His name was Sulaiman b. ‘Abd al-Qawiy b. ‘Abd al-Karim b. Sa’id al-Tufi.
He was born in the village of Tufa in the province of Sarsar which is about 12 km from Baghdad towards Kufa.
His Kunyah was Abu al-Rabi’ and his Laqab was Najm al-Din, frequently quoted as just al-Najm al-Tufi in short.
He was brought up in Tufa where he memorised Mukhtasar al-Khiraqi in Fiqh and al-Luma’ of Ibn Jinni in Nahw before moving to Baghdad. Also, during his time in Tufa he frequented Sarsar where he studied Fiqh under Zain al-Din b. Muhammad al-Sarsari.
In the year 691 AH he moved to Baghdad where he memorised al-Muharrar by Al-Majd Ibn Taymiyyah and studied it under al-Zarirani. There he also studied Usul under al-Faruqi al-Shafi’i, the sciences of the Arabic language under Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Mawsili, the science of Hadith under al-Rashid b. Abi al-Qasim, Ibn al-Battal, al-Mufid al-Harrani, al-Qalanisi, and Abu Nasr b. ‘Ukbar. He also accompanied and benefited from notables of Baghdad like Ibn ‘Asiyyah and Jamal al-Din al-Batti and benefitted from them on many of the sciences.
If we observe a little we will notice that most of whom al-Tufi studied under during this stage were from the eminent and distinguished scholars in their own respective fields.
In the year 704 AH he travelled from ‘Iraq to Damascus where he took Hadith from al-Qadi Sulaiman b. Hamzah, read some of Alfiyyah of Ibn Malik to his student Ibn Abi al-Fath al-Ba’li (the author of Talkhis al-Rawdah), studied under Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, al-Mizzi, ‘Isa al-Muta’im, and sat with Majd al-Din al-Harrani.
That year, during the month of Safar, he penned his book Mukhtasar al-Rawdah and completed it in a very short period of time.
He also made a trip to Bait al-Maqdis when he was residing in Damascus. It appears that his stay in Damascus wasn’t all as pleasant towards the end as he had written some harsh words about some people there.
In the year 707 AH he travelled from the Levant to Cairo where he sat with the master grammarian Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi and read to him Abu Hayyan’s abridgement of Sibawaih’s book al-Kitab called al-Tajrid Li Ahkam Sibawaih. He also attended the lessons of the famous Hanbali judge, al-Qadi Sa’d al-Din al-Harithi, who honoured and respected him and expressed this through setting a salary for him and appointing him as a teacher of Hanbali Fiqh in some of the institutions, from them: Mansuriyyah and Nasiriyyah, which eventually made al-Tufi a notable figure amongst them.
All of this did not stop al-Tufi from writing. That year he penned his commentary on the four gospels: al-Ta’liq ‘Ala al-Anajil al-Arba’ah. Then during Shawwal and Dhu al-Qi’dah of the same year he wrote al-Intisarat al-Islamiyyah, and in the following year he began authoring his masterful commentary for his book Mukhtasar al-Rawdah, and in the year following that he began writing his book ‘Alam al-Jadhal Fi ‘Ilm al-Jadal in the art of debating and completed it in about two months as well.
However, things did not continue to remain on an even keel for al-Tufi. An unfortunate incident occurred between him and his teacher al-Harithi where the latter, during one of his gatherings, was speaking about those who had attained the rank of Ijtihad and he categorised the Mujtahids into three categories when al-Tufi interjected and asked: “So, from which of these categories is our master (i.e. – al-Harithi)…?” Al-Harithi did not reply, but kept quiet. The question enraged his son who was also in the gathering who then erupted against al-Tufi.
This was followed by another blow where he was accused of being a Rafidi and the case was raised to the deputy governor. Al-Tufi rejected this accusation but lost the case as the evidences went against him. He was punished and then put on the back of a donkey and paraded through the streets. They also sacked him from all the institutions he used to teach in. He was imprisoned for a while and then released and exiled. Whilst in prison he wrote his Tafsir for Surah al-Inshiqaq and Surah al-Naba and there he also wrote his book Hallaal al-‘Uqad Fi ‘Ilm al-Mu’taqad.
