nor was Ibn Taymiyyah the only one to hold this understanding, for a number of Qur’anic exegetes have mentioned it while discussing the foregoing verses.

Sixth:
Al-Subki took issue with Ibn Taymiyyah for citing certain reports that point to the extinction of Hellfire, deeming those reports debatable. This can be answered by saying that Ibn Taymiyyah may not, at that stage, have been aware of the defects in their chains. For this reason al-ʿAllāmah al-Albānī excused him, saying:

“Perhaps that occurred during his early pursuit of knowledge, before he had broadened his study of the Book and Sunnah and become thoroughly versed in the legal proofs.” (1)

Moreover, those reports were not his only evidence; as noted earlier, he also relied on the qualifying verses (2).

Seventh:
Ibn Taymiyyah justified what he wrote in his epistle by invoking a principle firmly established in the Sharīʿah—namely, the vastness of Allah’s mercy. Allah says: “My mercy encompasses all things.” (3)

Shaykh al-Albānī commented:

“What impelled him to this view was his profound confidence in his Lord’s mercy and pardon, which encompass everything without exception. That confidence harmonized with the noble character and compassionate nature with which Allah had endowed him and for which he was known among his companions.” (4)

Just as some of the early generations preceded Shaykh al-Islam in this opinion, a number of scholars agreed with him, such as Imām Ibn al-Qayyim, Ibn al-Wazīr, and others. Indeed, the author of ‘Kashf al-Astār li-Ibṭāl Idʿāʾ Fanāʾ al-Nār’ recounts that a master’s thesis was defended by the researcher Fayṣal ʿAbd Allah at Umm al-Qurā University in Mecca entitled “Paradise and Hellfire and the Opinions Concerning Them.” Its author judged the view that the Fire will cease to exist to be the stronger one, arguing that it accords with Allah’s all-embracing mercy, boundless generosity, and pardon.