As-Sayf al-Battār ʿalā al-ʿĀdhiriyyah al-Kuffār
A response to the doubts of the ʿādhiriyyah
بِحَمْدِ اللهِ نَبْدَأُ فِي الْمَقَالِ
وَنُثْنِي بِالْمَدِيحِ لِذِي الْجَلَالِ
إِلَهِ الْعَالَمِينَ وَكُلِّ حَيٍّ
تَفَرَّدَ بِالْعُبُودِيَّةِ وَالْكَمَالِ
وَمَوْصُوفٌ بِأَوْصَافٍ تَعَالَتْ
عَنِ التَّشْبِيهِ أَوْ ضَرْبِ الْمِثَالِ
وَمِنْ بَعْدِ الصَّلَاةِ عَلَى نَبِيٍّ
هُوَ الْمَعْصُومُ أَحْمَدُ ذُو الْجَمَالِ
زَكَى النَّفْسَ مَنْبَعَ كُلِّ خَيْرٍ
كَرِيمُ الْمُحْتَدَى سَامِي الْمَعَالِي
First doubt of the ʿĀdhiriyyah [from al-Imām al-Bukhārī]
وَكُلُّ مَنْ لَمْ يَعْرِفِ اللَّهَ بِكَلَامِهِ أَنَّهُ غَيْرُ مَخْلُوقٍ فَإِنَّهُ يُعْلَمُ، وَيُرَدُّ جَهْلُهُ إِلَى الْكِتَابِ وَالسُّنَّةِ، فَمَنْ أَبَى بَعْدَ الْعِلْم بِهِ، كَانَ مُعَانِدًا، قَالَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى: ﴿وَمَا كَانَ اللَّهُ لِيُضِلَّ قَوْمًا بَعْدَ إِذْ هَدَاهُمْ حَتَّى يُبَيِّنَ لَهُمْ مَا يَتَّقُونَ﴾ [التوبة: ١١٥]، وَلِقَوْلِهِ: ﴿وَمَنْ يُشَاقِقِ الرَّسُولَ مِنْ بَعْدِ مَا تَبَيَّنَ لَهُ الْهُدَى وَيَتَّبِعْ غَيْرَ سَبِيلِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ نُوَلِّهِ مَا تَوَلَّى وَنُصْلِهِ جَهَنَّمَ وَسَاءَتْ مَصِيرًا﴾ [النساء: ١١٥]
“And anyone who does not know—through Allah’s speech—that it is uncreated is to be taught, and his ignorance is to be referred back to the Book and the Sunnah. Whoever then refuses after this knowledge has been made clear to him is a defiant opposer.
Allah the Exalted said: ‘Allah would not misguide a people after He had guided them until He makes clear to them what they must avoid’ (al-Tawbah 115).
And His saying: ‘Whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has been made clear to him, and follows a path other than that of the believers, We will turn him to what he has chosen and burn him in Hell—and what an evil destination!’ (al-Nisā’ 115).”
Whoever contemplates this text with fairness, then examines its context and what precedes it, will clearly realise that it is not about Takfīr. Rather, it is about explaining how to deal with an ignorant person, where he is to be treated with gentleness and taught the truth:
وَهَؤُلَاءِ الْمَعْرُوفُونَ بِالْعِلْمِ فِي عَصْرِهِمْ بِلَا اخْتِلَافٍ مِنْهُمْ، أَنَّ الْقُرْآنَ كَلَامُ اللَّهِ، إِلَّا مَنْ شَذَّهَا، أَوْ أَغْفَلَ الطَّرِيقَ الْوَاضِحَ فَعَمِيَ عَلَيْهِ، فَإِنَّ مَرَدَّهُ إِلَى الْكِتَابِ وَالسُّنَّةِ
And these [scholars] who were known for knowledge in their era, without any disagreement among them, held that the Qurʾān is the speech of Allāh, except for those who deviated or neglected the clear path, causing it to become obscure to them, their position is to be referred back to the Book and the Sunnah.
Khalq Afʿāl al-ʿIbād - 1/61
This does not indicate the negation of Takfīr before teaching, and this is what the teacher of al-Bukhārī, Isḥāq ibn Rāhawayh said:
فَفِي هَذَا تَصْدِيقُ مَا وَصَفْنَا أَنَّهُ يَكْفُرُ بِالرَّدِّ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ ﷺ وَلَكِنْ كُلُّ مَنْ كَانَ كُفْرُهُ مِنْ جِهَةِ الْجَهْلِ وَغَيْر الِاسْتِهَانَةِ رُفِقَ بِهِ حَتَّى يَرْجِعَ إِلَى مَا أَنْكَرَهُ كَمَا رَفَقَ النَّبِيُّ ﷺ بِالْأَعْرَابِيّ
In this is confirmation of what we described, that one disbelieves by responding to (radd ʿalā) the Prophet ﷺ. However, everyone whose disbelief arises from ignorance and not from disdain is treated gently until he retracts from what he denied, just as the Prophet ﷺ treated the Bedouin gently...
Taʿẓīm Qadr aṣ-Ṣalāt - 2/929
Therefore, whoever claims that al-Bukhārī sees ʿinād as a condition for Takfīr, let him prove that from al-Bukhārī's own statements. Otherwise, let him be silent.
Al-Bukhārī only mentioned teaching the ignorant, and if the person persists after the clarification, then he is considered a muʿānid.
ما أُبالِي صَلَّيْتُ خَلْفَ الجَهْمِيِّ الرّافِضِيِّ أمْ صَلَّيْتُ خَلْفَ اليَهُودِ والنَّصارى، ولا يُسَلَّمُ عَلَيْهِمْ، ولا يُعادُونَ، ولا يُناكَحُونَ، ولا يَشْهَدُونَ، ولا تُؤْكَلُ ذَبائِحُهُم
I don't see a difference between praying behind a Jahmī and a Rāfiḍī or behind Christians and Jews. They are not to be greeted, nor are they to be visited, nor are they to be married, nor is their testimony to be accepted, nor are their slaughtered meat to be eaten.
Khalq Afʿāl al-ʿIbād - 1/33
Second doubt of the ʿĀdhiriyyah [from Ibn Abī ʿĀṣim]
مما اتفق أهل العلم على أن نسبوه إلى السنة…القرآن كلام الله تبارك وتعالى تكلم الله به ليس بمخلوق، ومن قال: مخلوق، ممن قامت عليه الحجة فكافر بالله العظيم، ومن قال من قبل أن تقوم عليه الحجة فلا شيء عليه
"Among the matters upon which the people of knowledge agreed and attributed to the Sunnah is that the Qur’an is the Speech of Allah, blessed and exalted; Allah spoke it, and it is not created. Whoever says that it is created after the proof has been established against him is a disbeliever in Almighty Allah. And whoever says it before the proof has been established against him, then nothing is (to be ruled) against him."
Look how Ibn Abi Asim mentioned an IJMAA' on this matter!!!! Absolutely catastrophic for the ghulaat
First of all, we do not know of the book except for a single, solitary manuscript in al-Madīnah, copied in the year 1084h. It is poor in quality upon examination, and there is doubt concerning it. Even if we grant its authenticity, Ibn Abī ʿĀṣim was a Ṣūfī and a propagator of the Ẓāhirī madhhab in Aṣbahān, and he was among its early scholars. Ibn ʿAbd al-Hādī, adh-Dhahabī, Abū Nuʿaym and others mentioned this. Excusing due to ignorance is well-known among many Ẓāhirīs.