The year 711 AH was when he was released from prison and banished, after which he found himself in Busir, a village in Upper Egypt. From there he travelled for Hajj and then returned to the village of Qus which is also in Upper Egypt. He remained there for years where he continued to keep himself occupied with work, study of Hadith, authoring, and attending lessons. He was very widely read; certain scholars like the Shafi’i historian and jurist al-Udfuwi have said that they believe that al-Tufi had gone through the books of most of the libraries that were in Qus. From the books he wrote there was his commentary on the 40 hadith of al-Nawawi which he called al-Ta’yin Fi Sharh al-Arba’in. It was said that they had a library full of just books authored by al-Tufi in Qus.
In the year 714 AH he left Egypt again and travelled for his second Hajj. This stretched into the following year (715 AH) where he remained for a while in the Haramayn and sat in the gatherings of the scholars there. From those he sat with in Makkah was al-Najm b. al-Jamaal b. al-Muhib al-Tabari and in Madinah he attended the lessons of Siraj al-Din al-Ansari amongst others. He then went back to Makkah to perform Hajj for the third time.
Towards the end of the year 715 AH or the beginning of 716 AH, after his third Hajj, he set out for Palestine. There, in Bayt al-Maqdis, he penned al-Isharat al-Ilahiyyah Ila al-Mabahith al-Usuliyyah which took him approximately 24 days to complete.
This was also the year (716 AH) when Al-Tufi passed away in the city of al-Khalil, which is around 40 km south-west of Bayt al-Maqdis.
May Allah bestow upon him from His vast mercy and reward him for all the effort he put into spreading knowledge and for what he had to endure in this journey. He was a man who excelled in the sciences of Shari’ah. There isn’t a subject except that he has written a book on it, which is a clear indication of his intellectual brilliance and how vastly read he was. He was always busy with either writing, reading, learning, or teaching. Due to all this he was praised by many through honorifics like: “al-Imam”, “al-‘Alim”, “al-‘Allamah”, “al-Fadil”, “al-Faqih”, “al-Usuli”, “al-Adib”, “al-Sha’ir”, “al-Mutafannin”, “Najm al-Din”, “Al-Bahr al-‘Ubab”, “Al-Ghayth Alldahi Yaqsuru ‘Anhu al-Sahab” (each of which can be referenced fully, InshaAllah).
• Teachers whom al-Tufi explicitly stated that he took from:
1) Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH)
2) Al-Mizzi (d. 742 AH)
3) Al-Qalanisi (d. 704 AH)
4) Ibn ‘Ukbar (d. 735 AH)
5) Ibn al-Battal (d. 708 AH)
6) Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi (d. 745 AH)
7) Ibn al-Mujallikh (d. 700 AH)
8) Ibn al-Jamid (d. 705 AH)
9) al-Harithi (d. 711 AH)
10) al-Tibi (d. n/A)
11) Muhammad b. Nasir al-Baghdadi (d. n/A)
12) Ibn ‘Asiyyah al-Baghdadi (d. 721 AH)
13) Jamal al-Din b. al-Batti (d. 726 AH)
• Teachers whom the biographers of al-Tufi have established that he took from:
1) al-Faruqi (d. 706 AH)
2) al-Rashid al-Baghdadi (d. 707 AH)
3) Ibn Abi al-Fath al-Ba’li (d. 709 AH)
4) Abu al-Fadl Ibn Qudamah (d. 715 AH)
5) Al-Muta’im al-Maqdisi (d. 719 AH)
6) Al-Biza’i (d. 725 AH)
7) Siraj al-Din al-Ansari (d. 726 AH)
8) al-Najm al-Tabari (d. 730 AH)
9) Majd al-Din al-Harrani (d. 729 AH)
10) Al-Zarirani (d. 729 AH)
11) al-Mawsili (d. n/A)
12) Ibn al-Bawqi (d. n/A)
13) ‘Izz al-Din al-Kufi (d. 700 AH)
• Controversy surrounding some of his theological beliefs:
It is known that Imam al-Tufi held erroneous beliefs at some levels of Irja’ and Jabr though his positions were not as serious as the beliefs held by certain other groups in these two areas. We can leave this to be discussed another time, InshaAllah. Right now we will just quote a few things to show his stance towards certain groups to show that he was not from them, and that will be followed by particularly and briefly touching on the accusations of him being a Shi’i. Here are some of what he has said:
