IbnTaymiyyah.Com | Ibn Taymiyyah on the Eternity of Paradise and Hellfire: Part 1

From the many lies against Ibn Taymiyyah is that he does not believe in the eternity of the Hellfire. The reason for this doubt is that his student Ibn al-Qayyim (rahimahullaah) inclined towards this view, outlining it's evidences, and showing the strength of this position, without actually indicating explicitly that he holds it out of firm conviction. When he mentioned the evidences for this view in his books such as Haadi al-Arwaah,and Shifaa al-Aleel, he made reference to the fact that Ibn Taymiyyah has mentioned a number of views regarding the matter, from which was the saying that the Hellfire is not eternal and will expire. However, the innovators took this to mean that Ibn Taymiyyah actually held this view, when in reality, Ibn Taymiyyah simply mentioned the views of various factions, and then proceeded to refute what is incorrect and establish what agrees with the Book and the Sunnah as is his habit. As for Ibn al-Qayyim, upon study of this subject in his numerous books it appears that he was not committed fully to the view, but considered the arguments for it to be very strong and inclined towards it. One can find him expressing another second opinion as occurs in his other books such al-Waabil al-Sayyib and Tariq al-Hijratayn, which is that Hellfire is eternal (the correct view). In any case, Ibn al-Qayyim supported the view of Hellfire not being eternal and coming to an end partially because of the presence of narrations from the Companions that indicate this, and he was not the first to express this view, with our knowledge that his writings only indicate his belief in the strength of argument for this view, not that he wholeheartedly believed it to be actually true.
One should note that Ibn al-Qayyim's position in the first of his two views has no connection with the doctrine of the Jahmiyyah regarding the expiration of Paradise and Hellfire. Since the origin of the saying of al-Jahm bin Safwaan in this regard is based upon the principle of "the impossibility of an endless chain of events" in both the past and the future and "whatever is not devoid of hawaadith is itself haadith (originated)". Upon this, the Jahmiyyah denied Allaah's chosen actions, and this led them to many corrupt statements in belief, including the statemennt of the Qur'an being created and the claim of the non-eternity of Paradise and Hellfire. As for the view that Ibn al-Qayyim tended to, then the origin of that is either a general text (in the Qur'an) or narrations (from numerous Companions) that are not authentic. Hence, Ibn al-Qayyim (in the first view he inclined towards) simply spoke with a view that is marjooh, daeef (weak) as Imaam Ibn Baz explained (see here) and his position has nothing to do with the Jahmiyyah. Far from it. On the contrary, Ibn al-Qayyim demolished the particular foundation of the Jahmiyyah upon which their corrupt doctrines are built. For more information and elaboration, please refer to the articles (here)(here) and (here).

The Saying that the Hellfire is Eternal Is Plentiful and Abundant in the Works of Ibn Taymiyyah and He Refutes the Contrary View

An example of that is the saying of Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah in response to a question (Majmu' al-Fatawa 18/307):

And he was asked: About the hadeeth of Anas bin Malik from the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) that he said, "Seven never die, never perish and never taste perishment. The Hellfire, its inhabitants, the Preserved Tablet, the Pen, the Kursee, and the Arsh", is this hadith sahih (authentic) or not?
So he replied: This narration with this wording is not from the speech of the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), but it is from the speech of some of the Scholars. And the Salaf of the Ummah and its leading scholars, and all of Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah are agreed that there are from the created things those which will not cease to exist, and will never entirely perish, such as Paradise and Hellfire, the Throne and other than that. And none spoke of the expiration of all of the created things except a faction from the innovating Ahl al-Kalaam, such as al-Jahm bin Safwan and whoever agreed with him from the Mu'tazilah and their likes. This saying is futile, it opposes the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger and the consensus of the Salaf of this Ummah and its leading scholars. Just as there is evidence in that of the eternity of Paradise and its inhabitants, and the eternity of other than that which this page does not suffice for it to be mentioned. Some of the factions of Ahl al-Kalaam and the Mutafalsifah have argued for the impossibility of the expiration of all created things using rational evidences. And Allaah knows best.

Comments

Regarding the mention of al-Jahm bin Safwan, he spoke of the expiration of all created things because he was operating upon the principle that an endless chain of events (tasulsul) is impossible in both the past and the future. Al-Jahm (and Abu al-Hudhayl al-Allaaf al-Mu'tazilee who said all motion will cease) were both consistent in this regard, and this matter is connected to their proof to demonstrate the universe is originated (huduth al-ajsaam) which has its origins in the Hellenized Sabean Philosophers through whom it entered into the Muslim Ummah. The Ash'arites and Maturidis contradicted themselves by allowing an endless chain of events in the future but not in the past. The saying of (إمتناع الحوادث لا أول لها), an endless chain of events in the past is impossible, is the foundation upon which al-Jahm bin Safwan founded all of his ta'teel of the attributes of Allaah, the Exalted, and all of the Ahl al-Kalaam, the Mujassimah amongst them (Rafidah, Karraamiyyah) and the Mu'attilah amongst them (Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, Kullaabiyyah, Ash'ariyyah, Maturidiyyah) all operate upon this premise (refer to this article).
As for Ahl al-Sunnah they say that Allaah has eternally been the doer of whatever He wills, and thus He has eternally been one who speaks if He wills, acts if He wills, creates if He wills, provides if He wills and so on. This means there is no end to Allaah's speech and action in the past or the future. Resulting from this is the saying that it is permissible (yajuz) for their to be an endless chain of events (meaning here things Allaah creates or brings about) in the past and the future, with each and every single one of these events or entities being preceded by it's own non-existence. Thus, there is nothing besides Allaah that is eternal along with Him, and this also falsifies the view of the Philosophers that the universe is eternal along with Allaah and is necessary to His existence. But when the Ahl al-Kalaam began to operate upon their false premise (إمتناع الحوادث لا أول لها), and endless chain of events is impossible, they were forced to deny Allaah's attributes and actions and His will, choice - to varying degrees - in order to remain consistent with their proof for the universe being originated and having a creator. The Jahmiyyah, even though most misguided, were intellectually more honest in sticking to the binding necessities of this proof. As for the Ash'aris and their likes, they fell into great contradiction and intellectually incoherent, despite not being as misguided in the actual views they held. For more information on this subject please visit Asharis.Com.