Also, his own Shuyūkh refute this supposed consensus. Adh-Dhahabī said:
شُيُوخُهُ: أَبُو الْوَلِيدِ الطَّيَالِسِيُّ، وَعَمْرُو بْنُ مَرْزُوقٍ، وَأَبُو عُمَرَ الْحَوْضِيُّ، وَمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ كَثِيرٍ، وَمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ أَبِي بَكْرٍ الْمُقَدَّمِيُّ، وَشَيْبَانُ بْنُ فَرُّوخَ، وَهَدْبَةُ بْنُ خَالِدٍ، وَمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ نُمَيْرٍ، وَإِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ الشَّافِعِيُّ، وَيَعْقُوبُ بْنُ حُمَيْدِ بْنِ كَاسِبٍ، وَإِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ الْحَجَّاجِ السَّامِيُّ، وَالْحَوْطِيُّ عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ بْنُ نَجْدَةَ، وَدُحَيْمٌ، وَهِشَامُ بْنُ عَمَّارٍ، وَأَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ، وَعَبْدُ الْأَعْلَى بْنُ حَمَّادٍ، وَكَامِلُ بْنُ طَلْحَةَ الْجَحْدَرِيُّ، وَأَبُو كَامِلٍ الْجَحْدَرِيُّ، وَعَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ أَسْمَاءَ، وَطَبَقَتِهِمْ، وَيَنْزِلُ إِلَى طَبَقَةِ أَبِي حَاتِمٍ الرَّازِيِّ، وَالْبُخَارِيِّ، وَيُكْثِرُ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ، وَابْنِ كَاسِبٍ، وَهِشَامٍ.
His Shuyūkh: Abū al-Walīd aṭ-Ṭayālisī, ʿAmr ibn Marzūq, Abū ʿUmar al-Ḥawḍī, Muḥammad ibn Kathīr, Muḥammad ibn Abī Bakr al-Muqaddamī, Shaybān ibn Farrūkh, Hadbah ibn Khālid, Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdillāh ibn Numayr, Ibrāhīm ibn Muḥammad al-Shāfiʿī, Yaʿqūb ibn Ḥumayd ibn Kāsib, Ibrāhīm ibn al-Ḥajjāj as-Sāmī, al-Ḥawṭī ʿAbd al-Wahhāb ibn Najdah, Duḥaym, Hishām ibn ʿAmmār, Abū Bakr ibn Abī Shaybah, ʿAbd al-Aʿlā ibn Ḥammād, Kāmil ibn Ṭalḥah al-Jaḥdarī, Abū Kāmil al-Jaḥdarī, ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad ibn Asmāʾ, and their generation; and he narrates from the generation of Abū Ḥātim ar-Rāzī and al-Bukhārī; and he narrates extensively from Ibn Abī Shaybah, Ibn Kāsib, and Hishām.
Abū al-Walīd aṭ-Ṭayālisī:
Abū Dāwūd as-Sijistānī narrated:
١٧١٨ - ثَنَا عَبَّاسٌ، قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ أَبَا الْوَلِيدِ، يَقُولُ: «مَنْ لَمْ يَعْقِدْ قَلْبَهُ عَلَى أَنَّ الْقُرْآنَ لَيْسَ بِمَخْلُوقٍ، فَهُوَ خَارِجٌ مِنَ الْإِسْلَامِ»
1718 - ʿAbbās narrated to us, he said: I heard Abā al-Walīd say: “Whoever does not firmly believe in his heart that the Qurʾān is not created, then he is outside of Islām.”
Masāʾil Abī Dāwūd - n° 1718
Al-Lālakāʾī narrated:
٥١٦ - ذَكَرَهُ عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ أَبِي حَاتِمٍ قَالَ: ثنا إِسْحَاقُ بْنُ الْحَجَّاجِ، ثنا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ الْوَلِيدِ قَالَ: ثنا أَبُو الْوَلِيدِ الطَّيَالِسِيُّ قَالَ: «مَنْ قَالَ الْقُرْآنُ مَخْلُوقٌ يُفَرَّقُ بَيْنَهُ وَبَيْنَ امْرَأَتِهِ بِمَنْزِلَةِ الْمُرْتَدِّ»
516 - ʿAbd ar-Raḥmān ibn Abī Ḥātim mentioned it, he said: Isḥāq ibn al-Ḥajjāj narrated to us, Aḥmad ibn al-Walīd narrated to us, he said: Abū al-Walīd aṭ-Ṭayālisī narrated to us, he said: “Whoever says the Qurʾān is created is to be separated from his wife in the same manner as an apostate.”
Sharḥ Uṣūl al-Iʿtiqād - n° 516
Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdillāh ibn Numayr:
Ibn Baṭṭah narrated:
٢٩٢ - حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ أَحْمَدُ بْنُ سَلْمَانَ، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ الْحَضْرَمِيُّ، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا عَبَّاسٌ الْعَنْبَرِيُّ، قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ مُحَمَّدَ بْنَ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ نُمَيْرٍ، يَقُولُ: «الْقُرْآنُ كَلَامُ اللَّهِ وَلَيْسَ بِمَخْلُوقٍ، وَمَنْ قَالَ: إِنَّهُ مَخْلُوقٌ، فَقَدْ كَفَرَ».
292 - Abū Bakr Aḥmad ibn Salmān narrated to us, he said: Abū Jaʿfar al-Ḥaḍramī narrated to us, he said: ʿAbbās al-ʿAnbarī narrated to us, he said: I heard Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdillāh ibn Numayr say: “The Qurʾān is the speech of Allāh and is not created. And whoever says that it is created has disbelieved.”
Hishām ibn ʿAmmār:
Adh-Dhahabī said:
٢٤٤ - قَالَ أَبُو الْفَضْلِ يَعْقُوبُ بْنُ إِسْحَاقَ بْنِ مَحْمُودٍ الْحَافِظُ: حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ مَنْصُورٍ الْبَزَّارُ: سَمِعْتُ هِشَامَ بْنَ عَمَّارٍ -وَبَلَغَهُ أَنَّ نَاسًا يَنْسِبُونَهُ إِلَى اللَّفْظِيَّةِ- فَغَضَبَ وَقَالَ: الْقُرْآنُ كَلَامُ اللَّهِ وَلَيْسَ بِمَخْلُوقٍ، وَمَنْ قَالَ: الْقُرْآنُ أَوْ قُدْرَةُ اللَّهِ أَوْ عِزَّةُ اللَّهِ مَخْلُوقَةٌ فَهُوَ مِنَ الْكَافِرِينَ. فَقِيلَ لَهُ: مَا تَقُولُ فِيمَنْ قَالَ: «لَفْظِي بِالْقُرْآنِ مَخْلُوقٌ»؟ فَقَالَ: ﴿قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ، اللَّهُ الصَّمَدُ﴾ إِلَى آخِرِهَا. ثُمَّ قَالَ: هَذَا الَّذِي قَرَأْتُ كَلَامُ اللَّهِ.
244 - Abū al-Faḍl Yaʿqūb ibn Isḥāq ibn Maḥmūd al-Ḥāfiẓ said: ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad ibn Manṣūr al-Bazzār narrated to us: I heard Hishām ibn ʿAmmār - and it had reached him that some people were attributing him to the Lafẓiyyah - so he became angry and said: “The Qurʾān is the speech of Allāh and is not created. And whoever says that the Qurʾān, or Allāh's power, or Allāh's might is created, then he is among the disbelievers.” Then he was asked: “What do you say about one who says: “My lafẓ of the Qurʾān is created?”” So he recited: {Say, He is Allāh, [who is] One, Allāh, the Eternal Refuge} to its end. Then he said: “This that I have recited is the speech of Allāh.”
Mukhtaṣar al-ʿUlūw - 1/197
Abū Ḥātim ar-Rāzī transmitted the consensus of the scholars of his generation:
وَمَنْ زَعَمَ أَنَّ الْقُرْآنَ مَخْلُوقٌ فَهُوَ كَافِرٌ بِاللَّهِ الْعَظِيمِ كُفْرًا يَنْقُلُ عَنِ الْمِلَّةِ. وَمَنْ شَكَّ فِي كُفْرِهِ مِمَّنْ يَفْهَمُ فَهُوَ كَافِرٌ. وَمَنْ شَكَّ فِي كَلَامِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَ فَوَقَفَ شَاكًّا فِيهِ يَقُولُ: لَا أَدْرِي مَخْلُوقٌ أَوْ غَيْرُ مَخْلُوقٍ فَهُوَ جَهْمِيٌّ. وَمَنْ وَقَفَ فِي الْقُرْآنِ جَاهِلًا عُلِّمَ وَبُدِّعَ وَلَمْ يُكَفَّرْ.
