤﺒﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻭﻳﻌﻈﻤﻮﻧﻪ ،ﻭﻟﻢ
ﻳﻜﻮﻧﻮﺍ ﻳﺤﺒﻮﻥ ﻟﻪ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﻏﻞ ﻣﻊ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﻡ ﻭﻻ ﺍﻟﻔﻼﺳﻔﺔ ،ﻛﻤﺎ ﻫﻮ ﻁﺮﻳﻖ ﺃﺋﻤﺔ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ
ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻘﺪﻣﻴﻦ ،ﻛﺎﻟﺸﺎﻓﻌﻲ ﻭﺃﺣﻤﺪ ﻭﺇﺳﺤﺎﻕ ﻭﺃﺑﻲ ﻋﺒﻴﺪ ﻭﻧﺤﻮﻫﻢ ،ﻭﻛﺬﻟﻚ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ ﻫﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎء ﻣﻦ
ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎء ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺤﺪﺛﻴﻦ ﻭﺍﻟﺼﺎﻟﺤﻴﻦ ﻛﺮﻫﻮﺍ ﻟﻪ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺮﺩ ﺑﺒﻌﺾ ﺷﺬﻭﺫ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺃﻧﻜﺮﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻒ
ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻦ ﺷﺬ ﺑﻬﺎ ،ﺣﺘﻰ ﺇﻥ ﺑﻌﺾ ﻗﻀﺎﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺪﻝ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺻﺤﺎﺑﻨﺎ ﻣﻨﻌﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻹﻓﺘﺎء ﺑﺒﻌﺾ ﺫﻟﻚ.
ﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ :ﻭﻏﺎﻟﺐ ﺣﻄﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﻀﻼء ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﺰﻫﺪﺓ ﻓﺒﺤﻖ ،ﻭﻓﻲ ﺑﻌﻀﻪ ﻫﻮ ﻣﺠﺘﻬﺪ،
ﻭﻣﺬﻫﺒﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺬﺭ ﻟﻠﺨﻠﻖ ،ﻭﻻ ﻳﻜﻔﺮ ﺃﺣﺪﺍً ﺇﻻ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻗﻴﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺠﺔ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ.
ﻗـــﺎﻝ :ﻭﻟﻘﺪ ﻧﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻀﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻄﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻔﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺍﺣﺘﺞ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺑﺒﺮﺍﻫﻴﻦ ﻭﻣﻘﺪﻣﺎﺕ ،ﻭﺃﻣﻮﺭ
ﻟﻢ ﻳﺴﺒﻖ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ ،ﻭﺃﻁﻠﻖ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﺣﺠﻢ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻷﻭﻟﻮﻥ ﻭﺍﻵﺧﺮﻭﻥ ﻭﻫﺎﺑﻮﺍ ،ﻭﺟﺴﺮ ﻫﻮ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ،ﺣﺘﻰ
ﻗﺎﻡ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻣﻦ ﻋﻠﻤﺎء ﻣﺼﺮ ﻭﺍﻟﺸﺎﻡ ﻗﻴﺎﻣﺎً ﻻ ﻣﺰﻳﺪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ،ﻭﺑﺪﻋﻮﻩ ﻭﻧﺎﻅﺮﻭﻩ ﻭﻛﺎﺑﺮﻭﻩ ،ﻭﻫﻮ
ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻻ ﻳﺪﺍﻫﻦ ﻭﻻ ﻳﺤﺎﺑﻲ ،ﺑﻞ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺤﻖ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﱠ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺃﺩﱠﺍﻩ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﺍﺟﺘﻬﺎﺩﻩ ،ﻭﺣﺪﺓ ﺫﻫﻨﻪ ،ﻭﺳﻌﺔ
ﺩﺍﺋﺮﺗﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻔﻦ ﻭﺍﻷﻗﻮﺍﻝ ،ﻣﻊ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺷﺘﻬﺮ ﻋﻨﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻮﺭﻉ ،ﻭﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮ ،ﻭﺳﺮﻋﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺭﺍﻙ،
ﻭﺍﻟﺨﻮﻑ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻠّﻪ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻈﻴﻢ ﻟﺤﺮﻣﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻠّﻪ.
ﻓﺠﺮﻯ ﺑﻴﻨﻪ ﻭﺑﻴﻨﻬﻢ ﺣﻤﻼﺕ ﺣﺮﺑﻴﺔ ،ﻭﻭﻗﻌﺎﺕ ﺷﺎﻣﻴﺔ ﻭﻣﺼﺮﻳﺔ ،ﻭﻛﻢ ﻣﻦ ﻧﻮﺑﺔ ﻗﺪ ﺭﻣﻮﻩ ﻋﻦ ﻗﻮﺱ
ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺓ ،ﻓﻴﻨﺠﻴﻪ ﷲ ،ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﺩﺍﺋﻢ ﺍﻻﺑﺘﻬﺎﻝ ،ﻛﺜﻴﺮ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻐﺎﺛﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﻌﺎﻧﺔ ﺑﻪ ،ﻗﻮﻱ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﻛﻞ ،ﺛﺎﺑﺖ
ﺍﻟﺠﺄﺵ ،ﻟﻪ ﺃﻭﺭﺍﺩ ﻭﺃﺫﻛﺎﺭ ﻳُﺪْﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻜﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﻭﺟﻤﻌﻴﺔ .ﻭﻟﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻑ ﺍﻵﺧﺮ ﻣﺤﺒﻮﻥ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎء
ﻭﺍﻟﺼﻠﺤﺎء ،ﻭﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺪ ﻭﺍﻷﻣﺮﺍء ،ﻭﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﺒﺮﺍء ،ﻭﺳﺎﺋﺮ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﺤﺒﻪ؛ ﻷﻧﻪ ﻣﻨﺘﺼﺐ ﻟﻨﻔﻌﻬﻢ
ﻟﻴﻼ ً ﻭﻧﻬﺎﺭﺍً ،ﺑﻠﺴﺎﻧﻪ ﻭﻗﻠﻤﻪ.
ﻭﺃﻣﺎ ﺷﺠﺎﻋﺘﻪ :ﻓﺒﻬﺎ ﺗﻀﺮﺏ ﺍﻷﻣﺜﺎﻝ ،ﻭﺑﺒﻌﻀﻬﺎ ﻳﺘﺸﺒﻪ ﺃﻛﺎﺑﺮ ﺍﻷﺑﻄﺎﻝ .ﻭﻟﻘﺪ ﺃﻗﺎﻣﻪ ﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻓﻲ
ﻧﻮﺑﺔ ﻗﺎﺯﺍﻥ .ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻘﻲ ﺃﻋﺒﺎء ﺍﻷﻣﺮ ﺑﻨﻔﺴﻪ .ﻭﻗﺎﻡ ﻭﻗﻌﺪ ﻭﻁﻠﻊ ،ﻭﺩﺧﻞ ﻭﺧﺮﺝ ،ﻭﺍﺟﺘﻤﻊ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻠﻚ-
ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﻗﺎﺯﺍﻥ -ﻣﺮﺗﻴﻦ ،ﻭﺑﻘَﻄْﻠﻮﺷﺎﻩ ،ﻭﺑُﻮﻻﻱ .ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﻗﻴﺠﻖ ﻳﺘﻌﺠﺐ ﻣﻦ ﺇﻗﺪﺍﻣﻪ ﻭﺟﺮﺍءﺗﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﻭﻟﻪ ﺣﺪﺓ ﻗﻮﻳﺔ ﺗﻌﺘﺮﻳﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺚ ،ﺣﺘﻰ ﻛﺄﻧﻪ ﻟﻴﺚ ﺣﺮِﺏ .ﻭﻫﻮ ﺃﻛﺒﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻨﺒﻪ ﻣﺜﻠﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﻧﻌﻮﺗﻪ .ﻭﻓﻴﻪ ﻗﻠﺔ ﻣﺪﺍﺭﺍﺓ ،ﻭﻋﺪﻡ ﺗﺆﺩﺓ ﻏﺎﻟﺒﺎً ،ﻭﺍﻟﻠّﻪ ﻳﻐﻔﺮ ﻟﻪ .ﻭﻟﻪ ﺇﻗﺪﺍﻡ ﻭﺷﻬﺎﻣﺔ ،ﻭﻗﻮﺓ ﻧﻔﺲ
ﺗﻮﻗﻌﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻣﻮﺭ ﺻﻌﺒﺔ ،ﻓﻴﺪﻓﻊ ﷲ ﻋﻨﻪ.
ﻭﻟﻪ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻗﻠﻴﻞ ﻭﺳﻂ .ﻭﻟﻢ ﻳﺘﺰﻭﺝ ،ﻭﻻ ﺗﺴﺮﻱ ،ﻭﻻ ﻟﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺇﻻ ﺷﻲء ﻗﻠﻴﻞ ﻭﺃﺧﻮﻩ ﻳﻘﻮﻡ
ﺑﻤﺼﺎﻟﺤﻪ ،ﻭﻻ ﻳﻄﻠﺐ ﻣﻨﻬﻢ ﻏﺪﺍء ﻭﻻ ﻋﺸﺎء ﻓﻲ ﻏﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﺖ .ﻭﻣﺎ ﺭﺃﻳﺖ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻢ ﺃﻛﺮﻡ ﻣﻨﻪ،
ﻭﻻ ﺃﻓﺮﻍ ﻣﻨﻪ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻨﺎﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﺭﻫﻢ ،ﻻ ﻳﺬﻛﺮﻩ ،ﻭﻻ ﺃﻅﻨﻪ ﻳﺪﻭﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻫﻨﻪ .ﻭﻓﻴﻪ ﻣﺮﻭءﺓ ،ﻭﻗﻴﺎﻡ ﻣﻊ
ﺃﺻﺤﺎﺑﻪ ،ﻭﺳﻌﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺼﺎﻟﺤﻬﻢ .ﻭﻫﻮ ﻓﻘﻴﺮ ﻻ ﻣﺎﻝ ﻟﻪ .ﻭﻣﻠﺒﻮﺳﻪ ﻛﺂﺣﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎء :ﻓَﺮﱠﺟِﻴﱠﻪ،
ﻭﺩِﻟْﻖ ،ﻭﻋﻤﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺛﻼﺛﻴﻦ ﺩﺭﻫﻤﺎً ﻭﻣﺪﺍﺱ ﺿﻌﻴﻒ ﺍﻟﺜﻤﻦ .ﻭﺷﻌﺮﻩ ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺹ.
