Scholars who made takfir of the Ashairah

«واعلموا رحمكم الله أن صنفا من الجهمية اعتقدوا بمكر قلوبهم، وخبث آرائهم، وقبيح أهوائهم، أن القرآن مخلوق، فكنوا عن ذلك ببدعة اخترعوها، تمويها وبهرجة على العامة، ليخفى كفرهم، ويستغمض إلحادهم على من قل علمه، وضعفت نحيزته، فقالوا: إن القرآن الذي تكلم الله به وقاله، فهو كلام الله غير مخلوق، وهذا الذي نتلوه ونقرؤه بألسنتنا، ونكتبه في مصاحفنا ليس هو القرآن الذي هو كلام الله، ‌هذا ‌حكاية ‌لذلك، ‌فما نقرؤه نحن حكاية لذلك القرآن بألفاظنا نحن، وألفاظنا به مخلوقة، فدققوا في كفرهم، واحتالوا لإدخال الكفر على العامة بأغمض مسلك»
[الإبانة الكبرى - ابن بطة - الجزء ٥ - الصفحة ٣١٧]

Ibn Battah said: “And know, may God have mercy on you, that a group of the Jahmiyyah, by the cunning of their hearts, the corruption of their opinions, and the ugliness of their desires, held that the Qur’an is created. They did this as an innovation, disguised and adorned before the common people, so that their disbelief would be hidden and their impiety concealed from those of little knowledge and weak understanding. They said: ‘The Qur’an by which God spoke and declared is the speech of God and not created. But what we recite, read with our tongues, and write in our Mushafs is not the Qur’an that is God’s speech; it is a Hikayah (narration) of it. What we recite is merely a Hikayah of that Qur’an in our words, and our words in it are created.’ Examine carefully their disbelief and the subtle ways they sought to introduce disbelief to the common people.” [Al-Ibanatul Kubrah - Ibn Battah - Volume 5 - Page 317]

Ibn Battah is speaking on the Kullabiyyah, Bishr al-Marisi, and al-Ash'ari. He is saying that they are a group of the Jahmiyyah, and he is clear on the fact that it is disbelief to hold their view regarding the Quran.

قال الشيخ أسعده الله بطاعته: وهذه صفة الزنادقة الأشعرية، الذين ظهروا في هذا العصر، فأعرضوا عن الكتاب والأثر، واعتمدوا القياس، وقالوا بعقولهم السخيفة، ما يخالف الأثر
[مجلس في الرد على الزنادقة» (ص3)]

Ibn Mandah said: “And this is the description of the Ash‘ari zanadiqah who have appeared in this era: they have turned away from the Qur’an and the Prophetic traditions, relied upon analogy, and with their weak intellects claimed that which contradicts the transmitted reports.” [Majlis fi al-Radd 'ala al-Zanadiqah - Ibn Mandah - Page 3]

قال الشيخ - أسعده الله: وهذا كلام ابن عباس وغيره من الصحابة، ينفي التشبيه بخلاف ما ادعى الزنادقة والأشعريون على حملة العلم المتبعين للكتاب والأثر.
[مجلس في الرد على الزنادقة» (ص4)]

Ibn Mandah said: “(after mentioning a report from Ibn Abbas about knowing Allah through His description in the Quran and Hadith) And this is the statement of Ibn ‘Abbas and others among the Companions, which negates any anthropomorphism, contrary to what the Ash‘ari zanadiqah claim, according to those who follow knowledge and adhere to the Qur’an and the Prophetic tradition.” [Majlis fi al-Radd 'ala al-Zanadiqah - Ibn Mandah - Page 4]

ونقول: من زعم أن حرفا في كتاب الله من المقطوعات مثل: ألم، و: حم عسق، وأشباهها غير كلام الله وأن كلام الله ليس فيها حروف وأن هذا كلام جبريل، فقد قال بخلق القرآن، وسبيله سبيل عبدة الأوثان، نسأل الله الستر الجميل برحمته.
[مجلس في الرد على الزنادقة» (8)]

Ibn Mandah said: "And we say: Whoever claims that a letter in the Book of Allah, such as the disconnected letters like Alif-Lām-Mīm, or Ḥā-Mīm ‘Ayn-Sīn-Qāf, and the like, is not part of the speech of Allah, and that Allah’s speech does not contain letters, and that this is the speech of Jibril—then he has effectively claimed that the Qur’an was created, and his path is the path of idolaters. We ask Allah, by His mercy, to grant us beautiful concealment and protection." [Majlis fi al-Radd 'ala al-Zanadiqah - Ibn Mandah - Page 8]

The Mushrikun of Quraysh used to say that the Quran is not the speech of Allah but rather the speech of Jibril, and with that the Ashairah follow them in their belief.

قال الشيخ - أسعده الله-: وهذه صفة الأشعريين، تقول: ألفاظنا بالقرآن مخلوق، والمقروء والمتلو حكاية عن كلام الله، وأن ما بين الدفتين المكتوب حروفها مخلوقة، فهم قائلون بخلق القرآن عن غير تصريح، نسأل الله أن يحفظ علينا أدياننا، ويختم لنا بالسعادة والإسلام، برحمته.
[مجلس في الرد على الزنادقة» (8)]

Ibn Mandah said: “And this is the description of the Ash‘aris (similar to al-Karabisi): they say that the words we utter in the Qur’an are created, and that the recited and the read is merely a narration of the speech of Allah, and that the letters written between the covers of the book are created. Thus, they claim that the Qur’an is created without explicitly stating it. We ask Allah to preserve our religions for us and to grant us a happy end in Islam, by His mercy.” [Majlis fi al-Radd 'ala al-Zanadiqah - Ibn Mandah - Page 9]

«القرآن تكلم الله به على الحقيقة ، وأنه أنزله على محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم ، وأمره أن يتحدى به ، وأن يدعو الناس إليه ، وأنه القرآن على الحقيقة. متلو في المحاريب ، مكتوب في المصاحف ، محفوظ في صدور الرجال، ‌ليس ‌بحكاية ولا عبارة عن قرآن ، وهو قرآن واحد غير مخلوق وغير مجعول ومربوب ، بل هو صفة من صفات ذاته ، لم يزل به متكلما ، ومن قال غير هذا فهو كافر ضال مضل مبتدع مخالف لمذاهب السنة والجماعة»
[شرح أصول اعتقاد - الجزء ٢ - الصفحة ٣٦٤]