1) And whoever claims that the Qurʾān is created, then he is a disbeliever in Allāh the Mighty, a form of disbelief that takes him out of the religion.
2) And whoever doubts his disbelief, among those who understand, then he is a disbeliever.
3) And whoever doubts the speech of Allāh the Exalted, and withholds doubtfully about it, saying: I do not know whether it is created or uncreated, then he is a Jahmī.
4) And whoever withholds regarding the Qurʾān out of ignorance, then he is to be taught and is considered an innovator, but is not excommunicated.
Sharḥ Uṣūl al-Iʿtiqād - 1/197
Look at how he and Abū Zurʿah say that the one who says the Qurʾān is created is a disbeliever without tafṣīl, unlike the one who withholds, in which they differentiate between the knowledgeable and the ignorant. So if we concede that ḥujjah here means removing doubts and what else, then this ijmāʿ is invalid, for the statements of the Salaf regarding direct individual Takfīr are numerous. And his own scholars didn't necessitate proof to be established, and some of their speech is clearly talking about individual Takfīr.
And what supports, furthermore, that this ijmāʿ is invalid is that ar-Rāziyayn, who are greater than Ibn Abī ʿĀṣim, mentioned in their ʿAqīdah that the ignorant Wāqifī is made tabdīʿ of as shown, then what about the ignorant Makhlūqī, how can there be nothing ruled against him?
Though we can explain his speech by the speech of the scholars, whoever the truth has reached, then ḥujjah is established on him, and this is the truth. Whoever it has reached that the Qurʾān is the speech of Allāh which He spoke, then ḥujjah is established on him, and the Qurʾān is sufficient. So, either this isn't authentic from him, or it is, and he's a ʿĀdhirī like your Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah, or his speech is being misinterpreted. Either way, he isn't a proof.
Third doubt of the ʿĀdhiriyyah [from al-Imām Aḥmad]
أَخْبَرَنِي عَبْدُ الْمَلِكِ الْمَيْمُونِيُّ، قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ يَذْكُرُ الْجَهْمِيَّةَ، فَقَالَ رَجُلٌ لِأَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ: أَرَأَيْتَ إِنْ مَاتَ فِي قَرْيَةٍ لَيْسَ فِيهَا إِلَّا نَصَارَى، مَنْ يَشْهَدُهُ؟ قَالَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ مُجِيبًا: " أَنَا لَا أَشْهَدُهُ، يَشْهَدُهُ مَنْ شَاءَ، قَالَ لِي أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ: غَيْرُ وَاحِدٍ يَحْكِي عَنْ وَكِيعٍ، أَنَّهُ قَالَ: «كَافِرٌ»
ʿAbd al-Malik al-Maymūnī reported to me, saying: “I heard Abū ʿAbd Allāh (Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal) mention the Jahmiyyah. So a man said to Abū ʿAbd Allāh: ‘What do you say about one of them who dies in a village where there are only Christians—who will attend his funeral?’ Abū ʿAbd Allāh replied: ‘I will not attend him; whoever wishes may attend.’ Abū ʿAbd Allāh then said to me: ‘More than one person has narrated to me from Wakīʿ that he said: “He is a disbeliever.”’
We clearly see that Ahmad allowed attending the funeral of an individual jahmi, although he personally wouldn't do it. PRETTY STRANGE IF HE TAKFIRED HIM.
Al-Khallāl narrated before he brought this narration:
١٧١٢ - أَخْبَرَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ، أَنَّ يَعْقُوبَ بْنَ بُخْتَانَ، حَدَّثَهُمْ، أَنَّ رَجُلًا قَالَ لِأَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ: مَا تَقُولُ فِي رَجُلٍ مِنَ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ يَمُوتُ وَلَا يَشْهَدُ أَحَدٌ مِنْ أَصْحَابِهِ، أَنَدْفِنُهُ؟ قَالَ لِي: «أَقَلُّ مَا يَكُونُ هَذَا، أَرْجُو أَنْ لَا تُبْتَلَى بِهَذَا» . ثُمَّ قَالَ: «بَلَغَنِي أَنَّ بَعْضَ. . . . . مِنْ أَنَّ رَجُلًا مِنْهُمْ ضُرِبَ عُنُقُهُ، فَطَرَحُوهُ فِيهَا، فَلَمْ يُصَلَّ عَلَيْهِ.»
١٧١٢ - أَخْبَرَنِي الْحُسَيْنُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ النُّعَيْمِيُّ، عَنِ الْحُسَيْنِ بْنِ الْحَسَنِ، قَالَ: ثنا يَعْقُوبُ بْنُ بُخْتَانَ، أَنَّ أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، قَالَ: «لَا يُصَلَّى عَلَى الْجَهْمِيِّ.»
1712 - Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī reported to us that Yaʿqūb ibn Bukhtān narrated to them that a man said to Abū ʿAbdillāh: “What do you say about a man from the Jahmiyyah who dies and none of his companions are present, should we bury him?“ He said to me: “The least that could happen is this. I hope you will not be tested with this.’” Then he said: “It reached me that some [...] a man from them had his neck struck, and they threw him in it, and it wasn't prayed over him.”
1713 - Al-Ḥusayn ibn ʿAbdillāh an-Nuʿaymī narrated to me, on the authority of al-Ḥusayn ibn al-Ḥasan, he said: Yaʿqūb ibn Bukhtān narrated to us that Abū ʿAbdillāh said: “The Jahmī is not to be prayed over.”
Kitāb as-Sunnah - n° 1712/1713
Also, Aḥmad literally narrated after that Wakīʿ said he (the Jahmī) is a disbeliever, why would he do iḥtijāj with Wakīʿ if he didn't Takfīr him?
Secondly, the narration - as you mentioned - is about attending a Jahmī's funeral, which is more general than praying upon him. And this Jahmī isn't any Jahmī, he is a Jahmī who died in a village which has Christians only, and it is established from Aḥmad that he forbade attending the funerals of Jahmiyyah, so if he allowed it on this occasion, it would be a specific case, and it doesn't entail affirming Islām for any of them. How does allowing the burial of Kuffār and/or attending their funerals in specific cases entail that they are Muslims?
Al-Khallāl narrated:
أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ، قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ يَقُولُ: مَنْ قَالَ: الْقُرْآنُ مَخْلُوقٌ؛ فَلَا تَشْهَدْ جَنَازَتَهُ.
Abū Bakr reported to us, he said: I heard Abū ʿAbdillāh say: “Whoever says the Qurʾān is created, then do not attend his funeral.”
Al-Jāmiʿ li-ʿUlūm al-Imām Aḥmad - 4/89
{So do you believe in part of the Scripture and disbelieve in part? Then what is the recompense for those who do that among you except disgrace in worldly life; and on the Day of Resurrection they will be sent back to the severest of punishment. And Allāh is not unaware of what you do.}
Fourth doubt of the ʿĀdhiriyyah [from al-Imām Aḥmad]
In Kitab al-Mihnah we read:
قال أبو عبد اللَّه: وقد جعلت أبا إسحاق في حل ورأيت اللَّه يقول: ﴿وَلْيَعْفُوا وَلْيَصْفَحُوا أَلَا تُحِبُّونَ أَنْ يَغْفِرَ اللَّهُ لَكُمْ﴾ [النور: ٢٢] وأمر النبي ﷺ أبا بكر بالعفو في قضية مسطح. ثم قال أبو عبد اللَّه: العفو أفضل، وما ينفعك أن يعذب أخوك المسلم بسببك. ولكن تعفو وتصفح عنه، فيغفر اللَّه لك كما وعدك
Abū ʿAbd Allāh (Imām Aḥmad) said:
“I have pardoned Abū Isḥāq, and I saw that Allah says: ‘Let them pardon and overlook. Do you not love that Allah should forgive you?’ (al-Nūr 22). And the Prophet ﷺ commanded Abū Bakr to pardon (Mistah) in that incident.”