ﻭﻫﻮ ﺭَﺑْﻊ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻣﺔ ،ﺑﻌﻴﺪ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻜﺒﻴﻦ ،ﻛﺄﻥ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ ﻟﺴﺎﻧﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﻁﻘﺎﻥ ،ﻭﻳﺼﻠﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﺻﻼﺓ ﻻ
ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺃﻁﻮﻝ ﻣﻦ ﺭﻛﻮﻋﻬﺎ ﻭﺳﺠﻮﺩ .ﻭﺭﺑﻤﺎ ﻗﺎﻡ ﻟﻤﻦ ﻳﺠﻲء ﻣﻦ ﺳﻔﺮ ﺃﻭ ﻏﺎﺏ ﻋﻨﻪ ،ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﺟﺎء ﻓﺮﺑﻤﺎ
ﻳﻘﻮﻣﻮﻥ ﻟﻪ .ﺍﻟﻜﻞ ﻋﻨﺪﻩ ﺳﻮﺍء ،ﻛﺄﻧﻪ ﻓﺎﺭﻍ ﻣﻦ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺮﺳﻮﻡ ،ﻭﻟﻢ ﻳﻨﺤﻦِ ﻷﺣﺪ ﻗﻂ ،ﻭﺇﻧﻤﺎ ﻳﺴﻠﻢ
ﻭﻳﺼﺎﻓﺢ ﻭﻳﺒﺘﺴﻢ .ﻭﻗﺪ ﻳﻌﻈﻢ ﺟﻠﻴﺴﻪ ﻣﺮﺓ ،ﻭﻳﻬﻴﻨﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﻭﺭﺓ ﻣﺮﺍﺕ.
ﻗﻠﺖ :ﻭﻗﺪ ﺳﺎﻓﺮ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻣﺮﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﺮﻳﺪ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺮﻳﺔ ﻳﺴﺘﻨﻔﺮ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻣﺠﻲء
ﺍﻟﺘﺘﺮ ﺳﻨﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻴﻦ ،ﻭﺗﻼ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻢ ﺁﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺩ ،ﻭﻗﺎﻝ :ﺇﻥ ﺗﺨﻠﻴﺘﻢ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻡ ﻭﻧﺼﺮﺓ ﺃﻫﻠﻪ،
ﻭﺍﻟﺬﺏﱢ ﻋﻨﻬﻢ ،ﻓﺈﻥ ﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻳﻘﻴﻢ ﻟﻬﻢِ ﻣﻦ ﻳﻨﺼﺮﻫﻢ ﻏﻴﺮﻛﻢ ،ﻭﻳﺴﺘﺒﺪﻝ ﺑﻜﻢ ﺳﻮﺍﻛﻢ .ﻭﺗﻼ
ﻗﻮﻟﻪ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ " :ﻭَﺇﻥْ ﺗﺘﻮﻟﻮﺍ ﻳَﺴْﺘَﺒْﺪِﻝ ﻗﻮﻣﺎً ﻏﻴﺮَﻛْﻢ ﺛُﻢَ ﻻ َ ﻳﻜُﻮﻧُﻮﺍ ﺃﻣْﺜَﺎﻟَﻜﻢ" " ﻣﺤﻤﺪ "38 :ﻭﻗﻮﻟﻪ
ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ" :ﺇﻻ ﺗَﻨْﻔﺮُﻭﺍ ﻳُﻌَﺬﱢﺑْﻜﻢ ﻋَﺬَﺍﺑﺎً ﺃﻟِﻴﻤﺎً ﻭَﻳَﺴْﺘَﺒْﺪِﻝْ ﻗَﻮْﻣﺎً ﻏَﻴﺮَﻛﻢ ﻭَﻻ َ ﺗَﻀُﺮﻭﻩُ" "ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺑﺔ."120 :
ﻭﺑﻠﻎ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺗﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﺪ -ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ ﺣﻴﻨﺌﺬ -ﻓﺎﺳﺘﺤﺴﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ،
ﻭﺃﻋﺠﺒﻪ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻨﺒﺎﻁ ،ﻭﺗﻌﺠﺐ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻟﻠﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﺑﻤﺜﻞ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﻡ.
ﻭﺃﻣﺎ ﻣِﺤَﻦُ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ :ﻓﻜﺜﻴﺮﺓ ،ﻭﺷﺮﺣﻬﺎ ﻳﻄﻮﻝ ﺟﺪﺍً.
ﻭﻗﺪ ﺍﻋﺘﻘﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺓ ﺑﻌﺾ ﻧﻮﺍﺏ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺎﻡ ﻗﻠﻴﻼً ،ﺑﺴﺒﺐ ﻗﻴﺎﻣﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﺼﺮﺍﻧﻲ ﺳﺐ
ﺍﻟﺮﺳﻮﻝ ﺻﻠﻰ ﷲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ،ﻭﺍﻋﺘﻘﻞ ﻣﻌﻪ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺯﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﺭﻭﻗﻲ ،ﺛﻢ ﺃﻁﻠﻘﻬﻤﺎ
ﻭﻟﻤﺎ ﺻﻨﻒ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺄﻟﺔ "ﺍﻟﺤﻤﻮﻳﺔ" ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺼﻔﺎﺕ :ﺷﻨﻊ ﺑﻬﺎ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ ،ﻭﻧﻮﺩﻱ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻷﺳﻮﺍﻕ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﻗﺼﺒﺔ ،ﻭﺃﻥ ﻻ ﻳﺴﺘﻔﺘﻰ ﻣﻦ ﺟﻬﺔ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﻘَﻀﺎﺓ ﺍﻟﺤﻨﻔﻴﺔ .ﺛﻢ ﺃﻧﺘﺼﺮ ﻟﻠﺸﻴﺦ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﻮﻻﺓ ،ﻭﻟﻢ
ﻳﻜﻦ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻠﺪ ﺣﻴﻨﺌﺬ ﻧﺎﺋﺐ ،ﻭﺿُﺮﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﺩﻱ ﻭﺑﻌﺾ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻌﻪ ،ﻭﺳﻜﻦ ﺍﻷﻣﺮ.
ﺛﻢ ﺍﻣﺘﺤﻦ ﺳﻨﺔ ﺧﻤﺲ ﻭﺳﺒﻌﻤﺎﺋﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﺴﺆﺍﻝ ﻋﻦ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪﻩ ﺑﺄﻣﺮ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ .ﻓﺠﻤﻊ ﻧﺎﺋﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺓ
ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎء ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺼﺮ ،ﻭﺃﺣﻀﺮ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ،ﻭﺳﺄﻟﻪ ﻋﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ؟ ﻓﺒﻌﺚ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺣﻀﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﻩ "ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻴﺪﺓ
ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺳﻄﻴﺔ" ﻓﻘﺮءﻭﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺛﻼﺙ ﻣﺠﺎﻟﺲ ،ﻭﺣﺎﻗَﻘُﻮﻩ ،ﻭﺑﺤﺜﻮﺍ ﻣﻌﻪ ،ﻭﻭﻗﻊ ﺍﻻﺗﻔﺎﻕ .ﺑﻌﺪ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﺃﻥ ﻫﺬﻩ ﻋﻘﻴﺪﺓ ﺳُﻨﻴﺔ ﺳﻠﻔﻴﺔ ،ﻓﻤﻨﻬﻢ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺎﻝ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻁﻮﻋﺎً ،ﻭﻣﻨﻬﻢ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺎﻟﻪ ﻛﺮﻫﺎً.
ﻭﻭﺭﺩ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﻓﻴﻪ :ﺇﻧﻤﺎ ﻗﺼﺪﻧﺎ ﺑﺮﺍءﺓ ﺳﺎﺣﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ،ﻭﺗﺒﻴﻦ ﻟﻨﺎ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﺛﻢ ﺇﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺮﻳﻴﻦ ﺩﺑﺮﻭﺍ ﺍﻟﺤﻴﻠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻣﺮ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ،ﻭﺭﺃﻭﺍ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﻣﻌﻪ ،ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻳﻌﻘﺪ ﻟﻪ
ﻣﺠﻠﺲ ،ﻭﻳﺪَﻋﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ،ﻭﺗﻘﺎﻡ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﺸﻬﺎﺩﺍﺕ .ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺋﻤﻮﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻣﻨﻬﻢ :ﺑﻴﺒﺮﺱ
ﺍﻟﺠﺎﺷﻨﻜﻴﺮ ،ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺗﺴﻠﻄﻦ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﻭﻧﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺒﺠﻲ ﻭﺍﺑﻦ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻑ ﻗﺎﺿﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ،ﻓﻄُﻠﺐ
ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﺮﻳﺪ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺮﺓ ،ﻭﻋُﻘﺪ ﻟﻪ ﺛﺎﻧﻲ ﻳﻮﻡ ﻭﺻﻮﻟﻪ -ﻭﻫﻮ ﺛﺎﻧﻲ ﻋﺸﺮﻳﻦ ﺭﻣﻀﺎﻥ ﺳﻨﺔ
ﺧﻤﺲ ﻭﺳﺒﻌﻤﺎﺋﺔ -ﻣﺠﻠﺲ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ ،ﻭﺍﺩﻋِﻲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻑ ﻗﺎﺿﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ،ﺃﻧﻪ
ﻳﻘﻮﻝ :ﺇﻥ ﷲ ﺗﻜﻠﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ ﺑﺤﺮﻑ ﻭﺻﻮﺕ ،ﻭﺃﻧﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺵ ﺑﺬﺍﺗﻪ ،ﻭﺃﻧﻪ ﻳﺸﺎﺭ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ِ
ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﺪﻋﻲ :ﺃﻁﻠﺐ ﺗﻌﺰﻳﺮﻩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﺍﻟﻌﺰﻳﺰ ﺍﻟﺒﻠﻴﻎ -ﻳﺸﻴﺮ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﺘﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺬﻫﺐ ﻣﺎﻟﻚ-
ﻓﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ :ﻣﺎ ﺗﻘﻮﻝ ﻳﺎ ﻓﻘﻴﻪ؟ ﻓﺤﻤﺪ ﷲ ﻭﺃﺛﻨﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ،ﻓﻘﻴﻞ ﻟﻪ :ﺃﺳﺮﻉ ﻣﺎ ﺟﺌﺖ ﻟﺘﺨﻄﺐ،
ﻓﻘﺎﻝ :ﺃﺃُﻣﻨﻊ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺜﻨﺎء ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠّﻪ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ؟ ﻓﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ :ﺃﺟﺐ ،ﻓﻘﺪ ﺣﻤﺪﺕ ﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ.
ﻓﺴﻜﺖ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ،ﻓﻘﺎﻝ :ﺃﺟﺐ .ﻓﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻟﻪ :ﻣﻦ ﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻛﻢ ﻓﻲ؟ ﻓﺄﺷﺎﺭﻭﺍ :ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ ﻫﻮ
ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻛﻢ ،ﻓﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻻﺑﻦ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻑ :ﺃﻧﺖ ﺧﺼﻤﻲ ،ﻛﻴﻒ ﺗﺤﻜﻢ ﻓﻲ؟ ﻭﻏﻀﺐ ،ﻭﻣﺮﺍﺩﻩ :ﺇﻧﻲ
ﻭﺇﻳﺎﻙ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﺯﻋﺎﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺋﻞ ،ﻓﻜﻴﻒ ﻳﺤﻜﻢ ﺃﺣﺪ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﻤﻴﻦ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻵﺧﺮ ﻋﻴﻬﺎ .ﻓﺄﻗﻴﻢ
ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻭﻣﻌﻪ ﺃﺧﻮﺍﻩ ،ﺛﻢ ﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ،ﻭﻗﺎﻝ :ﺭﺿﻴﺖ ﺃﻥ ﺗﺤﻜﻢ ﻓﻲَ ،ﻓﻠﻢ ﻳﻤﻜﱠﻦ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺠﻠﻮﺱ،
ﻭﻳﻘﺎﻝ :ﺇﻥ ﺃﺧﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺷﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﺑﺘﻬﻞ ،ﻭﺩﻋﺎ ﺍﻟﻠّﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺧﺮﻭﺟﻬﻢ ،ﻓﻤﻨﻌﻪ
ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ،ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﻟﻪ :ﺑﻞ ﻗﻞ :ﺍﻟﻠﻬﻢ ﻫﺐ ﻟﻬﻢ ﻧﻮﺭﺍً ﻳﻬﺘﺪﻭﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﻖ.
ﺛﻢ ﺣﺒﺴﻮﺍ ﻓﻲ ﺑُﺮْﺝ ﺃﻳﺎﻣﺎً ،ﻭﻧﻘﻠﻮﺍ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺠﺐ ﻟﻴﻠﺔ ﻋﻴﺪ ﺍﻟﻔﻄﺮ ،ﺛﻢ ﺑﻌﺚ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺳﻠﻄﺎﻧﻲ ﺇﻟﻰ
ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﺤﻂ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ،ﻭﺃﻟﺰﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ -ﺧﺼﻮﺻﺎً ﺃﻫﻞ ﻣﺬﻫﺒﻪ -ﺑﺎﻟﺮﺟﻮﻉ ﻋﻦ ﻋﻘﻴﺪﺗﻪ،
ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻬﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﺰﻝ ﻭﺍﻟﺤﺒﺲ ،ﻭﻧﻮﺩﻱ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻣﻊ ﻭﺍﻷﺳﻮﺍﻕ .ﺛﻢ ﻗﺮﺉ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﺑﺴﺪﱠﺓ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻣﻊ
ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻌﺔ ،ﻭﺣﺼﻞ ﺃﺫﻯ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ ﻟﻠﺤﻨﺎﺑﻠﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺎﻫﺮﺓ ،ﻭﺣﺒﺲ ﺑﻌﻀﻬﻢ ،ﻭﺃﺧﺬ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﺑﻌﻀﻬﻢ
ﺑﺎﻟﺮﺟﻮﻉ .ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﻗﺎﺿﻴﻬﻢ ﺍﻟﺤﺮﺍﻧﻲ ﻗﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ.
ﺛﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺳﻠﺦ ﺭﻣﻀﺎﻥ ﺳﻨﺔ ﺳﺖ :ﺃﺣﺼْﺮ ﺳﻼﺭ -ﻧﺎﺋﺐ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﺑﻤﺼﺮ -ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎء ،ﻭﺗﻜﻠﻢ
ﻓﻲ ﺇﺧﺮﺍﺝ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ،ﻓﺎﺗﻔﻘﻮﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻁ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺃﻣﻮﺭ ،ﻭﻳﻠﺰﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﺮﺟﻮﻉ ﻋﻦ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻴﺪﺓ،
ﻓﺄﺭﺳﻠﻮﺍ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﻣﻦ ﻳﺤﻀﺮﻩ ،ﻭﻟﻴﺘﻜﻠﻤﻮﺍ ﻣﻌﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﻓﻠﻢ ﻳﺠﺐ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﻀﻮﺭ ،ﻭﺗﻜﺮﺭ ﺍﻟﺮﺳﻮﻝ
ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺳﺖ ﻣﺮﺍﺕ ،ﻭﺻﻤﻢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﻀﻮﺭ ،ﻓﻄﺎﻝ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻢ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺲ ،ﻓﺎﻧﺼﺮﻓﻮﺍ ﻣﻦ
ﺛﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺁﺧﺮ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﻭﺻﻞ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻧﺎﺋﺐ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﻨﺔ ﺑﺪﻣﺸﻖ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ،ﻓﺄﺧﺒﺮ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ
ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ ﻣﻤﻦ ﺣﻀﺮ ﻣﺠﻠﺴﻪ ،ﻭﺃﺛﻨﻲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ :ﻭﻗﺎﻝ :ﻣﺎ ﺭﺃﻳﺖ ﻣﺜﻠﻪ ،ﻭﻻ ﺃﺷﺠﻊ ﻣﻨﻪ .ﻭﺫﻛﺮ ﻫﻮ
ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻦ :ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺟﻪ ﺇﻟﻰ ﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ،ﻭﺃﻧﻪ ﻻ ﻳﻘﺒﻞ ﺷﻴﺌﺎً ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻜﺴﻮﺓ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﻭﻻ
ﻣﻦ ﺍﻷﺩﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻧﻲ ،ﻭﻻ ﺗﺪﻧﺲ ﺑﺸﻲء ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ.
ﺛﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺭﺑﻴﻊ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ﻣﻦ ﺳﻨﺔ ﺳﺒﻊ ﻭﺳﺒﻌﻤﺎﺋﺔ ﺩﺧﻞ ﻣﻬﻨﺎ ﺑﻦ ﻋﻴﺴﻰ ﺃﻣﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺏ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻣﺼﺮ،
ﻭﺣﻀﺮ ﺑﻨﻔﺴﻪ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻦ ،ﻭﺃﺧﺮﺝ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻣﻨﻪ ،ﺑﻌﺪ ﺃﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﺄﺫﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﻭﻋﻘﺪ ﻟﻠﺸﻴﺦ
ﻣﺠﺎﻟﺲ ﺣﻀﺮﻫﺎ ﺃﻛﺎﺑﺮ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎء ،ﻭﺍﻧﻔﺼﻠﺖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺧﻴﺮ.
ﻭﺫﻛﺮ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺮﺯﺍﻟﻲ ﻭﻏﻴﺮﻫﻤﺎ :ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻛﺘﺐ ﻟﻬﻢ ﺑﺨﻄﻪ ﻣﺠﻤﻼ ً ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﻭﺃﻟﻔﺎﻅﺎً ﻓﻴﻬﺎ
ﺑﻌﺾ ﻣﺎ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ،ﻟﻤﺎ ﺧﺎﻑ ﻭﻫﺪﺩ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺘﻞ ،ﺛﻢ ﺃﻁﻠﻖ ﻭﺍﻣﺘﻨﻊ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻲء ﺇﻟﻰ ﺩﻣﺸﻖ .ﻭﺃﻗﺎﻡ
ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺎﻫﺮﺓ ﻳﻘﺮﻯء ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ،ﻭﻳﺘﻜﻠﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﻮﺍﻣﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎﻟﺲ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ،ﻭﻳﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺧﻠﻖ.
ﺛﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺷﻮﺍﻝ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺬﻛﻮﺭﺓ ،ﺍﺟﺘﻤﻊ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﻓﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺷﻜﻮﺍ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺇﻟﻰ
ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻛﻢ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻓﻌﻲ ،ﻭﻋﻘﺪ ﻟﻪ ﻣﺠﻠﺲ ﻟﻜﻼﻣﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺮﺑﻲ ﻭﻏﻴﺮﻩ ،ﻭﺍﺩﻋﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﻄﺎء
ﺑﺄﺷﻴﺎء ،ﻭﻟﻢ ﻳﺜﺒﺖ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺷﻴﺌﺎً ،ﻟﻜﻨﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺮﻑ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻗﺎﻝ :ﻻ ﻳﺴﺘﻐﺎﺙ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺒﻲ ﺻﻠﻰ ﷲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ
ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ،ﺍﺳﺘﻐﺎﺛﺔ ﺑﻤﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﺒﺎﺩﺓ ،ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻳﺘﻮﺳﻞ ﺑﻪ ،ﻓﺒﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺿﺮﻳﻦ ﻗﺎﻝ :ﻟﻴﺲ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬﺍ
ﻭﺭﺃﻯ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻛﻢ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ :ﺃﻥ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺇﺳﺎءﺓ ﺃﺩﺏ ،ﻭﻋﻨﻔﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﻓﺤﻀﺮﺕ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ
ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ :ﺃﻥ ﻳﻌﻤﻞ ﻣﻌﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺗﻘﺘﻀﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻳﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﻓﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ :ﻗﺪ ﻗﻠﺖ ﻟﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻘﺎﻝ
ﺍﻹﻗﺎﻣﺔ ﺑﺪﻣﺸﻖ ،ﺃﻭ ﺑﺎﻹﺳﻜﻨﺪﺭﻳﺔ ،ﺑﺸﺮﻭﻁ ،ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺤﺒﺲ،
ﺛﻢ ﺇﻥ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻟﺔ ﺧﻴﺮﻭﻩ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺃﺷﻴﺎء ،ﻭﻫﻲ ِ
ﻓﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺤﺒﺲ .ﻓﺪﺧﻞ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺃﺻﺤﺎﺑﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻔﺮ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺩﻣﺸﻖ ،ﻣﻠﺰﻣﺎً ﻣﺎ ﺷﺮﻁ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻓﺄﺟﺎﺑﻬﻢ،
ﻓﺄﺭﻛﺒﻮﻩ ﺧﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺒﺮﻳﺪ ،ﺛﻢ ﺭﺩﻭﻩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻐﺪ ،ﻭﺣﻀﺮ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ ﺑﺤﻀﻮﺭ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎء ،ﻓﻘﺎﻝ
ﻟﻪ ﺑﻌﻀﻬﻢ :ﻣﺎ ﺗﺮﺿﻰ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻟﺔ ﺇﻻ ﺑﺎﻟﺤﺒﺲ .ﻓﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ :ﻭﻓﻴﻪ ﻣﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﻟﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻨﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﻧﺴﻲ
ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻜﻲ ﻭﺃﺫﻥ ﻟﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺤﻜﻢ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﺤﺒﺲ ،ﻓﺎﻣﺘﻨﻊ ،ﻭﻗﺎﻝ :ﻣﺎ ﺛﺒﺖ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺷﻲء ،ﻓﺄﺫﻥ ﻟﻨﻮﺭ
ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺰﻭﺍﻭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻜﻲ ،ﻓﺘﺤﻴﺮ ،ﻓﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ :ﺃﻧﺎ ﺃﻣﻀﻲ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﺒﺲ ﻭﺃﺗﺒﻊ ﻣﺎ ﺗﻘﺘﻀﻴﻪ
ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ ،ﻓﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺰﻭﺍﻭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﺬﻛﻮﺭ :ﻓﻴﻜﻮﻥ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﻳﺼﻠﺢ ﻟﻤﺜﻠﻪ ،ﻓﻘﻴﻞ ﻟﻪ :ﻣﺎ ﺗﺮﺿﻰ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻟﺔ
ﺇﻻ ﺑﻤﺴﻤﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﺒﺲ ،ﻓﺄﺭﺳﻞ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺣﺒﺲ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ ﻭﺃﺟﻠﺲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺃﺟﻠﺲ ﻓﻴﻪ
ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ ﺗﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺑﻨﺖ ﺍﻷﻋﺰ ﻟﻤﺎ ﺣﺒﺲ ،ﻭﺃﺫﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻋﻨﺪﻩ ﻣﻦ ﻳﺨﺪﻣﻪ .ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺟﻤﻴﻊ
ﺫﻟﻚ ﺑﺈﺷﺎﺭﺓ ﻧﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺒﺠﻲ.
ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻤﺮ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺒﺲ ﻳﺴﺘﻔﺘﻰ ﻭﻳﻘﺼﺪﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ،ﻭﻳﺰﻭﺭﻭﻧﻪ ،ﻭﺗﺄﺗﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺎﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻜﻠﺔ
ﻣﻦ ﺍﻷﻣﺮﺍء ﻭﺃﻋﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ.
ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺃﺻﺤﺎﺑﻪ ﻳﺪﺧﻠﻮﻥ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺃﻭﻻ ً ﺳﺮﺍً ،ﺛﻢ ﺷﺮﻋﻮﺍ ﻳﺘﻈﺎﻫﺮﻭﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﺪﺧﻮﻝ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ،ﻓﺄﺧﺮﺟﻮﻩ ﻓﻲ
ﺍﻹﺳﻜﻨﺪﺭﻳﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﺮﻳﺪ ،ﻭﺣﺒﺲ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺑﺮﺝ
ﺳﻠﻄﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﺸﻨﻜﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻘﺐ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻈﻔﺮ ،ﺇﻟﻰ ِ
ﺣﺴﻦ ﻣﻀﻲء ﻣﺘﺴﻊ ،ﻳﺪﺧﻞ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺷﺎء ،ﻭﻳﻤﻨﻊ ﻫﻮ ﻣﻦ ﺷﺎء ،ﻭﻳﺨﺮﺝ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﻤﺎﻡ ﺇﺫﺍ
ﺷﺎء ،ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﻗﺪ ﺃﺧﺮﺝ ﻭﺣﺪﻩ ،ﻭﺃﺭﺟﻒ ﺍﻷﻋﺪﺍء ﺑﻘﺘﻠﻪ ﻭﺗﻔﺮﻳﻘﻪ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺮﺓ ،ﻓﻀﺎﻗﺖ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ ﺻﺪﻭﺭ
ﺍﻹﺳﻜﻨﺪﺭﻳﺔ ﻣﺪﺓ ﺳﻠﻄﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻈﻔﺮ.
ﻣﺤﺒﻴﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺎﻡ ﻭﻏﻴﺮﻩ ،ﻭﻛﺜﺮ ﺍﻟﺪﻋﺎء ﻟﻪ .ﻭﺑﻘﻲ ﻓﻲ ِ
ﻓﻠﻤﺎ ﻋﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﻨﺔ ﻭﺗﻤﻜﻦ ،ﻭﺃﻫﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻤﻈﻔﺮ ،ﻭﺣﻤﻞ ﺷﻴﺨﻪ ﻧﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺒﺠﻲ،
ﻭﺍﺷﺘﺪﺕ ﻣﻮﺟﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺓ ﻟﻤﺪﺍﺧﻠﺘﻬﻢ ﺍﻟﻤﻈﻔﺮ ،ﻭﻋﺰﻝ ﺑﻌﻀﻬﻢ :ﺑﺎﺩﺭ ﺑﺈﺣﻀﺎﺭ
ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺮﺓ ﻣﻜﺮﻣﺎً ﻓﻲ ﺷﻮﺍﻝ ﺳﻨﺔ ﺗﺴﻊ ﻭﺳﺒﻌﻤﺎﺋﺔ ،ﻭﺃﻛﺮﻣﻪ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﺇﻛﺮﺍﻣﺎَ ﺯﺍﺋﺪﺍً،
ﻭﻗﺎﻡ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ،ﻭﺗﻠﻘﺎﻩ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﻠﺲ ﺣﻔﻞ ،ﻓﻴﻪ ﻗﻀﺎﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺮﻳﻴﻦ ﻭﺍﻟﺸﺎﻣﻴﻴﻦ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎء ﻭﺃﻋﻴﺎﻥ
ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻟﺔ .ﻭﺯﺍﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻛﺮﺍﻣﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻢ ،ﻭﺑﻘﻲ ﻳُﺴﺎﺭﻩ ﻭﻳﺴﺘﺸﻴﺮﻩ ﺳﻮﻳﻌﺔ ،ﻭﺃﺛﻨﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺑﺤﻀﻮﺭﻫﻢ
ﺛﻨﺎء ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺍً ،ﻭﺃﺻﻠﺢ ﺑﻴﻨﻪ ﻭﺑﻴﻨﻬﻢ .ﻭﻳﻘﺎﻝ :ﺇﻧﻪ ﺷﺎﻭﺭﻩ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻣﺮﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺣﻖ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺓ ،ﻓﺼﺮﻓﻪ ﻋﻦ
ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﻭﺃﺛﻨﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻢ ،ﻭﺃﻥ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻑ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ :ﻣﺎ ﺭﺃﻳﻨﺎ ﺃﻓﺘﻰ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ ،ﺳﻌﻴﻨﺎ ﻓﻲ
ﺩﻣﻪ .ﻓﻠﻤﺎ ﻗﺪﺭ ﻋﻠﻴﻨﺎ ﻋﻔﺎ ﻋﻨﺎ.
ﻭﺍﺟﺘﻤﻊ ﺑﺎﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﻣﺮﺓ ﺛﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺃﺷﻬﺮ ،ﻭﺳﻜﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺎﻫﺮﺓ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﻳﺘﺮﺩﺩﻭﻥ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ،
ﻭﺍﻷﻣﺮﺍء ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻨﺪ ،ﻭﻁﺎﺋﻔﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎء ،ﻭﻣﻨﻬﻢ ﻣﻦ ﻳﻌﺘﺬﺭ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﻭﻳﺘﻨﺼﻞ ﻣﻤﺎ ﻭﻗﻊ.
ﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺒﻲ :ﻭﻓﻲ ﺷﻌﺒﺎﻥ ﺳﻨﺔ ﺇﺣﺪﻯ ﻋﺸﺮﺓ ،ﻭﺻﻞ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﺄ :ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﺒﻜﺮﻱ -ﺃﺣﺪ
ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻐﻀﻴﻦ ﻟﻠﺸﻴﺦ -ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺮﺩ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺑﻤﺼﺮ ،ﻭﻭﺛﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ،ﻭﻧﺘﺶ ﺑﺄﻁﻮﺍﻗﻪ ،ﻭﻗﺎﻝ :ﺍﺣﻀﺮ ﻣﻌﻲ
ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻉ ،ﻓﻠﻲ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ ﺩﻋﻮﻯ ،ﻓﻠﻤﺎ ﺗﻜﺎﺛﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﺍﻧﻤﻠﺺ ،ﻓﻄﻠﺐ ﻣﻦ ﺟﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻟﺔ ،ﻓﻬﺮﺏ
ﻭﺫﻛﺮ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ :ﺃﻧﻪ ﺛﺎﺭ ﺑﺴﺒﺐ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻓﺘﻨﺔ ،ﻭﺃﺭﺍﺩ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ ﺍﻻﻧﺘﺼﺎﺭ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺒﻜﺮﻱ ﻓﻠﻢ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻬﻢ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ
ﻭﺍﺗﻔﻖ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻣﺪﺓ :ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻜﺮﻱ ﻫﻢّ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﺑﻘﺘﻠﻪ ،ﺛﻢ ﺭﺳﻢ ﺑﻘﻄﻊ ﻟﺴﺎﻧﻪ ،ﻟﻜﺜﺮﺓ ﻓﻀﻮﻟﻪ
ﻭﺟﺮﺍءﺗﻪ ،ﺛﻢ ﺷﻔﻊ ﻓﻴﻪ ،ﻓﻨﻔﻲ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺼﻌﻴﺪ ،ﻭﻣﻨﻊ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﻮﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻜﻼﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ .ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ
ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺪﺓ ﻳﻘﺮﺉ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ،ﻭﻳﺠﻠﺲ ﻟﻠﻨﺎﺱ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﺎﻟﺲ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ.
