What is your opinion on the validation by the Shaykh al-Islam of the story of the hadith, "Whoever deliberately lies about me, let him take his seat in the Fire," which indicates that fabrication occurred during the time of the Messenger of Allah?

The questioner : What is your opinion on the validation by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) of the story of the hadith which indicates that fabrication occurred during the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)? And if the story is authentic, is it valid for the Rafidah to use it as evidence for denouncing the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them)?

The Shaykh : The story is authentic, and the Rafidah’s argument against them is not worthy of what they expect from what they have brought against us, for they are before others. This is because they believe in some of the Companions and declare disbelief against the majority of the Companions. So what they want to apply to all of our Companions is refuted by some of our Companions in whom they believe, and there is no difference. This is from one aspect. From another aspect, we say that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) is the Guardian of His religion, and part of His guardianship of His religion is that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) exposed the fabrication of that man against his Prophet and inspired him to warn his Ummah from falling into something like his fabrication, so He said: . This hadith and its like were a deterrent for the Imams of the people of the Sunnah, not for the scholars of the Shi'ah. I do not say "Imams of the Shi'ah" because the Shi'ah have no Imams. If they have true Imams, like Ja'far al-Sadiq and the known people of the Household of the Prophet renowned for their knowledge and virtue, they are our Imams, not their Imams, because they fabricate about them a lot, and a very great deal.
My point is that this hadith, for which that occasion arose and Allah inspired His Prophet to say as a warning: , was this hadith and its like among the reasons that led the Imams of the people of the Sunnah, and not the scholars of the Shi'ah, to establish the science of hadith terminology and the science of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil (the critique and vindication of narrators). This is a point in which the people of the Sunnah excel the Shi'ah in a way that destroys their religion from its root and branch. That is because the scholars of the Shi'ah have no principles in the science of hadith, and they have no books on the biographies of the narrators of the hadiths of the Household of the Prophet, especially those connected to 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), Salman al-Farisi, and the few Companions in whose companionship they have confidence. They have no knowledge of hadith terminology or the biographies of the men of hadith. Indeed, as some of the Imams of the Salaf said: "The isnad is part of the religion, and were it not for the isnad, whoever wished would say what he wished". Consequently, the scholars of knowledge, the hadith scholars of today, even some of the disbelievers among them, from the perspective of "and the virtue is that which the enemies have testified to", have said that the isnad is a distinctive feature of this Ummah of Muhammad. It is not only we, the Muslims, who say and take pride in the fact that the isnad is a distinctive feature of this Ummah of Muhammad, but some of the disbelieving Orientalists and Arabists among them have given this true testimony that the isnad is a speciality of this Ummah in which no one shares with it.
And I, quoting from this consensus of the scholars of knowledge, both Muslim and non-Muslim, quote and say: The isnad, which is a distinctive feature among the distinctive features of the Ummah of Islam—I do not say the Ummah of Islam in its entirety, but this is a distinctive feature for the people of the Sunnah, not for the Shi'ah, let alone the other sects—because they have no isnads. Their isnads are broken off from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) by stages. And these broken isnads, they cannot prove their authenticity based on the shallow and few biographies they have. So what does a person say when some of the extremists of the Shi'ah acknowledge that the most authentic book they have, after the Book of Allah—if they have an authentic one, for they claim that this Noble Qur'an is incomplete and is only completed by the Mushaf of Fatima? Where is it? ... If they rely on the Mushaf, then they do not rely on anything of the Sunnah that is authentic. And the most authentic book they have is the one known as the book of "al-Kafi", and some of their writers have criticized it in some of the editions printed for this book in hundreds of hadiths. And they claim that it corresponds to our book, Sahih al-Bukhari, which comes after the Book of our Lord. So where is this in comparison to that? As it was said in the past, even if not on this occasion, with this verse of poetry... I say to these people:
"This difference between us is sufficient for you *** And every vessel gushes forth with what is in it"?