Imam al-Lalakaee said: “The Qur’an is the literal speech of Allah. He revealed it to Muhammad, peace be upon him, commanded him to challenge with it, and to call people to it. It is the Qur’an in truth: recited in the prayer, written in the Mushafs, and preserved in the hearts. It is neither a mere Hikayah (narration) nor a Ibarah (expression) of the Qur’an. It is a single Qur’an, neither created nor made nor fabricated; rather, it is an attribute of God’s essence, eternally. Whoever says otherwise is a disbeliever, misguided, misleading, innovator, and contrary to Ahl Sunnah wal-Jama'ah.” [Sharh Usul I'tiqad - Volume 2 - Page 364]

Allah's attribute of speech is eternal and that's always with Him, but He speaks whenever He wills. That is the understanding of Ahl Sunnah regarding His speech. And He speaks literally, with sound and letter.

قال الهروي (ج4ص411): «ورأيت يحيى بن عمار ما لا أحصي من مرة على منبره يكفرهم ويلعنهم، ويشهد على أبي الحسن الأشعري بالزندقة، وكذلك رأيت عمر بن إبراهيم ومشائخنا»
[ذم الكلام وأهله - ت الأنصاري - مكتبة الغرباء الأثرية - المجلد ٤، الصفحة ٤١١]

Abu Ismail al-Harawi said: “I saw Yahya ibn ‘Ammar, countless times upon his pulpit, declaring them (Asharis) disbelievers, cursing them, and testifying that Abu al-Hasan al-Ash‘ari was a zindiq. And I saw the same from Umar ibn Ibrahim and our shaykhs.” [Dhamm al-Kalam wa Ahlihi - Abu Ismail al-Harawi - Volume 4 - Page 411 - Edition: Maktabah al-Ghuraba al-Athariyyah]

وقال الهروي: وسمعت بلال بن أبي منصور المؤذن يقول: سمعت عمر بن إبراهيم يقول: «لا تحل ذبائح الأشعرية؛ لأنهم ليسوا بمسلمين، ولا بأهل كتاب، ولا يثبتون في الأرض كتاب الله»
[ذم الكلام وأهله - ت الأنصاري - مكتبة الغرباء الأثرية - المجلد ٤، الصفحة ٤١٣]

Abu Ismail al-Harawi mentioned: I heard Bilal ibn Abi Mansur, the muadhin, say: I heard ‘Umar ibn Ibrahim say: "The slaughtered animals of the Ash‘aris are not lawful, because they are neither Muslims nor Ahl Kitab, and they do not believe that the Book of Allah (Quran) is on earth." [Dhamm al-Kalam wa Ahlihi - Abu Ismail al-Harawi - Volume 4 - Page 413 - Edition: Maktabah al-Ghuraba al-Athariyyah]

قال الهروي: سمعت أحمد بن حمزة وأبا علي الحداد يقولون: «وجدنا أبا العباس أحمد بن محمد النهاوندي على الإنكار على أهل الكلام وتكفير الأشعرية»
[ذم الكلام وأهله - ت الأنصاري - مكتبة الغرباء الأثرية - المجلد ٤، الصفحة ٤٠٤]

Abu Ismail al-Harawi mentioned: I heard Ahmad ibn Hamzah and Abu Ali al-Haddad say: ‘We found Abu al-‘Abbas Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Nahawandi engaged in refuting the theologians and making takfir of the Ash‘aris.’” [Dhamm al-Kalam wa Ahlihi - Abu Ismail al-Harawi - Volume 4 - Page 404 - Edition: Maktabah al-Ghuraba al-Athariyyah]

This narration is also mentioned in the book "Jam' al-Juyush wal-Dasakir 'ala Ibn Asakir". Many editions have unjustly removed the parts of Dhamm al-Kalam where takfir was mentioned regarding the Asha'irah, and this narration is one of them.

Here we see that a major scholar of that time like al-Nahawandi viewed the Ashairah to be kuffar.

قال الهروي: «ورأيت يحيى بن عمار ما لا أحصي من مرة على منبره يكفرهم ويلعنهم، ويشهد على أبي الحسن الأشعري بالزندقة»
[ذم الكلام وأهله - ت الأنصاري - مكتبة الغرباء الأثرية - المجلد ٤، الصفحة ٤١١]

Abu Ismail al-Harawi said: “I saw Yahya ibn ‘Ammar, countless times upon his pulpit, declaring them (Asharis) disbelievers, cursing them, and testifying that Abu al-Hasan al-Ash‘ari was a zindiq.” [Dhamm al-Kalam wa Ahlihi - Abu Ismail al-Harawi - Volume 4 - Page 411 - Edition: Maktabah al-Ghuraba al-Athariyyah]

قال الهروي: وسمعت أبي يقول: سمعت أبا المظفر الترمذي -هو حبال بن أحمد- إمام أهل ترمذ: «يشهد عليهم بالزندقة»
[ذم الكلام وأهله - ت الأنصاري - مكتبة الغرباء الأثرية - المجلد ٤، الصفحة ٤٠٨]

Abu Ismail al-Harawi mentioned: I heard my father say: I heard Abu al-Muzaffar al-Tirmidhi—who is Habbāl ibn Ahmad—the imam of the people of Tirmidh, declaring them (Asharis) to be zanadiqah. [Dhamm al-Kalam wa Ahlihi - Abu Ismail al-Harawi - Volume 4 - Page 408 - Edition: Maktabah al-Ghuraba al-Athariyyah]

«الأشعرية ضلال زنادقة إخوان … من عَبَدَ العُزَّى مع الَّلات
بِرَبِّهِمْ كفروا جَهْراً وقولهُمُ … إذا تدبرته أسوا المقالاتِ
ينفون ما أثبتوا عودا ببدئهم … عقائد القوم من أوهى المُحالات»
[إثبات الحدّ - الدشتي - الصفحة ٢٦٧]

