Clarification of some of the words of the Shaykh al-Islam and Ibn Hazm regarding logic?

The student : Yes, yes.

The questioner : Please, our Shaykh, regarding Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, when he speaks about logic and philosophy, he says: "It is a subject from which the intelligent person does not benefit, because the rational proofs and evidence found in it are to be found in the Book and the Sunnah."

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : "So there is no benefit in it, and the dull-witted person does not understand anything of it. But Muhammad ibn Hazm says in this matter: 'And whoever forbids logic has a defect in his intellect.' So it is not correct; he accuses him of having little intellect and little intelligence. He says that logic is: 'It is necessary for understanding what came in the Book and the Sunnah.'"

The Shaykh : With your right hand, with your right hand, yes.

The questioner : For establishing the rational and logical proofs, our Shaykh said: "This aids in understanding the Book and the Sunnah, and aids in debate, in disputation, and in confronting the Jews, the Sophists, and the Christians as well."

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : "And the people of Kalam from all the Islamic sects." He sees that there is no fault in logic for one who takes it in its correct manner for establishing rational proof. For example, when he discusses with the Sophists, or when he discusses with the Sophists, our Shaykh speaks with rational proofs... purely rational proofs.

The Shaykh : It may benefit the logicians, but it does not benefit the Muslim scholars, especially those who are scholars of the Book and the Sunnah, because he quoted from Ibn Taymiyyah that what is in the Qur'an and the Sunnah suffices for all those proofs and evidence. But the unfortunate reality is that this is one of the effects of the science of Kalam. When many of the sects turned away from the proofs of the Book and the Sunnah and were afflicted with the study of logic, they found in it what they imagine to be proofs and evidence by which they can establish the argument against their opponents. These people lost the true proof and found that the illusory proof has its effect and its impact. Ibn Hazm, without a doubt, was living in a society afflicted with sects and groups of Jews and Christians of various religions, so he found in the science of logic what helps him to establish the argument against them due to their knowledge. But the Muslim does not need any of this, and I mean, of course, the clear Muslim scholar of the Book and the Sunnah. For example, take His saying—Exalted is He—: This is a legal proof, but it is also rational and logical. The scholar of the evidence of the Book and the Sunnah never finds in other sciences what he benefits from, unless he is ignorant of what is in the Book and the Sunnah. This is my opinion, and Allah knows best.