Category Archives: Hanbali Fiqh & Aqeedah

A Clarification regarding the Hanbalis and the study of ‘Ilmul Kalam

By Imran al-Hanbali

A particular thing that some modern day Hanbalis, and others, suffer from is the lack of understanding regarding the madhhabs of ‘Aqidah, and the issue regarding the study of ‘Ilmul Kalam.

From the three Madhhabs of ‘Aqidah -namely Ash’ari, Maturidi, and Hanbali- the school of the Hanbalis prohibits the use of Kalam, however many look at this issue as if it is just black and white, with very limited understanding and knowledge. When it comes to Kalam some of the believers think that once one is a Hanbali in ‘Aqidah that they should not ever come near the Kalam works, this is incorrect, as these people do not differentiate between using Kalam and studying, or discussing, Kalam to understand it.

The Hanbalis and their Madhhab in ‘Aqidah

The Hanbali who is Hanbali in ‘aqidah,
Most of the Hanbalis [in fiqh] were Hanbali in ‘aqidah, this is the most preferred school in ‘aqidah to follow for someone who is Hanbali in Fiqh.

The Hanbali Ash’aris

Some Hanbalis have been Ash’ari in ‘aqidah, and this school is perfectly fine and permitted to follow, since they are by consensus Ahlussunnah.

The Hanbalis and ‘Ilmul Kalam

For a Hanbali who is Hanbali in ‘aqidah, for them the use of ‘Ilmul Kalam is prohibited.

For a Hanbali who is Ash’ari in ‘aqidah, the use and study of Kalam is permissible and not prohibited, since this Madhhab of ‘Aqidah permits it.

Regarding Kalam we want to focus on the one who is a Hanbali in ‘aqidah. One should differentiate between Using ‘Ilmul Kalam and Studying it to understand it.

Great a`immah such as Imams Muhammad al Saffarini, al Qaddumi, Ibn Badran have studied, and narrated, the mu’tamad works of ‘Ilmul Kalam. And contemporary Hanbali Shuyukh are also known to have studied ‘Ilmul Kalam.

So Kalam being prohibited in the Hanbali ‘aqidah is regarding the application of Kalam, but the prohibition does not apply on reading, studying, and narrating it.

In short,
Hanbali in ‘Aqidah:
Use of Kalam prohibited.

Studying to understand it permissible.
Ash’ari in ‘Aqidah:
Use and study of Kalam permissible.


By Brother Imran

Many individuals claim to be Hanbali, however many in reality tend to be Wahhabi, in ‘aqidah and fiqh, carrying falsely the title of Hanbali.

The Fiqh, the Usūl, and the ‘Aqīdah of the Hanabilah is based upon certain rightly guided Authorities and their works.

The authorities are the Mujtahid scholars of each age, and the works are the relied upon (mu’tamad) books they authored, adhered to, and passed on to the next generation with a chain of trustworthy purified scholars.

The Fiqh comes from the following scholars, Imams, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, al Marrūdhī, al Khallāl, al Khiraqī, Qādī Abū Ya’lā, Ibn ‘Aqeel, Mahfūż al Kalwadhānī, ‘Abdul Qādir al Jīlānī, Majd al Din Ibn Taymiyyah, Muwaffaq al Din Ibn Qudāmah, ‘Abdul Ghānī al Maqdisī, Ibn Hāmid, Ibn ‘Abdul Hādī, Ibn Rajab, Musa al Hajjāwī, Alāudīn al Mardāwī, Mansur al Buhūtī, Mar’ī al Karmī, Ibn al Najjār, al Saffārīnī, Abdul Baqi al Mawāhibi, ‘Isa al Qaddūmī, ‘Abdullah al Qaddumi, Ibn Balbān, ‘Abdul Qādir Ibn Badrān, Mustafa al Shattī, ‘Abdul Latīf al Subkī, al Ruhaybani, Ahmad al Shami, and the living Hanbali authorities of our age.

And their Mu’tamad works of Fiqh we study from, Akhsar al Mukhtasarāt, Umdah al Tālib, Dalil al Talib, Zād al Mustaqni’, Rawdul Murbi’, al Insāf, al Iqna’, Kashshaf al Qina’, Muntahal Iradah, Ghayatul Muntaha, and some other works.

The ‘Aqidah comes from the following scholars, Imams, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, al Kirmānī, al Barbahārī, Abu Ya’la, Ibn Qudamah, ‘Abdul Ghani al Maqdisi, Ibn Hamdān, Ibn ‘Abdul Baqi, Ibn Qā’id al Najdi, al Balbani, al Saffarini, Mar’i al Karmi, Mustafa al Shatti, ‘Abdullah al Qaddūmī, and others.

And their Mu’tamad works of ‘Aqidah are, al I’tiqad, Usul al Sunnah, Lum’atul I’tiqad, Najatul Khalaf, Qalaidul Iqyan, Mukhtasar al Ilfadat, Nihayatul Mubtadi’in, Manhaj al Ahmad, al ‘Ayn wal Athar, Lawami’ul Anwar al Bahiyyah, Aqawil al Thiqat, and others.
They were accepted by ijma’ as Ahlussunnah, their fiqh and usul was strictly preserved.

As well as their ‘aqidah which they have inherited from Imam Ahmad, without tajsim but with tafweed.

And we follow these Imams by not only just reading their books, but by taking it from the Orthodox Hanbalis who have the chains back to these Imams and their works.

If someone claims to be a Hanbali in Fiqh or ‘Aqidah and follows other Imams and other works than mentioned above, than they are liars.


History is pivotal in understanding why Hijāz with its people changed so much.
We must understand how Wahhabism spread in the Hijaz and Najd (modern Saudi Arabia) during and after the time of Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab al Najdi, how they martyred the Hanabilah and how they took the name of the Hanabilah.

The ‘Ulama from the Hanafiyyah, the Malikiyya and the Shafi’iyyah are well known amongst the people, however, the great Hanbali luminaries are known less, the most noticeable reason for this is because the Hanbali madhhab is the smallest madhhab with the least followers.

