Shaikhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (rahimahullah) said, "If we assume that someone narrated the view of the Salaf but what he narrated is far removed from what the view of the Salaf actually is, then he has little knowledge of the view of the Salaf, such as Abu'l-Ma'aali, Abu Haamid al-Ghazzali, Ibn al-Khateeb and the like, who did not have enough knowledge of hadeeth to qualify them as ordinary scholars of hadeeth, let alone as prominent scholars in that field for none of these people had any knowledge of al-Bukharee and Muslim and their ahadeeth apart from what they heard, which is similar to the situation of the ordinary Muslim, who cannot distinguish between a hadeeth which is regarded as saheeh and mutawatir according to the scholars of hadeeth and a hadeeth which is fabricated and false. Their books bear witness to that because they contain strange things and most of these scholars of Ilmul-Kalaam and Sufis who have drifted away from the path of the Salaf admit that either at the time of death or before death. There are many such well known stories.
This Abu Haamid al-Ghazzali, despite his brilliance, his devotion to Allah, his knowledge of kalaam and philosophy, his asceticism and spiritual practices and his Sufism ended up in a state of confusion and resorted to the path of those who claim to find out things through reams and spiritual methods."
[See Majmoo al-Fatawa, (4/66)]
[Majmoo al-Fatawa (4/71)]
Ibn Taymiyah also said,
"Hence, even though Abu Haamid refuted the philosophers and classed them as kuffar (disbelievers), and expressed veneration of Prophethood [as opposed to philosophy], etc., and even though some of what he says is true and good, and indeed of great benefit, nevertheless some of his writings contain philosophical material and matters where he followed the corrupt principles of philosophy that contradict Prophethood and even contradict sound common sense."
Source:
