Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Hanbal, Abu `Abd
Allah al-Dhuhli al-Shaybani al-Marwazi al-Baghdadi (d. 241). Al-Dhahabi says of
him: "The true Shaykh of Islam and leader of the Muslims in his time, the
hadith master and proof of the Religion. He took hadith from Hushaym, Ibrahim
ibn Sa`d, Sufyan ibn `Uyayna, `Abbad ibn `Abbad, Yahya ibn Abi Za’ida, and
their layer. From him narrated al-Bukhari [two hadiths in the Sahih],
Muslim [22], Abu Dawud [254], Abu Zur`a, Mutayyan, `Abd Allah ibn Ahmad, Abu
al-Qasim al-Baghawi, and a huge array of scholars. His father was a soldier
û one of those who called to Islam û
and he died young." Al-Dhahabi continues:
`Abd Allah ibn Ahmad said: "I heard Abu Zur`a [al-Razi] say:
‘Your father had memorized a million hadiths, which I rehearsed with him
according to topic.’"
Hanbal said: "I heard Abu `Abd Allah say: ‘I memorized
everything which I heard from Hushaym when he was alive.’"
Ibrahim al-Harbi said: "I held Ahmad as one for whom Allah had
gathered up the combined knowledge of the first and the last."
Harmala said: "I heard al-Shafi`i say: ‘I left Baghdad and did
not leave behind me anyone more virtuous (afdal), more learned (a`lam),
more knowledgeable (afqah) than Ahmad ibn Hanbal.’"
`Ali ibn al-Madini said: "Truly, Allah reinforced this Religion
with Abu Bakr al-Siddiq the day of the Great Apostasy (al-Ridda), and He
reinforced it with Ahmad ibn Hanbal the day of the Inquisition (al-Mihna)."
Abu `Ubayd said: "The Science at its peak is in the custody of
four men, of whom Ahmad ibn Hanbal is the most knowledgeable."
Ibn Ma`in said, as related by `Abbas [al-Duri]: "They meant for
me to be like Ahmad, but û by Allah!
û I shall never in my life compare to him."
Muhammad ibn Hammad al-Taharani said: "I heard Abu Thawr say:
‘Ahmad is more learned û or
knowledgeable û than al-Thawri.’"
Al-Dhahabi concludes: "Al-Bayhaqi wrote Abu `Abd Allah’s
biography (sîra) in one volume, so did Ibn al-Jawzi, and also Shaykh
al-Islam [`Abd Allah al-Harawi] al-Ansari in a brief volume. He passed
on to Allah’s good pleasure on the day of Jum`a, the twelfth of Rabi`
al-Awwal in the year 241, at the age of seventy-seven. I have two of
his short-chained narrations (`awâlîh), and a licence (ijâza) for
the entire Musnad." Al-Dhahabi’s chapter on Imam Ahmad in Siyar A`lam
al-Nubala’ counts no less than 113 pages.
One of the misunderstandings prevalent among the "Salafis" who
misrepresent Imam Ahmad’s school today is his position regarding kalâm or
dialectic theology. It is known that he was uncompromisingly opposed to kalâm
as a method, even if used as a means to defend the truth, preferring to stick
to the plain narration of textual proofs and abandoning all recourse to
dialectical or rational ones. Ibn al-Jawzi relates his saying: "Do not sit with
the people of kalâm, even if they defend the Sunna." This attitude is at
the root of his disavowal of al-Muhasibi. It also explains the disaffection of
later Hanbalis towards Imam al-Ash`ari and his school, despite his subsequent
standing as the Imam of Sunni Muslims par excellence. The reasons for
this rift are now obsolete although the rift has amplified beyond all
recognizable shape, as it is evident, in retrospect, that opposition to
Ash`aris, for various reasons, came out of a major misunderstanding of their
actual contributions within the Community, whether as individuals or as a
whole.
There are several general reasons why the Hanbali-mutakallim
rift should be considered artificial and obsolete. First, kalâm in its
original form was an innovation in Islam (bid`a) against which there was
unanimous opposition among Ahl al-Sunna. The first to use kalâm were
true innovators opposed to the Sunna, and in the language of the early scholars kalâm
was synonymous with the doctrines of the Qadariyya, Murji’a, Jahmiyya,
Jabriyya, Rawâfid, and Mu`tazila and their multifarious
sub-sects. This is shown by the examples Ibn Qutayba gives of kalâm and mutakallimûn
in his book Mukhtalif al-Hadith, none of which belongs to Ahl al-Sunna.
Similarly the adherents of kalâm brought up in the speech of al-Hasan
al-Basri, Ibn al-Mubarak, Ibn Rahuyah, Imam al-Shafi`i and the rest of the
pre-Hanbali scholars of hadith are the innovators of the above-mentioned sects,
not those who later opposed them using the same methods of reasoning. The
latter cannot be put in the same category. Therefore the early blames of kalâm
cannot be applied to them in the same breath with the innovators.