Then Abū ʿAbd Allāh said:
“Forgiveness is better. What benefit is there for you if your Muslim brother is punished because of you? Rather, forgive him and overlook him, and Allah will forgive you as He promised.”
(Abi Jannah edition, p.133)
Al-Muʿtasim later repented, Aḥmad restricted his pardoning to not be to a Mubtadiʿ, so how can he later pardon someone who is above a Mubtadiʿ?
Ḥanbal narrated:
فَقَالَ لَهُ: يَا أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، أَنَا تَائِبٌ إِلَى اللَّهِ تَعَالَى مِنَ السُّلْطَانِ. قَالَ لَهُ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ: فَأَنْتَ فِي حِلٍّ، وَكُلُّ مَنْ ذَكَرَنِي إِلَّا مُبْتَدِعًا.
قَالَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ: وَقَدْ جَعَلْتُ أَبَا إِسْحَاقَ فِي حِلٍّ، وَرَأَيْتُ اللَّهَ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ يَقُولُ: ﴿وَلْيَعْفُوا وَلْيَصْفَحُوا أَلَا تُحِبُّونَ أَنْ يَغْفِرَ اللَّهُ لَكُمْ﴾ [النور: ٢٢]، وَأَمَرَ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَبَا بَكْرٍ بِالعَفْوِ فِي قَضِيَّةِ مِسْطَحٍ.
ثُمَّ قَالَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ: العَفْوَ أَفْضَلُ، وَمَا يَنْفَعُكَ أَنْ يُعَذَّبَ أَخُوكَ المُسْلِمُ بِسَبَبِكَ. وَلَكِنْ تَعْفُوَ وَتَصْفَحَ عَنْهُ، فَيَغْفِرُ اللَّهُ لَكَ كَمَا وَعَدَكَ.
So he (a man) said to him: “O Abā ʿAbdillāh, I repent to Allāh the Exalted for [my association with] the Sulṭān.” Abū ʿAbdillāh said to him: “Then you are absolved, and [so is] everyone who mentioned me except an innovator.”
Abū ʿAbdillāh said: “And I have absolved Abā Isḥāq (al-Muʿtaṣim), and I saw Allāh say: {And let them pardon and overlook. Would you not like that Allāh should forgive you?} [Qurʾān 24:22], and the Prophet ﷺ commanded Abā Bakr to pardon in the matter of Misṭaḥ.” Then Abū ʿAbd Allāh said: “Pardon is superior. And what benefit is it to you that your Muslim brother is punished because of you? Rather, you should pardon and overlook his offence, so that Allāh may forgive you as He has promised you.”
Kitāb al-Miḥnah riwāyat Ḥanbal - p. 133
Ḥanbal said:
وَكَانَ أَبُو إِسْحَاقَ أَمَرَ إِسْحَاقَ بْنَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ أَلَّا يَقْطَعَ عَنْهُ خَبَرَهُ، وَذَلِكَ أَنَّهُ تَرَكَهُ فِيمَا حُكِيَ لَنَا عِنْدَ الْإِيَاسِ مِنْهُ، وَبَلَغَنَا أَنَّ أَبَا إِسْحَاقَ نَدِمَ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ وَأَسْقَطَ فِي يَدِهِ حَتَّى صَلُحَ.
And Abū Isḥāq had ordered Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm not to cut him off from [bringing] his report. That was because he had abandoned him, as has been related to us, when he despaired of him. And it has reached us that Abū Isḥāq regretted after that, and was struck with remorse until he was reformed.
Kitāb al-Miḥnah riwāyat Ḥanbal - p. 127
Abū Bakr al-Armawī said:
بَلَغَنِي أَنَّ الْمُعْتَصِمَ لَمَّا ضَرَبَ أَحْمَدَ بْنَ حَنْبَلٍ لَمْ يَنْتَفِعْ بِنَفْسِهِ، وَأَخَذَتْهُ الرَّعْدَةُ وَضِيقُ النَّفْسِ، وَكَانَتْ تَرْتَعِدُ فَرَائِصُهُ وَلَا تَكَادُ تَسْتَقِيمُ لَهُ قَدَمٌ عَلَى الْأَرْضِ، فَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُ: الْأَطِبَّاءُ؟ قَالَ: أَنَا أَعْرِفُ عِلَّتِي، عِلَّتِي مُحْنَةُ الْعَبْدِ الصَّالِحِ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ حَنْبَلٍ حِينَ ابْتُلِيتُ بِهِ. حَتَّى مَاتَ عَلَى ذَلِكَ.
It reached me that when al-Muʿtaṣim beat Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, he (al-Muʿtaṣim) derived no benefit from himself (i.e., he was consumed by anguish). He was seized by trembling and shortness of breath. His limbs would tremble, and he could scarcely keep his feet steady on the ground. When it was said to him: “The doctors?” He says: “I know my ailment. My ailment is the miḥnah of the righteous servant Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, when I was tested with him.” He remained in that state until he died.
Kitāb al-Miḥnah by al-Maqdisī - p. 116
Fifth doubt of the ʿĀdhiriyyah [from al-Imām Aḥmad]
الإسكاف سُلَيْمَان بن عبد الله السجزى نقل عَن إمامنا أَشْيَاء مِنْهَا المحنة قَالَ أتيت بَاب المعتصم وَإِذا النَّاس قد ازدحموا على بَابه كَيَوْم الْعِيد فَدخلت الدَّار فَرَأَيْت بساطا مَبْسُوطا وكرسيا مطروحا فوقفت بِإِزَاءِ الكرسى فَبينا أَنا قَائِم فَإِذا المعتصم قد أقبل فَجَلَسَ على الكرسى وَنزع نَعله من رجله وَوضع رجلا على رجل ثمَّ قَالَ احضروا أَحْمد بن حَنْبَل فأحضر فَلَمَّا وقف بَين يَدَيْهِ سلم عَلَيْهِ قَالَ لَهُ يَا أَحْمد تكلم وَلَا تخف أَحْمد وَالله يَا أَمِير الْمُؤمنِينَ لقد دخلت عَلَيْك وَمَا فى قلبى مِثْقَال حَبَّة من الْفَزع
Al-Iskaf – Sulayman ibn Abdullah al-Sajzi
He transmitted from our Imam some of the events of the trial (al-mihna). He said: I came to the door of al-Muʿtaṣim, and people had crowded around his door like on a festival day. I entered the house and saw a carpet laid out and a chair placed on it. I stood beside the chair. While I was standing, al-Muʿtaṣim came in, sat on the chair, took off his sandals from his feet, crossed one leg over the other, and then said: “Bring Ahmad ibn Hanbal.”
He was brought, and when he stood before him, he greeted him. Al-Muʿtaṣim said to him: “O Ahmad, speak and do not fear.” Ahmad said: “By Allah, O Commander of the Faithful, I came to you, and there is not even the weight of a grain of fear in my heart.”
Al-Qadi Abu Ya'la said:
أو كان متعلقًا بالاعتقاد، وهو المتأول لشبهة تعرض يذهب فيها إلى خلاف الحق. وهذا ظاهر كلامه في رواية المروزي في الأمير يشرب المسكر ويغل، يغزي معه، وقد كان يدعو المعتصم بأمير المؤمنين، وقد دعاه إلى القول بخلق القرآن
Or it may be related to belief, that is, a person who interprets a doubtful matter in a way that leads away from the truth. This is evident in his statement in al-Marwazi’s narration regarding the prince who drank intoxicants and engaged in usury while campaigning, and he had called al-Muʿtaṣim “Commander of the Faithful,” and had invited him to say that the Qur’an is created.
So it is established by the hanabilah themselves that he called him amirul mu'mineen.