But it is also important to know that due to the Wahhabi genocide in Hijaz the Hanbali ‘ulama were martyred and the madhhab lost its authenticity in most of those regions.

The founder of the madhhab is Imam Ahlussunnah Abu ‘Abdullah Ahmad Ibn Hanbal al Shaybani, born in 164 after Hijri.

Imam Ahmad was from the Salaf, he was from amongst the greatest Muhaddithin and Mujtahidin, he was a Mujtahid Mutlaq and had memorised 1 million ahadith.

Imam Ahmad and his students were massive scholars and they were upon the creed of the Salaf, they were Sunni in ‘Aqidah and Fiqh.

Imam Ahmad along the three other Imams are accepted by consensus in the Ummah as the greatest scholars.

Historically some Hanabilah have been affected by Tajsīm as the Ahnāf were by I’tizāl, but no sane individual would discard a school of Ahlussunnah because of some deviant adherents, majority have been upon the right path and Ijma’ remains on four schools.

The Hanbalis in fiqh always remained among the Ahlussunnah, and the ‘Aqidah of the Hanbalis was that of the Ash’aris.

The madhhab took its main blow during the crusades of Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab al Najdi, a khārijī who emerged to “cleanse” the world of muslim apostates. This khariji with his cult, and later the Muwahhidun as well, brutally murdered many believers, and they dessimated the Hanbali madhhab and killed the Hanbali ‘ulama of Hijaz and Najd.

Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab al Najdi (1703-1792) was a Khariji and a deviant individual. The ‘Ulama of Ahlussunnah already warned against him before his crusades.

He declared every believer on earth and every believer 600 years prior to his crusades as kuffar.

He spent many years in al Diriyyah and after he gained alliances and power, he then started with his 51 years long crusade against the muslims.
He declared every single muslim on earth to be a disbeliever, except those that followed his religion, and brutally massacred thousands of people, he along his descendants.

In his lifetime he was declared as a Murtad and Kafir by his older brother and the Hanbali Authority of the time, Imam Sulayman Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab, may Allah be pleased with him.

Once the Wahhabis grew in number, along the progeny of Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab, they killed many people beyond belief, commiting horrible murders by emptying cities and other unimaginable atrocities.

To the extent that he even murdered his own brother Imam Sulayman.

Besides killing the believers, they dessimated the graves of the Salaf, their houses, the wells they had built, even the trees that were planted by the Prophet ﷺ and his Companions.

They destroyed old relics, artifacts and so much more, all under the pretext of “protecting people against Shirk”, which was an absurd claim, rather, it was to erase Islam completely by the order of the West.

After the death of Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab his sons continued their crusades against Islam.

The Ottomans were the ones who declared war upon the Wahhabi Khawarij, between the years 1811-1818 the Ottoman army at the time, which was led by Muhammad ‘Ali Pasha aided the muslims against them.

Do you know what the Ottomans did to the Wahhabi cult?

They waged war against them and dessimated the Wahhabi cult.

Many Wahhabis ran away, some of them who fled to Egypt, and those that were captured were imprisoned, their main leaders and followers received the death penalty.

To the extent that the son of Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab was shot to death, by a thousand bullets.
This shows the people what evil atrocities this cult committed.

Because of the Ottomans the Wahhabis were pushed back and removed from power.

But unfortunately after the fall of the Ottoman Khilafah, the Wahhabis rose again due to their alliance with the Sa’ud family and the British Empire.
They spread their Wahabi religion in Hijaz and changed the name to ‘Saudi Arabia’, and finally proclaimed the Dawla (state) of the Wahabiyya, and the rest is history.

Due to this, the people in this age are Wahhabiyyun, I do not state that every single individual is a Wahhabi because there are still some Sunni ‘ulama in those regions.

But the Hanbali madhhab from Hijaz and Najd was infected by them, so that is why so many of them claim the madhhab today.


The Wahhabis claimed to be “Athari” in ‘Aqidah, but their beliefs were false and not in line with ‘Aqidah of the true Atharis or Ahlussunnah. They were Khawarij and shared many beliefs of the Mu’tazilah and the Shi’ah.

They claimed that Allah ﷻ is in a place, that Allah ﷻ is in a direction, that Allah ﷻ sits, that Allah ﷻ resembles his creation. Far from that is our Exalted Lord ﷻ!

The Wahhabi creed is based upon the teachings of Muhammad Amir al San’ani, Ibn Abdul Wahhab al Najdi, al Shawkani, Muhammad ‘Abduh, Jamaluddin al Afghani, Bin Baz, al Albani, Ibnul Uthaymin, and along the rejected opinions of Ibn Taymiyyah.
Their fathers (Amir al San’ani and Ibn Abdul Wahhab) revolted against the ummah and went against the consensus of Ahlussunnah.

They left and rejected the classical teachings of the Hanbali/Athari ‘aqidah, the ‘aqidah of Imam Ahmad, Sayyiduna ‘Abdul Qadir al Jilani, Muwaffaq al Din Ibn Qudamah, Imam al Saffarini, Imam Ibn Badran, al Shatti, and Imam Ibn Balban.

True Hanbali ‘Aqidah is what is found in Lum’atul I’tiqad, Qala’idul Iqyan, Nihayatul Mubtadi’in, Al ‘Ayn wal Athar, Manhaj al Ahmad, Lawami’ul Anwar, only ‘aqidah literature authored by classic Sunni Hanabilah.

And the Madhhab we take from men like ‘Abdul Qadir al Jilani, Ibn Qudamah, ‘Abdul Ghani al Maqdisi, Majd al Din, ‘Ala al Din al Mardawi, Ibn Rajab, al Buhuti, Musa al Hajjawi, al Futuhi, Mar’i al Karmi, al Ba’li, Ibn Badran, Ibn Balban,..

It was a revivement of the Khariji and Mu’tazilah cults. They were declared as disbelievers by the Hanbali authorities.

May Allah ﷻ make Ahlussunnati Wal Jama’ah victorious again.

