Question 1

Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Kathir

Was Ibn Kathir considered to be part of Ahl al-Sunna by the orthodox

community even though he was a student of Ibn Taymiya?

Was Ibn Kathirs Islamic faith (aqida) actually different than Ibn Taymiyas? If
so, on what points? (I will need references.) I know he differed on many fiqh
issues, but that is because Ibn Kathir was a Shafii scholar, one such
difference being the Mawlid. Ibn Kathirs tafsir (Quranic exegesis) is widely
regarded as one of the great works of tafsir, but doesnt it contain
anthropormorphic assertions about the attributes of Allah Most High? If so,
how can we reconcile that with the Ashari and Maturidi positions?

Answer
Ibn Kathir (d. 774/1373) is a scholar of Ahl al-Sunna who was of the Shafii
school (according to the first volume of his main work, Tafsir al-Quran
al-Azim, 1.2), while Ibn Taymiya (d. 728/1328) was a scholar whose fiqh
remained in the general framework of the Hanbali school. Ibn Taymiyas
controversies in tenets of faith (aqida) and literalist interpretations of the
attributes of Allah were mostly adopted from what had historically been the
more anthropomorphic end of the previous spectrum of Hanbali aqida
Hanbali in that some of the followers of this school had these beliefs, not that
Ahmad ibn Hanbal in any way supported them or that they were part of his
madhhab. They have been resurrected in our times as Salafism or "return to
early Islam" by moneyed supporters of the Wahhabi sect, whose differences
with Ahl al-Sunna consist almost entirely of the ideas of Ibn Taymiya. In
scholarship, Ibn Kathir was a hadith master (hafiz, someone with at least
100,000 hadiths by memory), while Ibn Taymiya was not: his name does not
appear in any of the works of tabaqat al-huffaz or "successive generations of
hadith masters," that comprehensively document such scholars. Whatever
length of time Ibn Kathir studied with Ibn Taymiya, he was in his twenties
when the latter died, and his long and fruitful career extended over the next
forty-six years.

Alhough I have not read all of Ibn Kathirs Quranic exegesis (tafsir), I have
not found in it any traces of Ibn Taymiyas more unusual positions, the most
significant of which, for aqida and Quranic exegesis, is his claim that "there
is no figurative expression (majaz) in the Quran" (Ibn Taymiya: al-Iman, 83),
even in the use of such words as hand, face, eyes, shin, and the like with
reference to Allah. He says, "Every word in the Book of Allah and His
messenger is conditioned by that which clarifies its meaning, in none of
which is there any figurative expression (majaz); rather, all of it is literal
(haqiqa)" (ibid., 78). Compare this with what Ibn Kathir says about the verse
"Then He was established (istawa) upon the Throne" (Quran 7:54), (istawa
here rendered as "was established" not by way of definitive interpretation,
but rather out of need to answer the question):

People have many positions on this matter, and this is not the place to
present them at length. On this point, we follow the position of the early
Muslims (salaf)Malik, Awzai, Thawri, Layth ibn Sad, Shafii, Ahmad, Ishaq
ibn Rahawayh, as well as others among the Imams of the Muslims, ancient
and modernnamely, to let the verse pass as it has come, without saying
how it is meant (bi la takyif), without any resemblance to created things (wa
la tashbih), and without nullifying it (wa la tatil): the literal outward meaning
(dhahir) that comes to the minds of anthropomorphists (al-mushabbihin) is
negated of Allah [italics mine], for nothing created has any resemblance to
Him: "There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him, and He is the All-hearing,
the All-seeing" (Quran 42:11) (Ibn Kathir: Tafsir al-Quran al-Azim, 2.220).

This is precisely the position of tafwid or "consigning the knowledge of what is

really meant by such scriptural expressions to Allah" that Asharis like Imam
Nawawi and many others held concerning such verses. It cannot be lost on
you how far Ibn Kathir is from anthropomorphism, and I havent found
anything else in his tafsir that suggests he followed the ideas of Ibn Taymiya
or his student Ibn Qayyim in the literalism that gives the impression of
likening Allah to created things. And Allah knows best.