Al-Dashti mentioned: Al-Silafi said: “The Ash‘aris are misguided, zanadiqah, brethren of those who worshipped al-‘Uzzā alongside al-Lāt. They have openly disbelieved in their Lord, and their speech—when you reflect upon it—is among the worst of statements. They deny what they themselves first affirmed; the doctrines of these people are among the worst of impossibilities.” [Ithbat al-Hadd - Al-Dashti - Page 267]

ولقد حكى محمد بن عبد الله المالكي المغربي٤٥ وكان فقيهاً صالحاً عن الشيخ أبي سعيد البرقي٦ وهو من شيوخ فقهاء المالكيين ببرقة٧ عن أستاذه خلف المعلم٨ وكان من فقهاء المالكيين أيضاً أنه١ قال: أقام الأشعري أربعين سنة على الاعتزال، ثم أظهر التوبة، فرجع عن الفروع وثبت على الأصول.
وهذا كلام خبير بمذهب الأشعري وغوره ٢.
[ص211-210 - كتاب رسالة السجزي إلى أهل زبيد]

Al-Sijzi mentioned: Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Mālikī al-Maghribī—who was a righteous jurist—related from Shaykh Abū Saʿīd al-Barqī, one of the leading Mālikī jurists in Barqa, from his teacher Khalaf al-Muʿallim, who was also among the Mālikī jurists, that he said: "Al-Ashʿarī remained upon the doctrine of the Muʿtazilah for forty years, then he publicly repented. He retracted from the subsidiary matters (furūʿ) but remained firm upon the foundational principles (uṣūl)." Al-Sijzi said: "And this is a statement coming from an expert in the doctrine of al-Ashʿarī and its deeper dimensions." [Al-Risalah ila Ahl Zabid - Al-Sijzi - Page 210-211]

This shows that Abu al-Hasan al-Ashari remained a Mutakallim, and that he never repented from the methodology of Ahl al-Kalam. He only differed with the Mu'tazilah in the Furu', but upon the foundations he agreed with them.

Like for example that the Quran on earth is created, and that Allah does not speak literally, with sound and letter.

[الفصل السابع: في بيان فعلهم في إثبات الصفات في الظاهر وعدولهم إلى التأويل في الباطن]
وينبغي أن يتأمل قول الكلابية والأشعرية في الصفات، ليعلم أنهم غير مثبتين (إلهاًَ) ١ في الحقيقة، وأنهم يتخيرون من النصوص ما أرادوه، ويتركون سائرها ويخالفونه.
من ذلك اعترافهم بأن الله سبحانه موصوف بأن له يداً وأن هذه الصفة إنما عرفت من جهة السمع، وأظهروا الرد على المعتزلة في ذلك.
وأهل السنة متفقون على أن لله سبحانه يدين، بذلك ورد النص في الكتاب والأثر، قال الله تعالى: {لِمَا خَلَقْتُ بِيَدَيّ} ٢. وقال النبيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم: "وكلتا يدي الرحمن يمين" ٣. وعند الكلابية أن له يدا واحدة١ ومن أثبت له يدي صفة فقد ضل. ثم فسروا اليد وعدلوا في التفسيرعن الظاهر إلى تأويل مخالف له فعادوا إلى المعتزلة.
والأشعري أثبت يدين لكنه وافق ابن كلاب في التأويل٢.
وكل حديث جاء في الصحيح مما يتعلق في الصفات عدلوا به إلى معنى غير الصفة. منها حديث ابن مسعود عن النبيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم في قوله: {وَمَا قَدَرُوا اللَّهَ حَقَّ قَدْرِهِ وَالْأَرْضُ جَمِيعاً قَبْضَتُهُ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ} ٣
فقال١: "يحمل السموات على أصبع والأرضين على أصبع" ٢.
ومنها حديثه الثابت عنه عليه السلام: "قلوب العباد بين أصبعين من أصابع إلرحمن" رواه النواس بن سمعان ٣ وجماعة من الصحابة رحمهم الله١.
ومنها (حديث) ٢ أبي هريرة عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: "يضحك الله سبحانه وتعالى إلى رجلين" ٣
وحديث أبي رزين١ في معناه٢.
ومن ذلك الغضب، والرضى، وغير ذلك، وقد نطق القرآن بأكثرها٣.
وعند أهل الأثر أنها صفات ذاته لا يفسر منها إلا ما فسره النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أو الصحابي
بل نمر هذه الأحاديث على ما جاءت بعد قبولها والإيمان بها والاعتقاد بما فيها بلا كيفية١.
ولأبي بكر بن فورك الأصبهاني١ كتابان في تفسيرما ورد في القرآن من الصفات، ومعنى ما جاء في الحديث الصحيح٢ منها ما يخالف
في ... ١ أهل السنة. ومن أتقن السنة ثم تأمل كتابيه بانَ له خلاف أبي بكر بن فورك وأصحابه للحق.
[ص270-263 - كتاب رسالة السجزي إلى أهل زبيد]

Al-Sijzi said: "[Chapter Seven: On Explaining Their Method of Affirming the Attributes Outwardly While Resorting to Interpretation Inwardly] It is necessary to reflect on the statements of the Kullābiyyah and the Ashʿariyyah regarding the attributes, so that one may realize that they do not truly affirm a (deity) in reality, and that they selectively choose from the texts what suits their aims, leaving the rest and opposing it. Among this is their acknowledgment that God—Glorified and Exalted—is described as having a hand, and that this attribute is only known through transmitted revelation. They have openly refuted the Muʿtazilah on this point. Ahl al-Sunnah are in agreement that God—Glorified and Exalted—has two hands, as this is established in the Qur’an and the ḥadīth. Allah تعالى said: “For what I created with My two hands” [Qur’an 38:75]. And the Prophet ﷺ said: “Both of the hands of the Most Merciful are right.” The Kullābiyyah hold that He has only one hand, and that whoever affirms for Him two hands as an attribute has gone astray. They then interpret the “hand,” departing from the apparent meaning to a figurative interpretation, thus returning to the position of the Muʿtazilah. Al-Ashʿarī affirmed two hands, but he agreed with Ibn Kullāb in his methodology of Tawil (on other aspects). And every ḥadīth found in the authentic collections regarding the attributes, they reinterpret to a meaning other than the attribute. Among them is the ḥadīth of Ibn Masʿūd from the Prophet ﷺ regarding His words: “And they did not appraise Allah with true appraisal, while the whole earth will be in His grasp on the Day of Resurrection” (Qur’an 39:67). He ﷺ said: “He will hold the heavens on one finger and the earths on one finger.” Among them is his established ḥadīth: “The hearts of the servants are between two fingers of the Most Merciful,” narrated by al-Nawwās ibn Samʿān and a group of the Companions, may Allah have mercy on them. Also, from Abu Hurayrah, the Prophet ﷺ said: “Allah—Glorified and Exalted—laughs to two men.” And the ḥadīth of Abu Razīn conveys a similar meaning. Among these are the attributes of anger, pleasure, and others, most of which the Qur’an has expressed. According to Ahl al-Athar, these are attributes of His essence, and nothing is interpreted from them except what the Prophet ﷺ or the Companions explained. Rather, we accept these ḥadīth as they came, affirming and believing in them, without questioning how. Abū Bakr ibn Fūrak al-Aṣbahānī wrote two books on interpreting what has been reported in the Qur’an regarding the attributes, and on the meanings of the ḥadīth in the authentic collections, some of which contradict Ahl al-Sunnah. Whoever masters the Sunnah and then reflects on his two books will realize the opposition of Abū Bakr ibn Fūrak and his companions to the truth." [Al-Risalah ila Ahl Zabid - Al-Sijzi - Page 263-270]