“It is sufficient for Ahl al-Sunnah as an honour and virtue that whenever the enemies of Islam critique the religion their words go against them and against their opinions. As for the innovators then the critique (of the disbelievers) doesn’t really go against them as their positions are already in agreement with the enemies of Islam. This is why we see that when this fool attacked the prophethood he directed his doubts towards the Ahl al-Hadith.” [al-Intisarat al-Islamiyyah]
“I am an Athari when it comes to the verses and reports related to Sifat.” [al-Intisarat al-Islamiyyah]
“If what the Divine Law mentions can be rationalised by the mind then Alhamdulillah, but if it cannot be rationalised then it is (still) obligatory to submit to it. When it becomes established that the Divine Law has indeed stated something then the role of the mind (in trying to rationalise it) goes away, just as the service of the deputy of the king is no longer required upon the king’s return from his travels.” [al-Intisarat al-Islamiyyah]
“It is more appropriate to exploit the widespread and authentic prophetic narrations in explaining the Qur’an than just using the mind, as the prophetic narrations are free from error due to the infallibility of the source, whereas the mind on its own is like a ship without a sailor swaying amongst ferocious winds and on the brink of sinking.” [al-Sa’qah al-Ghadabiyyah; al-Intisarat; al-Isharat al-Ilahiyyah]
“The mind cannot be autonomous in comprehending the reality of things… it can slip and deviate as it happened to most of the philosophers and Kalam practitioners with most of their conclusions and judgements.” [al-Isharat al-Ilahiyyah]
“The science pertaining to the fundamentals of belief is the one called Usul al-Din. As for what the latter-day practitioners of Kalam have inserted into this science then those things are more befitting to be a part of books of philosophy and a Muslim is in no need of these (additions).” [al-Ta’yin Fi Sharh al-Arba’in]
“All of that which the Asha’irah have said are unnecessary complications, rejection of what is apparent, whimsical speculations, and ephemeral thoughts. How strange are these people…?” [Sharh Mukhtasar al-Rawdah]
“The doctrine of the Mu’tazilah and others like them contain intellectual and philosophical elements that are foreign to Islam.” [al-Intisarat al-Islamiyyah]
He had other harsh things to say about the Mu’tazilah which can be found in his al-Intisarat and al-Isharat.
On the Shi’ah:
“Being at odds (with the main body of the Muslims) is denounced and prohibited when it sows dissension amongst the Muslims and causes controversy and disorder like the oddness of the Khawarij, the Mu’tazilah, and the Rafidah.” [Sharh Mukhtasar al-Rawdah]
“The Rafidah, may Allah curse them…” [al-Isharat al-Ilahiyyah]
“The Shi’ah, may Allah curse them…” [al-Isharat al-Ilahiyyah]
“The Shi’ah, may Allah distance them…” [al-Isharat al-Ilahiyyah]
“The Shi’ah, may Allah humiliate them…” [al-Isharat al-Ilahiyyah]
• On being accused of being a Shi’i:
There are many equivocal statements that people quote from al-Tufi in an attempt to prove that he was a Shi’i (e.g. the famous line of poetry). These can easily be refuted by presenting the alternative meanings that are not so difficult to infer by just comparing them to the many other things he has said that clearly show that he is was not a Shi’i. Here we will just quote some of what he has said that totally contradict the beliefs of the Shi’ah.