It is established that Aḥmad performed Takfīr upon him, he said:
سَأَلَنِي عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ فَقَالَ لِي: مَا تَقُولُ فِي القُرْآنِ؟ فَقَالَ لِي أَبُو إِسْحَاقَ: أَجِبْهُ. فَقُلْتُ لَهُ: مَا تَقُولُ فِي العِلْمِ؟ فَسَكَتَ. فَقُلْتُ لِعَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ القَزَّازِ: القُرْآنُ مِنْ عِلْمِ اللهِ، وَمَنْ زَعَمَ أَنَّ عِلْمَ اللهِ مَخْلُوقٌ فَقَدْ كَفَرَ بِاللهِ. قَالَ: فَسَكَتَ عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ فَلَمْ يُرِدْ عَلَيَّ شَيْئًا. فَقَالُوا بَيْنَهُمْ: يَا أَمِيرَ المُؤْمِنِينَ، أَكْفَرَنَا وَأَكْفَرَكَ! فَلَمْ يَلْتَفِتْ إِلَى ذَلِكَ مِنْهُمْ.
Abd ar-Raḥmān asked me and said to me: “What do you say about the Qurʾān?” So Abū Isḥāq (al-Muʿtasim) said to me: “Answer him.” So I said to him: “What do you say about knowledge?” So he remained silent. Then I said to ‘Abd ar-Raḥmān al-Qazzāz: “The Qurʾān is from the knowledge of Allāh, and whoever claims that the knowledge of Allāh is created has disbelieved in Allāh.” He (Aḥmad) said: So ʿAbd ar-Raḥmān remained silent and did not respond to me with anything. Then they said amongst themselves: “O Amīr al-Muʾminīn, he has declared us disbelievers and declared you a disbeliever!” But he did not pay attention to that from them.
Kitāb al-Miḥnah riwāyat Ḥanbal - p. 118
Aḥmad did not deny what they attributed to him, if he really saw al-Muʿtasim as a Muslim, then he would deny the takfīr of a Muslim without a right, but he didn't.
As for Aḥmad calling him Amīr al-Muʾminīn, this is not proof for negating Takfīr. A man may be given a title he does not deserve, and may be addressed by what has become customary (ʿurf) [an example of this is the Jew who called ʿUmar by “Amīr al-Muʾminīn”], even if he is, in reality, a disbeliever. And it may be merely a descriptive statement, considering that he is a ruler (amīr) who undertakes the affairs of the believers and governs them.
So why hold to the mutashābih and leave the muḥkam?
Sixth doubt of the ʿĀdhiriyyah [from al-Imām Aḥmad]
Abd al-Rahman said to me: “There was Allah and no Qur’an.” I said: “So there was Allah and no knowledge?!” He fell silent, and if he had said, “There was Allah and no knowledge,” he would have disbelieved in Allah. (kitab al mihnah, p.102)
Ahmad literally had the same exact logic in his takfir of the qadariyyah. He would takfir the ghulaat al qadariyyah who denied Allah's knowledge, otherwise he would excuse them.
No rational person would abandon the dozens of explicit narrations and reports from Aḥmad regarding the disbelief of those who say the Qurʾān is created, and then argue based on ambiguous speech, unless they are driven by desire. Aḥmad said this during a debate, as an ilzām upon his opponent. So Aḥmad would say to him: “The Qurʾān is from the knowledge of Allāh, and if you say it is created, you are forced to say that knowledge is created, and that is also disbelief in your view.” But as for Aḥmad himself, this Jahmī is a disbeliever, whether he said knowledge is created or not.
Aḥmad himself performed Takfīr upon the one who says the Qurʾān is created without saying that Allāh's names or knowledge are created. Keep holding to straws. Al-Khallāl narrated:
١٨٠٤ - وَأَخْبَرَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ، قَالَ: ثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ الْأَثْرَمُ، قَالَ: أَتَيْنَا أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ أَنَا وَالْعَبَّاسُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَظِيمِ، فَقَالَ لَنَا الْعَبَّاسُ. وَأَخْبَرَنِي مُوسَى بْنُ سَهْلٍ، قَالَ: ثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ أَحْمَدَ الْأَسَدِيُّ، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنِي إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ الْحَارِثِ الْعَبَّادِيُّ، قَالَ: قُمْتُ مِنْ عِنْدِ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، فَأَتَيْتُ عَبَّاسًا الْعَنْبَرِيَّ ................ قُلْتُ لِأَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ: فَمَنْ قَالَ الْقُرْآنُ مَخْلُوقٌ، فَقَالَ: «لَا أَقُولُ أَسْمَاءُ اللَّهِ مَخْلُوقَةٌ، وَلَا عِلْمُهُ»، وَلَمْ يَزِدْ عَلَى هَذَا، أَقُولُ: هُوَ كَافِرٌ؟ فَقَالَ: «هَكَذَا هُوَ عِنْدَنَا». قَالَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ: «نَحْنُ نَحْتَاجُ أَنْ نَشُكَّ فِي هَذَا؟ الْقُرْآنُ عِنْدَنَا فِيهِ أَسْمَاءُ اللَّهِ، وَهُوَ مِنْ عِلْمِ اللَّهِ، مَنْ قَالَ مَخْلُوقٌ، فَهُوَ عِنْدَنَا كَافِرٌ».
1804 - And Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī reported to us, he said: Abū Bakr al-Athram narrated to us, he said: “We came to Abū ʿAbdillāh (Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal), myself and al-ʿAbbās ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAẓīm, and al-ʿAbbās said to us...” And Mūsā ibn Sahl reported to me, he said: Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad al-Asadī narrated to us, he said: Ibrāhīm ibn al-Ḥārith al-ʿAbbādī narrated to me, saying: “I left the gathering of Abū ʿAbdillāh and went to ‘Abbās al-ʿAnbarī... I said to Abū ʿAbdillāh: “The one who says the Qurʾān is created, but he says I do not say that the names of Allāh are created, nor His knowledge, and he did not add to this. Do I say he is a disbeliever?“ He replied: “That is how it is according to us.“ Abū ʿAbdillāh then said: “Do we need to doubt this? The Qurʾān, according to us, contains the names of Allāh, and it is from the knowledge of Allāh. Whoever says it is created is, according to us, a disbeliever.”
Kitāb as-Sunnah - n° 1804
Secondly, the Imām performed Takfīr upon al-Karābīsī and his followers from the Lafẓiyyah. Did they deny Allāh's knowledge?
And how retarded can you be to compare the Jahmiyyah who say Allāh's speech is created to the Qadariyyah who say they make their actions of evil, you retarded baffoon. The speech of the non-Ghulāt Qadariyyah isn't disbelief.
Seventh doubt of the ʿĀdhiriyyah [from al-Imām Aḥmad]
جيء بي إلى دار إسحاق بن إبراهيم، فحضرت صلاة الظهر، فتقدم ابن سماعة فصلى، فلما انفتل من الصلاة قال لي: صليت والدم يسيل في ثوبك؟ قال: فقلت: قد صلى عمر رضي الله عنه وجرحه يثعب دماً
I (Ahmad) was brought to the house of Ishaq ibn Ibrahim, and I attended the Dhuhr prayer. Ibn Sam‘a went forward to lead the prayer, and when he finished, he said to me: “Did you pray while blood was flowing on your garment?” I replied: “‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, prayed while his wound was gushing blood.”
This Ibn Sam'a is a well known JAHMII, how could Ahmad pray behind a kafir?!
فَجِيءَ بِهِ إِلَى دَارِ إِسْحَاقَ بْنِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ. قَالَ أَبِي: فَنُودِيَ بِصَلَاةِ الظُّهْرِ، فَصَلَّيْنَا الظُّهْرَ. وَقَالَ ابْنُ سَمَّاعَةَ: صَلَّيْتَ وَالدَّمُ يَسِيلُ مِنْ ضَرْبِكَ؟ فَقُلْتُ: بِهِ صَلَّى عُمَرُ وَجُرْحُهُ يَثْغَبُ دَمًا! فَسَكَتَ.
So he was brought to the house of Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm. My father said: “Then the call for Ẓuhr prayer was made, and we prayed Ẓuhr. And Ibn Samāʿah said: “You prayed while blood was flowing from your beating?“ So I said: “ʿUmar prayed while his wound was gushing blood!“ So he fell silent.“
Sīrat al-Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal - p. 63
Secondly, Ibn Samāʿah himself was a caller to his creed, and the relied upon opinion in the madhhab of the Ḥanābilah is that prayer behind the dāʿiyah is invalid. Even according to your Shaykh, the proof should be established upon him because the Imām debated him.