والمعتزلة مع سوء مذهبهم أقل ضرراً على عوام أهل السنة من هؤلاء، لأن المعتزلة قد أظهرت مذهبها ولم تستقف٢ ولم تموه.
[ص270 - كتاب رسالة السجزي إلى أهل زبيد]

Al-Sijzi said: "And the Muʿtazilah, despite the flaws in their doctrine, are less harmful to the common people of Ahl al-Sunnah than these others (Ashairah), because the Muʿtazilah have openly declared their doctrine and did not conceal or disguise it." [Al-Risalah ila Ahl Zabid - Al-Sijzi - Page 270]

والكلابية والأشعرية قد أظهروا الرد على المعتزلة، والذب عن السنة وأهلها، وقالوا في القرآن وسائر الصفات ما ذكرنا بعضه، وقولهم في القرآن حيره١ يدعون قرآنا ليس بعربي وأنه الصفة الأزلية وأما هذا النظم العربي فمخلوق عندهم٢.
[ص273 - كتاب رسالة السجزي إلى أهل زبيد]

Al-Sijzi said: "The Kullābiyyah and the Ashʿariyyah have outwardly shown opposition to the Muʿtazilah and defended (some aspects of) the Sunnah and its people. However, they spoke regarding the Qur’an and the other attributes as we have mentioned some of it. Concerning the Qur’an, they express a confusion—they claim there is a Qur’an that is not in Arabic, and that it is the eternal attribute, whereas this Arabic text is, in their view, created." [Al-Risalah ila Ahl Zabid - Al-Sijzi - Page 273]

For the Ashairah, the Quran we see here on earth is a second Quran which is a created expression of the uncreated Quran which remains in Allah's Self. They say Allah speaks in Himself, which they called Kalam Nafsi. They believe that He doesn't speak literally, as it is without sound or letters.

So they believe the Quran on earth to be created and not the actual Quran, because they believe Allah wouldn't speak the Quran with sound or letters. In this they agree with the Mu'tazilah that what we have in the Mushaf is created.

وقال أبو محمّد بن كلاب ومن وافقه، والأشعري وغيرهم: "القرآن غير مخلوق، ومن قال بخلقه كافر إلا أن الله لا يتكلم بالعربية، ولا بغيرها من اللغات ولا يدخل كلامه النظم، والتأليف، والتعاقب، ولا يكون حرفاً ولا صوتاً "١. فقد بان بما قالوه١ أن القرآن الذي نفوا الخلق عنه ليس بعربي، وليس له أوّل ولا آخر.
ومنكر القرآن العربي وأنه كلام الله كافر بإجماع الفقهاء٢ ومثبت قرآن لا أوّل له ولا آخر كافر بإجماعهم
[ص155-154 - كتاب رسالة السجزي إلى أهل زبيد]

Al-Sijzi said: "Abu Muhammad ibn Kilab, those who agreed with him, al-Ash‘ari, and others said: “The Qur’an is uncreated, and whoever claims that it was created is a disbeliever—except that Allah does not speak in Arabic, nor in any other language, and His speech does not involve meter, composition, succession, nor does it consist of letters or sounds.” From what they stated, it is clear that the Qur’an, whose creation they denied, is not in Arabic and has neither beginning nor end. Whoever denies that the Qur’an is Arabic and that it is the speech of Allah is a disbeliever according to the consensus of jurists, and whoever affirms a Qur’an that has no beginning or end is also a disbeliever according to their consensus." [Al-Risalah ila Ahl Zabid - Al-Sijzi - Page 154-155]

في مجلس له أشار إلى القشيري ومن معه وقال: «أى صلح يكون بيننا؟ إنما يكون الصلح بين مختصمين على ولاية، أو دنيا، أو تنازع فى ملك. فأما هؤلاء القوم: ‌فإنهم ‌يزعمون ‌أنّا ‌كفار، ونحن نزعم أن من لا يعتقد ما نعتقده كان كافرا، فأىّ صلح بيننا؟»[[9]]
[ذيل طبقات الحنابلة - الجزء ١ - الصفحة ٤٢]

In a gathering, he pointed to al-Qushayri and those with him and said: “What kind of reconciliation could there be between us? Reconciliation occurs only between two disputants over a position, or worldly matters, or a contested property. As for these people: they claim that we are disbelievers, and we (the Hanbalis) claim that whoever does not believe what we believe is a disbeliever—so what reconciliation could there be between us?” [Dhayl Tabaqat al-Hanabilah - Volume 1 - Page 42]

«فكان آخر البدع ظهورا مذهب الأشعري وتولى نصرته الظلمة وأرباب الدنيا، وأصحاب المظالم، القائلين بما يخالف الشرع من النجامة، والفلسفة، والإدمان على المظالم، والفسق؛ لتعلم أن هذه البدعة شر البدع بظهورها آخر الزمان، وانتشارها في فاسد البلدان، وركوب دعاتها التموية والمحال، والكلام المرخرف، وفي باطنه الكفر والضلال، فزمان هذه البدعة أخبث الأزمنة وأتباعها أخبت الأمة، ودعاتها أقل أديان هذه الملة»
[الرسالة الواضحة في الرد على الأشاعرة - ابن الحنبلي - الجزء ٢ - الصفحة ٤٥٢]