But just before we start quoting al-Tufi, here is something Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah has said:
“No doubt that certain followers of the four Imams have been accused of having inclinations towards certain beliefs of the Mu’tazilah, however, it isn’t known that any one of them was ever accused of being a Rafidi.” [Minhaj al-Sunnah]
One should note that Ibn Taymiyyah was in Egypt when al-Tufi was imprisoned there and he wrote Minhaj al-Sunnah during that same year or after it.
Al-Khawansari (d. 1313 AH), the Rafidi historian, said:
“We have not found anything in the biographical works of the Shi’ah and the Imamiyyah that shows that al-Tufi was one of them, let alone being from their jurists and scholars. Had the things mentioned in his biography were true then it wouldn’t have been hidden from the people of truth (i.e. the Shi’ah, acc. to him) nor would he have added “al-Hanbali” after his name for it (i.e. the Hanbali school) is the furthest away – from schools of the general people (Sunnis) – from the path of the special ones (Shi’a). [Rawdat al-Janat]
Unequivocal statements from al-Tufi that contradict Shi’a beliefs:
From the things he has said pertaining to the issue of the Khilafah:
“No doubt that the Sahabah disputed over the caliphate but it belonged to Abu Bakr as per the promise of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam)…” [al-Intisarat al-Islamiyyah]
“The Shi’ah have said that Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman are not from the rightly guided caliphs as they preceded him (in the caliphate) unjustly. However, the texts of the Sunnah and the consensus of its scholars reject their claim.” [al-Ta’yin Fi Sharh al-Arbai’in]
“Know that this verse is from the foundational arguments that the Shi’a use to establish the imamate of ‘Ali (r), but upon close examination it doesn’t support their view from any angle.” [‘Alam al-Jadhal Fi ‘Ilm al-Jadal]
From his praises for Abu Bakr (r) and ‘Umar (r):
“Allah created the nations and chose from them this nation, and from it He chose the Sahabah, and from the Sahabah He chose those who were a part of the Bay’ah al-Ridwan, and from those who were a part of the Bay’ah al-Ridwan He chose those who partook in Badr, and from those who partook in Badr He chose the forty, that last of whom was ‘Umar; and from those forty He chose the ten who were promised paradise; and from those ten He chose the four rightly guided caliphs, and from the four rightly guided caliphs He chose Abu Bakr (r).” [Mukhtasar al-Tirmidhi]
“Abu Bakr was blessed such that his analogy and deduction was in conformity with the Hadith, whilst it would’ve been better for ‘Umar to have agreed Abu Bakr as he was accustomed to his opinions being in agreement with what was revealed.” [al-Ta’yin Fi Sharh al-Arba’in]
“From the intelligent Arabs were Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Amr b. al-‘As, and al-Mughirah.” [al-Intisarat al-Islamiyyah]
“The verse ‘…indeed Allah is with us.’ was revealed in relation to Abu Bakr.” [al-Ta’liq ‘Ala al-Anajil]
“If the weakness of this follower of ‘Isa is measured against Abu ‘Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman b. Madh’un, and other Sahabah who were from the early days of Islam when the Quraysh were in power – as they fought them without the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam), and Abu Bakr’s hair was torn and not the Messenger’s, and ‘Umar bled, and ‘Uthman’s eye was gouged out – one will find a stark difference between them.” [al-Ta’liq ‘Ala al-Anajil]
“’Umar’s reign were days of goodness, days of guidance, and days that were in favour of the lands and the worshippers. His reign was like a glow on the face of time and his empire was the focus of attention in his era.” [al-Intisarat al-Islamiyyah]
“’Umar (r) wanted to bring glory and honour to Islam through…” [al-Sa’qah al-Ghadabiyyah]
“The companionship of ’Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali and the rest of the ten (promised paradise) has been established through mass transmission.” [al-Isharat al-Ilahiyyah]
As for the number of times he has said “Radiyallahu ‘Anhu” after mentioning Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and the rest of the Sahabah, and the number of times he has called Abu Bakr and ‘Umar “Shaykhan” and “Imaman” then they are too many to list.
