Ibn Taymiyyah's Mistakes in Minhaj Al-Sunnah

[Farid]

Bismillah al-rahman al-raheem,

It is known that Ibn Taymiyyah made some mistakes in Minhaj Al-Sunnah when it came to the attribution of narrations to sources. I was not aware of the reason as to how he could have made such mistakes, other than simple negligence on his part, but I stumbled upon the words of some scholars that have cleared this issue up.

Sh. Hammad Al-Ansari said: The reason for the mistakes of Shaikh Al-Islam in Al-Minhaj is because he didn't have sources.
His son commented: It seems that the mistakes are about his attribution of hadiths to sources, for Shaikh Al-Islam used to write those hadiths from his memory.

As for the reason as to why he didn't have sources, Bakr Abu Zaid commented that it was written while he was in prison in Egypt.

[Husayn]

Is it true that this book was motivated due to al-Hilli's book Minhaj al-Kiramah? Also, if true - why was that? Were the Imamis propogating their beliefs to such a large extent back then that Ibn Taymiyyah felt a refutation was needed?

From what I gather, al-Hilli seemed to have political connections and high status with the Mongols, due to his association with Nasir al-Din at-Tusi. I guess that partly explains it, especially concerning Ibn Taymiyyah's struggle against the Mongol invasions.

[Farid]

Brother, it is said that Shah Khoda Banda divorced his wife three times in one sitting, and wanted it to be counted as one divorce. Strangely, at the time, all four schools held the belief that triple divorce in one sitting is equal to three divorces. However, this was not the case with the Shias. They believed that triple divorce in a sitting is equal to one divorce.

The Shah then asked to be taught about Shiasm, and Ibn Mutahar was instructed to write his book, Minhaj Al Karama. The Shah then converted to Shiasm.

I suggest every knowledgable Sunni to read Ibn Mutahar's book to see the weakness of his arguments. Ibn Taymiyyah's response was indeed an overkill.

Ironically, Ibn Taymiyyah also held the view that three divorced in a sitting are equal to one divorce, like his opponent.