The Hanabilah and the Asha’irah

In our time there is a great misunderstanding amongst the believers who think that the Hanbalis are malignant and hateful towards the Ash’aris. And most erroneous, some who believe that the Hanbalis do not regard the Ash’aris as Sunnis, but that the Hanbalis regard them as deviants -or even worse, as disbelievers .

This false notion has to do with both a misconception and misinformation about the Hanbali works and misunderstanding the incidents that have taken place in the past which have been spread unwisely and unjustly by ignoramuses with their limited and faulty understanding.

We will make it clear upfront, the Ash’aris are declared as Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah by the Hanbalis, this is the mu’tamad without a doubt.

We will address the matter according to the following steps.

1. Defining the Hanbalis and the Ash’aris.
2. The differences between the Hanbalis and the Ash’aris.
3. Addressing the issues historically how everything developed from the early times, and how the Hanbalis interacted with the Ash’aris
4. Finally, on what the Hanbali Authorities have said and the Fatawa on the Asha’irah
————— —–
1.  Defining the Hanbalis and the Ash’aris

The Hanabilah are the followers of Imam Ahlussunnah Ahmad Ibn Hanbal al Shaybāni, rahimahullah (d. 264ah).
The Imam who protected the beliefs of Ahlussunnah, the Mujtahid Mutlaq, al Zahid, the Imam who is agreed upon by all of the Ummah.

The Hanbalis are from amongst the people of Ahlussunnati wal Jama’ah, they can either be followers in fiqh or ‘aqidah but in this case we are referring to those who are Hanbali in ‘aqidah.

And as we have made clear many times in the past, we speak of the classic Sunni Hanbalis/Atharis and not of those imposters of the latter days who merely claimed to be Hanbalis.

The Ash’aris need no introduction, as these are the righteous followers of Imam Abul Hasan al Ash’arī (d. 324ah), rahimahullah, the Imam, the Mutakallim, and protector of the beliefs of Ahlussunnah wal Jama’ah.

The school that is agreed upon by the Ummah as the school of Orthodox beliefs.

‘Abdullah Ibn ‘Umar, radiyallahu ‘anhum, reports that the Prophet ﷺ said,

“Allah will never allow my Ummah to unite upon misguidance, Allah’s assistance is with the group and whomsoever deviates from the group will be cast into the fire .”
Sunan al Tirmidhi
————— —–
2.  The differences between the Hanbalis and Ash’aris

In the main ‘Aqaid (beliefs) the differences are very small between the Hanbalis and Ash’aris.

The major differences amongst the schools have to do with the Hanbalis prohibiting the use of ‘Ilmul Kalām (Rational Theology).

The Hanabilah prohibit the use of ‘Ilmul Kalam, and this is the mu’tamad, the relied upon position, they abstain from using logic and rational argumentation in creed.

The reason for the prohibiton of this science is that they did not want to introduce Kalam out of fear of introducing something the Salaf did not practise, and they feared that it would have a negative impact on the purity of the beliefs. However, some Hanbalis in the past have made use of it.

Another thing is that the Hanbalis do not permit Ta’weel (figurative interpretation) of the Attributes of Allah. The Hanabilah practise Tafweed (leaving the meaning to Allah).
Tafweed is also the method that the Ash’aris and Maturidis use, only that they permit Ta’weel.

In the Hanbali ‘aqidah Ta’weel is not used unless it has been clearly related by the Prophet ﷺ or the Companions, and so in some places ta’weel was done by Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and other Hanabilah.

We accept the difference of opinion, as they are both rightly guided groups .
May Allah ﷻ increase the rank of all the Ash’aris and Hanbalis!
————— —–

3. Hanbalis and the Ash’aris historically

This is a pivotal part that people should
understand well.

The Ash’aris have already been declared as Ahlussunnah by consensus 800 year ago, the consensus on this issue was related by the Sultanul ‘Ulama and documented by Imam al Subki.

And I also would like to add that even a 1,000 years ago the noble Ash’aris were declared as Ahlussunnah by the Shaykhul Hanabilah Qadi Abu Ya’la (d. 458). Imam Qadi Abu Ya’la the Grand Imam held debates with the Asha’irah, he did not agree with them in some issues but he did agree that they were from Ahlussunnah wal Jama’ah.

Some dissenters and false claimers of the Hanbali madhhab tend to use some names of the Hanbali scholars that had objections towards the Asha’irah and spread it like it is the relied upon ruling, and they also take some historical passages from the incidents of Baghdad where the Ash’aris and Hanbalis fought one another, and quote this to use it as a proof that the Ash’aris were deviant .
Regarding the incidents that took place amongst them, such as, the many debates, the Hanbali works that objected towards the Asha’irah, and the fighting amongst them in Baghdad.
We will explain these incidents and explain them in the correct context.

After Imam Abul Hasan al Ash’ari had left the Mu’tazilah he wrote his book al Ibanah, and he presented this work to Imam al Barbahari al Hanbali (d. 329), Imam al Barbahari rejected his work and did not accept it.

In the very early days when Imam al Ash’ari was teaching his ‘aqidah it would take some time before it would be spread and accepted, it began only after Imam al Ash’ari taught his methodology which then would be taught further to others.

From the above we see that the Ash’ari ‘aqidah was alien in the early stages and that they still needed time to be fully understood and accepted amongst the Ummah .

Also, many tribulations took place between the two groups, most of the tribulations being in Baghdad, such as, Imam ‘Abdul Rahim al Qushayri who was one of the proponents of the Ash’ari ‘aqidah that caused conflict and disputes between the Hanabilah and the Asha’irah in Baghdad around the year 465 ah, the city which was the stronghold of the Hanabilah at the time. His desire to preach Ash’ari creed in that place caused fighting amongst the two groups that even led to killings.

And other incidents, such as, Abul Qasim al Bakri who came to preach the Ash’ari theology in Baghdad in the year 475 ah, which caused further riots in Baghdad. Also, Imam Abu Bakr al Maghribi (d. 476) who was from amongst the Ash’aris in Baghdad who caused a lot of tribulation amongst the Hanabilah at the time as well.