And Subḥān Allāh, there are tons of narrations of Aḥmad saying that the prayer behind the Jahmī is repeated, and then he comes to one of their heads who was a staunch Jahmī who wanted Aḥmad to be killed and prays behind him? Are you slow?
Finally, Ṣālih himself narrated:
وَقَالَ أَبِي: مَنْ زَعَمَ أَنَّ الْقُرْآنَ مَخْلُوقٌ فَقَدْ كَفَرَ، وَمَنْ زَعَمَ أَنَّ أَسْمَاءَ اللهِ مَخْلُوقَةٌ كَفَرَ. لَا يُصَلَّى خَلْفَ مَنْ قَالَ الْقُرْآنَ مَخْلُوقٌ، فَإِنْ صَلَّى رَجُلٌ عَاد.
And my father said: “Whoever claims that the Qurʾān is created has disbelieved, and whoever claims that the names of Allāh are created has disbelieved. Prayer isn't performed behind the one who says the Qurʾān is created; if a man prays, then let him repeat.“
Sīrat al-Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal - p. 67
قُلْتُ لِأَبِي: مَنْ قَالَ لَفْظِي بِالْقُرْآنِ مَخْلُوقٌ يُكَلَّمُ؟ قَالَ: هَذَا لَا يُكَلَّمُ وَلَا يُصَلَّى خَلْفَهُ، وَإِنْ صَلَّى رَجُلٌ أَعَادَ.
I asked my father: “The one who says my lafẓ of the Qurʾān is created, is he to be spoken to?“ He said: “This person is not to be spoken to, and prayer isn't performed behind him; and if a man prays, he repeats.“
Sīrat al-Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal - p. 70
And accordingly, whenever he mentioned praying behind the Jahmiyyah, this means that he repeated it, even if he did not explicitly state so in the same narrative, because that is known from his fatāwā and his methodology. It is as if he were saying that he went to pray, so it is necessarily understood that he performed wuḍūʾ, even if he did not mention that.
Eighth doubt of the ʿĀdhiriyyah [from al-Imām Aḥmad]
And for those who will try to claim he was under ikrah and this was only due to the mihnah, you are DEAD WRONG:
لم يزل أبو عبدالله بعد أن أطلقه المعتصم وانقى أمر المحنة، وبرأ من ضربه، يحضر الجمعة والجماعة، ويفتي ويحدث أصحابه، حتى مات أبو إسحاق، وولي ابنه هارون
After al-Mu’tasim released him and resolved the matter of the mihnah, clearing him of the beating, Abu Abdullah continued to attend Friday and congregational prayers, give fatwas, and transmit hadith to his companions, until Abu Ishaq passed away and his son Harun took his place.
I would sometimes go with him on Fridays, walking behind him. He would weave through the streets so as not to be recognised, then proceed to pray and leave.
لَمْ يَزَلْ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ أَحْمَدُ بْنُ حَنْبَلٍ بَعْدَ أَنْ أَطْلَقَهُ الْمُعْتَصِمُ، وَانْقَضَى أَمْرُ الْمِحْنَةِ، وَبَرَأَ مِنْ ضَرْبِهِ، يَحْضُرُ الْجُمُعَةَ وَالْجَمَاعَةَ، وَيُفْتِي، وَيُحَدِّثُ أَصْحَابَهُ، حَتَّى مَاتَ أَبُو إِسْحَاقَ، وَوَلِيَ هَارُونُ ابْنُهُ، وَهُوَ الَّذِي يُدْعَى الْوَاثِقَ، فَأَظْهَرَ مَا أَظْهَرَ مِنَ الْمِحْنَةِ، وَالْمَيْلِ إِلَى ابْنِ أَبِي دُؤَادَ وَأَصْحَابِهِ. فَلَمَّا اشْتَدَّ الْأَمْرُ عَلَى أَهْلِ بَغْدَادَ، وَأَظْهَرَتِ الْقُضَاةُ الْمِحْنَةَ، وَفُرِّقَ بَيْنَ الْأَنْمَاطِيِّ وَامْرَأَتِهِ، وَبَيْنَ أَبِي صَالِحٍ وَامْرَأَتِهِ، كَانَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ يَشْهَدُ صَلَاةَ الْجُمُعَةِ، وَيُعِيدُ الصَّلَاةَ إِذَا رَجَعَ، وَيَقُولُ: «الْجُمُعَةُ تُؤْتَى لِفَضْلِهَا، وَالصَّلَاةُ تُعَادُ خَلْفَ مَنْ قَالَ بِهَذِهِ الْمَقَالَةِ». قَالَ: وَسَمِعْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ يَقُولُ: «إِذَا صَلَّى بِكَ إِمَامٌ يَوْمَ الْجُمُعَةِ وَلَهُ رَأْيٌ، فَأَجِبْ لِلْجُمُعَةِ. إِذَا كَانَ الَّذِي يَأْمُرُ بِهِ - يَعْنِي الدَّاعِي - يَدْعُو إِلَى رَأْيٍ، فَأَجَبْتَ إِلَى الْجُمُعَةِ، فَأَعَدْتَ الصَّلَاةَ فَلَا بَأْسَ». فَكَانَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ يَحْضُرُ الْجُمُعَةَ فِي أَيَّامِ الْوَاثِقِ إِلَى أَنْ تُوَارَى، ثُمَّ يَرْجِعُ فَيُعِيدُ. فَلَمَّا كَانَتْ أَيَّامُ الْمُتَوَكِّلِ، كَانَ يَحْضُرُ الْجُمُعَةَ وَلَا يُعِيدُ.
حَدَّثَنَا حَنْبَلٌ، قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، وَسَأَلَهُ يَعْقُوبُ بْنُ الدَّوْرَقِيِّ، فَقَالَ لَهُ: يَا أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، مَا تَرَى فِي الصَّلَاةِ خَلْفَ مَنْ قَالَ هَذَا الْكَلَامَ - يَعْنِي مِمَّنْ قَالَ بِخَلْقِ الْقُرْآنِ؟ فَقَالَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ: «إِذَا كَانَ الَّذِي يَأْمُرُ بِالصَّلَاةِ لَا يَقُولُ هَذَا الْقَوْلَ، لَمْ أُعِدِ الصَّلَاةَ. فَأَمَّا الْجُمُعَةُ فَلَا بُدَّ مِنْ إِتْيَانِهَا، فَإِنْ كَانَ مِمَّنْ يَقُولُ هَذَا، أُعِيدُ الصَّلَاةَ، وَلَا نَتْرُكُ الْجُمُعَةَ عَلَى حَالٍ».
وَكَانَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ يَأْتِي الْجُمُعَةَ فِي أَيَّامِ الْوَاثِقِ، وَكَانَ يُصَلِّي بِنَا رَجُلٌ مِنْ وَلَدِ عِيسَى بْنِ جَعْفَرٍ، فَقِيلَ لِأَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ: إِنَّهُ يَقُولُ هَذَا الْقَوْلَ. فَكَانَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ يُعِيدُ الصَّلَاةَ. ثُمَّ وَلِيَ آخَرُ لَهُ لَقَبٌ، فَكَانَ يُعِيدُ إِلَى أَنْ وَلِيَ الْمُتَوَكِّلُ، فَرَفَعَ هَذَا الْكَلَامَ، فَكَانَ لَا يُعِيدُ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ. فَكُنْتُ رُبَّمَا ذَهَبْتُ مَعَهُ فِي يَوْمِ الْجُمُعَةِ، أَمْشِي وَرَاءَهُ، فَكَانَ يَتَخَلَّلُ الدُّرُوبَ حَتَّى لَا يُعْرَفَ، فَيَمْضِي فَيُصَلِّي وَيَنْصَرِفُ.
