In the seventh and eighth centuries AH, Ibn Taymiyyah, by proposing a new and revolutionary approach in the fields of theology and jurisprudence, aroused widespread opposition among scholars of various Islamic schools. This wave of opposition, which was carried out by Sunni scholars such as Taqi al-Din Sabqi and al-Dhahabi, as well as Imamiyyah scholars led by Allamah Hilli, is considered a unique phenomenon in the history of Islamic thought. The main issue of this research is to explore the historical context of these reactions and to conduct a comparative analysis of the foundations, reasons, and methods of criticism of these two groups with the aim of identifying similarities and differences in their intellectual foundations, motivations, and methods of debate and refutation.

The aim of this research is to comprehensively explain the various reasons and methods of opposition to Ibn Taymiyyah from the perspectives of the Sunnis and the Imamis. The research method is descriptive-analytical and is based on a library study and a comparative study of primary sources and refutation books. The main question of the research is what were the most important reasons and aspects of commonality and difference in the criticisms made by these two groups? The central hypothesis emphasizes that despite the existence of common criticisms on theological issues such as Tawasul and Tazsim, the main motivation of Sunni scholars (preserving the unity of the Ummah) and Imamiyyah (defending the Imamate) as well as their methods of confrontation were completely distinct.