From the above we see that fighting broke out amongst them because the Hanbalis did not want to accept their creed, even though the Imam of the Hanbalis in Baghdad, Abu Ya’la, declared them already as Ahlussunnah but it seems that this had not taken root yet amongst all the Hanbalis.

However, looking at it in the correct context of location, most of this was confined to Baghdad alone, as the Shafi’i Ash’aris and the Hanbalis of Isfahan did not have this infighting amongst them.

Others such as, Muwaffaq al Din Ibn Qudamah (d. 620) and his cousin ‘Abdul Ghani al Maqdisi (d. 600) were also from the Hanabilah who had disputes with the Asha’irah. To the extent that some of the Asha’irah tried to kill Imam ‘Abdul Ghani al Maqdisi al Hanbali for preaching against them.

Verily, al Barbahari, Ibn Qudamah, ‘Abdul Ghani al Maqdisi, and many other Baghdadi Hanbalis might have disagreed with the Ash’aris. However, this still does not negate that the ‘majority opinion’ of the Hanabilah was that the Ash’aris were Ahlussunnah, which is to be found amongst the very early Hanabilah, such as Ibn Batta, al Tamimi, Qadi Abu Ya’la.

There were many political tensions amongst them, and most of the Hanbali Ash’ari clashes were confined to Baghdad .

And when we look at Imams such as Muwaffaq al Din Ibn Qudamah and his objections, one can not ignore the fact that even if he disagreed with the Asha’irah, nevertheless he knew that their creed was sound, and had the akhlaq to take benefit from them, and this is proven from his company and gatherings with leading Ash’ari scholars such as Sultan Salahuddin al Ayyubi.
As Muwaffaq al Din Ibn Qudamah, his older brother Abu ‘Umar al Maqdisi and ‘Imaduddin al Hanbali were all generals in the army of Sultan Al Ayyubi, along thousands of Hanabilah who pledged their allegiance to Sultan Salahuddin al Ayyubi, the Ash’ari mutakallim.

As many Hanbalis also studied with Ash’aris and Maturidis, so one must use his intellect and realise why these noble scholars would take the company or knowledge from someone if they were deviant?

Just as in our own age, almost a thousand years later and people are still using the same arguments and bickering over the same long-resolved issues .

Looking at the teachings historically and objectively, one will understand the correct context in how they interacted, and we will present below some examples of Hanbali scholars who studied different sciences such as tafsir, grammar, hadith, tasawwuf, and many others, under Ash’ari ‘ulama.

– Imam ‘Abdurrahman Ibn Batta taught in al Qarawiyyin, which is a Maliki Ash’ari Institute, and used to exchange knowledge with the Ash’ari ‘ulama around the year 420 Ah .

– Imam ‘Awnun Din Ibn Hubayra (d. 560) participated in Jihad along Nuruddin Zangi al Ash’ari

– Imam Muwaffaq al Din Ibn Qudamah (d. 620) used to consult Najm al Din al Shirazi on difficult matters and pledged his allegiance to Sultan Salahuddin al Ayyubi al Ash’ari and kept his .company
– Imam Shamsuddin Ibn Qudamah (d. 682) taught at Jami’ul Umawi, the Ash’ari Institute, and one of his tudents was the great Imam al Nawawi al Ash’ari

– Imam Ibn Rajab al Hanbali (d. 796) from his teachers were the likes of Taqiuddin al Subki al Ash’ari and Zaynuddin al ‘Irāqi al Ash’ari

– Imam Taqiuddin al Futuhi (d. 972) taught al Azhar, the Ash’ari Institute

– Imam Mansur al Buhuti (d. 1051) taught at the Ash’ari al Azhar University, and he had Hanbali students who were Ash’ari in creed

– Imam ‘Abdul Baqi al Mawahibi al Ba’li (d. 1071) studied in the Ash’ari institute, al Azhar al Sharif. From amongst his teachers were Imam Ibrahim al Laqqani al Ash’ari, Imam Ahmad al Muqri al Maghribi al Ash’ari, and his student Shaykh Abdul Gani al Nabulsi al Maturidi

– Imam Muhammad al Saffarini (d. 1188) one of his teachers was Imam ‘Abdul Ghani al Nabulsi al Maturidi

– Imam ‘Abdullah al Qaddumi (d. 1331) taught in al Azhar the Ash’ari University

– Imam Musa Ibn ‘Isa al Qaddumi (d.1336) studied under Imam Muhammad al Manini al Hanafi and Salim Ibn Yasin al Attar al Ash’ari

– Imam ‘Abdul Latif al Subki al Hanbali (d. 1388) was ‘Shaykhul Azhar’ in the Ash’ari Institute .

– Imam Ahmad al Shami (d. 1414) his teacher in Tariqa was the Sufi Shaykh Muhammad al Hashimi al Ash’ari

– Shaykh Muwaffaq ‘Uyun al Hanbali (born 1377) his teacher was Muhyiddin al Kurdi al Ash’ari

– Imam ‘Abdul Karim al Subki taught at al Azhar al Sharif

– Shaykh Muhammad al Sayyid al Hanbali, a contemporary Hanbali faqeeh also teaches at al AzharAnd several other Hanbalis that study and teach at al Azhar al Sharif.

The Umawis were Ash’ari, the Ottomans were Maturidi, if they were deviants than it would have been impossible for the Hanabilah to reside amongst them .

Most importantly, the Hanabilah would never contradict the Noble Prophet ﷺ, if the Prophet ﷺ said that conqueror of Constantinople would be a righteous leader, than this meant only that he praised a rightly guided believer, and this rightly guided believer was none other than Sayyidina Muhammad al Fatih, the ‘Maturidi’.
Sallallahu ‘ala Sayyidina Muhammad ﷺ
4. What the Hanbali Authorities have said and the Fatawa on the Asha’irah

For the following we will present proofs from the great authoritative Hanbali Imams on what they said about the Asha’irah .

– Imam Abul Fadl al Tamimi (d. 410)
Shaykhul Hanabilah Abul Fadl al Tamimi, rahimahullah, said to his companions,

“Adhere to this man, Abu Bakr al Baqillani, because the Sunnah cannot be without him “.