After al-Muʿtaṣim released him and the affair of the miḥnah had concluded, and he had recovered from his beating, Abū ʿAbdillāh Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal continued to attend the Friday prayer and congregational prayers, issue fatāwā, and transmit ḥadīth to his companions until Abū Isḥāq died and his son Hārūn, who is called al-Wāthiq, succeeded him. Al-Wāthiq then reinstated the miḥnah and showed favour to Ibn Abī Duʾād and his companions. When the situation became severe for the people of Baghdād, and the judges publicly enforced the miḥnah, separating al-Anmaṭī from his wife and Abū Ṣāliḥ from his wife, Abū ʿAbdillāh would attend the Friday prayer and then repeat the prayer upon returning. He would say: “The Friday prayer is attended for its virtue, but the prayer is repeated behind one who holds this belief.” He said: I heard Abū ʿAbdillāh say: “If an imām leads you in prayer on Friday and he has an opinion (i.e he is a Jahmī), respond to the call for Friday prayer. If the one who calls to it calls to an opinion, and you have responded to the Friday prayer, then you repeat the prayer - there is no harm in that.” Thus, Abū ʿAbdillāh would attend the Friday prayer during the days of al-Wāthiq until it was done, then return and repeat it. When the days of al-Mutawakkil came, he would attend the Friday prayer and would not repeat it.
Ḥanbal narrated: I heard Abū ʿAbdillāh when Yaʿqūb ibn ad-Dawraqī asked him: “O Abū ʿAbd Allāh, what is your opinion regarding praying behind one who says this statement - meaning, among those who say the Qurʾān is created?” Abū ʿAbdillāh replied: “If the one who calls to the prayer does not say this statement, I do not repeat the prayer. As for the Friday prayer, it must be attended. If he is among those who say this, I repeat the prayer, but we do not abandon the Friday prayer under any circumstance.”
Abū ʿAbdillāh would come to the Friday prayer during the days of al-Wāthiq, and a man from the descendants of ʿĪsā ibn Jaʿfar would lead us in prayer. It was said to Abū ʿAbdillāh: “Indeed, he holds this belief.” So Abū ʿAbdillāh would repeat the prayer. Then another man with a title succeeded him, and he (Aḥmad) would repeatuntil al-Mutawakkil took power. He abolished this discourse, and after that, he (Aḥmad) did not repeat. Sometimes I would go with him on Friday, walking behind him. He would weave through side streets so as not to be recognised, then proceed to pray and leave.
Kitāb al-Miḥnah riwāyat Ḥanbal - p. 142-144
For the slow people, if the imām was known to be a Jahmī (like during al-Wāthiq’s persecution), Aḥmad would attend the Friday prayer (because it shouldn’t be abandoned under any circumstance) and repeat the prayer privately afterwards (because praying behind a Jahmī is invalid).
If the imām was not known to be Jahmī (like after the miḥnah ended, or when al-Mutawakkil stopped the persecution), Aḥmad would go to the prayer normally and wouldn't repeat it afterwards.
Claiming that those who were appointed after the miḥnah were Jahmiyyah and Aḥmad didn't see a problem with praying behind them is so idiotic. The political pressure was lifted, and Aḥmad would not pray behind a known Jahmī. Otherwise, why would he go back to repeating the prayers at the time of al-Wāthiq? What changed? Keep holding to straws you retard.
Ninth doubt of the ʿĀdhiriyyah [from al-Imām ash-Shāfiʿī]
I dont care how disorganised this justpateit is gonna be, ghulaat love to spam random quotes so I'm gonna do the exact same thing LOL. Imam adh-Dhahabi said:
"وقال شيخ الإسلام علي بن أحمد بن يوسف الهكاري، في كتاب (عقيدة الشافعي) له: أخبرنا أبو يعلى الخليل بن عبد الله الحافظ، أخبرنا أبو القاسم بن علقمة الأبهري، حدثنا عبد الرحمن بن أبي حاتم، حدثنا يونس بن عبد الأعلى، سمعت أبا عبد الله الشافعي يقول - وقد سئل عن صفات الله -تعالى- وما يؤمن به - فقال: لله أسماء وصفات، جاء بها كتابه، وأخبر بها نبيه صلى الله عليه وسلم أمته، لا يسع أحدا قامت عليه الحجة ردها، لأن القرآن نزل بها، وصح عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم القول بها، فإن خالف ذلك بعد ثبوت الحجة عليه، فهو كافر، فأما قبل ثبوت الحجة، فمعذور بالجهل، لأن علم ذلك لا يدرك بالعقل، ولا بالروية والفكر، ولا نكفر بالجهل بها أحدا، إلا بعد انتهاء الخبر إليه بها، ونثبت هذه الصفات، وننفي عنها التشبيه، كما نفاه عن نفسه، فقال: {ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصير} [الشورى: 11] .
And Sheikh al-Islam ʿAli ibn Ahmad ibn Yusuf al-Hakari said in his book ʿAqeedat al-Shafiʿi:
Abu Yaʿla al-Khalil ibn ʿAbdullah al-Hafiz informed us, he said: Abu al-Qasim ibn ʿAlqama al-Abhari informed us, he said: ʿAbd al-Rahman ibn Abi Hatim narrated to us, he said: Yunus ibn Abd al-Aʿla narrated to us, I heard Abu Abdullah al-Shafiʿi say—when he was asked about the attributes of Allah, may He be exalted, and what one believes regarding them—he said:
“Allah has names and attributes, which were brought by His Book, and conveyed by His Prophet ﷺ to His nation. No one who is confronted with the proof of this can reject them, because the Qur’an was revealed with them, and it has been authentically reported from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ that he spoke of them. Whoever opposes this after the proof has been established against him is a disbeliever. As for before the proof has been established, he is excused by ignorance, because knowledge of this cannot be attained by reason alone, nor by observation or reflection, and no one is declared a disbeliever due to ignorance of it until the report has reached him.
We affirm these attributes and negate any comparison (tashbih), just as Allah negated it regarding Himself, for He said: {There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing} [Ash-Shura: 11].”
https://shamela.ws/book/7350/645
Go ahead and make takfir on Imam ash-Shafi'i. Oh and for anyone that's going to say "he was talking about khabariyyah, he said we can't attain them by reason alone." He wasn't making an exception for sifaat that are fitri, rather there is no contradiction with our beliefs. That is because what is fitri can be corrupted, and in this case how can the fitrah be hujjah? You need establishment of naql before takfir.
What are you even saying? Yes, he (if this was even authentic) is talking about Ṣifāt Khabariyyah, why would he need to make an exception? If he was talking about attributes in general then sure but he is talking about a certain type of attributes, what would he make an exception from? Also fiṭrah getting corrupted is not an excuse, here's your Ibn al-Qayyim's statement:
وَالصَّحِيحُ مِنْ هَذِهِ الْأَقْوَالِ: مَا دَلَّ عَلَيْهِ الْقُرْآنُ وَالسُّنَّةُ أَنَّهُمْ وُلِدُوا حُنَفَاءَ عَلَى فِطْرَةِ الْإِسْلَامِ، بِحَيْثُ لَوْ تُرِكُوا وَفِطَرَهُمْ لَكَانُوا حُنَفَاءَ مُسْلِمِينَ، كَمَا وُلِدُوا أَصِحَّاءَ كَامِلِي الْخِلْقَةِ، فَلَوْ تُرِكُوا وَخَلْقِهِمْ لَمْ يَكُنْ فِيهِمْ مَجْدُوعٌ وَلَا مَشْقُوقُ الْأُذُنِ. وَلِهَذَا لَمْ يَذْكُرِ النَّبِيُّ ﷺ لِذَلِكَ شَرْطًا مُقْتَضِيًا غَيْرَ الْفِطْرَةِ، وَجَعَلَ خِلَافَ مُقْتَضَاهَا مِنْ فِعْلِ الْأَبَوَيْنِ. وَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ ﷺ فِيمَا يَرْوِي عَنْ رَبِّهِ: «إِنِّي خَلَقْتُ عِبَادِي حُنَفَاءَ، وَإِنَّهُمْ أَتَتْهُمُ الشَّيَاطِينُ فَاجْتَالَتْهُمْ عَنْ دِينِهِمْ»، فَأَخْبَرَ أَنَّ تَغْيِيرَ الْحَنِيفِيَّةِ الَّتِي خُلِقُوا عَلَيْهَا بِأَمْرٍ طَارِئٍ مِنْ جِهَةِ الشَّيْطَانِ. وَلَوْ كَانَ الْكُفَّارُ مِنْهُمْ مَفْطُورِينَ عَلَى الْكُفْرِ لَقَالَ: خَلَقْتُ عِبَادِي مُشْرِكِينَ، فَأَتَتْهُمُ الرُّسُلُ فَاقْتَطَعَتْهُمْ عَنْ ذَلِكَ! كَيْفَ وَقَدْ قَالَ: «خَلَقْتُ عِبَادِي حُنَفَاءَ كُلَّهُمْ»؟! فَهَذَا الْقَوْلُ أَصَحُّ الْأَقْوَالِ، وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ.