ﻗﺪﻡ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻡ ﻫﻮ ﻭﺇﺧﻮﺗﻪ ﺳﻨﺔ ﺍﺛﻨﺘﻲ ﻋﺸﺮﺓ ﺑﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺩ ،ﻟﻤﺎ ﻗﺪﻡ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﻟﻜﺸﻒ ﺍﻟﺘﺘﺮ
ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻡ .ﻓﺨﺮﺝ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﻴﺶ ،ﻭﻓﺎﺭﻗﻬﻢ ﻣﻦ ﻋﺴﻘﻼﻥ ،ﻭﺯﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺖ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺪﺱ.
ﺛﻢ ﺩﺧﻞ ﺩﻣﺸﻖ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻏﻴﺒﺘﻪ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻮﻕ ﺳﺒﻊ ﺳﻨﻴﻦ ،ﻭﻣﻌﻪ ﺃﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﻭﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺻﺤﺎﺑﻪ ،ﻭﺧﺮﺝ
ﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ ﻟﺘﻠﻘﻴﻪ ،ﻭﺳُﺮﱠ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﺑﻤﻘﺪﻣﻪ ،ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻤﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺃﻭﻻً ،ﻣﻦ ﺇﻗﺮﺍء ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ،
ﻭﺗﺪﺭﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﻤﺪﺭﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻜﺮﻳﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺤﻨﺒﻠﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺇﻓﺘﺎء ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﻭﻧﻔﻌﻬﻢ.
ﺛﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺳﻨﺔ ﺛﻤﺎﻥ ﻋﺸﺮﺓ :ﻭﺭﺩ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﺑﻤﻨﻌﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﻮﻯ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﻠﻒ
ﺑﺎﻟﻄﻼﻕ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻜﻔﻴﺮ ،ﻭﻋﻘﺪ ﻟﻪ ﻣﺠﻠﺲ ﺑﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﺎﺩﺓ ،ﻭﻣﻨﻊ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﻭﻧﻮﺩﻱ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻠﺪ ﺛﻢ ﻓﻲ
ﺳﻨﺔ ﻋﺸﺮﺓ ﻋﻘﺪ ﻟﻪ ﻣﺠﻠﺲ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﻛﺎﻟﻤﺠﻠﺲ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ،ﻭﻗﺮﺉ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﺑﻤﻨﻌﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ،
ﻭﻋﻮﺗﺐ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻓﺘﻴﺎﻩ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻊ ،ﻭﺍﻧﻔﺼﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﻜﻴﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻊ.
ﺛﻢ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻣﺪﺓ ﻋﻘﺪ ﻟﻪ ﻣﺠﻠﺲ ﺛﺎﻟﺚ ﺑﺴﺒﺐ ﺫﻟﻚ ،ﻭﻋﻮﺗﺐ ﻭﺣﺒﺲ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ .ﺛﻢ ﺣﺒﺲ ﻷﺟﻞ ﺫﻟﻚ
ﻣﺮﺓ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ .ﻭﻣﻨﻊ ﺑﺴﺒﺐ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﻴﺎ ﻣﻄﻠﻘﺔ ،ﻓﺄﻗﺎﻡ ﻣﺪﺓ ﻳﻔﺘﻲ ﺑﻠﺴﺎﻧﻪ ،ﻭﻳﻘﻮﻝ :ﻻ ﻳﺴﻌﻨﻲ ﻛﺘﻢ
ﻭﻓﻲ ﺁﺧﺮ ﺍﻷﻣﺮ :ﺩﺑﺮﻭﺍ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﺤﻴﻠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻊ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﻔﺮ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻗﺒﻮﺭ ﺍﻷﻧﺒﻴﺎء ﻭﺍﻟﺼﺎﻟﺤﻴﻦ،
ﻭﺃﻟﺰﻣﻮﻩ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻘﺺ ﺑﺎﻷﻧﺒﻴﺎء ،ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﻛﻔﺮ ،ﻭﺃﻓﺘﻰ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ ﻁﺎﺋﻔﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻷﻫﻮﺍء ،ﻭﻫﻢ
ﺍﻹﺧﻨﺎﻧﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻜﻲ ﻭﺃﻓﺘﻰ ﻗﻀﺎﺓ ﻣﺼﺮ ﺍﻷﺭﺑﻌﺔ ﺑﺤﺒﺴﻪ،
ﺛﻤﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﻋﺸﺮ ﻧﻔﺴﺎً ،ﺭﺃﺳﻬﻢ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ ِ
ﻓﺤﺒﺲ ﺑﻘﻠﻌﺔ ﺩﻣﺸﻖ ﺳﻨﺘﻴﻦ ﻭﺃﺷﻬﺮﺍً .ﻭﺑﻬﺎ ﻣﺎﺕ ﺭﺣﻤﻪ ﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ.
ﻭﻗﺪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺭﺣﻤﻪ ﺍﻟﻠّﻪ :ﺃﻥ ﻣﺎ ﺣﻜﻢ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﻁﻞ ﺑﺈﺟﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﻩ ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺓ ﺟﺪﺍً،
ﻭﺃﻓﺘﻰ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ ﺑﺄﻧﻪ ﻳﺨﻄﺊ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺧﻄﺄ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻬﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻐﻔﻮﺭ ﻟﻬﻢ ،ﻭﻭﺍﻓﻘﻪ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻋﻠﻤﺎء
ﺑﻐﺪﺍﺩ ،ﻭﻏﻴﺮﻫﻢ .ﻭﻛﺬﻟﻚ ﺍﺑﻨﺎ ﺃﺑﻲ ﺍﻟﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ ﺑﺪﻣﺸﻖ ﺃﻓﺘﻴﺎ :ﺃﻧﻪ ﻻ ﻭﺟﻪ ﻟﻼﻋﺘﺮﺍﺽ
ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻗﺎﻟﻪ ﺃﺻﻼً ،ﻭﺃﻧﻪ ﻧﻘﻞ ﺧﻼﻑ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎء ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺄﻟﺔ ،ﻭﺭﺟﺢ ﺃﺣﺪ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻟﻴﻦ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ.
ﻭﺑﻘﻲ ﻣﺪﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ ﻳﻜﺘﺐ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ﻭﻳﺼﻨﻔﻪ ،ﻭﻳﺮﺳﻞ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﺻﺤﺎﺑﻪ ﺍﻟﺮﺳﺎﺋﻞ ،ﻭﻳﺬﻛﺮ ﻣﺎ ﻓﺘﺢ ﷲ
ﺑﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻈﻴﻤﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻷﺣﻮﺍﻝ ﺍﻟﺠﺴﻴﻤﺔ.
ﻭﻗﺎﻝ :ﻗﺪ ﻓﺘﺢ ﷲ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺤﺼﻦ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺓ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ ،ﻭﻣﻦ ﺃﺻﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ
ﺑﺄﺷﻴﺎء ،ﻛﺎﻥ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎء ﻳﺘﻤﻨﻮﻧﻬﺎ ،ﻭﻧﺪﻣﺖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﻀﻴﻴﻊ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺃﻭﻗﺎﺗﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ
ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ ،ﺛﻢ ﺇﻧﻪ ﻣﻨﻊ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺑﺔ ،ﻭﻟﻢ ﻳﺘﺮﻙ ﻋﻨﺪﻩ ﺩﻭﺍﺓ ﻭﻻ ﻗﻠﻢ ﻭﻻ ﻭﺭﻕ ،ﻓﺄﻗﺒﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻼﻭﺓ
ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻬﺠﺪ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﺟﺎﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﺬﻛﺮ.
ﻗﺎﻝ ﺷﻴﺨﻨﺎ ﺃﺑﻮ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻠّﻪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻢ :ﺳﻤﻌﺖ ﺷﻴﺨﻨﺎ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺗﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻗﺪﺱ ﷲ
ﺭﻭﺣﻪ ،ﻭﻧﻮﺭ ﺿﺮﻳﺤﻪ ،ﻳﻘﻮﻝ :ﺇﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﻧﻴﺎ ﺟﻨﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺪﺧﻠﻬﺎ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺪﺧﻞ ﺟﻨﺔ ﺍﻵﺧﺮﺓ .ﻗﺎﻝ :ﻭﻗﺎﻝ
ﻟﻲ ﻣﺮﺓ :ﻣﺎ ﻳﺼﻨﻊ ﺃﻋﺪﺍﺋﻲ ﺑﻲ؟ ﺃﻧﺎ ﺟﻨﺘﻲ ﻭﺑﺴﺘﺎﻧﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺻﺪﺭﻱ ،ﺃﻳﻦ ﺭﺣﺖ ﻓﻬﻲ ﻣﻌﻲ ،ﻻ
ﺗﻔﺎﺭﻗﻨﻲ ،ﺃﻧﺎ ﺣﺒﺴﻲ ﺧﻠﻮﺓ .ﻭﻗﺘﻠﻲ ﺷﻬﺎﺩﺓ ،ﻭﺇﺧﺮﺍﺟﻲ ﻣﻦ ﺑﻠﺪﻱ ﺳﻴﺎﺣﺔ.
ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺒﺴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ :ﻟﻮ ﺑﺬﻟﺖ ﻣﻞء ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ ﺫﻫﺒﺎً ﻣﺎ ﻋﺪﻝ ﻋﻨﺪﻱ ﺷﻜﺮ ﻫﺬﻩ
ﺍﻟﻨﻌﻤﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻗﺎﻝ :ﻣﺎ ﺟﺰﻳﺘﻬﻢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﻮﺍ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺨﻴﺮ -ﻭﻧﺤﻮ ﻫﺬﺍ.
ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﻓﻲ ﺳﺠﻮﺩﻩ ،ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﺤﺒﻮﺱ :ﺍﻟﻠﻬﻢ ﺃﻋﻨﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻛﺮﻙ ﻭﺷﻜﺮﻙ ﻭﺣﺴﻦ ﻋﺒﺎﺩﺗﻚ ،ﻣﺎ
ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﻣﺮﺓ :ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺒﻮﺱ ﻣﻦ ﺣﺒﺲ ﻗﻠﺒﻪ ﻋﻦ ﺭﺑﻪ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺄﺳﻮﺭ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺳﺮﻩ ﻫﻮﺍﻩ.
ﻭﻟﻤﺎ ﺩﺧﻞ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ ،ﻭﺻﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﺳﻮﺭﻫﺎ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﻭﻗﺎﻝ" :ﻓﻀﺮﺏ ﺑﻴﻨﻬﻢ ﺑﺴﻮﺭ ﻟﻪ ﺑﺎﺏ ،ﺑﺎﻁﻨﻪ
ﻓﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﺔ ،ﻭﻅﺎﻫﺮﻩ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻠﻪ ﺍﻟﻌﺬﺍﺏ" "ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺪ."13 :
ﻗﺎﻝ ﺷﻴﺨﻨﺎ :ﻭﻋﻠﻢ ﷲ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺃﻳﺖ ﺃﺣﺪﺍً ﺃﻁﻴﺐ ﻋﻴﺸﺎً ﻣﻨﺔ ﻗﻂ ،ﻣﻊ ﻣﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺒﺲ
ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻬﺪﻳﺪ ﻭﺍﻹﺭﺟﺎﻑ ،ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﻊ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺃﻁﻴﺐ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﻋﻴﺸﺎً ،ﻭﺃﺷﺮﺣﻬﻢ ﺻﺪﺭﺍً ،ﻭﺃﻗﻮﺍﻫﻢ ﻗﻠﺒﺎً،
ﻭﺃﺳﺮﻫﻢ ﻧﻔﺴﺎً ،ﺗﻠﻮﺡ ﻧﻀﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﻌﻴﻢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺟﻬﻪ ﻭﻛﻨﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺍﺷﺘﺪ ﺑﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﺨﻮﻑ ﻭﺳﺎءﺕ ﺑﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﻈﻨﻮﻥ،
ﻭﺿﺎﻗﺖ ﺑﻨﺎ ﺍﻷﺭﺽ :ﺃﺗﻴﻨﺎﻩ ،ﻓﻤﺎ ﻫﻮ ﺇﻻ ﺃﻥ ﻧﺮﺍﻩ ،ﻭﻧﺴﻤﻊ ﻛﻼﻣﻪ ،ﻓﻴﺬﻫﺐ ﻋﻨﺎ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻛﻠﻪ ،ﻭﻳﻨﻘﻠﺐ
ﺍﻧﺸﺮﺍﺣﺎً ﻭﻗﻮﺓ ﻭﻳﻘﻴﻨﺎً ﻭﻁﻤﺄﻧﻴﻨﺔ.
ﻓﺴﺒﺤﺎﻥ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺷﻬﺪ ﻋﺒﺎﺩﻩ ﺟﻨﺘﻪ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻟﻘﺎﺋﻪ ،ﻭﻓﺘﺢ ﻟﻬﻢ ﺃﺑﻮﺍﺑﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ ،ﻓﺄﺗﺎﻫﻢ ﻣﻦ
ﺭَﻭﺣﻬﺎ ﻭﻧﺴﻴﻤﻬﺎ ﻭﻁﻴﺒﻬﺎ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺮﻍ ﻗﻮﺍﻫﻢ ﻟﻄﻠﺒﻬﺎ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ.
ﻭﺃﻣﺎ ﺗﺼﺎﻧﻴﻔﻪ ﺭﺣﻤﻪ ﺍﻟﻠّﻪ :ﻓﻬﻲ ﺃﺷﻬﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻥ ﺗﺬﻛﺮ ،ﻭﺃﻋﺮﻑ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻨﻜﺮ .ﺳﺎﺭﺕ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ
ﺍﻟﺸﻤﺲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻷﻗﻄﺎﺭ ،ﻭﺍﻣﺘﻸﺕ ﺑﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻼﺩ ﻭﺍﻷﻣﺼﺎﺭ .ﻗﺪ ﺟﺎﻭﺯﺕ ﺣﺪ ﺍﻟﻜﺜﺮﺓ ،ﻓﻼ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺃﺣﺪ
ﺣﺼﺮﻫﺎ ،ﻭﻻ ﻳﺘﺴﻊ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﺎﻥ ﻟﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻭﻑ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ،ﻭﻻ ﺫﻛﺮﻫﺎ.
ﻭﻟﻨﺬﻛﺮ ﻧﺒﺬﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺳﻤﺎء ﺃﻋﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻨﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﺎﺭ :ﻛﺘﺎﺏ "ﺍﻹﻳﻤﺎﻥ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ ،ﻛﺘﺎﺏ "ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻘﺎﻣﺔ"
ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺍﻥ "ﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﺮﺍﺿﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺮﻳﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺎﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﺤﻤﻮﻳﺔ" ﺃﺭﺑﻊ ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺍﺕ ،ﻛﺘﺎﺏ "ﺗﻠﺒﻴﺲ
ﺍﻟﺠﻬﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺄﺳﻴﺲ ﺑﺪﻋﻬﻢ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﻣﻴﺔ" ،ﻓﻲ ﺳﺖ ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺍﺕ ﻛﺒﺎﺭ ،ﻛﺘﺎﺏ "ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺮﻳﺔ"
ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺍﻥ "ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺍﻹﺳﻜﻨﺪﺭﺍﻧﻴﺔ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ "ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺎﻭﻯ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺮﻳﺔ" ﺳﺒﻊ ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺍﺕ.
ﻭﻛﻞ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﺎﻧﻴﻒ ﻣﺎ ﻋﺪﺍ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ "ﺍﻹﻳﻤﺎﻥ" ﻛﺘﺒﻪ ﻭﻫﻮ ﺑﻤﺼﺮ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺪﺓ ﺳﺒﻊ ﺳﻨﻴﻦ ﺻﻨﻔﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ
ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻦ .ﻭﻛﺘﺐ ﻣﻌﻬﺎ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺎﺋﺔ ﻟَﻔﱠﺔ ﻭﺭﻕ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ،ﻛﺘﺎﺏ "ﺩﺭء ﺗﻌﺎﺭﺽ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻞ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻘﻞ" ﺃﺭﺑﻊ
ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻮﺍﺏ ﻋﻤﺎ ﺃﻭﺭﺩﻩ ﻟﻠﺸﻴﺦ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻳﺸﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ،ﻧﺤﻮ ﻣﺠﻠﺪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ
"ﻣﻨﻬﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﻮﻳﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻧﻘﺾ ﻛﻼﻡ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﻌﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﻳﺔ" ﺃﺭﺑﻊ ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺍﺕ "ﺍﻟﺠﻮﺍﺏ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻟﻤﺎ
ﺑﺪﻝ ﺩﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻴﺢ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺍﻥ "ﺷﺮﺡ ﺃﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺼﻞ ﻟﻠﺮﺍﺯﻱ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ "ﺷﺮﺡ ﺑﻀﻌﺔ ﻋﺸﺮ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ
ﻣﻦ ﺍﻷﺭﺑﻌﻴﻦ ﻟﻠﺮﺍﺯﻱ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺍﻥ "ﺍﻟﺮﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻄﻖ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ ﻛﺒﻴﺮ "ﺍﻟﺮﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﻜﺮﻱ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ
ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻐﺎﺛﺔ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ "ﺍﻟﺮﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻫﻞ ﻛﺴﺮﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺮﻭﺍﻓﺾ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺍﻥ "ﺍﻟﺼﻔﺪﻳﺔ"" ،ﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺎﻝ:
ﺇﻥ ﻣﻌﺠﺰﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﻧﺒﻴﺎء ﻗﻮﻯ ﻧﻔﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ "ﺍﻟﻬﻼﻭﻧﻴﺔ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ "ﺷﺮﺡ ﻋﻘﻴﺪﺓ ﺍﻷﺻﺒﻬﺎﻧﻲ" ﺟﻠﺪ
"ﺷﺮﺡ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﺪﺓ" ﻟﻠﺸﻴﺦ ﻣﻮﻓﻖ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ .ﻛﺘﺐ ﻣﻨﻪ ﻧﺤﻮ ﺃﺭﺑﻊ ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺍﺕ "ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻘﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺮﺭ ﻓﻲ
ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻪ ﻟﺠﺪﻩ ﻋﺪﺓ ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺍﺕ "ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺭﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻮﻝ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺷﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﺮﺳﻮﻝ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ" ،ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﺑﻄﻼﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ "ﺍﻗﺘﻀﺎء ﺍﻟﺼﺮﺍﻁ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻔﺔ ﺃﺻﺤﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺠﺤﻴﻢ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ
"ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺮﻳﺮ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺣﻔﻴﺮ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﺴﻤﺔ ،ﻛﺘﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﻋﺘﺮﺍﺿﺎً ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺨﻮﻱ ﻓﻲ
ﺣﺎﺩﺛﺔ ﺣﻜﻢ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ "ﺍﻟﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﻴﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻋﺘﺮﺽ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﻠﻒ ﺑﺎﻟﻄﻼﻕ" ﺛﻼﺙ
ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺍﺕ ،ﻛﺘﺎﺏ "ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻗﺎﻥ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻄﻠﻴﻖ ﻭﺇﻷﻳﻤﺎﻥ" ﻟﻤﺎ ﻣﺠﻠﺪ ﻛﺒﻴﺮ "ﺍﻟﺮﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﺧﻨﺎﺋﻲ
ﻓﻲ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺰﻳﺎﺭﺓ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ .ﻭﺃﻣﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻮﺳﻄﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺼﻐﺎﺭ ﻭﺃﺟﻮﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺎﻭﻯ :ﻓﻼ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ
ﺍﻹﺣﺎﻁﺔ ﺑﻬﺎ ،ﻟﻜﺜﺮﺗﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﻭﺗﻔﺮﻗﻬﺎ .ﻭﻣﻦ ﺃﺷﻬﺮﻫﺎ "ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻗﺎﻥ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺃﻭﻟﻴﺎء ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ ﻭﺃﻭﻟﻴﺎء
ﺍﻟﺸﻴﻄﺎﻥ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ ﻟﻄﻴﻒ "ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻗﺎﻥ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﻖ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﻄﻼﻥ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ ﻟﻄﻴﻒ "ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻗﺎﻥ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﻼﻕ
ﻭﺍﻷﻳﻤﺎﻥ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ ﻟﻄﻴﻒ "ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻋﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺻﻼﺡ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﻋﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺮﻋﻴﺔ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ ﻟﻄﻴﻒ "ﺭﻓﻊ
ﺍﻟﻤﻼﻡ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻷﺋﻤﺔ ﺍﻷﻋﻼﻡ" ﻣﺠﻠﺪ ﻟﻄﻴﻒ.