Hafiz Ibn ‘Asakir in al Tabyīn Kadhib al Muftarī

Here one should realize the authority the Imam had, as his statement is not a random scholarly statement, as this was an authoritative Imam and head of the Hanabilah of his time. And one should also keep in mind that they were already accepted by the Hanbalis in the very early stages of their inception.
Imam Abu Bakr al Baqillani is from amongst the great Ash’ari theologians.

– Imam Qadi Abu Ya’la (d. 458)
He included the Asha’irah amongst Ahlussunnah, the Imam used to hold debates with Ash’aris and he said that the Asha’irah are from Ahlul Hadith (Ahlussunnah), and this can be found in the second volume of Tabaqatul Hanabilah .

He was the Grand Imam of the Ummah, Shaykhul Islam, the authoritative Imam, his work on creed was studied throughout the Khilafah

– Imam Abul Khattab Mahfuz al Kalwadhani (d. 510)
The Imam was an Ash’ari in creed, as this is confirmed by his student and related by Hafiz Ibn ‘Asākir in his book Tabyīn Kadhib al Muftarī .

We mention these evidences to prove that the Hanabilah accepted them as Ahlussunnah. As this great authoritative Imam was a student of Qadi Abu Ya’la, he was from amongst the Mujtahid fil Madhhab rank, the Imam along Sayyidina ‘Abdul Qadir al Jilani could do Ijtihad in all 4 schools .

– During the seventh century ah, the Hanabilah agreed on that the Asha’irah are from .Ahlussunnah

– Imam Najm al Din al Tufi (d. 716)
The great Hanbali Usuli Is described in Imam Ibn Rajab’s al Dhayl ‘ala Tabaqatul Hanabilah as being an Ash’ari .

– Taqiuddin Ibn Taymiyyah al Harrani (d. 728)
In his Majmu’ al Fatawa, the Imam tried to unify the Hanbalis and Ash’aris, as he praised Imam Abul Hasan al Ash’ari and said that he was from amongst the greatest of the Mutakallimin.

ﺃَﻥ ﺍﻟْﺎﺷﻌﺮﻱ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣِﻦ ﺃﺟﻞِّ ﺍﻟﻤُﺘﻜَﻠﻤﻴﻦَ

– Imam Muhammad Ibn Muhammad al Sa’di (d. 900)
The Hanabilah have mentioned that this great Imam was Ash’ari in creed, and this is known from his biography and his work called ‘Jawhar al Muhassal’.

May Allah ﷻ uphold the believers of Ahlussunnah and forgive those who erred.
————— —-
– The Fatawa and relied upon ruling of the Hanabilah on the Asha’irah –

ﻭﻗﺪ ﺫﻛﺮ ﺷﻴﺦ ﺍﻹﺳﻼﻡ ﻋﺰ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﺴﻼﻡ ﺃﻥ ﻋﻘﻴﺪﺗﻪ ﺍﻻَﺷﻌﺮﻱ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﻊ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻓﻌﻴﺔ، ﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟﻜﻴﺔ، ﻭ
ﺍﻟﺤﻨﻔﻴﺔ، ﻭ ﺍﻟﻔﻀﻼﺀ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﻨﺎﺑﻠﺔ .

– Shaykhul Islam al ‘Izz al Din Ibn ‘Abdussalam (d. 660) said,
“The Ash’ari ‘aqidah is agreed upon by the Shafi’is, the Malikis, the Hanafis, and with the nobility of the Hanbalis “.

Imam al Subki in Tabaqatul Shafi’iyyah al Kubra

This consensus related by Ibn ‘Abdussalam proves that by this time they were already declared as Ahlussunnah by all of the authorities from all the Madhahib.
– Imam ‘Abdul Baqi al Mawahibi (d. 1071)
the Hanbali authority of his time said the following in his ‘al ‘Ayn wal Athar fi ‘Aqa`idi Ahlul Athar’.

ﻭ ﻫﻲ ﺃﻥ ﻃﻮﺍﺀِﻑ ﺃﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ، ﺍﺷﺎﻋﺮﺓ، ﻭ ﺣﻨﺎﺑﻠﺔ، ﻭ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺪﻳﺔ .

“The groups of Ahlussunnah are three, Asha’irah, Hanabilah, and Maturidiyyah”.

The Imam also added that the Asha’irah are declared as Ahlussunnah in all of the Hanbali works.

Imam ‘Abdullah ibn Sufan al Qaddumi in his ‘al Manhaj al Ahmad’ said that the most used and relied upon (mu’tamad) ‘aqidah works of the Hanabilah are Mukhtasar al Ilfadat by Ibn Balban and al ‘Ayn wal Athar by Imam al Mawahibi.

The above proves that the above related statement is the mu’tamad, and without a doubt this is agreed upon by all the Hanbalis.
– Imam Muhammad al Saffarini (d. 1188)
Imam Muhammad al Saffarini is the relied upon source in the Hanbali ‘aqidah, he made the following statement in his ‘Lawami’ al Anwar al Bahiyyah.’

“The Ahlussunnah consist of three, The Athariyyah, their Imam being Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, the Ash’ariyyah, their Imam being Abul Hasan al Ash’ari and the Maturidiyyah, their Imam being Abu Mansur al Maturidi. And as far as the astray sects and cults besides them, they are very many indeed “.