Ibn al-Hanbali said: “The last of the innovations to appear was the Ash‘ari doctrine, and its support was taken up by the ignorant, the worldly-minded, the oppressors, and those guilty of injustices, who speak in ways contrary to the Law—through astrology, philosophy, persistent wrongdoing, and immorality. It should be known that this innovation is the worst of all innovations due to its appearance in the end times, its spread in corrupt lands, the deceitful and impossible claims of its proponents, and the nonsensical speech that conceals Kufr and misguidance. The era of this innovation is the vilest of times, its followers the vilest of the community, and its promoters the least religious among this nation.” [Al-Risalah al-Wadihah fi al-Radd 'ala al-Ash'ariyyah - Ibn al-Hanbali - Volume 2 - Page 452]

فمن زعم أنه مخلوق أو عبارته أو التلاوة غير المتلو، أو قال: لفظي بالقرآن مخلوق فهو كافر بالله العظيم، ولا يخالط ولا يؤاكل ولا يناكح ولا يجاور، بل يهجر ويهان، ولا يصلى خلفه، ولا تقبل شهادته، ولا تصح ولايته في نكاح وليه، ولا يصلى عليه إذا مات، فإن ظفر به استتيب ثلاثًا كالمرتد، فإن تاب وإلا قتل.
[الغنية للطالبين لطريق الحق - عبد القادر الجيلاني - الجزء ١ - الصفحة ١٢٨]

Abdul-Qadir al-Jilani said: "Whoever claims that the Qur’an is created, or that it is merely an 'Ibarah (expression), or that what is recited is different than what is original, or says: “My recitation of the Qur’an is created,” is a disbeliever in God, the Almighty. He should not be associated with, dined with, married to, or resided near; rather, he should be avoided and humiliated. Prayer should not be performed behind him, his testimony is not accepted, his guardianship in marriage is invalid, and funeral prayer should not be offered for him if he dies. If he is captured, he should be asked to repent three times like an apostate; if he repents, well and good, otherwise he receives the capital punishment." [Al-Ghunyah li al-Talibin Tariq al-Haqq - Abdul-Qadir al-Jilani - Volume 1 - Page 128]

وَهَذَا حَال هَؤُلَاءِ الْقَوْم لَا محَالة فهم زنادقة بِغَيْر شكّ فَإِنَّهُ لَا شكّ فِي أَنهم يظهرون تَعْظِيم الْمَصَاحِف إيهاما أَن فِيهَا الْقُرْآن ويعتقدون فِي الْبَاطِن أَنه لَيْسَ فِيهَا إِلَّا الْوَرق والمداد ويظهرون تَعْظِيم الْقُرْآن ويجتمعون لقرَاءَته فِي المحافل والأعرية ويعتقدون أَنه من تأليف جِبْرِيل وَعبارَته ويظهرون أَن مُوسَى سمع كَلَام الله من الله ثمَّ يَقُولُونَ لَيْسَ بِصَوْت
وَيَقُولُونَ فِي أذانهم وصلواتهم أشهد ان مُحَمَّدًا رَسُول الله ويعتقدون أَنه انْقَطَعت رسَالَته ونبوته بِمَوْتِهِ وَأَنه لم يبْق رَسُول الله وَإِنَّمَا كَانَ رَسُول الله فِي حَيَاته وَحَقِيقَة مَذْهَبهم أَنه لَيْسَ فِي السَّمَاء إِلَه وَلَا فِي الأَرْض قُرْآن وَلَا أَن مُحَمَّدًا رَسُول الله وَلَيْسَ فِي أهل الْبدع كلهم من يتظاهر بِخِلَاف مَا يَعْتَقِدهُ غَيرهم وَغير من أشبههم من الزَّنَادِقَة
[ص51-50 - كتاب المناظرة في القرآن]

Ibn Qudamah said: "And this is undoubtedly the condition of these people — they are certainly zanadiqah without any doubt. For there is no doubt that they outwardly show veneration for the muṣḥafs (written copies of the Quran) to give the impression that the Quran is in them, while inwardly they believe that they contain nothing but paper and ink. They outwardly display reverence for the Quran and gather to recite it in public assemblies and ceremonies, while inwardly believing that it is the composition and expression of Jibrīl. And they outwardly claim that Mūsā heard the speech of Allah from Allah, then they say that it was without sound." "They say in their call to prayer and their prayers: ‘I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah’, yet they believe that his message and prophethood ended with his death, and that he is no longer the Messenger of Allah — rather, he was the Messenger of Allah only during his lifetime. The true reality of their doctrine is that there is no God in the heavens, nor is there a Quran on earth, nor that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. Among all the people of innovation, there is none who outwardly shows the opposite of what they inwardly believe more than them and those like them from among the heretics (zanādiqah)." [Al-Manadharah fi al-Quran - Page 50-51]

Ibn Qudamah is very harsh towards the Asha'irah, as could clearly be seen in his sayings. How can some say that he was a mufawwid, while he views the Asha'irah to be zanadiqah!?

He then adds to this by speaking harshly about the founder of the Asha'irah: Abu Hasan al-Ash'ari:

وَمن الْعجب أَن إمَامهمْ الَّذِي أنشأ هَذِه الْبِدْعَة رجل لم يعرف بدين وَلَا ورع وَلَا شَيْء من عُلُوم الشَّرِيعَة الْبَتَّةَ وَلَا ينْسب إِلَيْهِ من الْعلم إِلَّا علم الْكَلَام المذموم وهم يعترفون بِأَنَّهُ أَقَامَ على الاعتزال أَرْبَعِينَ عَاما ثمَّ أظهر الرُّجُوع عَنهُ فَلم يظْهر مِنْهُ بعد التَّوْبَة سوى هَذِه الْبِدْعَة فَكيف تصور فِي عُقُولهمْ أَن الله لَا يوفق لمعْرِفَة الْحق إِلَّا عدوه وَلَا يَجْعَل الْهدى إِلَّا مَعَ من لَيْسَ لَهُ فِي علم الاسلام نصيب وَلَا فِي الدّين حَظّ ثمَّ إِن هَذِه الْبِدْعَة مَعَ ظُهُور فَسَادهَا وَزِيَادَة قبحها قد انتشرت انتشارا كثيرا وَظَهَرت ظهورا عَظِيما وأظنها آخر الْبدع وأخبثها وَعَلَيْهَا تقوم السَّاعَة وَأَنَّهَا لَا تزداد إِلَّا كَثْرَة وانتشارا
[ص51 - كتاب المناظرة في القرآن]