Second, there is difference of opinion among the Salaf on
the possible use of kalâm to defend the Sunna, notwithstanding Imam
Ahmad’s position quoted above. One reason why they disallowed it is wara`:
because of extreme scrupulousness against learning and practicing a discipline
initiated by the enemies of the Sunna. Thus they considered kalâm reprehensible
but not forbidden, as is clear from their statements. For example, Ibn Abi
Hatim narrated that al-Shafi`i said: "If I wanted to publish books refuting
every single opponent [of the Sunna] I could easily do so, but kalâm is
not for me, and I dislike that anything of it be attributed to me." This shows
that al-Shafi`i left the door open for others to enter a field which he
abstained from entering out of strict Godwariness.
Third, kalâm is a difficult, delicate science which
demands a mind above the norm. The imams forbade it as a sadd al-dharî`a
or pre-empting measure. They rightly foresaw that unless one possessed an
adequate capacity to practice it, one was courting disaster. This was the case
with Ahmad’s student Abu Talib, and other early Hanbalis who misinterpreted
Ahmad’s doctrinal positions as Bukhari himself stated. Bukhari, Ahmad, and
others of the Salaf thus experienced first hand that one who played with kalâm
could easily lapse into heresy, innovation, or disbelief. This was made
abundantly clear in Imam Malik’s answer to the man who asked how Allah
established Himself over the Throne: "The establishment is known, the ‘how’ is
inconceivable, and to ask about it is an innovation!" Malik’s answer is the
essence of kalâm at the same time as it warns against the misuse of kalâm,
as observed by the late Dr. Abu al-Wafa’ al-Taftazani. Malik’s reasoning is
echoed by al-Shafi`i’s advice to his student al-Muzani: "Take proofs from
creation in order to know about the Creator, and do not burden yourself with
the knowledge of what your mind did not reach." Similarly, Ibn Khuzayma and Ibn
Abi Hatim admitted their technical ignorance of the science of kalâm, at
the same time acknowledging its possible good use by qualified experts. As for
Ibn Qutayba, he regretted his kalâm days and preferred to steer
completely clear of it.
In conclusion, any careful reader of Islamic intellectual
history can see that if the Ash`ari scholars of kalâm had not engaged
and defeated the various theological and philosophical sects on their own
terrain, the silence of Ahl al-Sunna might well have sealed their defeat
at the hands of their opponents. This was indicated by Taj al-Din al-Subki who
spoke of the obligatoriness of kalâm in certain specific circumstances,
as opposed to its superfluousness in other times. "The use of kalâm in
case of necessity is a legal obligation (wajib), and to keep silence
about kalâm in case other than necessity is a sunna."
The biographical notice on Imam Ahmad in the Reliance of the
Traveller reads: "Out of piety, Imam Ahmad never gave a formal legal
opinion (fatwa) while Shafi`i was in Iraq, and when he later formulated
his school of jurisprudence, he mainly drew on explicit texts from the
[Qur’an], hadith, and scholarly consensus, with relatively little expansion
from analogical reasoning (qiyâs). He was probably the most learned in
the sciences of hadith of the four great Imams of Sacred Law, and his students
included many of the foremost scholars of hadith. Abu Dawud said of him:
‘Ahmad’s gatherings were gatherings of the afterlife: nothing of this world was
mentioned. Never once did I hear him mention this-worldly things.’ ... He never
once missed praying in the night, and used to recite the entire [Qur’an] daily.
He said, ‘I saw the Lord of Power in my sleep, and said, "O Lord, what is the
best act through which those near to You draw nearer?" and He answered,
"Through [reciting] (sic) My word, O Ahmad." I asked, "With
understanding, or without?" and He answered, "With understanding and
without."’. . . Ahmad was imprisoned and tortured for twenty-eight months under
the Abbasid caliph al-Mu`tasim in an effort to force him to publicly espouse
the [Mu`tazila] position that the Holy [Qur’an] was created, but the
Imam bore up unflinchingly under the persecution and refused to renounce the
belief of Ahl al-Sunna that the [Qur’an] is the uncreated word of Allah,
after which Allah delivered and vindicated him. When Ahmad died in 241/855, he
was accompanied to his resting place by a funeral procession of eight hundred
thousand men and sixty thousand women, marking the departure of the last of the
four great mujtahid Imams of Islam."
Ibn al-Jawzi narrates from Bilal al-Khawass that the latter met
al-Khidr and asked him: "What do you say of al-Shafi`i?" He said: "One of the
Pillar-Saints (Awtâd)." "Ahmad ibn Hanbal?" "He is a Siddîq."
Main sources: al-Dhahabi, Siyar A`lam al-Nubala’
9:434-547 #1876 and Tadhkira al-Huffaz 2:431 #438.