Imam Mustafa ibn Ahmad al Shatti al Hanbali in his Rabseer al Qani’ and Shaykh Ibn Sallum al Hanbali both agree on the Poem of Imam Muhammad al Saffarini on that The Ahlussunnah are the Hanabilah, Asha’irah and Maturidiyyah .
Again, another authoritative Imam, who is the mu’tamad as well relates the same ruling regarding the Asha’irah and is backed up by other Hanbali authorities in this.
– Imam ‘Abdullah Ibn Sufan al Qaddūmi (d. 1331) in al Manhaj al Ahmad, a mu’tamad work on Hanbali ‘aqidah, said,

ﺍﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻭ ﺍﻻَﺷﻌﺮﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺎﺗُﺮﻳﺪﻳﺔ ﻓﺮﻗﺘﺔٌ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺓ

“Ahlul Hadith, the Ash’ariyyah and the Maturidiyyah are one group “

From these Fatawa and Mu’tamad works, it proves that the Hanbalis have concluded that the noble Ash’aris are from Ahlussunnati wal Jama’ah.
————— —–

– Some fatawa of the contemporary scholars –

– Shaykh Salih al Asmari, a Sunni Hanbali from Hijaz said in a Risalah called, ‘al Ijabat al fasilah fil Ash’ariyyati ‘indal Hanabilah’ mentioned that the Hanabilah have declared the Ash’aris al Ahlussunnah’

Shaykh ‘Abdul Wahid al Azhari al Hanbali

A Hanbali ‘aalim from al Azhar al Sharif has made the following statement
“The Asha’irah are from Ahlussunnati wal Jama’ah.”
And Shaykh Abu Ja’far al Hanbali who has made the same statements .
All the Hanbalis from Ahlussunnah hold the mu’tamad opinion that the Ash’aris are from Ahlussunnah wal Jama’ah.
This is the truth, and we do not care about the opinions of the dissenters and false claimers of this noble Madhhab.

May Allah ﷻ make us from those who are guided and given sound understanding .

Finished in Ingushetia, Caucasus
10 Rabi’ul Awwal, 1441 AH
7 November AD 2019
Imran al Hanbali

Eligibility for Zakah (Hanbali)

Shaykh Abdus-Salaam ash-Shuway’ir al-Hanbali الله يحفظه recently explained in the “Book of Zakah” the verse speaking about obligatory charity:

“Zakah (Obligatory charity) are only for the poor and for the needy and for those employed to collect [zakah] and for bringing hearts together [for Islam] and for freeing captives [or slaves] and for those in debt and for the cause of Allah and for the [stranded] traveler – an obligation [imposed] by Allah . And Allah is Knowing and Wise.” (Tawbah: 60)

When explaining the difference between “Faqeer” (poor) and “Miskeen” (needy) he said that the affair revolves around whether one is *completely devoided of* or *deficient in* one of the following five:

1. Food and drink.

2. Clothing.

Some scholars say that the least amount needed is an outfit for summer and winter, while others say that the affair returns back to the custom due to the fiqh maxim: العادة محكمة

3. A place to live.

They should be given enough rent money that will suffice them for a year, and that it is appropriate for their family size. Ex: a family of 10 would not suffice with a one bedroom apartment.

4. The male who does not have enough money to become married and is fearful of falling into sin.

In this case, the amount of money given should suffice for a normal sensible priced dowry.

5. Everyday essentials one needs to live.

What is considered to be “everyday essentials” differs according to the custom, and it can range to different things. For example, if one is living in the desert and needs flock in order to live, then “saa’imah” can be given to him as Zakah.

The Shaykh mentioned that this includes Air Conditioners in extremely hot places like here in Makkah. Throughout the day, it becomes blazing hot without any exaggeration. It can reach 110-120+ degrees daily here. If there is someone without AC, or with a broken AC, then it is permissible to give Zakah money to that person to fulfill that need.

If one is completely devoided of one of the above mentioned, then he is considered to be a Faqeer.

If one is deficient in one of the five, then he is considered to be a Miskeen.

Due to this, the Faqeer is considered to be in more need than the Miskeen and that is expressed in the verse for those who ponder and reflect.

والله مستعان

Brief Response to the Claim: “Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal was a Muhaddith & not a Faqih

Just like the post yesterday where we gave a short response on the claim that Imam Abu Hanifah was not a Muhaddith, an opposite claim is usually made upon Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (rahmatullahi alayh), some claimed that he was not a Faqeeh (Jurist) but only a Muhaddith (Hadith Narrator), the following is the testimony of the scholars who refute such contention.

Imam Abu Ubaid Qasim Bin Salam (rahimahullah) [d.224H] said:

“The knowledge of Hadith went to its apex in four scholars and Imam Ahmad (rahimahullah) is the most learned Faqeeh of them.”

Imam Abu Thaur Ibraheem bin Khalid (rahimahullah) said:

“Imam Ahmad (rahimahullah) was more learned Faqeeh than Sufyan Ath-Thauri (rahimahullah).” [Imam Adh-Dhahabi (rahimahullah), Tazkirat-ul-Huffaz, 2/16]

Ibn ‘Aqeel said:

“One of the most surprising thing that I have heard from the young and ignorant folk is their saying that Ahmad (bin Hanbal) is not a scholar of fiqh, but a scholar of hadeeth. And this is the limit of ignorance, since he had preferred sayings which he based upon Ahadeeth and are not known by most people, and he had things that were extra to that which the greater scholars had.”

Hanbali Fiqh: Touching Women With Desire Breaks Wudhu’

[Compiled by Abul Layth]

The following is some research I did over a year ago for those striving to follow the Hanbali Madh-hab. I am not sure how much benefit it will be for people, but I decided that I would go ahead and post it for those that it may benefit insha’allah.

Al Hajjaawi states in Zaad Al Mustaqni’,

[The fifth nullifier of wudhu’] “He touches a woman bi-shahwah (with desire).”

Imaam Al-Bahuti in his “Rawdh Al Murabbi’” page 42 states, in explaining this: [He touches] meaning the man [a woman with desire] that is because it is calling (or is stimulation) to Al Hadath.

Ibn Qudaamah states in Al-’Umdah regarding the nullifiers of wudhu’:

“And to touch a woman when it is out of shahwah (desire).”