Ibn Qudamah said: "And among the astonishing things is that the imam (leader) of theirs who originated this innovation was a man not known for religion, nor for piety, nor for any knowledge of the Shari‘ah whatsoever. He is not attributed with any knowledge except the blameworthy ‘ilm al-kalām (theological dialectic). They themselves admit that he adhered to the doctrine of i‘tizāl (Mu‘tazilism) for forty years, then claimed to have abandoned it — yet nothing appeared from him after his ‘repentance’ except this innovation. So how can it be conceived in their minds that Allah would not guide anyone to the truth except His enemy, and that He would place guidance only with someone who has no share in the knowledge of Islam, nor any portion in the religion? Furthermore, this innovation — despite the clear evidence of its corruption and the increasing ugliness of it — has spread widely and appeared greatly. I suspect it is the last of the innovations and the most wicked of them. Upon it the Hour (Day of Judgment) will be established. And it will only continue to increase in number and spread further." [Al-Manadharah fi al-Quran - Page 51-53]

ومدار الْقَوْم على القَوْل بِخلق الْقُرْآن ووفاق الْمُعْتَزلَة وَلَكِن أَحبُّوا ان لَا يعلم بهم فارتكبوا مُكَابَرَة العيان وَجحد الْحَقَائِق وَمُخَالفَة الْإِجْمَاع ونبذ الْكتاب وَالسّنة وَرَاء ظُهُورهمْ وَالْقَوْل بِشَيْء لم يقلهُ قبلهم مُسلم وَلَا كَافِر
[ص34 - كتاب المناظرة في القرآن]

Ibn Qudamah said: "The foundation of their doctrine is the claim that the Quran is created, in agreement with the Muʿtazilah. But they preferred to conceal this, so they resorted to denying what is clearly visible, rejecting realities, opposing consensus, discarding the Book and the Sunnah, and saying something that no Muslim or disbeliever before them ever said." [Al-Manadharah fi al-Quran - Page 34]

وَمن الْعجب انهم لَا يتجاسرون على إِظْهَار قَوْلهم وَلَا التَّصْرِيح بِهِ إِلَّا فِي الخلوات وَلَو أَنهم وُلَاة الْأَمر وأرباب الدولة وَإِذا حكيت عَنْهُم مقالتهم الَّتِي يعتقدونها كَرهُوا ذَلِك وأنكروا وكابروا عَلَيْهِ وَلَا يتظاهرون إِلَّا بتعظيم الْقُرْآن وتبجيل الْمَصَاحِف وَالْقِيَام لَهَا عِنْد رؤيتها وَفِي الخلوات يَقُولُونَ مَا فِيهَا إِلَّا الْوَرق والمداد وَأي شَيْء فِيهَا وَهَذَا فعل الزَّنَادِقَة
[ص34 - كتاب المناظرة في القرآن]

Ibn Qudamah said: "Astonishingly, they do not dare to make their belief public, nor to openly state it — except in secret gatherings — and only if they are among the authorities or rulers. If you report their belief as something they actually hold, they hate that, deny it, and dispute it. Outwardly, they appear to venerate the Quran, honor the physical muṣḥaf, and even stand for it when they see it. But in private they say: ‘There is nothing in it but paper and ink — what is in it anyway?’ This is the very behavior of the zanādiqah." [Al-Manadharah fi al-Quran - Page 34]

٤٤٤ - عبْد الساتر بْنُ عبْدِ الحميدِ (١) بنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ أَبِي بَكْرِ بْنِ مَاضِي المَقْدِسِيُّ الفَقِيْهُ، تَقِى الدِّيْنِ، أَبُو مُحَمَّدٍ. سَمِعَ مِنْ مُوسَى بْنِ عَبْدِ القَادِرِ، وَابْنِ الزَّبِيْدِيِّ، وَالشَّيْخُ مُوَفَّقِ الدِّيْنِ وَغَيْرِهِمْ. وَتَفَقَّهَ عَلَى التَّقِيِّ بْنِ العِزِّ، وَمَهَرَ فِي المَذْهَبِ، وَعُنِيَ بِالسُّنَّةِ، وَجَمَعَ فِيْهَا، وَنَاظَر الخُصُوْمَ وَكَفَّرَهُمْ، وَكَانَ صَاحِبَ جُرْأَةٍ، وَتَحَرُّقٍ عَلَى الأشعَرِيَّةِ، فَرَمَوْهُ بِالتَّجْسِيْمِ.
[ذيل طبقات الحنابلة - الجزء ٤ - الصفحة ١٥٦]

ʿAbd al-Sātir ibn ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd ibn Muḥammad ibn Abī Bakr ibn Mādhī al-Maqdisī, the jurist, pious in religion, known as Abū Muḥammad. He studied under Mūsā ibn ʿAbd al-Qādir, Ibn al-Zubaydī, al-Shaykh Muwafaq al-Dīn, and others. He mastered jurisprudence under al-Taqī ibn al-ʿIzz, excelled in the school of law, devoted himself to the Sunnah, and compiled knowledge of it. He debated his opponents (Asharis) and declared them disbelievers. He was bold and zealous against the Asharis, who accused him of anthropomorphism (tajsīm). [Dhayl Tabaqat al-Hanabilah - Volume 4 - Page 156]

«ونعتقد ‌أن ‌الحروف ‌المكتوبة ‌والأصوات المسموعة عين كلام الله عز وجل، لا حكاية ولا عبارة» ثم قال: «فمن لم يقل إن هذه الأحرف عين كلام الله عز وجل فقد مرق من الدين، وخرج عن جملة المسلمين»
[ص141-140 - كتاب الاقتصاد في الاعتقاد للمقدسي]

