Criticism and examination of some problems of Ibn Taymiyyah on the hadith of Yum al-Dar

 Introduction
he Hadith of yawm al-dar is one of the oldest sources of proof of the wilayat and succession of Amir al-Mu'minin Ali (as), which has been narrated in numerous Shia and Sunni traditional, commentary, and historical sources. Nevertheless, Ibn Taymiyyah, whose anti-Shi'ism caused him to spend all his energy denying the virtues of the Ahl al-Bayt (as), especially Amir al-Mu'minin (as), turned to denying the origin of this hadith and raised several documentary and content objections about it in the book Minhaj al-Sunnah al-Nabawiyyah. Although his objections lack scientific support due to his unfounded claims and opposition to reliable and incipient sources, but because he has created doubts in this field and may cause anxiety in the minds of the audience who do not have enough information about it, it is important and necessary to review it. The works that have been done in this field so far have mostly been based on a belief approach or have dealt with this issue very superficially. Examining this issue with a hadith and interpretation approach was a gap that this article has tried to fill.
Materials and Methods
In the process of organizing this research, first, data and information (as research materials) were collected from the relevant sources, and then it was explored by using the method of description and analysis. These sources primarily include the Holy Qur'an, in which the revelation of a verse with the title of Aye Inzar (warning verse) is regarded as the authority of issuing hadith. Traditional sources after the Qur'an are the most used sources in this field, which include Shia and Sunni hadith texts. Shaykh Ţūsī's Amālī, al-Saduq's Ilal al-Sharaye', Ahmad ibn Hanbal's Musnad, Nasai's al-Khaṣā'iṣ, Hakim Neishaburi's Mustadrak, Muttaqi Hindi's Kanz al-Ummal, and Haskani's Shawahid al-Tanzil are some of the hadith sources that narrate this Hadith. After that, sources of interpretation such as Ţabresi's Majma' al-Bayan, Faiz Kashani's al-Wafi, Ibn Abi Hatam Razi's Tafsir al-Qur'an, Baghavi's Tafsir, Thaa'labi's Tafsir, Tabari's Tafsir and Tafsir al-Mizan have been used as sources and materials for this research. In a later stage, some historical sources such as Shaykh Mufid's al-Irshad, Ibn Athir's Al-Kamil, Tarikh al-Tabari, and Ibn Asakir's Tarikh Madinah Demashq have been considered as a source of reporting the research Issue. Although theological sources are not the main approach of this research, it is also useful to mention that some theological works such as Seyyed Morteza's al-Shafi and Hilli's Minhaj al-Karamah have also taken care to quote this hadith.
Results and findings
Examining Ibn Taymiyyah's point of view about the hadith of Yawm al-Dar, emphasizing on hadith and commentary sources, resulted in the following results and findings:

Ibn Taymiyyah's presupposition in the book "Minhaj al-Sunna al-Nabawiyyah" is to deny and consider all the traditions and evidences of the caliphate of Amir al-Mu'minin Ali (as) as fake. Therefore, the hadith of Yawm al-Dar has also been denied by him with the same approach. According to him, the reason for the denial is the lack of transmission of the hadith in authentic books, the weakening of some reporters, and the problems with the content and connotations of this tradition.
Ibn Taymiyyah's claim of not quoting hadith in authentic sources lacks scientific support; because this tradition has been clearly narrated in reliable and incipient hadith, commentary and historical sources. The multiplicity and diversity of these sources, along with their age, negates the claim of denying the original hadith and proves the absurdity of this claim.
Ibn Taymiyyah's objection to this hadith refers to a reporter named "Abd al-Ghaffar ibn Qasim". The only reason for weakening him is the accusation that he is a Shiite. Such an accusation cannot distort the hadith document; because in the evaluation of a document, reliability is the criterion, and if an individual's reliability is proven, his beliefs will not weaken the authenticity of his tradition. Therefore, in the Sihah and Masanid of the Sunnis, some hadiths have been narrated from the Shia, and this is something that Ibn Taymiyyah also confirmed and did not consider the mere fact of being a Shia to be an obstacle to the authenticity of the tradition. In addition, in some Sunni sources, the hadith of Yawm al-Dar has been narrated by a way other than Abd al-Ghaffar.
Ibn Taymiyyah's most important content objection to the Hadith of Yawm al-Dar is that it does not indicate the succession of Amir al-Mu'minin (as); because if accepting the invitation leads to succession, then all those who accepted the invitation of the Messenger of God and helped him should be his successors. Such a claim is due to not paying attention to the context of issuing this hadith. According to various evidences, accepting the invitation and helping in the same assembly has been the criterion; So that from the very beginning of the invitation, the most obedient, the best and the most virtuous person is determined for the succession. This action of the Prophet (pbuh) in the very first move revealed the level of obedience and sincerity and the inner feelings of people and showed that even the great ones like Hamza and Jafar do not deserve to be succeeded at the level of Amir al-Mu'minin (as) due to their delay in believing and he is the only one who is the worthiest person for this position because of his deep faith and unquestionable obedience and help.

Conclusion
In addition to the Qur'anic verses and rational reasons, the issue of succession of Amir al-Mu'minin (as) has a strong root in hadiths. The beginning of the tradition in this context is the hadith of Yawm al-Dar, which was told in the story of the invitation of the Messenger of God to his relatives. Despite the fact that the said hadith is stated in the advanced and reliable Shia and Sunni sources, but Ibn Taymiyyah tried to deny it and raised various objections about it in his opinion. The type of his objections shows a deep bias in his existence. In such a way that opposition to Shia has caused him to close his eyes to the facts and even speak against his own principles. The dominance of bias in his writing and thought has left his claims without scientific support. From this perspective, although he is not worthy of scientific criticism, his skepticism, as someone who has found a position of theorist among his followers, needs a response. In order to prove the falsehood of these claims and to enlighten the audience, the only correct way is through scientific criticism and the discovery and explanation of historical facts.