And the correct view among these opinions is what is indicated by the Qurʾān and Sunnah that they are born as Ḥunafāʿ upon the fiṭrah of Islām such that if they were left to their fiṭrah, they would remain Ḥunafāʾ Muslimīn. Just as they are born healthy and complete in form, and if they were left in their natural state, none of them would be born mutilated or with a split ear. For this reason, the Prophet ﷺ did not mention any prerequisite condition other than fiṭrah, and he attributed any deviation from it to the actions of the parents. The Prophet ﷺ also said, narrating from his Lord: “I created My servants as Ḥunafāʿ, but the devils came to them and led them astray from their religion.” Thus, he affirmed that the change from al-Ḥanīfiyyah occurs due to an external influence from the side of Shayṭān. Had the disbelievers been naturally created upon disbelief, he would have said: “I created My servants as polytheists, but the messengers came and cut them off from that.” How could that be, when He has said: “I created all My servants as Ḥunafāʾ”? Therefore, this opinion is the most correct, and Allāh knows best.
Kitāb Aḥkām Ahl adh-Dhimmah - 2/204
So how does fiṭrah get corrupted? Does it get corrupted by itself? Or does the individual get misguided and therefore it changes? And by the way, you don't even perform Takfīr upon the Ashāʿirah even though they know the Naql because of taʾwīl, so do you really agree with ash-Shāfiʿī?
Tenth doubt of the ʿĀdhiriyyah [from the Prophet ﷺ]
And for those who takfir Ibn Taymiyyah, he already refuted you in the very quote I just sent. He is talking about the man who famously doubted Allah's qudrah and asked people to burn his body after he died. This individiual was excused. And this very individual committed ta'til (rejection) of the sifaat. SO HOW ABOUT TA'WIL?!
Take this, you filthy Kāfir:
Clarifying some stuff
✺ I only wrote this because I keep seeing these shubuhāt often, as for the guy I'm refuting, then he's a retard whom I won't waste time with.
✺ The guy said that the narrations of the Salaf performing Takfīr without establishing ḥujjah are “because they viewed that the ḥujjah was already established enough upon him via that person's knowledge.” And how exactly did they know that it was established? Did they just take a guess and say: “Oh yeah, the ḥujjah is definitely established upon this unknown guy or this guy who might have a shubhah?”
✺ The person who claimed that ash-Shāfiʿī and his companions did not perform Takfīr upon Jahmiyyah except for Abu Ḥāmid isn't Ibn Rajab, it was Ibn Qudāmah, and he got this lie from Ashāʿirah. And which companions didn't perform Takfīr upon them except al-Khaṭṭābī and al-Bayhaqī, al-Juwaynī and other Jahmiyyah? And then you dare to claim that he didn't perform Takfīr upon Ḥafṣ!!
مَذْهَبُ الشَّافِعِيِّ فِي الْقُرْآنِ
(...)
أَنَا أَبُو مُحَمَّدٍ، ثنا الرَّبِيعُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنِي مَنْ أَثِقُ بِهِ، فَقَالَ: وَكُنْتُ حَاضِرًا فِي الْمَجْلِسِ، فَقَالَ حَفْصٌ الْفَرْدُ: الْقُرْآنُ مَخْلُوقٌ، فَقَالَ الشَّافِعِيِّ: كَفَرْتَ بِاللَّهِ الْعَظِيمِ.
فَسَأَلَ الشَّافِعِيَّ، فَاحْتَجَّ عَلَيْهِ الشَّافِعِيُّ، وَطَالَتْ فِيهِ الْمُنَاظَرَةُ، فَأَقَامَ الشَّافِعِيُّ الْحُجَّةَ عَلَيْهِ، بِأَنَّ الْقُرْآنَ كَلامُ اللَّهِ غَيْرُ مَخْلُوقٍ، وَكَفَّرَ حَفْصًا الْفَرْدَ. قَالَ الرَّبِيعُ: فَلَقِيتُ حَفْصًا الْفَرْدَ فِي الْمَجْلِسِ بَعْدُ، فَقَالَ: أَرَادَ الشَّافِعِيُّ قَتْلِي.
The madhhab of ash-Shāfiʿī regarding the Qurʾān
(...)
Abū Muḥammad narrated, ar-Rabīʿ ibn Sulaymān narrated to us, he said: Someone I trust narrated to me, so he said: I was present in the gathering when Ḥafṣ al-Fard said: “The Qurʾān is created.“ So ash-Shāfiʿī said: “You have disbelieved in Allāh al-ʿAẓīm (kafarta billāhi al-ʿAẓīm)!“
Abū Muḥammad said in my book: On the authority of ar-Rabīʿ ibn Sulaymān, who said: I was present with ash-Shāfiʿī, or Abū Shuʿayb narrated to me, but I know that ʿAbdillāh ibn ʿAbd al-Ḥakam, Yūsuf ibn ʿAmr ibn Yazīd, and Ḥafṣ al-Fard were present. And ash-Shāfiʿī used to call him Ḥafṣ al-Munfarid. Ḥafṣ asked ʿAbdillāh ibn ʿAbd al-Ḥakam, and he said: “What do you say about the Qurʾān?“ So he refused to answer him. Then he asked Yūsuf ibn ʿAmr ibn Yazīd, and he did not answer him. And both of them pointed to ash-Shāfiʿī.
So he asked ash-Shāfiʿī, and ash-Shāfiʿī argued against him, and the debate regarding it became lengthy. Ash-Shāfiʿī established the proof against him that the Qurʾān is the uncreated speech of Allāh, and he declared Ḥafṣ al-Fard a disbeliever.“ Ar-Rabīʿ said: “Later, I met Ḥafṣ al-Fard in the gathering, and he said: “Ash-Shāfiʿī wanted to kill me.““
Ādāb ash-Shāfiʿī wa Manāqibuhu - p. 148
✺ And then this guy tries to ilzām us with Ibn Rajab (Ibn Qudāmah in reality), acting like he didn't say that we should perform tawaqquf on whether those with bidʿah mukaffirah are in hell eternally or not, and Abū Yaʿlā, who introduced kalām and tafwīdh to the madhhab.
✺ And then he claims that the early Ḥanābilah performed Takfīr upon Ashāʿirah merely out of taʿaṣṣub and not because these Zanādiqah denied that the Qurʾān is the speech of Allāh, that He isn't above His Throne and that He doesn't act. {Unquestionably, the curse of Allāh is upon the wrongdoers.}
✺ Then he goes on to criticise al-Harawī, acting like he brought these narrations from his buttocks and not from the early Ḥanābilah like Yaḥyā ibn ʿAmmār, ʿUmar ibn Ibrāhīm, and other scholars, may Allāh have mercy upon them.
✺ And then the retard says that al-Harawī was wrong when he cursed the Jahmiyyah who denied that the Qurʾān is in the muṣḥaf!! And he attributes this view to al-Bukhārī!!
And then he claims that Ibn Mandah had Khārijiyyah in him...
✺ He keeps quoting adh-Dhahabī the Jāḥiẓī who agreed with al-Ashʿarī in takāfuʾ al-adillah and didn't leave any Mushrik except that he praised him! That's why it is said, if you want to know whether the individual is good or not, then check adh-Dhahabī's siyar. If he praised him and defended him then he's an innovator and if he criticised him then he's a Sunnī.
And may peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allāh, and upon his family, and all of his Companions.