Abdul-Ghaniy al-Maqdisi said: “And we believe that the written letters and the audible recitations (from the Quran) are the very speech of God, Exalted is He—neither a mere narration nor a mere expression. Whoever does not say that these letters are the very speech of God, Exalted is He, has deviated from the religion and has left the fold of the Muslims.” [Al-Iqtisad fi al-I'tiqad - Abdul-Ghaniy al-Maqdisi - Page 140-141]

فأخذا الجواب (١) وذهبا فأطالا الغيبة ثم رجعا, ولم يأتيا بكلام محصل إلا طلب الحضور، فأغلظت لهم في الجواب، وقلت لهم بصوت رفيع (٢): يا مبدلين (٣) يا مرتدين (٤) عن الشريعة يا زنادقة (٥)
[التسعينية - ابن تيمية - المجلد ١ - الصفحة ١١٨]

Ibn Taymiyyah said: “They took (Ashari guards) the response and went, prolonging their absence, then returned. They brought no summary of the discussion except the request for my presence. I responded sharply to them, and said in a loud voice: ‘O Mubaddilun, O Murtadun from the Sharia, O Zanadiqah!’” [Al-Tis'eeniyyah - Ibn Taymiyyah - Volume 1 - Page 118]

These are sharp words from Ibn Taymiyyah said to the Ashari guards who imprisoned him. He was calling them zanadiqah and murtadun, which is a clear takfir of the Ashairah.

However, Ibn Taymiyyah made distinctions between those who were ignorant and those who have seen the verses and narrations about Allah's attributes but still decided to reject them through Tawil.

As for those guards, Ibn Taymiyyah considered them inexcusable, for they knew the verses and narrations yet still ignored and rejected them, persisting in their ta’til through tawil/tafwid.

وفي [الجامع لسيرة شيخ الإسلام (ص50)] جاء جماعة من المشايخ التدامرة نحو سنة (708هـ) إلى ابن تيمية وقالوا: «يا سيدي قد حمَّلونا كلامًا نقوله لك، وحلَّفونا أنه ما يطَّلِع عليه غيرنا: أن تنزِلَ لهم عن مسألة العرش ومسألة القرآن، ونأخذ خطك بذلك، نوقف عليه السلطان ونقول له: هذا الذي حَبَسْنا ابن ‌تيمية عليه، قد رجع عنه، ونَقْطع نحن الورقة» فقال لهم الشيخ: «تدعونني أن أكتب بخطي أنه ليس فوق العرش إله يُعبد، ولا في المصاحف قرآن، ولا لله في الأرض كلام؟ ! ودقَّ بعمامته الأرضَ، وقام واقفًا ورفع برأسه إلى السماء، وقال: اللهم إني أشهدك على أنهم يدعونني ‌أن ‌أكفر بك وبكتبك ورسلك، وأن هذا شيءٌ ما أعمله» ثم دعا عليهم.
[ص50 - كتاب الجامع لسيرة شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية]

It is reported that a group of shaykhs from Tadmur came to Ibn Taymiyyah around the year 708 AH and said: ‘Ya sayyidi, they have tasked us with conveying a message to you, and made us swear that no one else would know of it: that you concede to them regarding the issue of the Throne and the issue of the Qur’an. We will take a written statement from you and present it to the Sultan, saying: “This is what we imprisoned Ibn Taymiyyah for, and he has now retracted it,” and then we will tear up the document.’ The Shaykh replied: ‘You are asking me to write with my own handwriting that there is no God above the Throne to be worshipped, that there is no Qur’an in the muṣḥafs, and that Allah has no speech on earth?!’ Then he struck the ground with his turban, stood up, raised his head to the sky, and said: ‘O Allah, I bear witness before You that they are calling me to disbelieve in You, in Your Books, and in Your Messengers—and this is something I will never do.’ Then he supplicated against them.” [Al-Jami' li Siyar - Muhammad 'Azir Shams - Page 50]

In this, it is clear that Ibn Taymiyyah regarded the Ashʿarī position as disbelief—among both their early and later scholars—particularly concerning their views on the Qur’an, the Speech of Allah, and His transcendence (ʿuluww).

وقال: «ولهذا يعترف هذا الرازي بأن النزاع بينهم وبين المعتزلة في الرؤية قريب من اللفظي فعلم أن هؤلاء حقيقة باطنهم ‌باطن ‌المعتزلة الجهمية المعطلة وإن كان ظاهرهم ظاهر أهل الإثبات كما أن المعتزلة عند التحقيق حقيقة أمرهم أمر الملاحدة نفاة الأسماء والصفات بالكلية وإن تظاهروا بالرد عليهم والملاحدة حقيقة أمرهم حقيقة من يجحد الصانع بالكلية هذا لعمري عند التحقيق»
[بيان تلبيس الجهمية - ابن تيمية - الجزء ٤ - الصفحة ٤٠١]

Ibn Taymiyyah said: “This al-Razi admits that the dispute between them (later Asharis) and the Mu‘tazilah regarding al-ru’ya (vision) is close to a verbal one, for he knew that in reality their inner truth is the inner truth of the Mu‘tazilah Jahmiyyah of negation, even if their outward appearance is like that of the people of affirmation. Just as the Mu‘tazilah, when examined closely, their reality is the same as that of the atheists—completely denying the Names and Attributes—though they outwardly appear to refute the atheists. And the reality of the atheists is the same as that of those who completely deny the Maker. This, in my view, is the reality upon close examination.” [Bayan Talbis al-Jahmiyyah - Ibn Taymiyyah - Volume 4 - Page 401]

Ibn Taymiyyah points out that the later Ash‘aris, in essence, hold the same beliefs, with differences only in wording or minor details.

He explains that, in reality, the later Ash‘aris very much resemble the Mu‘tazilah, even though they seem to oppose them outwardly.