ﺫﻛﺮ ﻧﺒﺬﺓ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻔﺮﺩﺍﺗﻪ ﻭﻏﺮﺍﺋﺒﻪ
ﺍﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻴﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﺼﺮﺓ ،ﻛﻤﺎء ﺍﻟﻮﺭﺩ ﻭﻧﺤﻮﻩ ،ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺟﻮﺍﺯ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻨﻌﻠﻴﻦ،
ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺪﻣﻴﻦ ،ﻭﻛﻞ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺤﺘﺎﺝ ﻓﻲ ﻧﺰﻋﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺟﻞ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻣﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻴﺪ ﺃﻭ ﺑﺎﻟﺮﺟﻞ ﺍﻵﺧﺮ ،ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﻳﺠﻮﺯ
ﻋﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺢ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻣﻴﻦ.
ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺨﻔﻴﻦ ﻻ ﻳﺘﻮﻗﻒ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺟﺔ ،ﻛﺎﻟﻤﺴﺎﻓﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﺮﻳﺪ ﻭﻧﺤﻮﻩ ،ﻭﻓﻌﻞ
ﺫﻟﻚ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻫﺎﺑﻪ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺮﻳﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺧﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺒﺮﻳﺪ ﻭﻳﺘﻮﻗﻒ ﻣﻊ ﺇﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺰﻉ ﻭﺗﻴﺴﺮﻩ.
ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺟﻮﺍﺯ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻔﺎﺋﻒ ﻭﻧﺤﻮﻫﺎ.
ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺟﻮﺍﺯ ﺍﻟﺘﻴﻤﻢ ﻟﺨﺸﻴﺔ ﻓﻮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﺖ ﻟْﻲ ﺣﻖ ﻋْﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺬﻭﺭ ،ﻛﻤﻦ ﺃﺧﺮ ﺍﻟﺼﻼﺓ ﻋﻤﺪﺍً ﺣﺘﻰ
ﺗﻀﺎﻳﻖ ﻭﻗﺘﻬﺎ .ﻭﻛﺬﺍ ﻣﻦ ﺧﺸﻲ ﻓﻮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻌﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻴﺪﻳﻦ ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﺤﺪﺙ .ﻓﺄﻣﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻴﻘﻆ ﺃﻭ ﺫﻛﺮ
ﻓﻲ ﺁﺧﺮ ﻭﻗﺖ ﺍﻟﺼﻼﺓ :ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﻳﺘﻄﻬﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺎء ﻭﻳﺼﻠﻲ ،ﻷﻥ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﺖ ﻣﺘﺴﻊ ﻓﻲ ﺣﻘﻪ.
ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺃﺓ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﻏﺘﺴﺎﻝ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺖ ،ﺃﻭ ﺷﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻨﺰﻭﻝ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﻤﺎﻡ
ﻭﺗﻜﺮﺭﻩ :ﺃﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﺘﻴﻤﻢ ﻭﺗﺼﻠﱠﻲ.
ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺃﻥ ﻻ ﺣﺪَ ﻷﻗﻞﱢ ﺍﻟﺤﻴﺾ ﻭﻻ ﻷﻛﺜﺮﻩ ،ﻭﻻ ﻷﻗﻞ ﺍﻟﻄﻬﺮ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﻴﻀﺘﻴﻦ ،ﻭﻻ ﻟﺴﻦ ﺍﻹﻳﺎﺱ ﻣﻦ
ﺍﻟﺤﻴﺾ .ﻭﺃﻥ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺭﺍﺟﻊ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻣﺎ ﺗﻌﺮﻓﻪ ﻛﻞ ﺍﻣﺮﺃﺓ ﻣﻦ ﻧﻔﺴﻬﺎ.
ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺃﻥ ﺗﺎﺭﻙ ﺍﻟﺼﻼﺓ ﻋﻤﺪﺍً :ﻻ ﻳﺠﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎء .ﻭﻻ ﻳﺸﺮﻉ ﻟﻪ .ﺑﻞ ﻳﻜﺜﺮ ﻣﺰ ﺍﻟﻨﻮﺍﻓﻞ ،ﻭﺃﻟﻦ
ﺍﻟﻘﺼﺮ ﻳﺠﻮﺯ ﻓﻲ ﻭﻗﺖ ﺍﻟﺴﻔﺮ ﻭﻁﻮﻳﻠﻪ ،ﻭﺃﻥ ﺳﺠﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻼﻭﺓ ﻻ ﻳﺸﺘﺮﻁ ﻟﻪ ﻁﻬﺎﺭﺓ.
ﻣﻜﺚ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺷﻌﺒﺎﻥ ﺳﻨﺔ ﻟﻤﺴﺖ ﻭﻋﺸﺮﻳﻦ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺫﻱ ﺍﻟﻘﻌﺪﺓ ﺳﻨﺔ ﺛﻤﺎﻥ
ﻭﻋﺸﺮﻳﻦ ،ﺛﻢ ﻣﺮﺽ ﺑﻀﻌﺔ ﻭﻋﺸﺮﻳﻦ ﻳﻮﻣﺎً ،ﻭﻟﻢ ﻳﻌﻠﻢ ﺍﻛﺜﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﺑﻤﺮﺿﻪ ،ﻭﻟﻢ ﻳﻔﺠﺄﻫﻢ ﺇﻻ
ﻣﻮﺗﻪ .ﻭﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻭﻓﺎﺗﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺳﺤﺮ ﻟﻴﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﺛﻨﻴﻦ ﻋﺸﺮﻱ ﺫﻱ ﺍﻟﻘﻌﺪﺓ ،ﺳﻨﺔ ﺛﻤﺎﻥ ﻭﻋﺸﺮﻳﻦ
ﻭﺫﻛﺮ ﻣﺆﺫﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻨﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻣﻊ ،ﻭﺗﻜﻠﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻟﺤﺮﺱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﺑﺮﺍﺝ ،ﻓﺘﺴﺎﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ،
ﻭﺑﻌﻀﻬﻢ ﺃﻋﻠﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻨﺎﻣﻪ ،ﻭﺃﺻﺒﺢ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ،ﻭﺍﺟﺘﻤﻌﻮﺍ ﺣﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﻐﻮﻁﺔ
ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺮﺝ ،ﻭﻟﻢ ﻳﻄﺒﺦ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻷﺳﻮﺍﻕ ﺷﻴﺌﺎً ،ﻭﻻ ﻓﺘﺤﻮﺍ ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺍً ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻛﺎﻛﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻣﻦ ﺷﺄﻧﻬﺎ ﺃﻥ
ﺗﻔﺘﺢ ﺃﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺭ.
ﻭﻓﺘﺢ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ ،ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﺋﺐ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﻨﺔ ﻏﺎﺋﺒﺎً ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺒﻠﺪ ،ﻓﺠﺎء ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺣﺐ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻧﺎﺋﺐ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ ،ﻓﻌﺰﺍﻩ
ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻠﺲ ﻋﻨﺪﻩ ،ﻭﺍﺟﺘﻤﻊ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺻﺤﺎﺑﻪ ،ﻳﺒﻜﻮﻥ ﻭﻳﺜﻨﻮﻥ،
ﻭﺃﺧﺒﺮﻫﻢ ﺃﺧﻮﻩ ﺯﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ :ﺃﻧﻪ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻫﻮ ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻣﻨﺬ ﺩﺧﻼ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ ﺛﻤﺎﻧﻴﻦ ﺧﺘﻤﺔ،
ﻭﺷﺮﻋﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺜﻤﺎﻧﻴﻦ ،ﻓﺎﻧﺘﻬﻴﺎ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻗﻮﻟﻪ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ " :ﺇﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻘﻴﻦ ﻓﻲ ﺟﻨﺎﺕ ﻭﻧﻬﺮ ﻓﻲ
ﻣﻘﻌﺪ ﺻﺪﻕ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻣﻠﻴﻚ ﻣﻘﺘﺪﺭ" "ﺍﻟﻘﻤﺮ."55 .54 :
ﻓﺸﺮﻉ ﺣﻴﻨﺌﺬ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺨﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﻟﺤﺎﻥ :ﻋﺒﺪ ﷲ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺐ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﻟﺤﻲ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺰﺭﻋﻲ ﺍﻟﻀﺮﻳﺮ -ﻭﻛﺎﻥ
ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻳﺤﺐ ﻗﺮﺍءﺗﻬﻤﺎ -ﻓﺎﺑﺘﺪﺍء ﻣﻦ ﺳﻮﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺧﺘﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ .ﻭﺧﺮﺝ ﺍﻟﺮﺟﺎﻝ ،ﻭﺩﺧﻞ
ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺎء ﻣﻦ ﺃﻗﺎﺭﺏ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ،ﻓﺸﺎﻫﺪﻭﻩ ﺛﻢ ﺧﺮﺟﻮﺍ ،ﻭﺍﻗﺘﺼﺮﻭﺍ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻦ ﻳﻐﺴﻠﻪ ،ﻭﻳﺴﺎﻋﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﺗﻐﺴﻴﻠﻪ ،ﻭﻛﺎﻧﻮﺍ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻛﺎﺑﺮ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﻟﺤﻴﻦ ﻭﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ،ﻛﺎﻟﻤﺰﻱ ﻭﻏﻴﺮﻩ ،ﻭﻟﻢ ﻳﻔﺮﻍ ﻣﻦ
ﻏﺴﻠﻪ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺍﻣﺘﻸﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﺮﺟﺎﻝ ﻭﻣﺎ ﺣﻮﻟﻬﺎ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻣﻊ ،ﻓﺼﻠَﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺑﺪﺭﻛﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻌﺔ:
ﺍﻟﺰﺍﻫﺪ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻭﺓ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ .ﻭﺿﺞ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﺣﻴﻨﺌﺬ ﺑﺎﻟﺒﻜﺎء ﻭﺍﻟﺜﻨﺎء ،ﻭﺑﺎﻟﺪﻋﺎء ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺮﺣﻢ.
