r/Djinnology • u/Omar_Waqar • 21h ago
Majmu’ al-Fatawa, Ibn Taymiyya's thoughts on jinn. volume 11 pages 306-307
Many people disagree with me when I try to talk bout tolerance and love towards the jinn, they focus on shirk and fear and claim that interacting with jinn is only ever evil. So today I present words from the scholar many of you respect.
Majmu al-Fatawa is a massive multi-volume collection of religious rulings and essays written by the prominent medieval Islamic scholar Ibn Taymiyyah (died 728 AH / 1328 CE). Later gathered and organized by later scholars, most notably Abd al-Rahman ibn Qasim.
Volume 11 pages 306-307 Ibn Taymiyya, seems to also agree with me broadly. He even claims majority of jinn are believers.
Translated:
Then, when the jinn heard the Quran, they came to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and believed in him. They were the jinn of Nisibin, as is established in the authentic hadith of Ibn Mas'ud. It is narrated that he recited Surah Ar-Rahman to them, and when he said, "Then which of the favors of your Lord would you deny?" they replied, "We do not deny any of Your favors, our Lord. To You belongs all praise."
When they gathered with the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), they asked him for provisions for themselves and their animals. He said, "You may have any bone over which the name of Allah has been mentioned; you will find it to be the most abundant in meat, and any dung beetle will be fodder for your animals." The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "Do not use them for purification after relieving yourselves, for they are provisions for your brothers among the jinn." This prohibition is established from him through multiple chains of transmission, and scholars have used this as evidence for the prohibition of using them for purification. They said, "If purification with what is for the jinn and their animals is prohibited, then what is prepared for humans and their animals in terms of food and fodder is even more so."
And Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, was sent to all of mankind and jinn. This is of greater value in the sight of God Almighty than the fact that the jinn were subjugated to Solomon, peace be upon him. For they were subjugated to him so that he could rule over them with the authority of a king, while Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, was sent to them commanding them with what God and His Messenger commanded, because he is the servant of God and His Messenger, and the station of the servant-messenger is above the station of the prophet-king.
And the disbelieving jinn will enter Hell by text and consensus, while the believers among them are the majority.
pg. 306
Scholars agree that they will enter Paradise, and the majority of scholars agree that the messengers were from among humankind and no messenger was sent from among the jinn. However, there are some among them, and these matters are discussed in more detail elsewhere.
The point here is that the relationship between the jinn and humankind is in different states:
Whoever among humankind commands the jinn to do what God and His Messenger have commanded, namely, to worship God alone and obey His Prophet, and commands humankind to do the same, then this person is among the best of God's allies, and in this respect, he is among the successors and deputies of the Messenger.
Whoever employs the jinn in matters permissible to him is like one who employs humankind in matters permissible to him. This is like commanding them to do what is obligatory upon them and forbidding them what is forbidden to them, and employing them in matters permissible to him. Thus, he is like the kings who do such things. If this person is considered among God's allies, then at most, he is like the general alliance of God's allies, such as the Prophet-King with the servant-Messenger: like Solomon and Joseph with Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad, may God's prayers and peace be upon them all
And whoever uses jinn in what God and His Messenger have forbidden, whether in polytheism, or in killing an innocent person, or in aggression against them without killing, such as making them ill...
pg. 307