قَدْ كَفَّرَ أَحْمَد بْنُ حَنْبَلٍ وَوَكِيعٌ وَغَيْرُهُمَا مَنْ قَالَ بِقَوْلِ جَهْمٍ فِي الْإِيمَانِ الَّذِي نَصَرَهُ أَبُو الْحَسَنِ. وَهُوَ عِنْدَهُمْ شَرٌّ مِنْ قَوْلِ الْمُرْجِئَةِ
[مجموع الفتاوى - ابن تيمية - الجزء ٧ - الصفحة ١٢٠]

Ibn Taymiyyah said: "Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Waki‘, and others declared takfir of whoever held the position of Jahm regarding Iman. Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari holds the view of Jahm in that. And according to them (Ahmad, Waki', and others), holding such view is worse than the view of the Murji'ah." [Majmu' al-Fatawa - Ibn Taymiyyah - Volume 7 - Page 120]

Ibn Taymiyyah acknowledges the fact that Abu al-Hasan al-Ashari held a belief of kufr due to supporting the view of Jahm regarding Iman.

نعم وُقُوع الْغَلَط فِي مثل هَذَا يُوجب مَا نقُوله دَائِما إِن الْمُجْتَهد فِي مثل هَذَا من الْمُؤمنِينَ إِن استفرغ وَسعه فِي طلب الْحق فَإِن الله يغْفر لَهُ خطأه وَإِن حصل مِنْهُ نوع تَقْصِير فَهُوَ ذَنْب لَا يجب ان يبلغ الْكفْر وَإِن كَانَ يُطلق القَوْل بِأَن هَذَا الْكَلَام كفر كَمَا أطلق السّلف الْكفْر على من قَالَ بِبَعْض مقالات الْجَهْمِية مثل القَوْل بِخلق الْقُرْآن أَو إِنْكَار الرُّؤْيَة أَو نَحْو ذَلِك مِمَّا هُوَ دون إِنْكَار علو الله على الْخلق وَأَنه فَوق الْعَرْش فَإِن تَكْفِير صَاحب هَذِه الْمقَالة كَانَ عِنْدهم من أظهر الْأُمُور فَإِن التَّكْفِير الْمُطلق مثل الْوَعيد الْمُطلق لَا يسْتَلْزم تَكْفِير الشَّخْص الْمعِين حَتَّى تقوم عَلَيْهِ الْحجَّة الَّتِي تكفر تاركها
[الاستقامة - ابن تيمية - الجزء ١ - الصفحتان ١٦٣-١٦٤]

Ibn Taymiyyah said: “Indeed, making a mistake in matters like this leads to what we always say: a mujtahid in such issues remains among the believers if he exerts all his effort in seeking the truth. God forgives his error, and if some shortcoming occurs on his part, it is a sin but does not necessarily amount to disbelief. Although it is sometimes said that such statements are disbelief—as the early scholars (al-salaf) applied the term disbelief to those who expressed certain Jahmiyyah views, such as claiming the Qur’an was created, denying the vision (al-ru’ya), or similar matters such as denying God’s exaltedness above His creation and His position above the Throne—declaring the person holding such a view a disbeliever was, for them, a matter of apparent clarity. Absolute declarations of disbelief, like absolute warnings, do not automatically make a specific person a disbeliever until the evidence proving it against them is established.” [Al-Istiqamah - Ibn Taymiyyah - Volume 1 - Page 163-164]

Ibn Taymiyyah explains that if someone holds a kufri belief due to misunderstanding or ignorance of the religious texts, they must first be informed and guided before being labeled a disbeliever.

This is especially clear when considering converts to Islam. No one would declare a convert a disbeliever simply because they misread an Arabic word in the Qur’an, leading them to mistakenly believe that Allah does not have Hands, when in fact He does.

The proper approach would be to teach the convert the correct meaning of the verse. While the initial misunderstanding might technically fall under disbelief, the person would not be considered a disbeliever because of their genuine ignorance of the truth.

This reflects Ibn Taymiyyah’s methodology: he is known to excuse prominent scholars among the Ash‘aris, viewing their errors as stemming from misunderstanding or ignorance of the truth. Even though he acknowledges that their beliefs about the Qur’an, Allah’s speech, and the denial of His Uluww constitute major disbelief, he still considers them accountable only in light of their knowledge and intent.

Some might interpret Ibn Taymiyyah as saying that philosophers, too, could be rewarded for seeking the truth through philosophy. However, Ibn Taymiyyah limits this reward to those who strive for truth through the Qur’an and Hadith, not through purely philosophical reasoning.

ولا ريب أن من اجتهد في طلب الحق والدين من جهة الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم، وأخطأ في بعض ذلك فالله يغفر له خطأه، تحقيقاً للدعاء الذي استجابه الله لنبيه وللمؤمنين حيث قالوا: {ربنا لا تؤاخذنا إن نسينا أو أخطأنا} (البقرة: ٢٨٦) .
[درء تعارض العقل والنقل - ابن تيمية - الجزء ٢ - الصفحة ١٠٣]

Ibn Taymiyyah said: "There is no doubt that whoever strives to seek the truth and the religion based on the teachings of the Messenger ﷺ, and errs in some of it, God will forgive his mistake. This fulfills the prayer that God accepted from His Prophet and the believers when they said: 'Our Lord, do not impose blame upon us if we forget or make a mistake.' (Al-Baqarah: 286)" [Dar-u Ta'arud al-'Aql wal-Naql - Ibn Taymiyyah - Volume 2 - Page 103]

فَإِنْ قَالُوا: إِنَّمَا أَشَارَ إِلَى حِكَايَةِ مَا فِي نَفْسِهِ وَعِبَارَتِهِ وَهُوَ الْمَتْلُوُّ الْمَكْتُوبُ الْمَسْمُوعُ، فَأَمَّا أَنْ يُشِيرَ إِلَى ذَاتِهِ فَلَا - فَهَذَا صَرِيحُ الْقَوْلِ بِأَنَّ الْقُرْآنَ مَخْلُوقٌ، بَلْ هُمْ فِي ذَلِكَ أَكْفَرُ مِنَ الْمُعْتَزِلَةِ
[شرح العقيدة الطحاوية - الجزء ١ - الصفحة ٢٠٣]

Ibn Abi al-'Izz al-Hanafi said: "If they (Asharis) say: ‘He only referred to it as being a Hikayah/Ibarah from that which is in Himself, and that it is what is expressed through recitation, written, and heard, but it's not what's in His essence itself’—then this is a clear statement that they view the Qur’an to be created. Indeed, in this, they are more disbelieving than the Mu‘tazilah." [Sharh al-Aqeedatul Tahawiyyah - Volume 1 - Page 203]