In Al-’Uddah Sharh Al Umdah, Imaam Bahaa’ud-deen Al Maqdisi states after mentioning the three reported opinions,

“…And the third report, and it is the Thaahir (manifest opinion) of the Madh-hab, that it (i.e. the touch) nullifies the wudhu’ when it is done due to shahwah (desire), and it does not nullify the wudhu’ if it is due to other than shahwah, combining all of the verses and narrations together…” ((Page 45 of Al-Uddah published by Maktabah Daar As-Salaam ))

Imaam Ibn Qudaamah Al Maqdisi states in Al Kaafi Fi Fiqh Al Imaam Ahmad page 74,

“[And the Third Opinion:] It is the Thaahir of the Madh-hab and it is that touching a woman out of shahwah (desire) nullfies the wudhu’. Touching does not nullify the wudhu’ if it is not done out of shahwah, [and this is derived by] combining all of the Aayaat and Narrations (Al Akhbaar). The “touch” is not hadath in and of itself, rather it is what calls (daa’) to hadath…”

The Sheikh continues with drawing a simile to An-Nawm (sleep), and how sleep itself is not hadath, but what it leads to (such as the probability of passing gas etc). For more detail see Sharh Al Kabeer and Al Mughni.

In Dalil At-Taalib, Shaykh Mar’i ibn Yusuf Al-Karmi writes,

“And the fifth (nullifier of wudhu’) is when a man touches a woman or a woman touches a man due to shahwa…”

In the gloss of Dalil At-Talib, Nayl Al-Maa’rib of Imam Abdul-Qaadir ibn ‘Umar Ash-Shaybaani he comments on the above,

“Due to Allah’s statement ‘…or touching women…’ and as for the touch it does not break wudhu’ unless it done out of shahwa due to the gathering of all the verses and narrations (akhbaar).” ((page 17 of Al-Azhar’s old publication – undated))

May Allah bless our beloved Prophet Muhammad, His family, His Companions, and those that follow them in righteousness. Amin!

Are all the Ḥanābilah Anthropomorphists???

By Abdul Wahab Saleem

Are Ḥanābilah anthropomorphists (mujassimah) because they establish what appears to be attributes of Allah?

Firstly, allow me to be very clear that I am not ḥanbalī. However, there is a growing sentiment among certain subsections of Muslims around the world that many ḥanābilah are actually anthropomorphists, especially those in our times, and hence they are either non-Muslims or at least extremely misguided. Based on this view, at least two entire countries in the Muslim world are either full of non-Muslims or extremely deviant human beings, in addition to their official or unofficial emissaries and followers around the world.
Whilst it doesn’t escape me that there have been some ḥanbalīs who actually were anthropomorphists over the centuries, the general majority of ḥanābilah throughout the centuries and even today are not anthropomorphists! The confusions lie in our failiure to communicate with each other based on the terms of our counterparts.

To illustrate this, allow me to share just one example: Ibn al-Fā’ūs al-Ḥanbalī established the tradition which says ❝the Blackstone is Allah’s right hand❞. For this, he was severely criticized and even entitled as al-Ḥajarī by Ibn al-Khāḍibah for establishing that a ḥajar (stone) is Allah’s right hand. Subḥānahū Wa Ta‘ālā! Now obviously, any sane person wouldn’t establish such a tradition on its apparent meaning, and any sane person would recognize that this is some form of metaphor! This is why al-Ghazzālī considered it insanity to establish this tradition on the apparent meaning in Faiṣal al-Tafriqah!

However, commenting on this specific example, Ibn Rajab al-Ḥanbalī said something that changes our entire view of the word ḍhāhir (apparent) or ḥaqīqah (reality) which is often used in the Ḥanbalī circles, for which they are often accused of anthropomorphism. Ibn Rajab said, ❝…If one were to say that this is metaphorical, some will understand that it has no meaning, and reality to it, so they (i.e. his ḥanbalīs) deny *that* and distance themselves from it. And those who denied the existence of metaphors forbid the usage of this term so the aforementioned fallacy doesn’t occur, and so it doesn’t become a means to deny meanings of the Qur’an and the Sunnah.❞

He further explained that even if it is majāz (metaphorical) based on the terminology of most scholars, the ḥanbalī terminology (or at least that of some ḥanbalīs) is to use the word ḥaqīqah instead as ḥaqīqah to them is divided into two categories: 1) a meaning which the word itself renders, and 2) a meaning which is rendered by the context. The second meaning of the word ḥaqīqah based on this nomenclature is the same as that of other scholars who use the word majāz instead, and that is what they mean in this context! And whats important in relation to belief is the meaning and not the word choice!

If this is understood by a sincere and *fair* person on both sides of the equation, then much of the ṣifāt wars for which endless hours are wasted will be put to better use. And if this is read by an insincere and unfair person, then he will neither understand nor try to understand. Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr Al-Qurṭubī said, ❝From the blessings of [true] knowledge is fairness, and whosoever is unfair will not understand, nor will he try to understand.❞

I ask Allah to make us of those who understand each other even if we disagree. I ask Allah to make us of those who call for beneficial knowledge, understanding, unity, love, and fairness.

Are Hanbali and Athari Aqeedah the same??

Question: Are Hanbali and Athari Aqida the same?? Was Athari `aqida ever a school like the Maturidi or Ash’ari??

Answer: Inside Islam Athari, Sunni, and Ahl al-Hadith are all synonymous with each other and with each of the Four Sunni Schools in contradistinction with those non-Sunnis that are defined, in Sunni heresiographical discourse, as denying part or all of the Athars (reports) and Hadiths that define the principles and practice of Ahl al-Sunna wal-Jama’a.

Inside Sunnism, however, the above terms differ in various ways due to further polemical meanings according to the emphasis desired by the speaker and the guidelines of his own self-definition.

For example, when Ahl al-Hadith define themselves in contradistinction of Ahl al-Raiy then the first term tends to be synonymous with Hanbalis (and Shafi’is) and the second term with Hanafis (and Malikis) although they are all Ahl al-Raiy wal-Hadith in the larger sense since, on the one hand raiy – qualified juridical opinion – is the soul of ijtihad and fiqh without which the Shari’a becomes impaired; and, on the other hand, the source-texts are no less essential to the Shari’a. Hence Imams Abu Hanifa and al-Shafi’is famous saying comparing the muhaddith to the pharmacist and the jurisprudent to the physician.