Some of his praises for the Sahabah (r):
“The virtues of Marwan, Mu’awiyah, ‘Amr b. al-‘As… rather the virtues of Salman and ‘Ammar and those of most of the Sahabah don’t come near the virtues of Abu Bakr and ‘Ali.” [al-Intisarat al-Islamiyyah]
So above we find him stating that Mu’awiyah and others are virtuous.
“Mu’awiyah was extremely proficient in language and very eloquent.” [Sharh Mukhtasar al-Rawdah]
“From the famous Arabs who were exemplary for their forbearance: the four caliphs and Mu’awiyah b. Abi Sufyan.” [al-Ta’liq ‘Ala al-Anajil]
“Ubay b. Ka’b and Zayd b. Thabit were from the best of the Sahabah.” [al-Ta’yin Fi Sharh al-Arba’in]
“Abu Bakrah is an eminent Sahabi whom we don’t suspect of not speaking the truth.” [Sharh Mukhtasar al-Rawdah]
“May the mercy of Allah be upon his companions; men of honourable traits and character.” [al-Ta’liq ‘Ala al-Anajil]
“Even if these texts did not mention anything with regards to them (i.e. the Sahabah) being upright then their extraordinarily upright nature would still be known through what has been mass transmitted about their proper state of affairs and their obedience to Allah and His messenger and about their sacrifice of self and wealth on the path of Jihad and in obedience of the Lord. As for the dispute that occurred between them then none of them were knowingly and purposefully rejecting the truth, rather they were exercising their own reasoning. Those who were on the right, there is no dispute with regards to their uprightness and the one who was in the wrong then their error whilst exercising Ijtihad does not blemish their uprightness either…. as their fight wasn’t one between Kufr and Takfir but between Ijtihad and Ta’wil.” [Sharh Mukhtasar al-Rawdah]
In fact, he states in Sharh Mukhtasar al-Rawdah that the uprightness of all Sahaba has been established through the divine texts.
“…except that the Rafidah have a filthy baseless principle, that, they do not accept the narrations of the companions, which is due to a disease they have in their hearts against them.” [al-Sa’qah al-Ghadabiyyah]
What he has said about ‘Aishah (r):
“’Aishah (r) and the other wives of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) are called the mothers of the believers.” [al-Ta’yin Fi Sharh al-Arba’in]
“The authentic narrations prove the innocence of ‘Aishah.” [al-Isharat al-Ilahiyyah]
“If we say that Maryam and her companions were prophetesses then they are better than Fatimah, Khadijah, and ‘Aishah, but if we say that they weren’t prophetesses then it’s possible that they are either better or equals.” [al-Isharat al-Ilahiyyah]
Other things he said, in addition to the above, with which he has opposed the Shi’ah:
“Khalid b. Walid assuming command over the army of Mu-ta was Shar’i.” [al-Ta’yin Fi Sharh al-Arba’in]
“The belief of the Rafidah that the prophets leave inheritance is downright false.” [al-Sa’qah al-Ghadabiyyah]
What he has said pertaining to the ruling of cursing Yazid: “It is possible to say that the one who has a predominantly zealous nature for the sake of Allah and His messenger and forbidding evil, that, it is permissible for that person to curse him. But the one whose nature is predominantly just a manifestation of the fanaticism of the Rafidah then it is not permissible for him to do so. Thus, a man should keep his intentions in check.” [al-Isharat al-Ilahiyyah]
“Mut’ah was abrogated during the period of prophethood, and no one from the Muslims today believe in its validity save a fringe few, and most of those who push its permissibility are the Rafidah.” [al-Intisarat al-Islamiyyah]
“The condition that the Shi’ah place that a report must come from an infallible Imam for it to be accepted as true is baseless as they are faced with the challenge of proving the existence of infallibility for other than angels and messengers.” [Sharh Mukhtasar al-Rawdah]
5900total visits,13visits today