ﻭﺃﺧﺮﺝ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺟﺎﻣﻊ ﺩﻣﺸﻖ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﺑﻌﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻧﺤﻮﻫﺎ .ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﻗﺪ ﺍﻣﺘﻸ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻣﻊ
ﻭﺻﺤﻨﻪ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﺔ ،ﻭﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺒﺮﻳﺪ ،ﻭﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻮﺍﺭﺓ .ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻊ ﺃﻋﻈﻢ
ﻣﻦ ﺟﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻌﺔ ،ﻭﻭﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﺰ ،ﻣﻤﺎ ﻳﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺼﻮﺭﺓ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻨﺪ ﻳﺤﻔﻈﻮﻥ
ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺎﺯﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺰﺣﺎﻡ ،ﻭﺟﻠﺲ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺻﻔﻮﻑ .ﺑﻞ ﻣﺮﺻﻮﺻﻴﻦ ،ﻻ ﻳﺘﻤﻜﻦ ﺃﺣﺪ ﻣﻦ
ﺍﻟﺠﻠﻮﺱ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﺠﻮﺩ ﺇﻻ ﺑﻜﻠﻔﺔ .ﻭﻛﺜﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﻛﺜﺮﺓ ﻻ ﺗﻮﺻﻒ.
ﻓﻠﻤﺎ ﺃﺫﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺆﺫﻥ ﺍﻟﻈﻬﺮ ﺃﻗﻴﻤﺖ ﺍﻟﺼﻼﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺴﺪﺓ ،ﺑﺨﻼﻑ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﺓ ،ﻭﺻﻠﻮﺍ ﺍﻟﻈﻬﺮ ،ﺛﻢ ﺻﻠﻮﺍ
ﺍﻹﻣﺎﻡ ﻧﺎﺋﺐ ﺍﻟﺨﻄﺎﺑﺔ ﻋﻼء ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺨﺮﺍﻁ ﻟﻐﻴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺰﻭﻳﻨﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﺪﻳﺎﺭ
ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ،ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ِ
ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺮﻳﺔ .ﺛﻢ ﺳﺎﺭﻭﺍ ﺑﻪ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﻓﻲ ﺑﻜﺎء ﻭﺩﻋﺎء ﻭﺛﻨﺎء ،ﻭﺗﻬﻠﻴﻞ ﻭﺗﺄﺳﻒ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺴﺎء ﻓﻮﻕ
ﺍﻷﺳﻄﺤﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺒﺮﺓ ﻳﺪﻋﻴﻦ ﻭﻳﺒﻜﻴﻦ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً .ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﻳﻮﻣﺎً ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺩﺍً ،ﻟﻢ ﻳﻌﻬﺪ ﺑﺪﻣﺸﻖ
ﻣﺜﻠﻪ ،ﻭﻟﻢ ﻳﺘﺨﻠﻒ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﺒﻠﺪ ﻭﺣﻮﺍﺿﺮﻩ ﺇﻻ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻴﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻀﻌﻔﺎء ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺨﺪﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺻﺮﺥ ﺻﺎﺭﺥ:
ﻫﻜﺬﺍ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺟﻨﺎﺋﺰ ﺃﺋﻤﺔ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ .ﻓﺒﻜﺎ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﺑﻜﺎء ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺍً ﻋﻨﺪ ﺫﻟﻚ.
ﻭﺃﺧﺮﺝ ﻣﻦ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺒﺮﻳﺪ ،ﻭﺍﺷﺘﺪ ﺍﻟﺰﺣﺎﻡ ،ﻭﺃﻟﻘﻰ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻌﺸﻪ ﻣﻨﺎﺩﻳﻞ ﻭﻋﻤﺎﺋﻤﻬﻢ ،ﻭﺻﺎﺭ
ﺍﻟﻨﻌﺶ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺮﺅﻭﺱ ،ﻳﺘﻘﺪﻡ ﺗﺎﺭﺓ ،ﻭﻳﺘﺄﺧﺮ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ .ﻭﺧﺮﺝ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﺃﺑﻮﺍﺏ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻣﻊ ﻛﻠﻬﺎ ﻭﻫﻲ
ﻣﺰﺩﺣﻤﺔ .ﺛﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺑﻮﺍﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺪﻳﻨﺔ ﻛﻠﻬﺎ ،ﻟﻜﻦ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻈﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺝ ،ﻭﻣﻨﻪ ﺧﺮﺟﺖ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺎﺯﺓ،
ﻭﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺍﺩﻳﺲ ،ﻭﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﺮ ،ﻭﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﺑﻴﺔ ،ﻭﻋﻈﻢ ﺍﻷﻣﺮ ﺑﺴﻮﻕ ﺍﻟﺨﻴﻞ.
ﻭﺗﻘﺪﻡ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺼﻼﺓ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ :ﺃﺧﻮﻩ ﺯﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ .ﻭﺩﻓﻦ ﻭﻗﺖ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﺮ ﺃﻭ ﻗﺒﻠﻬﺎ
ﺑﻴﺴﻴﺮ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺃﺧﻴﻪ ﺷﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﻋﺒﺪ ﷲ ﺑﻤﻘﺎﺑﺮ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﻓﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺣُﺰﺭ ﺍﻟﺮﺟﺎﻝ :ﺑﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﺃﻟﻒٍ
ﺍﻹﻣﺎﻡ ﺃﺣﻤﺪ" ﺑﻴﻨﻨﺎ
ﻭﺃﻛﺜﺮ ،ﺇﻟﻰ ﻣﺎﺋﺘﻲ ﺃﻟﻒ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺴﺎء ﺑﺨﻤﺴﺔ ﻋﺸﺮ ﺃﻟﻒ ،ﻭﻅﻬﺮ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ ﻗﻮﻝ ِ
ﻭﺑﻴﻦ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﺒﺪﻉ ﻳﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﺰ".
ﻭﺧﺘﻢ ﻟﻪ ﺧﺘﻤﺎﺕ ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺓ ﺑﺎﻟﺼﺎﻟﺤﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺪﻳﻨﺔ ،ﻭﺗﺮﺩﺩ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺯﻳﺎﺭﺓ ﻗﺒﺮﻩ ﺃﻳﺎﻣﺎً ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺓ ،ﻟﻴﻼ ً
ﻭﻧﻬﺎﺭﺍً ،ﻭﺭﺋﻴﺖ ﻟﻪ ﻣﻨﺎﻣﺎﺕ ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺓ ﺻﺎﻟﺤﺔ .ﻭﺭﺛﺎﻩ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎء ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻌﺮﺍء ﺑﻘﺺ ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺓ ﻣﻦ
ﺑﻠﺪﺍﻥ ﺷﺘﻰ ،ﻭﺃﻗﻄﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﺒﺎﻋﺪﺓ ،ﻭﺗﺄﺳﻒ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤﻮﻥ ﻟﻔﻘﺪﻩ .ﺭﺿﻲ ﺍﻟﻠّﻪ ﻋﻨﻪ ﻭﺭﺣﻤﻪ ﻭﻏﻔﺮ ﻟﻪ.
ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﻳﺒﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﻌﻴﺪﺓ ،ﺣﺘﻰ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻴﻤﻦ ﻭﺍﻟﺼﻴﻦ.
ﻭﺻﻠﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺻﻼﺓ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﺋﺐ ﻓﻲ ﻏﺎﻟﺐ ﺑﻼﺩ ِ
ﻭﺃﺧﺒﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﻓﺮﻭﻥ :ﺃﻧﻪ ﻧﻮﺩﻱ ﺑﺄﻗﺼﻰ ﺍﻟﺼﻴﻦ ﻟﻠﺼﻼﺓ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻳﻮﻡ ﺟﻤﻌﺔ "ﺍﻟﺼﻼﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺎﻥ
ﻭﻗﺪ ﺃﻓﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻓﻆ ﺃﺑﻮ ﻋﺒﺪ ﷲ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻬﺎﺩﻱ ﻟﻪ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﻠﺪﺓ ،ﻭﻛﺬﻟﻚ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺣﻔﺺ ﻋﻤﺮ ﺑﻦ
ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﺰﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻐﺪﺍﺩﻱ ﻓﻲ ﻛﺮﺍﺭﻳﺲ ،ﻭﺇﻧﻤﺎ ﺫﻛﺮﻧﺎﻫﺎ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺭ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻠﻴﻖ ﺑﺘﺮﺍﺟﻢ ﻫﺬﺍ
ﻭﻗﺪ ﺣﺪﺙ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺍً .ﻭﺳﻤﻊ ﻣﻨﻪ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﻔﺎﻅ ﻭﺍﻷﺋﻤﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ،ﻭﻣﻦ ﺗﺼﺎﻧﻴﻔﻪ،
ﻭﺧﺮﺝ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻧﻲ ﺃﺭﺑﻌﻴﻦ ﺣﺪﻳﺜﺎً ﺣﺪﺙ ﺑﻬﺎ.