When defining ‘aqida, the distinctions similarly reflect the self-perceived and self-representating emphases of each school. In this respect the Hanbalis perceive and represent themselves as the most focused of the Sunni Schools on source-texts. In reality, insofar as those Schools are defined by their founding Imams, then all four of them are equally source-text-focused. But most self-definitions of who Ahl al-Sunna are or what Sunna and Jama’a consist in, are actually formulaic responses which are not meant to be all-comprehensive but are part of a timely, practical arsenal to help dispatch deviations to their graves.

For example, Imam Abu Hanifa said: Sunna and Jama’a are defined by loyalty to the Two Shaykhs [Abu Bakr and `Umar as Caliphs], love of the Two Sons-in-Law [`Uthman and `Ali], and [the permissibility of] wiping over leather socks [in ablution]. Yet, elsewhere (as in his Wasiyya and Fiqh al-Akbar) he also made belief in Divine foreordained destiny (qadar) and the un-createdness of the Qur’an as essential, defining articles of Sunni doctrine also. The discrepancy is moot since each definition is dictated by context and the needs of the time in which it was uttered.

Similarly, the emphasis of the Hanbali School on textualism is a legacy of the heroic stand taken by Imam Ahmad in defense of that self-defining principle of Ahl al-Sunna wal-Jama`a against Mu’tazilism: We stick to all the authentic reports narrated from the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace, and his Companions that define his and their way because this is the Prophet’s own definition of the Saved Group. That legacy became embedded in Hanbali discourse and methodology even though there are, in the `aqidas narrated from the mouth of Imam Ahmad by his students, many Ash’ari and Maturidi truisms. This is the strain that a few Hanbalis embraced in their own positively Ash’ari creeds such as Ibn `Aqil, Ibn al-Jawzi, and al-Saffarini.

Al-Saffarini (d. 1188) notably gave the following definition in his Lawami` al-Anwar: Ahl al-Sunna consist of three groups: the textualists (al-Athariyya), whose Imam is Ahmad ibn Hanbal, the Ash`aris, whose Imam is Abu al-Hasan al-Ash’ari, and the Maturidis, whose Imam is Abu Mansur al-Maturidi. and they are all one sect, the saved sect, and they are Ahl al-Hadith.

Perhaps a more satisfactory expression of the Sunni self-definition of Ahl al-Sunna is given by the great Ash’ari Imam known in absolute terms as the Ustadh: Abu Mansur `Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi (d. 429) in his Farq bayn al-Firaq (The Difference between the Sects). This entire book is in fact an elucidation of the hadith of the Prophet, upon him blessings and peace, of which the central part says: … and my Community shall divide into 73 sects… At the end of the book he defines Ahl al-Sunna thus:

Those that have completely mastered and codified the principles of belief [=Ash`aris and Maturidis], the Mujtahid Scholars of the four Schools of Law and their followers, the Scholars of hadith that steered clear of deviation, the Scholars of Arabic grammar that steered clear of deviation, the Scholars of tafsir that steered clear of deviation, the Sufis, the people making jihad, and the general masses of the Muslims.

Similarly al-Iji (d. 756) in the Mawaqif:

The Saved Group which is excepted from the Prophet’s hadith All of them are in the Fire except one: Those that adhere to what I and my Companions follow – these are the Ash’aris, the Salaf of the scholars of hadith, and [generally speaking] Ahl al-Sunna wal-Jama`a.

While al-Haytami, al-Baydawi, and al-Saharanfuri say: When we use the term Ahl al-Sunna wal-Jama`a, what is meant are the Ash’aris and the Maturidis.

Imam `Abd Allah ibn `Alawi al-Haddad (d. 1132) said:

If you look with a sound understanding into those passages relating to the sciences of faith in the Book, the Sunna, and the sayings of the Salaf… you will know for certain that the truth is with the party called Ash’ari, named after the Shaykh Abu al-Hasan al-Ash’ari, Allah have mercy on him, who systematized the foundations of the creed of the people of the truth and recorded its earliest versions, these being the beliefs which the Companions and the best among the Successors agreed upon. The Maturidis are the same as the Ash’aris in the above regard.

Answered by Gibril F. Haddad

Ilm Chain of the Hanaabilah

How the Ilm reached in our Hearts…

Al-Basra is where 1 of the 10 Mushaf of Sayyiduna Uthman Ibn al-Affan (radhiyallahu anhu) was sent. Sayyiduna Ali Ibn Abi-Talib (radhiyallahu anhu) wrapped the black Imamah around the head of his student, Imam Hasan al-Basri (rahimahullah) and licensed him to teach.

Imam Hasan al Basri (rahimahullah) did the same thing to his student Imam Habib al-Ajami (rahimahullah).

Imam al-Ajami (rahimahullah) did the same thing to Imam Sufyan Ibn al-Uyaynah (rahimahullah).

Imam Ibn Uyaynah (rahimahullah) did the same thing to Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (rahimahullah).

Imam Ahmad (rahimahullah) did the same thing to his son, Imam Salih al-Baghdadi (rahimahullah).

Imam Baghdadi (rahimahullah) did the same to his student Imam Abu Qasim al-Kharaqi (rahimahullah).

Imam al-Kharaqi (rahimahullah) did the same to his student ibn Battah (rahimahullah).

Imam Ibn Battah (rahimahullah) did the same thing to his student Abu Talib al-Ushari (rahimahullah).

Imam al-Ushari (rahimahullah) did the same to his student, Imam Mahfuz al-Kalwazami (rahimahullah).

Imam al-Kalwazani did the same thing to his student Imam Shaykh Abdul Qadir al-Jilani (rahimahullah).

Imam Shaykh al-Jilani (rahimahullah) did the same thing to his students and successors, Imam Abd al-Rahman Ibn Jawzi, Imam Abd al-Ghani al-Maqdisi, Imam Muwaffaq-uddin Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdisi (rahimahumullah) and others.

With the exceptions of Imam Ibn al-Jawzi (rahimahullah), all these Imams were Palestinians and this is part of the story of how this strand of Islam spread from Makkah to Medina to Palestine and the whole world.

In sha Allah, I feel all of us who follow this beautiful Madh-hab should know this.

Share it with our brothers and sisters and memorize this.

Via Br. Mohammad Raza Mirza (Hafidhahullah)…